(12-13-2016 12:40 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:39 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:35 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:12 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:04 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  That doesn't seem very competitive.

Looking at 2016's numbers:
Houston- $2.4MM
Memphis- $2.1MM
Cincinnati- $2.1MM
UCF- $2.1MM
USF- $1.9MM
UConn- $1.9MM
ECU- $1.7MM

Don't let that fool you. It's very competitive. They are backloaded like Strong's contract. Strong is bringing Texas assistants also, who have buyouts like Strong did. Goes up to 3.4M.

By the way, Taggart's assistant pool was 2.4 Million (would have went up to 2.6M next year), not 1.9M. Do you really think they are going to have less overall money (from all sources) than the 2.6 that Taggart had? No. If your numbers are correct, USF had the largest assistant salary pool in the AAC.

http://www.tbo.com/sports/colleges/usf-b...-20151221/

There is a $2.4 million salary pool available to USF’s assistant coaches (the pool was $1.9 million in Taggart’s original contract). An additional $100,000 will be available next July 1. The assistant’s salary pool graduates to $2.6 million on Jan. 1, 2017, and increases by $100,000 at the start of each year.

I was just going off the numbers here http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries.../assistant

The far right column is the total assistant pay.

OK. Taggart's pool was upped to 2.4 Mil before last year under terms of his renegotiated contract.

Well then the whole list is suspect, so just ignore what I said

By the way, here is exactly what I was talking about. Texas' assistant coaches were under guaranteed contracts and are owed 7 million dollars combined by Texas. That is why Strong doesn't need a huge salary pool in year one. But once the Texas money runs out, Strong will have a 3.4M salary pool at USF. USF has and will continue to have one of the largest salary pools and salaries for assistant coaches. USF did the same thing with Strong's assistant coaches that they did with Strong.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...eed-deals/

AUSTIN – When Charlie Strong hired his initial staff at Texas in 2014 all nine of his on-field assistant coaches had multi-year guaranteed contracts.

The downside of those types deals is when Strong was officially fired the morning after a 31-9 loss to TCU ended his three-year tenure with a 16-21 record, Texas was immediately on the hook for the more than just the $10 million in guaranteed money left on Strong’s deal.

The Longhorns are also going to have to cover the guaranteed money owed to Strong’s assistant coaches, which is expected to approach nearly $7 million total.

I love the hire and the contract. Well done USF.

(12-13-2016 03:35 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:40 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:39 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:35 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:12 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Don't let that fool you. It's very competitive. They are backloaded like Strong's contract. Strong is bringing Texas assistants also, who have buyouts like Strong did. Goes up to 3.4M.

By the way, Taggart's assistant pool was 2.4 Million (would have went up to 2.6M next year), not 1.9M. Do you really think they are going to have less overall money (from all sources) than the 2.6 that Taggart had? No. If your numbers are correct, USF had the largest assistant salary pool in the AAC.

http://www.tbo.com/sports/colleges/usf-b...-20151221/

There is a $2.4 million salary pool available to USF’s assistant coaches (the pool was $1.9 million in Taggart’s original contract). An additional $100,000 will be available next July 1. The assistant’s salary pool graduates to $2.6 million on Jan. 1, 2017, and increases by $100,000 at the start of each year.

I was just going off the numbers here http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries.../assistant

The far right column is the total assistant pay.

OK. Taggart's pool was upped to 2.4 Mil before last year under terms of his renegotiated contract.

Well then the whole list is suspect, so just ignore what I said

By the way, here is exactly what I was talking about. Texas' assistant coaches were under guaranteed contracts and are owed 7 million dollars combined by Texas. That is why Strong doesn't need a huge salary pool in year one. But once the Texas money runs out, Strong will have a 3.4M salary pool at USF. USF has and will continue to have one of the largest salary pools and salaries for assistant coaches. USF did the same thing with Strong's assistant coaches that they did with Strong.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...eed-deals/

AUSTIN – When Charlie Strong hired his initial staff at Texas in 2014 all nine of his on-field assistant coaches had multi-year guaranteed contracts.

The downside of those types deals is when Strong was officially fired the morning after a 31-9 loss to TCU ended his three-year tenure with a 16-21 record, Texas was immediately on the hook for the more than just the $10 million in guaranteed money left on Strong’s deal.

The Longhorns are also going to have to cover the guaranteed money owed to Strong’s assistant coaches, which is expected to approach nearly $7 million total.

So in other words Texas will be helping USF by paying its head coach and assistants more money than the Bulls will for first two year.
I approve.

Not only did we structure the deal perfectly but if you notice, we end up saving about $15 million over 3 years.... now what could $15 million build USF... hmmmmm

I wonder if this will piss off Texas and they will cancel our HandH in 2020 and 2022? Or do they have so much money that they really don't care?

(12-13-2016 12:32 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:26 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 11:49 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  According to Joey Knight of the Tampa Bay Times, Strong will be paid about 10M over 5 years (9.8M to be exact), but here's the interesting part. USF backloaded the deal to take advantage of the payments owed to Strong by Texas. USF is only paying him 1M the first 2 years (Texas owes him 5M a year for 2 years), and then when the Texas payments stop, USF is paying him almost 8M over the final 3 years of contract, at an average of 2.6M per year.

Strong also has a big buyout of 2.5M if he leaves soon, going down to 1.7 in time (Willie Taggart's buyout was 1.7M.

Strong is going to be making serious cash from USF if he stays for years 3-5.

Joey Knight ‏@TBTimes_Bulls · 29m29 minutes ago

BREAKING: Charlie Strong's #USF salary -- 5 years, $9.8 million. First 2 years is $1 million annually (500K base + other compensation)

Joey Knight ‏@TBTimes_Bulls · 27m27 minutes ago

Per Strong contract, assistant salary pool starts at $1.66 million, grows to $3.4 million by Years 4 and 5 #USF

Joey Knight ‏@TBTimes_Bulls · 25m25 minutes ago

If Strong leaves #USF, buyout starts at $2.5 million through Dec. 31, 2017. Ultimately dwindles to $1.7 million

Joey Knight ‏@TBTimes_Bulls · 8m8 minutes ago

In Year 3 of deal, after Texas' buyout obligations expire, Strong's salary jumps to $2.5 million.

He will be gone in two years.

Don't be so sure. His wife is from the Tampa Bay area, and word has it, that was a deciding factor for him. Other reports stated he was looking for somewhere to be long term, in other words, a final job.

Careful there.

4 Years Ago:

His wife is from the Cincinnati area, and word has it, that was a deciding factor for him. Other reports stated he was looking for somewhere to be long term, in other words, a final job.

(12-13-2016 12:31 PM)Bear Wrote:  This is an amazing deal. Texas is covering the brunt of the costs (up front)....

Strong is technically the HIGHEST paid coach in the AAC.

The contract is backloaded -- couldn't have asked for a better deal myself

The real problem becomes if Strong cannot deliver. Because the contact is back-loaded the payout will be huge if they need to fire him.

(12-14-2016 09:18 AM)Bull Wrote:  I wonder if this will piss off Texas and they will cancel our HandH in 2020 and 2022? Or do they have so much money that they really don't care?

This is Texas right now:



But really, last week Texas owed Charlie $10MM. Now Texas only owes Charlie $9MM.

I doubt they're mad at all. If anything, they're happy that Charlie got a good job and owe a little less money. The administration loved Charlie.

Probably was a long shot to begin with, but you can forget about a B12 invite after this contract.

(12-14-2016 09:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Probably was a long shot to begin with, but you can forget about a B12 invite after this contract.

LOL. It wasnt happening. Plus Texas has shown that even if you kiss their behinds they could still stab you in the back if it was in their interest. Time to start acting the same.

Texas paying 9 million to get rid of him but yeah...it should work out great for USF

Insanity

Bottom line: every coaching hire is met with excitement and expectations... but we all have to wait and see if it works out. Sometimes it does, sometimes it does not.

But I love the 'doomed to failure' comments because Texas fired him... when the entirety of this remaining resume is damn near perfect.

(12-14-2016 11:26 AM)Bull Wrote:  Bottom line: every coaching hire is met with excitement and expectations... but we all have to wait and see if it works out. Sometimes it does, sometimes it does not.

But I love the 'doomed to failure' comments because Texas fired him... when the entirety of this remaining resume is propped up by Teddy Bridgewater.

FTFY

(12-14-2016 01:06 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 11:26 AM)Bull Wrote:  Bottom line: every coaching hire is met with excitement and expectations... but we all have to wait and see if it works out. Sometimes it does, sometimes it does not.

But I love the 'doomed to failure' comments because Texas fired him... when the entirety of this remaining resume is propped up by Teddy Bridgewater.

FTFY^

No thanks... My wording is more accurate. Just anout every article I have seen agrees...

(12-14-2016 01:19 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 01:06 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 11:26 AM)Bull Wrote:  Bottom line: every coaching hire is met with excitement and expectations... but we all have to wait and see if it works out. Sometimes it does, sometimes it does not.

But I love the 'doomed to failure' comments because Texas fired him... when the entirety of this remaining resume is propped up by Teddy Bridgewater.

FTFY^

No thanks... My wording is more accurate. Just anout every article I have seen agrees...

Sounds like someone hasn't watched Charlie's numerous game-time coaching failures. But don't worry, you'll see for yourself soon enough. I can't wait till you watch him call time-outs that give the visiting team time to score and all sorts of other Charlie Strong things.

Not to mention, there's even an article from your own hometown newspaper, the Tampa Bay Times, that agree the hire could go either way. Nobody's said it's "doomed to failure," but you guys are hailing him as a guaranteed home-run hire.

Quote:My reservations about Strong have nothing to do with him being recently fired by Texas.

It's about why he was fired. How can we just erase what happened at Texas?

He lost seven games each of his three seasons and was 16-21 overall. That's the worst winning percentage of any Longhorns coach. Ever.

Strong is a supposedly a defensive specialist, yet his Longhorns were 94th in the country in total defense this year after finishing 106th a year ago.

This season, Texas gave up 31.5 points, which was tied for 89th. That was even worse than USF's defense (31 ppg, which was 86th).

Then there's this stat: During Strong's tenure, Texas was 5-10 in games decided by seven points or fewer, including 2-5 this season. Some might say that only shows how close the Longhorns were to winning. But those who follow the program closely say that proved Texas wasn't coached well enough in tight games.

On the positive side, he did a bang-up job at Louisville. From all reports, he's a nice man who runs a clean program.

In the end, no hire comes without warts, whether it's Kiffin or Schiano or Strong. Any hire USF makes will be punctuated with a question mark, not an explanation point.

That includes Charlie Strong.

(12-13-2016 12:33 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:31 PM)Bear Wrote:  This is an amazing deal. Texas is covering the brunt of the costs (up front)....

Strong is technically the HIGHEST paid coach in the AAC.

The contract is backloaded -- couldn't have asked for a better deal myself

USF put the screws to Texas. I hope this doesn't affect any future negotiations with Texas/Big 12, should they decide to expand. "We're not going to add USF because they lowballed Strong's contract for the first 2 years and screwed Texas out of millions".

I doubt Texas sees it as anything to be upset about

would they have liked it is USF paid $5 million a year from year one sure, but the reality is in most cases Strong was not going to walk right into a quality head coaching job that paid even a million a year in just a few weeks

more than likely he would have gotten a DC job and the school that took him for DC would have offered $250K or something like that

so hell Texas is getting a $750K break on the deal

and there is the fact that he might have simply taken a year off to look for something that was the best for for him as a DC or as a head coach

or simply to evaluate what happened at Texas and to take some time with his family

it is not like he was not working his ass off and it is not like he probably could use some family time if he wanted it and he can damn sure afford it

USF is a great fit for him (hopefully) and the money they are paying even with this deal is better money than a large number of other head coaching jobs would pay that would be available to Strong especially 2 or 3 weeks after Texas

Texas has nothing to be upset about with this deal period

and Texas does not "run" the Big 12 so even if there was remotely a chance that Texas was upset by this deal (when they should be happy with it and wishing Strong all the best) if USF was wanted by the Big 12 the Big 12 would add them no matter what Texas said

(12-14-2016 01:56 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:33 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:31 PM)Bear Wrote:  This is an amazing deal. Texas is covering the brunt of the costs (up front)....

Strong is technically the HIGHEST paid coach in the AAC.

The contract is backloaded -- couldn't have asked for a better deal myself

USF put the screws to Texas. I hope this doesn't affect any future negotiations with Texas/Big 12, should they decide to expand. "We're not going to add USF because they lowballed Strong's contract for the first 2 years and screwed Texas out of millions".

I doubt Texas sees it as anything to be upset about

would they have liked it is USF paid $5 million a year from year one sure, but the reality is in most cases Strong was not going to walk right into a quality head coaching job that paid even a million a year in just a few weeks

more than likely he would have gotten a DC job and the school that took him for DC would have offered $250K or something like that

so hell Texas is getting a $750K break on the deal

and there is the fact that he might have simply taken a year off to look for something that was the best for for him as a DC or as a head coach

or simply to evaluate what happened at Texas and to take some time with his family

it is not like he was not working his ass off and it is not like he probably could use some family time if he wanted it and he can damn sure afford it

USF is a great fit for him (hopefully) and the money they are paying even with this deal is better money than a large number of other head coaching jobs would pay that would be available to Strong especially 2 or 3 weeks after Texas

Texas has nothing to be upset about with this deal period

and Texas does not "run" the Big 12 so even if there was remotely a chance that Texas was upset by this deal (when they should be happy with it and wishing Strong all the best) if USF was wanted by the Big 12 the Big 12 would add them no matter what Texas said

So what's your point??

(12-14-2016 06:04 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 01:56 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:33 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 12:31 PM)Bear Wrote:  This is an amazing deal. Texas is covering the brunt of the costs (up front)....

Strong is technically the HIGHEST paid coach in the AAC.

The contract is backloaded -- couldn't have asked for a better deal myself

USF put the screws to Texas. I hope this doesn't affect any future negotiations with Texas/Big 12, should they decide to expand. "We're not going to add USF because they lowballed Strong's contract for the first 2 years and screwed Texas out of millions".

I doubt Texas sees it as anything to be upset about

would they have liked it is USF paid $5 million a year from year one sure, but the reality is in most cases Strong was not going to walk right into a quality head coaching job that paid even a million a year in just a few weeks

more than likely he would have gotten a DC job and the school that took him for DC would have offered $250K or something like that

so hell Texas is getting a $750K break on the deal

and there is the fact that he might have simply taken a year off to look for something that was the best for for him as a DC or as a head coach

or simply to evaluate what happened at Texas and to take some time with his family

it is not like he was not working his ass off and it is not like he probably could use some family time if he wanted it and he can damn sure afford it

USF is a great fit for him (hopefully) and the money they are paying even with this deal is better money than a large number of other head coaching jobs would pay that would be available to Strong especially 2 or 3 weeks after Texas

Texas has nothing to be upset about with this deal period

and Texas does not "run" the Big 12 so even if there was remotely a chance that Texas was upset by this deal (when they should be happy with it and wishing Strong all the best) if USF was wanted by the Big 12 the Big 12 would add them no matter what Texas said

So what's your point??

that Texas can crap on dem coogs doh anytime they want to so why worry about USF doing what is best for USF when USF is doing nothing really wrong and not really screwing Texas

(12-14-2016 01:40 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 01:19 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 01:06 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 11:26 AM)Bull Wrote:  Bottom line: every coaching hire is met with excitement and expectations... but we all have to wait and see if it works out. Sometimes it does, sometimes it does not.

But I love the 'doomed to failure' comments because Texas fired him... when the entirety of this remaining resume is propped up by Teddy Bridgewater.

FTFY^

No thanks... My wording is more accurate. Just anout every article I have seen agrees...

Sounds like someone hasn't watched Charlie's numerous game-time coaching failures. But don't worry, you'll see for yourself soon enough. I can't wait till you watch him call time-outs that give the visiting team time to score and all sorts of other Charlie Strong things.

Not to mention, there's even an article from your own hometown newspaper, the Tampa Bay Times, that agree the hire could go either way. Nobody's said it's "doomed to failure," but you guys are hailing him as a guaranteed home-run hire.

Quote:My reservations about Strong have nothing to do with him being recently fired by Texas.

It's about why he was fired. How can we just erase what happened at Texas?

He lost seven games each of his three seasons and was 16-21 overall. That's the worst winning percentage of any Longhorns coach. Ever.

Strong is a supposedly a defensive specialist, yet his Longhorns were 94th in the country in total defense this year after finishing 106th a year ago.

This season, Texas gave up 31.5 points, which was tied for 89th. That was even worse than USF's defense (31 ppg, which was 86th).

Then there's this stat: During Strong's tenure, Texas was 5-10 in games decided by seven points or fewer, including 2-5 this season. Some might say that only shows how close the Longhorns were to winning. But those who follow the program closely say that proved Texas wasn't coached well enough in tight games.

On the positive side, he did a bang-up job at Louisville. From all reports, he's a nice man who runs a clean program.

In the end, no hire comes without warts, whether it's Kiffin or Schiano or Strong. Any hire USF makes will be punctuated with a question mark, not an explanation point.

That includes Charlie Strong.

Any new hire could go either way
Strong was very good at Louisville
Not good in Texas
We are excited because the things that made him successful at UL are present at USF.
Nothing is guaranteed but we feel good about the choice.

@ChuckCarltonDMN 2m2 minutes ago
Quick impression of Charlie Strong at USF: Projected air of confidence and comfort in his surroundings far different than his Texas intro.