How soon before Riley is ran out of USC...?
- Thread starter ttowncoug
- Start date
Since it's a private school, I don't think the terms of his contract are public, and who knows how much is guarantied. But I doubt USC can afford to say goodbye any time soon.
Riley will be there for a while. Grinch better touch up his resume though.
Although the 48 scored by ND was highly misleading. That had way more to do with the three turnovers, USC actually wasn’t that bad defensively.
My guess…they dump the truck for Tosh Luppoi. That guy will chase a dollar anywhere.
Although the 48 scored by ND was highly misleading. That had way more to do with the three turnovers, USC actually wasn’t that bad defensively.
My guess…they dump the truck for Tosh Luppoi. That guy will chase a dollar anywhere.
Going to be a little bit. I think he is hesitating on ditching Grinch to give himself the good old out of canning the DC if needed, as it may be later this year. They still have to play UW and Oregon, not to mention UCLA and Utah.
Riley will sacrifice Grinch at the end of this season. I'd give pretty good odds....
A new D coordinator will solve most of Riley's problems. He'll be mandated to find a new one in December.
I could certainly be wrong, but I suspect he has already been mandated and is quietly talking to people behind the scenes.
Two unlikely but non-zero probability things for people to consider in light of possible realignment issues:
- Jake Dickert, USC defensive coordinator
- Alex Grinch, WSU head coach
The first is really unlikely, but if WSU goes 4-8 or something and Dickert wants out with the knowledge that a lot of the remaining key talent is transferring, and/or he is pressured to restructure his deal, this is a decidedly non-zero proposition. Even less likely than it otherwise would be in part because I agree Riley already likely is looking around.
The second isn't as unlikely, especially if Chun leaves, but still is unlikely overall. Schulz's plan if Leach left when Grinch was still the DC was to hire Grinch as the head coach. Believe this was during the period when Moos had left and we didn't have an AD, and there was concern about Leach leaving after what I call the "Tennessee dalliance."
Dickert would benefit from more coaching contacts. I think that is his biggest issue right now.
Regarding Grinch, he needs to cut Hercules a big fat check.
No Hercules, no coordinator jobs at OU and USC.
I really don't see USC dumping Grinch for Dickert. Right now, that doesn't look like an upgrade. They'll pluck a coordinator from a smaller school, or maybe a defense-minded HC who gets fired.
No way. -0-% chance. USC will pay Dickert his $2.7 million salary? And Dickert will uproot his young family and move to LA for a team that has had how many head coaches in the last 10 years? And if it came to pass that Dickert was asked to take a pay cut to Mtn West standards:
2023 MW Football HC Salaries $2.34M—Bohl, Wyo $2.30M—Brennan, SJSU $1.78M—Odom, UNLV $1.75M—Avalos, BSU $1.70M—Norvell, CSU $1.55M—Tedford, Fresno St $1.38M—Anderson, USU $1.27M—Hoke, SDSU $950K—Wilson, Nev $700K—Gonzales, UNM $600K—Chang, Hawai'i
Edit: This list is interesting. Tedford making $1.38M. Damn he was making $1.5M in 2004 at Cal.
Hoke (former Michigan, etc coach making $950K.
2023 MW Football HC Salaries $2.34M—Bohl, Wyo $2.30M—Brennan, SJSU $1.78M—Odom, UNLV $1.75M—Avalos, BSU $1.70M—Norvell, CSU $1.55M—Tedford, Fresno St $1.38M—Anderson, USU $1.27M—Hoke, SDSU $950K—Wilson, Nev $700K—Gonzales, UNM $600K—Chang, Hawai'i
Edit: This list is interesting. Tedford making $1.38M. Damn he was making $1.5M in 2004 at Cal.
Hoke (former Michigan, etc coach making $950K.
Last edited:
Dickert will no way in hell take a pay cut in the middle of a contract.
He may opt to take a lower amount in exchange for, say, a long term deal and no buyout.
But not a chance he just gives away money.
I agree. And my MTN West illustration just shows that he ain't that far above the two top guys.
Really, really curious to know what is rattling around in his head. 4 years at Wyoming under seeming lifer Craig Bohl. he's seen these guys. Tedford could certainly get another shot at a bigger school. Just sayin..... And if you look at Dickert' resume, he's been moving every couple of years his whole career. And $2.7 million in Pullman is not too bad.
No way someone agrees to a mid-contract pay cut. Not without something in return. And especially not when his salary wouldn't be that far out of line with peers.
So, rework the deal. Offer a $2M salary. In exchange for the reduction, eliminate or drastically reduce the buyout, add incentives that could get back to $2.7M annually, and create a longevity bonus (for example, if he stays for 4 years after the signature date, he gets a $2M balloon payment).
No no no. We blew our $30/year deal. Who knows what is going to transpire money wise. But if we did do a MTN West merger, no way would we go "Gee Jake, we too a 20-some million hit, so we thought cutting you down by $400,000 (match top Mtn West coaches would help a lot). What we need to be telling our coaches is that there will be no coaching layoffs or salary decreases. Period.
Who pays for this ... you covering the $2-3 mil in incremental costs for the entire staff? Why would we say "no layoffs" and what would that mean? I get your former sentiment, but there are going to be some hard doses of reality if we get stuck with the MWC or a MWC-style media rights package. The AD already is in the red and has a lot of debt. Now you go from an expectation of $30m or so (I believe that under Larry's and George's mismanagement, it still is more like $25m, but they reasonably expected more starting in 2024, with $30m very reasonable) to the $4m a year they get in the MWC, other than Boise State, which gets $6m. What gets cut to cover that $21-25m?
There is plenty of money available to fund ongoing athletic operations for WSU. That money could come from three possible sources.
1. Media money from PAC and/or other conference. Amounts are certainly unknown at this time, and are very likely to be less (maybe much less) than we are used to.
2. Our pockets/bank accounts. By our I mean WSU fans and alumni, not existing AD accounts. Are the chances the amounts donated to the AD will dramatically increase be slim or none? Probably.
3. The WSU endowment fund. Lots of money there, and there is a valid argument to be made that some of it could/should be spent on athletics as a way of attracting more students to the university. The hard part will be actually winning that argument.
Or maybe we just forget those options and have Chun invest heavily in lottery tickets?
As pertinent to my point regarding MWC and MWC-style media payouts, in essence, this boils down to us raiding the endowment. I don't have major issues with that personally, if it's temporary and limited in scope, but I don't think it's as simple or easy as we, sports fans, would like it to be, in terms of liquidity of assets, process, friction with other interests at the university, etc.
We've talked about that in the past when it came to things like facilities improvements (believe it was on here), and it's not a trivial thing, despite it seeming pretty harmless to pull the amounts we're talking about from an endowment of that size.
That said, these are pretty dire circumstances, and I don't think there is any clear precedent for a school going from a power conference to a complete have-not since the SWC implosion, and it isn't clear that would be a useful guide due to it being so long ago and a lot of the other circumstances being different. Maybe they just raid the endowment for $10m a year or something for a few years. Honestly have no idea whether that's a complete non-starter or just something nobody does because it hasn't been as necessary as it arguably would be here. I know a ton of people would be opposed to it very strongly, though.
Donations, such as to the endowment fund, can be restricted. I don't think that will work. Direct or indirect institutional support (deficit spending) might be what you mean.
As to "our pockets", we have a long history of not doing that as you noted.
Yeah, the only endowment funds that Athletics can attack is the Athletics endowment. How big is that? Well we don't know. The Foundation and Athletic Foundation won't tell us, and their posted annual report is 3 years old to boot. I see Athletics did get $15 million in donations in 18-19
Where do you get this $2-3 million in incremental costs if there are no raises? And I was talking about coaches. Where could Athletics save some money? Well, peruse the staff directory. This thing has gotten heavier over the years. In Football, the two areas that stick out are strength and conditioning (5 plus grad), and the 5 video and design people - just for Football. Also, sure are a lot of analysts and non-coaches that might be slimmed down.
Compliance? I believe we had 2 when I worked at WSU. Now we have 4 plus grad.
11 in the Cougar Athletic Fund dept?
Boy and 5 more video people (not Football), and 2 graphic designers. Finally, the 6 marketing/promotions people.
So how about we look for the low hanging fruit before we cut coaches pay.
Last edited:
$2-3m cumulatively over the coaching staff in terms of excess compared to what it would be if they were asked to restructure to comparable MWC wages, with precise amounts depending on whether we would be at the top of the conference (which I'm sure you'd say we should be, but which doesn't make a lot of sense compared to, e.g., SDSU) or more in the upper 40%, and some assumptions about, e.g., Dickert's non-guaranteed money vs. other possible money in his current deal. And no, I won't devote another second to telling you precisely how I got there or mapping it out. If you want to pick at it, you do the work and come up with your own figures.
My cousin is part of the “low hanging fruit”. And she works 60+ hours a week. Which is the most F’d up part of these entitled assholes who screwed the conference with their ineptitude.
I don't care enough to try to do the math. But calling it "incremental costs" is an odd way of characterizing not reducing salaries.
Not to most people. Incremental as compared to not doing the restructuring, where the restructuring was the subject of the discussion. Pretty basic stuff. Shocked you aren’t in to do the math after questioning it.
in·cre·men·tal
[ˈiNGkrəˌmen(t)l, ˈinkrəˌmen(t)l]
ADJECTIVE
incremental (adjective)
- relating to or denoting an increase or addition, especially one of a series on a fixed scale:
"incremental changes to the current system" · "the incremental cost of sending additional newsletters"
****. You are getting to be up there with Ed. Chime in on everything despite no clue what you are talking about, too lazy to actually think or look anything up unless it is some bullshit like this as part of an argument, and then waste everyone’s time with nonsense. Yes, you inane clown, incremental to what the coaching budget would be if restructured. “Especially” doesn’t mean only, and all that is needed for it to work is a baseline. Give it a think and come back in the morning if you still have questions. Or better yet, don’t, since you know the point and are trying desperately to win an argument where you know **** all about the substance by trying to look up a definition. Get real and let the grown-ups talk about the serious topics. Tell the guys at the bar about your plan to bite the bullet and join the MWC.
Last edited:
Well at least he’s not talking about his pecker, so chalk that up as a win for the board
I fear we're overdue for a dong post.
As I said, the hard part will be winning the argument for using endowment funds for athletics. I'm sure that a lot of it can and does have usage restrictions. And without knowing anything about all that confidential information, I think that the most likely possibility for endowment assistance is to only allocate interest earnings to the AD and not touch the principle amounts. That way the AD would not be eating into the amounts donated, only restricting the growth of the funds.
A
anon_1nb5kgc7kwlls
Guest
Interesting ... who knows if this guy is credible, but I wouldn't be shocked if Riley finally is acknowledging the likelihood of 3-5 losses this year and in subsequent years and is looking to take that NFL leap while his rep remains largely intact. He really is a great offensive mind. Just needs a defensive coordinator who can deal with his head coach having no input on that side of the ball and frequently hanging the defense out to dry with short fields and needing to be on the field for 60% of the game.
Boy aren't you full of vinegar. Let's see:
1. None of us have a clue as to most of what's going on. We are just fans chatting.
2. Actually, if you read my posts I do a lot of looking things up and posting links.
3. You used incremental incorrectly. Incremental is used for adding or increasing - not some hypothetical decrease as you coined it. My only sin was asking what you were talking about. I'm not aware that there is an argument going on here. I did take English 101 at WSU.
4, Inane clown? That would be someone throwing out the Dickert to USC as DC and Grinch to WSU as head coach. That someone would be.........you.
5. Finally, what are our choices? Big 12 does not want us. So we either try to cobble together a new country-wide PacAmerica by grabbing a bunch of G5 schools from all over hell's half acre, or we merge with the Mtn West. You got another idea? Let's hear it.
You're going on iggy, Loyal. First person I've done that to in something like 15 years of being here. So that latest stupidity can stand and you can add whatever you want. I won't see it.
While it is possible that Riley is looking at the NFL, what I find more likely is that he wants the Admin to THINK he is looking, so he can get some contract extension/protection after this season goes south.
Goodbye then.
And for the rest of the board, any thoughts on what my "latest stupidity" is would be appreciated. I think my posts are quite intelligent, save for some humor once in a while.
Note: I served as Treasurer for a College Foundation at one of my career stops.
Most endowments are untouchable except for the annual distributions that go to the purpose designated by the donor (ex: scholarships). Many endowment agreements contain a caveat that the university could repurpose these endowments should some catastrophe befall the institution. No idea what WSU's agreements say. Would be curious to know what the Athletics endowments look like (size and agreements).
There is also the Land Grant endowment, which consists of 151,000 acres of timber and is restricted to capital project and debt expenses. Not sure if that could be twisted to include the Martin Stadium debt? Legislative action is needed to mess with this one.
So the best option I see is a campaign to offset the hit we are likely to take in the next step. Unrestricted donations. I'd kick in a couple of bucks.
Bottom line, "raid the endowment" is a slim or none prospect. Unless the Foundation can talk to it's donors and get them to modify their agreements.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Semi OT: Feel good story related to the upcoming Superb Owl Tomorrow
- Latest: KRUSTYtheCOUG
-
-