Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 112
  1. #51
    Pylons's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 25, 2005
    Posts
    7,003
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    You made the statement that certain words are subjective (i.e. best, elite, etc) depending on the context (which is true). However, in the context of defining whether a program is elite or not, the only opinion that matters is the media's opinion. The media's opinion can have a great influence on how other coaches and potential recruits see a program. If a program is viewed as an elite program, then a coach may be willing to accept a job there for less money because he knows it will open up more doors for him down the road. Also, he will be given more opportunities to coach the elite players, which will keep his name in the spotlight (directly and indirectly) through the coverage of the player. Likewise, if a program is not viewed as an elite, then it may be forced to overpay a coach to compensate for the view of the program.
    Well, I wouldn't say "the media" has "an opinion." The media conveys an image that is influential to people's opinions. It can be very powerful in that regard (positively and negatively..."any publicity is good publicity" is a crock). But it's not the "only" thing that matters in that arena.

    As for what coaches will do, I'm sure they might act on any of a number of priorities, just like any of us working stiffs. Some are more money motivated. Some may put a priority on the program's perception within the media or the general public. Some want the spotlight on them personally, others want none of that. Some may put a priority on things that impact their family.

    I think we're straying pretty far though here...how do coaches' salaries play into this?

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Pylons View Post
    Well, I wouldn't say "the media" has "an opinion." The media conveys an image that is influential to people's opinions. It can be very powerful in that regard (positively and negatively..."any publicity is good publicity" is a crock). But it's not the "only" thing that matters in that arena.

    As for what coaches will do, I'm sure they might act on any of a number of priorities, just like any of us working stiffs. Some are more money motivated. Some may put a priority on the program's perception within the media or the general public. Some want the spotlight on them personally, others want none of that. Some may put a priority on things that impact their family.

    I think we're straying pretty far though here...how do coaches' salaries play into this?
    As you said a coach could have many reasons for wanting to accept an offer at another school, so a school needs to be flexible when pursuing a coach. The elite schools typically will have the most flexibility which gives them an advantage over the non-elite schools. If a coach is more interested in the school's reputation, then the AD can tailor the sales pitch to that which could mean leaving some of the benjamins in the vault. Likewise, if a coach is only interested in a school that "shows him the money," then the AD can "make it rain" until the coach says "yes."

  3. #53
    Senior Member vthokiedsp's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 07, 2012
    Location
    St Pete
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Pylons View Post
    well, I guess the bottom line is that whether you call it "prominent," "pretty good," "mediocre," or whatever else, you seem frustrated by it and I'm pretty happy with it. Give me 15-20 years moving forward that mirror the 15-20 years passed and I think I will have had 3-4 decades of VT football enjoyment.
    and that is certainly your right. i'm not happy with fools gold success. one was built on sand, the other on rock. i want to see decisions, progress, and results (from top to bottom) that are worthy of filling that barren championship case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pylons View Post
    I don't even necessarily need to go to "negligible," my point is that it seems illogical to me to say "we can't be serious about being elite at this salary level" when the current national champ is ~10% above us.
    yea, i don't want to get caught up in small percentages. we are 6th in the ACC in assistant salaries (don't get me started on how underpaid foster is...annuity schmaschmuity) and what...30's nationally? maybe lower? on a very simple level, that doesn't seem to be the right range for a team that wants to be a perennial national title contender. maybe every 10-15 years when we land a generational type of player but that's not the type of consistency i'm looking for personally. see above.


    Quote Originally Posted by Pylons View Post
    I guess I just don't take it personally. I can have a sliver of influence through my donatations, attendance, etc., but VT's football success just isn't really a reflection of me.
    like i said, it's hard not to take it personally when you're proud of your program, and want respected success instead of chastisement. maybe apathy is the way to go...
    Last edited by vthokiedsp; Tue Jan 14 2014 at 04:06 PM.
    It's not that you are ignorant, it's just that you know so much that isn't so.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    October 20, 2002
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by vthokiedsp View Post
    and that is certainly your right. i'm not happy with fools gold success. one was built on sand, the other on rock. i want to see decisions, progress, and results (from top to bottom) that are worthy of filling that barren championship case.



    yea, i don't want to get caught up in small percentages. we are 6th in the ACC in assistant salaries (don't get me started on how underpaid foster is...annuity schmaschmuity) and what...30's nationally? maybe lower? on a very simple level, that doesn't seem to be the right range for a team that wants to be a perennial national title contender. maybe every 10-15 years when we land a generational type of player but that's not the type of consistency i'm looking for personally. see above.




    like i said, it's hard not to take it personally when you're proud of your program, and want respected success instead of chastisement. maybe apathy is the way to go...
    I'll jump into this discussion with regards to salaries.
    We are where we are based on revenues. Sure, we could up them a bit, but what other athletic department or part of the football program are you taking the money from? We paid more than FSU and they did ok. They just lost their DC to UGa today, why? Money and SEC.
    So unless someone out there has an idea of how we can increase our annual revenue from $72 mil to $120 mil, all of this salary talk is mute point.
    Quite frankly, I'd rather us spend more on the basketball program so we can get a better return on that program. We are losing a lot of revenue from lack of attendance, no NCAA tournament, plus potential Hokie Club donations from basketball supporters.

  5. #55
    Senior Member vthokiedsp's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 07, 2012
    Location
    St Pete
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer74 View Post
    I'll jump into this discussion with regards to salaries.
    We are where we are based on revenues. Sure, we could up them a bit, but what other athletic department or part of the football program are you taking the money from? We paid more than FSU and they did ok. They just lost their DC to UGa today, why? Money and SEC.
    So unless someone out there has an idea of how we can increase our annual revenue from $72 mil to $120 mil, all of this salary talk is mute point.
    Quite frankly, I'd rather us spend more on the basketball program so we can get a better return on that program. We are losing a lot of revenue from lack of attendance, no NCAA tournament, plus potential Hokie Club donations from basketball supporters.
    revamping of hokie club for starters. changing the way we fund expansion. like i mentioned before, it's a symptom. other items in our program and athletic department need addressing as well.
    It's not that you are ignorant, it's just that you know so much that isn't so.

  6. #56
    Pylons's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 25, 2005
    Posts
    7,003
    Quote Originally Posted by vthokiedsp View Post
    yea, i don't want to get caught up in small percentages. we are 6th in the ACC in assistant salaries (don't get me started on how underpaid foster is...annuity schmaschmuity) and what...30's nationally?
    so do you want to pay the guys we have more? or get guys who are better/worth more?

    With the former, I fail to understand how that has much of an impact on how hard we're trying or whether we're elite or not. We can triple Bud Foster's salary today and I would expect that to have approximately zero impact on the things you're saying drive your pride/frustration. Paying people just based on how you want your salary level to appear in the rankings seems rather frivolous.

    If you want to pay Grimes more because he's talking to LSU, I guess that's ok...as long as you're doing it to keep Grimes, not to "have elite salaries." And you have to realize that you've just given the rest of the staff an indication of what drives salaries.

    With the latter--you want better guys--I think the argument for higher salaries certainly has merit.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer74 View Post
    I'll jump into this discussion with regards to salaries.
    We are where we are based on revenues. Sure, we could up them a bit, but what other athletic department or part of the football program are you taking the money from? We paid more than FSU and they did ok. They just lost their DC to UGa today, why? Money and SEC.
    So unless someone out there has an idea of how we can increase our annual revenue from $72 mil to $120 mil, all of this salary talk is mute point.
    Quite frankly, I'd rather us spend more on the basketball program so we can get a better return on that program. We are losing a lot of revenue from lack of attendance, no NCAA tournament, plus potential Hokie Club donations from basketball supporters.
    Is there really that much of a potential return from the basketball program? I pose that question, not because I don't believe people won't support the program, but for other factors that is beyond the athletic department's control. For example Blacksburg is located in SW VA, but majority of the Hokie Club members are located in either NOVA or the '757.' Given that basketball frequently plays games during the week, is it a wise move for the athletic department to assume that a significant number of Hokie Club members will take off from work (assuming they are able) and drive 4 hours to attend a 7pm on a Tuesday night? If the athletic department believes that Hokie Club support is depended upon Hokie Club members in the Roanoka/NRV, then doesn't the athletic department have to scale back how much it invests in the program? After all the Roanoke/NRV Hokie Club members cannot be expect to make up the different in lost support from the rest of the state. Likewise, the basketball team cannot be expected to play a majority of their home games on the weekends (like in football).

    In that regards, I almost think the athletic department has to view the revenue from football as its primary source since it is the only sport that can really "connect" (meaning dip into their wallets) with Hokie Club members regardless if they are located instate or out-of-state. If the school was located in a different part of the state and Hokie Club members only had a 1-2 hour drive, then I could see a bigger return because people would have a greater opportunity to attend more weekday basketball games without sacrificing too much in their personal life. The more opportunities a person has to experience, then the more likely they are willing to donate to earn a right to them.

  8. #58

    Join Date
    October 20, 2002
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    Is there really that much of a potential return from the basketball program? I pose that question, not because I don't believe people won't support the program, but for other factors that is beyond the athletic department's control. For example Blacksburg is located in SW VA, but majority of the Hokie Club members are located in either NOVA or the '757.' Given that basketball frequently plays games during the week, is it a wise move for the athletic department to assume that a significant number of Hokie Club members will take off from work (assuming they are able) and drive 4 hours to attend a 7pm on a Tuesday night? If the athletic department believes that Hokie Club support is depended upon Hokie Club members in the Roanoka/NRV, then doesn't the athletic department have to scale back how much it invests in the program? After all the Roanoke/NRV Hokie Club members cannot be expect to make up the different in lost support from the rest of the state. Likewise, the basketball team cannot be expected to play a majority of their home games on the weekends (like in football).

    In that regards, I almost think the athletic department has to view the revenue from football as its primary source since it is the only sport that can really "connect" (meaning dip into their wallets) with Hokie Club members regardless if they are located instate or out-of-state. If the school was located in a different part of the state and Hokie Club members only had a 1-2 hour drive, then I could see a bigger return because people would have a greater opportunity to attend more weekday basketball games without sacrificing too much in their personal life. The more opportunities a person has to experience, then the more likely they are willing to donate to earn a right to them.
    I agree with you to some extent with regards to a lot of our Hokie Club base being more than 2 hours away with large numbers in NOVA. However, if we could sustain a top 20 team, I can assure you that Cassell would be full, those contributors would show on weekends.
    Think about how much money we are losing by not qualifying for the NCAA tournament. How much money the University is losing in no one traveling to Blacksburg, spending money on basketball related apparel, etc. if you think top flight basketball doesn't bring in big money to a University, I beg to differ.
    AND there is no reason we can't be a consistent top 20 school. We just need to make it a priority. The arguments about our location, Cassell, etc. are a crock. Just look at the top 20 schools today. Sure, there are the usual premier schools, but look at Iowa State and Whicita St. I'm sure every 4 - 5 Star recruit has said "geez, I've dreamed of going to school and living in Whicita, Kansas and Ames, Iowa".

  9. #59

    Join Date
    September 27, 2004
    Posts
    2,274
    I have a bad feeling about all of this. VT needs to do what it can to keep Grimes.

  10. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer74 View Post
    I agree with you to some extent with regards to a lot of our Hokie Club base being more than 2 hours away with large numbers in NOVA. However, if we could sustain a top 20 team, I can assure you that Cassell would be full, those contributors would show on weekends.
    Think about how much money we are losing by not qualifying for the NCAA tournament. How much money the University is losing in no one traveling to Blacksburg, spending money on basketball related apparel, etc. if you think top flight basketball doesn't bring in big money to a University, I beg to differ.
    AND there is no reason we can't be a consistent top 20 school. We just need to make it a priority. The arguments about our location, Cassell, etc. are a crock. Just look at the top 20 schools today. Sure, there are the usual premier schools, but look at Iowa State and Whicita St. I'm sure every 4 - 5 Star recruit has said "geez, I've dreamed of going to school and living in Whicita, Kansas and Ames, Iowa".
    Yes, I agree with you that Cassell would be full on the weekends. What about during the week? If a NOVA/757 Hokie Club member decides to get season tickets (even though the member will only be able to attend half of the home games), then the member will be forced to try to sell the tickets for the weekday games or eat the cost. VT will still have an attendance issue to deal with for the weekday games. I am not saying that revenue can't be made from basketball. What I am saying is that a lot more money can be made from football because the entire home schedule is more friendly to a wider pool. Location is not a crock when you are speaking about attendance. The reason Iowa St and Wichita St do not have attendance issues is because a large percentage of their fan base is located within a 1 hour radius. It is no different than the luxury that JMU, GMU, Richmond, ODU, or W&M have compared to VT. I am not suggesting that VT can't overcome this issue, but it is a challenge that most schools don't have to deal with and places VT in a somewhat slight disadvantage.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •