Posted without comment.

http://www.dnj.com/story/sports/college/...autologin=

EDIT: Updated to include USA Today article detailing all FBS compensation.

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/

Supports my position that Bailiff is an averagish coach overall. 79th best paid coach in FBS (more likely 86th, since I think it is a decent bet that USC, BYU, Wake, Vandy, Tulsa, Pitt, and SMU all pay their coaches more). Rice's final ranking in Massey/Sagarin have been around that spot (or better) since 2011: 2011(92/89), 2012 (79/83), 2013 (57/69), and 2014 (69/69).

I think it would be more useful to know the budget for the entire coaching staff. Some coordinators at major P5 programs earn more than Bailiff, and probably more than all the other coaches on staff combined (excluding Bailiff).

I'm surprised at how many of the teams (and whom) have what I suspect are 'performance based' incentives that can sometimes double or more their salary

(10-09-2015 11:40 AM)mrbig Wrote:  Supports my position that Bailiff is an averagish coach overall. 79th best paid coach in FBS (more likely 86th, since I think it is a decent bet that USC, BYU, Wake, Vandy, Tulsa, Pitt, and SMU all pay their coaches more). Rice's final ranking in Massey/Sagarin have been around that spot (or better) since 2011: 2011(92/89), 2012 (79/83), 2013 (57/69), and 2014 (69/69).

I think it would be more useful to know the budget for the entire coaching staff. Some coordinators at major P5 programs earn more than Bailiff, and probably more than all the other coaches on staff combined.

True. I recall a chart that marked performance vs salary... and as I recall, David was slightly above the mean... so we are essentially getting what we are paying for.

Oddly, many of the p5 schools were the ones getting horrible returns... and many 'off-brand' programs were getting incredible bargains. I recall one of the academies and perhaps La Tech or somebody being way above the line.

(10-09-2015 11:44 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  True. I recall a chart that marked performance vs salary... and as I recall, David was slightly above the mean... so we are essentially getting what we are paying for.

Oddly, many of the p5 schools were the ones getting horrible returns... and many 'off-brand' programs were getting incredible bargains. I recall one of the academies and perhaps La Tech or somebody being way above the line.

I 100% believe we need to be looking for coaches, including assistants and coordinators, who would be way above the line. That is what Rice really needs to take another step forward, unless someone wins the Powerball or MegaMillions and donates most of the post-tax winnings to Rice athletics for use in upgrading football coaching salaries.

(10-09-2015 11:55 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 11:44 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  True. I recall a chart that marked performance vs salary... and as I recall, David was slightly above the mean... so we are essentially getting what we are paying for.

Oddly, many of the p5 schools were the ones getting horrible returns... and many 'off-brand' programs were getting incredible bargains. I recall one of the academies and perhaps La Tech or somebody being way above the line.

I 100% believe we need to be looking for coaches, including assistants and coordinators, who would be way above the line. That is what Rice really needs to take another step forward, unless someone wins the Powerball or MegaMillions and donates most of the post-tax winnings to Rice athletics for use in upgrading football coaching salaries.

On it.

Note that 9 (!) AAC coaches earn base salaries higher than the top base salary in CUSA.

This includes Tulane.

(10-09-2015 12:02 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  Note that 9 (!) AAC coaches earn base salaries higher than the top base salary in CUSA.

This includes Tulane.

Good point. And not surprising at all, AAC is clearly a step above CUSA right now, whether it is coaching salaries or bowl affiliations.

(10-09-2015 12:02 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  Note that 9 (!) AAC coaches earn base salaries higher than the top base salary in CUSA.

This includes Tulane.

Well, Tulane and UCF are certainly not getting bang for their buck this year!

(10-09-2015 01:34 PM)owl95 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 12:02 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  Note that 9 (!) AAC coaches earn base salaries higher than the top base salary in CUSA.

This includes Tulane.

Well, Tulane and UCF are certainly not getting bang for their buck this year!

Yep ... O'Leary jumps off the page as the worst deal in the country this season.

(10-09-2015 01:34 PM)owl95 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 12:02 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  Note that 9 (!) AAC coaches earn base salaries higher than the top base salary in CUSA.

This includes Tulane.

Well, Tulane and UCF are certainly not getting bang for their buck this year!

Athletic Budgets were among the key criteria used by the Big East when endeavoring upon their last two rounds of expansion.

(10-09-2015 09:42 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 01:34 PM)owl95 Wrote:  

(10-09-2015 12:02 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  Note that 9 (!) AAC coaches earn base salaries higher than the top base salary in CUSA.

This includes Tulane.

Well, Tulane and UCF are certainly not getting bang for their buck this year!

Athletic Budgets were among the key criteria used by the Big East when endeavoring upon their last two rounds of expansion.

So upping student fees to help pay for a new stadium pays off.

In addition to facilities, just one more reason why it is so hard for a G5 program to be competitive a P5 program.

G5 programs lose more than $20M/year just on TV rights to P5 team. Obviously, most P5 have higher ticket sales and other revenues streams to pay for the coaching salary arms race. Tough road.

Saw a stat that the highest paid public employee in 35 of the 50 US states is either an AD, Football, or MBB coach.