(02-04-2016 09:35 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:22 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:15 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  http://www.underdogdynasty.com/2016/2/1/...out-clause

Discuss.

That article is absurd, if a P5 school had done this it would have been labeled as smart. Why end up like Arkansas State with one and done coaches? Just common sense of Southern Miss part

Didn't ASU have two 10 win season during that time? Didn't they win 9 last season? Is that really so bad?

The problem is, its like putting duct tape over a hole in a dam. It might hold for a while, but after while more holes will appear. Eventually the whole dam will collapse and it will take a long time to rebuild after that.

Basically, its not about immediate results, its about lasting results.

[quote='chidave' pid='12968223' dateline='1454598250']
I think that article is "absurd" and obviously Southern Miss had leverage or they wouldn't have been able to get him to sign that deal. I think it's good for all parties involved, and hope that Hopson can continue to get Southern Miss back to glory.
[/quote
I think it prevented us from getting a few of our targets. But JH wanted this bad enough he didnt balk. The ad presented it, hop forwarded it to his attorney and 15 minutes later it was signed

(02-04-2016 09:35 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:22 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:15 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  http://www.underdogdynasty.com/2016/2/1/...out-clause

Discuss.

That article is absurd, if a P5 school had done this it would have been labeled as smart. Why end up like Arkansas State with one and done coaches? Just common sense of Southern Miss part

Didn't ASU have two 10 win season during that time? Didn't they win 9 last season? Is that really so bad?

ASU's AD has been nothing short of brilliant with his hires through three one and done coaching losses. Hell, the buyout amounts he put in Blake Anderson's contract make what Hopson got seem small time.

Hopson probably has some idea how long he wants to be at USM and it's >2 years. Hell, Fedora stayed 4, Eustachy stayed 8, Bower stayed 1,107... even Monken stayed 3, and EJ collected those USM checks long after we had a security guard tap him on the shoulder. God be praised, but the more we discuss this article the stupider it seems.

(02-04-2016 06:33 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  [quote='chidave' pid='12968223' dateline='1454598250']
I think that article is "absurd" and obviously Southern Miss had leverage or they wouldn't have been able to get him to sign that deal. I think it's good for all parties involved, and hope that Hopson can continue to get Southern Miss back to glory.
[/quote
I think it prevented us from getting a few of our targets. But JH wanted this bad enough he didnt balk. The ad presented it, hop forwarded it to his attorney and 15 minutes later it was signed

Believe what you want but Jay was the man all along. That is why BM said confidently that we would have a coach by the following weekend. All the rest was just show and to put on the appearance of a national search. I believe Jay is a great hire and will do well here. Probably better than several of the 'statement' candidates mention that some of the fan base was hot for.

(02-04-2016 06:35 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:35 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:22 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:15 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  http://www.underdogdynasty.com/2016/2/1/...out-clause

Discuss.

That article is absurd, if a P5 school had done this it would have been labeled as smart. Why end up like Arkansas State with one and done coaches? Just common sense of Southern Miss part

Didn't ASU have two 10 win season during that time? Didn't they win 9 last season? Is that really so bad?

ASU's AD has been nothing short of brilliant with his hires through three one and done coaching losses. Hell, the buyout amounts he put in Blake Anderson's contract make what Hopson got seem small time.

It's not a bad thing to lose a coach. Dawgxas was trying to make it sound like one and done coaches was terrible for us. We've put up an 8, 9 and 2 10 win seasons in the last 5 years. You don't want a bunch in a row because it severely screws up your class numbers in recruiting. (We lost our entire WR Unit this year, lose our entire OL next year), but if you guys go 10-2 and Auburn comes and takes Hopson, I doubt you guys would be complaining much.

The 2 million dollars should be entirely designed to keep the G5 schools away, while providing a profit for USM in case an SEC school comes calling. If anything it should be wonderful that Hopson signed that contract because it shows commitment. It shows he doesn't necessarilly see Hattiesburg as a stop over, but a place where he can build. We lost out on a chance for Chad Morris because of buyout issues a couple years ago, I applaud USM for ensuring the University can start profiting from coach departures.

Doc has a $3MM if he goes to wvu.

I think it was a very smart move by the USM AD and I agree that it will not keep the P5 schools away but if they want him then you will get paid. When Dykes left for Cal his buyout was 250k more I think if his current team was in bowl game. Of course that was the year (2012) we were scared to play ULM in the Indy bowl after we were ranked as high as 18.

Our AD was idiot and Dykes actually had a big hand is us holding out for the Liberty Bowl and not taking the Indy invite. Thankfully our AD got canned but the kids on the team missed out on a bowl after winning 9 games during the season. The verdict is still out on our current AD but we won't be skipping any more bowl games. Also, just FYI ULM got rolled by an average Ohio U team in the Indy bowl.

Great move - coaches are overcompensated anyways, thanks entirely to massive sources of newfound tax-free revenue for athletic departments. The argument that there are only so many people capable of being an FBS coach is a complete fallacy, especially when said cowch's salary is a large percentage of his football program's budget.

(02-04-2016 06:15 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:35 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:22 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:15 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  http://www.underdogdynasty.com/2016/2/1/...out-clause

Discuss.

That article is absurd, if a P5 school had done this it would have been labeled as smart. Why end up like Arkansas State with one and done coaches? Just common sense of Southern Miss part

Didn't ASU have two 10 win season during that time? Didn't they win 9 last season? Is that really so bad?

The problem is, its like putting duct tape over a hole in a dam. It might hold for a while, but after while more holes will appear. Eventually the whole dam will collapse and it will take a long time to rebuild after that.

Basically, its not about immediate results, its about lasting results.

29 wins over three years is a little better than duct tape.

ASU keeps bringing in similar coaches who basically want the same type of team, so the transition is very smooth.

That said, didn't they put a similar clause on Anderson's contract?

(02-06-2016 12:35 AM)eaglenjxn Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 06:15 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:35 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:22 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:15 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  http://www.underdogdynasty.com/2016/2/1/...out-clause

Discuss.

That article is absurd, if a P5 school had done this it would have been labeled as smart. Why end up like Arkansas State with one and done coaches? Just common sense of Southern Miss part

Didn't ASU have two 10 win season during that time? Didn't they win 9 last season? Is that really so bad?

The problem is, its like putting duct tape over a hole in a dam. It might hold for a while, but after while more holes will appear. Eventually the whole dam will collapse and it will take a long time to rebuild after that.

Basically, its not about immediate results, its about lasting results.

29 wins over three years is a little better than duct tape.

ASU keeps bringing in similar coaches who basically want the same type of team, so the transition is very smooth.

That said, didn't they put a similar clause on Anderson's contract?

Honestly I just couldn't think of a better example, either way I think what I was trying to communicate gets across.

(02-06-2016 12:00 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-06-2016 12:35 AM)eaglenjxn Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 06:15 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:35 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:22 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  That article is absurd, if a P5 school had done this it would have been labeled as smart. Why end up like Arkansas State with one and done coaches? Just common sense of Southern Miss part

Didn't ASU have two 10 win season during that time? Didn't they win 9 last season? Is that really so bad?

The problem is, its like putting duct tape over a hole in a dam. It might hold for a while, but after while more holes will appear. Eventually the whole dam will collapse and it will take a long time to rebuild after that.

Basically, its not about immediate results, its about lasting results.

29 wins over three years is a little better than duct tape.

ASU keeps bringing in similar coaches who basically want the same type of team, so the transition is very smooth.

That said, didn't they put a similar clause on Anderson's contract?

Honestly I just couldn't think of a better example, either way I think what I was trying to communicate gets across.

Anderson had 3 million buyout after one year and 2 million for the next two (I think) It does go down after 3.

I'm a huge stAte fan and I agree, they has been very fortunate to get away with the changes without a lot harm. The 5 coaches in 5 years is not a good way to go. Lucky that the "dam" didn't get completely washed away. Truth is playing the SB probably helped. Not trying to hate on the SBC, it's just the truth.

(02-06-2016 02:04 PM)Rik Flair Wrote:  

(02-06-2016 12:00 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-06-2016 12:35 AM)eaglenjxn Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 06:15 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:35 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Didn't ASU have two 10 win season during that time? Didn't they win 9 last season? Is that really so bad?

The problem is, its like putting duct tape over a hole in a dam. It might hold for a while, but after while more holes will appear. Eventually the whole dam will collapse and it will take a long time to rebuild after that.

Basically, its not about immediate results, its about lasting results.

29 wins over three years is a little better than duct tape.

ASU keeps bringing in similar coaches who basically want the same type of team, so the transition is very smooth.

That said, didn't they put a similar clause on Anderson's contract?

Honestly I just couldn't think of a better example, either way I think what I was trying to communicate gets across.

Anderson had 3 million buyout after one year and 2 million for the next two (I think) It does go down after 3.

I'm a huge stAte fan and I agree, they has been very fortunate to get away with the changes without a lot harm. The 5 coaches in 5 years is not a good way to go. Lucky that the "dam" didn't get completely washed away. Truth is playing the SB probably helped. Not trying to hate on the SBC, it's just the truth.

Its definitely better than if they tried that in say the SEC or *insert P5 conference here*. I wouldn't say any of the G5 conferences would be harder, but it definitely wouldn't be a cakewalk to try that in a few of them

(02-06-2016 10:39 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-06-2016 02:04 PM)Rik Flair Wrote:  

(02-06-2016 12:00 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  

(02-06-2016 12:35 AM)eaglenjxn Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 06:15 PM)BoutThemDawgs Wrote:  The problem is, its like putting duct tape over a hole in a dam. It might hold for a while, but after while more holes will appear. Eventually the whole dam will collapse and it will take a long time to rebuild after that.

Basically, its not about immediate results, its about lasting results.

29 wins over three years is a little better than duct tape.

ASU keeps bringing in similar coaches who basically want the same type of team, so the transition is very smooth.

That said, didn't they put a similar clause on Anderson's contract?

Honestly I just couldn't think of a better example, either way I think what I was trying to communicate gets across.

Anderson had 3 million buyout after one year and 2 million for the next two (I think) It does go down after 3.

I'm a huge stAte fan and I agree, they has been very fortunate to get away with the changes without a lot harm. The 5 coaches in 5 years is not a good way to go. Lucky that the "dam" didn't get completely washed away. Truth is playing the SB probably helped. Not trying to hate on the SBC, it's just the truth.

Its definitely better than if they tried that in say the SEC or *insert P5 conference here*. I wouldn't say any of the G5 conferences would be harder, but it definitely wouldn't be a cakewalk to try that in a few of them

Agreed. The Freeze and Malzahan teams were very good. I would argue as good as any in the G5. But the turnover has taken it's toll. In the last 3 years the teams have not been as good and depth, especially on the lines, has been a problem.

Anderson even said as much after the NOLA bowl. Said we didn't have the depth to compete with Tech. He said we got away with it late in the season in the SBC, (last games were against ULM, NMSU and Tx. St), but it showed in the bowl game. We took a lot of Jucos this recruiting class because we are still trying to plug holes.