... and in 13 others he's a basketball coach:

http://deadspin.com/infographic-is-your-...socialflow

Thanks for finding this info. At U of Illinois, the hoops coach doesn't make much less than the football coach. Surprised that Bo Ryan(hoops) is paid more than Gary Anderson(football)

Northeast being weird as usual.

Maybe the Northeast has it right.

Wow Gino makes more than Ollie I remember the reporter and some reporter from a CT paper having words with Jim Calhoon a few years back.

and our highest paid isn't even at the flagship, but our previous chancellor got fired for wanting to start a new med school in Springfield so research money would count for Amherst to try to get into the AAU

Women's basketball coach. Oh UConn.

(05-09-2013 09:19 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Women's basketball coach. Oh UConn.

Embarrassing, isn't it?

They could just say that the coaches are "officially" the highest paid state employees. wink, wink!

The jokes from that just write themselves...

Nevada- a plastic surgeon is the highest paid public employee
Illinois- you might say Tim Beckman doesn't deserve it, but given that the last 3 (4?) governors have left office in handcuffs, it could be going worse places

Northeasterners might feel smug, but they forget pro sports are subsidized more than college. I'm guessing Belichick makes more than the UMass med school chancellor, and I'm sure the Patriots receive more state money than Texas football. I'm always amused that the Northeast prefers pro sports run by large corporations financed by public funds to make private profits while disdaining college sports, where (at least at the highest level) it's mostly private money and any profits go back to the university (or at least the athletic department).

And we wonder why this country is going to sh*t. Our priorities are totally **********************************

The entire state of Iowa must be laughing at the fact that the highest-paid public employee in California is now Steve Freakin' Alford.

But it looks like a trend on that graphic. Assuming that Deadspin's data is up-to-date, several of these highest-paid state employee/coaches have a career record of 0-0 at their current school:

Steve Alford (UCLA BB)
Bret Bielema (Arkansas FB)
Mark Helfrich (Oregon FB)
Butch Jones (Tennessee FB)
Eddie Jordan (Rutgers BB)
Mike MacIntyre (Colorado FB)
Richard Pitino (Minnesota BB)

Public universities compete in the private market. In many states, the only state funding they receive is a subsidy per in-state student.

If you're going to count university employees as "public employees," then you also have to count General Motors, Fannie May, Freddie Mac, the Alaska Permanent Fund (a firm that invests Alaska's oil wealth and has $40 billion in assets), and any venture capital firm run by the State or local governments (which there are a ton, believe me). These are all "state-owned" companies that compete against private firms.

This especially applies to athletic departments, which by law, aren't supposed to receive state funding (at least in Ohio, and probably other States too). Correct me if I'm wrong, but most athletic departments at SEC schools (other than Vandy) are a different legal entity from the school, which even furthers the separation.

Of course, splitting off the public part of that pay from media income (eg, coaches shows, endorsements) might change the result, but if it did, it wouldn't get as many hits. More work for fewer hits? Never mind, leave the numbers as sensationalist as possible.

(05-10-2013 11:44 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Of course, splitting off the public part of that pay from media income (eg, coaches shows, endorsements) might change the result

It wouldn't, unless the media income is part of a separate contract for which the school is not legally on the hook.

I think in most cases, the money is part of the coach's contract with the school even though the school is using Nike money or media money to pay part or all of it. Also, if the coach is fired, the buyout money is also in the contract and the school is on the hook for it, even if the school ends up getting the money from boosters or whomever.

Using Nike money to pay a football coach is, in that way, kind of like using money from John Doe's endowment to pay the John Doe Professor of Physics at your university. The professor is a university employee and the university is legally obligated for his/her salary and benefits even if the cost is covered by the endowment and not by the university's general operating fund.

Worst offenders:

1) New Jersey, Basketball coach. Really? It should be the football coach
2) Nevada, Med school plastic surgeon. Nuf said.
3) Maine, Law School Dean. Only one of these on the list. It needs to be the University President or Hockey Coach.
4) Connecticut, Women's basketball coach. This explains why UConn is not in the ACC.

(05-10-2013 11:44 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Of course, splitting off the public part of that pay from media income (eg, coaches shows, endorsements) might change the result, but if it did, it wouldn't get as many hits. More work for fewer hits? Never mind, leave the numbers as sensationalist as possible.

THIS

And there was a thread around here just a few days ago questioning the profitability of FBS football programs? Do you really think they would be the highest paid persons in 27 states if the programs weren't profitable?

(05-10-2013 01:34 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  And we wonder why this country is going to sh*t. Our priorities are totally **********************************

I totally agree with this post!

(05-10-2013 05:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And there was a thread around here just a few days ago questioning the profitability of FBS football programs? Do you really think they would be the highest paid persons in 27 states if the programs weren't profitable?

In many places, to call the program "profitable" you have to count the money donated by boosters as revenue. Some athletic departments count the money collected from "student activity fees" as revenue. (See the USA Today report on college athletic finances for several examples.)

That's different, obviously, from the sense in which NFL franchises are profitable.