prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 14:56:45 GMT -5
Steve Alford at UCLA "gave back" his extension last year after missing the NCAAs Because Steve Alford did it, would you? A good, reasonable person/gentleman probably would. |
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,398 
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Jan 9, 2017 15:04:28 GMT -5
Because Steve Alford did it, would you? I might if I had already earned 8 million dollars and my extension didn't begin for another 3 years. I wouldn't. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 9, 2017 15:05:26 GMT -5
Because Steve Alford did it, would you? A good, reasonable person/gentleman probably would. It's easy to say this when you're not the one giving the money back. Also, Steve Alford being the exception, I cannot think of anyone else in any industry who gave back money because their performance was perceived to be lacking. To make a bigger point, we don't know JT3's contract terms or how long remains on his contract. But, assuming it's not up after this year, you all do realize that even if JT3 was dismissed, the university would still be on the hook paying him until the contract expired? So, whether you think JT3 should be fired or not, the university still has an obligation to pay JT3, regardless of whether he's the coach. In fact, that's what Georgetown did in Esherick's case, since the university unwisely signed him to a long-term extension the year before he was fired. And that was for significantly less than JT3 makes right now. Thus, again, I am failing to see the obsession with salary. In sports, coaching salaries are set on a contract and usually based on past success, not current or future success. And nobody rational would give the money back. And those of you saying he should give it back are the same ones who want to fire him! So why would he give it back? |
|
smokeyjack
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by smokeyjack on Jan 9, 2017 15:06:07 GMT -5
I said it earlier: I think JT3 should take the high road and give some money back. Does he need to? No, that was the contract he signed. Maybe we would have been smarter to make it a highly performance driven contract with milestones to meet but that is not the industry standard. A show of hands from those of you around the table who will take the "high road" and give back a portion of their salary:  Such arguments are not well founded because they make an assumption that a winning record is the measurement of a coach at Georgetown within the University. As noted before, it isn't and there are many examples of this. Those are not the terms of this agreement and won't be going forward. Few coaching contracts, even at State U, are expressly founded on winning at the T&C level. But claiming that athletic success is not part of the expectation at GU is ludicrous. And a cursory look at TIJ's results analysis above pretty clearly removes any chance of twisting this into a semantics battle over the definition of "success." As SD said, if JT3's job expectations are completely unattached to on-court success, then the university is betraying both a large chunk of the fan base, not to mention logic. Last time I checked, we were keeping score and charging admission. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:08:45 GMT -5
A good, reasonable person/gentleman probably would. It's easy to say this when you're not the one giving the money back. I wasn't talking about giving money back. He shouldn't do that. What I meant is not taking more, nevermind the extension of his contract. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 9, 2017 15:11:29 GMT -5
Of course, coaching success is an important consideration. I don't believe for one minute the people saying it isn't. And there's no denying that there's been less success than people want recently. The question (and this is where people differ) is whether we are at the point where a change needs to be made. Some people think that time passed long ago, some are coming to that conclusion now, and others (like me), think it's premature to be dismissing the coach now.
But, of course, there's an expectation of winning. If there was no expectation of winning, there would not have been a reason to build an expensive practice facility. Of course, other sports benefit from the facility too, but that's clearly not why it was built.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:19:18 GMT -5
But, of course, there's an expectation of winning. If there was no expectation of winning, there would not have been a reason to build an expensive practice facility. Nor a reason to pay the head coach a Top 10 NCAA salary of $3M plus benefits. |
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:21:41 GMT -5
Exactly. We could pay a guy 100K to recruit a bunch of good students who are also OK basketball players and all come from good families and don't get in trouble. That ain't hard.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,681
|
Post by tashoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:25:20 GMT -5
If there was no expectation of winning, no one would be discussing the tenure of the HC of the MBB at all. The discussion about the compensation is silly because, as others have noted, the man has a contract. What purpose would giving back some marginal amount of money serve?
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:30:00 GMT -5
If there was no expectation of winning, no one would be discussing the tenure of the HC of the MBB at all. The discussion about the compensation is silly because, as others have noted, the man has a contract. Contracts can be amended if both parties agree to it. Or, he could resign and the University would not owe him anything else. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 9, 2017 15:32:36 GMT -5
But, of course, there's an expectation of winning. If there was no expectation of winning, there would not have been a reason to build an expensive practice facility. Nor a reason to pay the head coach a Top 10 NCAA salary of $3M plus benefits. Yes, and when JT3 was given his contract, he earned that. As I said, salaries are based on past performance, not future performance. I mean, USC gave Enfield a big raise over his FGCU salary to $1,000,000 a year solely for winning two NCAA games, essentially (he can thank us). I realize that there's an agenda out there trying to argue that JT3 never had success or it wasn't good enough, but the fact is that in a span from 2005-2015 he gave us NCAA seeds of: 7 (Sweet 16), 2 (Final Four), 2, 3, 6, 3, 2, 4. There aren't many more than 10 coaches (if that) who had similar success in getting good seeds in that time range. Now, I fully admit that the March results weren't there, but it's easy to see why he made so much money - he had very high quality regular seasons, which is where all those high seeds came from. We don't know the terms of JT3's contract, but the reason he's making that amount of money is because of what he did 2015 and beforehand. So, yes, it's actually quite logical that he'd be making that amount of money, even if the last couple of seasons have been poor. That's (partially) why we would not pay a new coach $3 million when he is hired. First, there wouldn't be anybody meriting that type of money who would come to Georgetown. Second, any mid-major coach or assistant we would hire would be fairly unproven and would not deserve that kind of money. Again, as tashoya said, I don't get the obsession with the money aspect. He's paid because of the past performance, and the university has an obligation to pay him for the duration of his contract, regardless of whether he's there are dismissed. And, my feeling is that if we hired a replacement who made less money (for example, $1.2 million or $1.5 million) that expectations would be no lower among fans. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 9, 2017 15:38:07 GMT -5
If there was no expectation of winning, no one would be discussing the tenure of the HC of the MBB at all. The discussion about the compensation is silly because, as others have noted, the man has a contract. Contracts can be amended if both parties agree to it. Or, he could resign and the University would not owe him anything else. This is getting silly now. I have no idea what you do prhoya, but my feeling is that if you were leaving your job and owed a substantial sum of money you would not just give it back to your employer. And what type of amendment do you suggest? Negotiate a lower salary, and then dismiss him? Even if he did renegotiate (and I wouldn't), any sensible person would negotiate a clause stating that if he was dismissed the original terms kicked in. There's no reason to give up money if you're going to get canned anyway. |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,458
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:40:58 GMT -5
Contracts can be amended if both parties agree to it. Or, he could resign and the University would not owe him anything else. This is getting silly now. I have no idea what you do prhoya, but my feeling is that if you were leaving your job and owed a substantial sum of money you would not just give it back to your employer. And what type of amendment do you suggest? Negotiate a lower salary, and then dismiss him? Even if he did renegotiate (and I wouldn't), any sensible person would negotiate a clause stating that if he was dismissed the original terms kicked in. There's no reason to give up money if you're going to get canned anyway. David Falk is III's agent. He's not renegotiating or giving anything back. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:41:04 GMT -5
Nor a reason to pay the head coach a Top 10 NCAA salary of $3M plus benefits. Yes, and when JT3 was given his contract, he earned that. As I said, salaries are based on past performance, not future performance. I mean, USC gave Enfield a big raise over his FGCU salary to $1,000,000 a year solely for winning two NCAA games, essentially (he can thank us). I realize that there's an agenda out there trying to argue that JT3 never had success or it wasn't good enough, but the fact is that in a span from 2005-2015 he gave us NCAA seeds of: 7 (Sweet 16), 2 (Final Four), 2, 3, 6, 3, 2, 4. There aren't many more than 10 coaches (if that) who had similar success in getting good seeds in that time range. Now, I fully admit that the March results weren't there, but it's easy to see why he made so much money - he had very high quality regular seasons, which is where all those high seeds came from. We don't know the terms of JT3's contract, but the reason he's making that amount of money is because of what he did 2015 and beforehand. So, yes, it's actually quite logical that he'd be making that amount of money, even if the last couple of seasons have been poor. That's (partially) why we would not pay a new coach $3 million when he is hired. First, there wouldn't be anybody meriting that type of money who would come to Georgetown. Second, any mid-major coach or assistant we would hire would be fairly unproven and would not deserve that kind of money. Again, as tashoya said, I don't get the obsession with the money aspect. He's paid because of the past performance, and the university has an obligation to pay him for the duration of his contract, regardless of whether he's there are dismissed. And, my feeling is that if we hired a replacement who made less money (for example, $1.2 million or $1.5 million) that expectations would be no lower among fans. He's making that Top 10 salary because he is JT2's son, simple as that. That record did not merit a Top 5 salary at the time. The NCAA upset losses followed by a losing record and not making a post-season tournament, followed by his hirrible record in the new BE would have gotten him fired at other Top 10 salary-paying universities. He is protected by JT2 and that's why he is still around. |
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,681
|
Post by tashoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:42:27 GMT -5
This is getting silly now. I have no idea what you do prhoya, but my feeling is that if you were leaving your job and owed a substantial sum of money you would not just give it back to your employer. And what type of amendment do you suggest? Negotiate a lower salary, and then dismiss him? Even if he did renegotiate (and I wouldn't), any sensible person would negotiate a clause stating that if he was dismissed the original terms kicked in. There's no reason to give up money if you're going to get canned anyway. David Falk is III's agent. He's not renegotiating or giving anything back. And JT3 is not a moron so he's not renegotiating or giving anything back. |
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,681
|
Post by tashoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:45:30 GMT -5
Yes, and when JT3 was given his contract, he earned that. As I said, salaries are based on past performance, not future performance. I mean, USC gave Enfield a big raise over his FGCU salary to $1,000,000 a year solely for winning two NCAA games, essentially (he can thank us). I realize that there's an agenda out there trying to argue that JT3 never had success or it wasn't good enough, but the fact is that in a span from 2005-2015 he gave us NCAA seeds of: 7 (Sweet 16), 2 (Final Four), 2, 3, 6, 3, 2, 4. There aren't many more than 10 coaches (if that) who had similar success in getting good seeds in that time range. Now, I fully admit that the March results weren't there, but it's easy to see why he made so much money - he had very high quality regular seasons, which is where all those high seeds came from. We don't know the terms of JT3's contract, but the reason he's making that amount of money is because of what he did 2015 and beforehand. So, yes, it's actually quite logical that he'd be making that amount of money, even if the last couple of seasons have been poor. That's (partially) why we would not pay a new coach $3 million when he is hired. First, there wouldn't be anybody meriting that type of money who would come to Georgetown. Second, any mid-major coach or assistant we would hire would be fairly unproven and would not deserve that kind of money. Again, as tashoya said, I don't get the obsession with the money aspect. He's paid because of the past performance, and the university has an obligation to pay him for the duration of his contract, regardless of whether he's there are dismissed. And, my feeling is that if we hired a replacement who made less money (for example, $1.2 million or $1.5 million) that expectations would be no lower among fans. He's making that Top 10 salary because he is JT2's son, simple as that. That record did not merit a Top 5 salary at the time. The NCAA upset losses followed by a losing record and not making a post-season tournament, followed by his hirrible record in the new BE would have gotten him fired at other Top 10 salary-paying universities. He is protected by JT2 and that's why he is still around. Partially true I'm sure. Coming off a Final Four, being the son of the man who made the Georgetown program a nationally recognized thing, there was/is actual value to JT3 being a Thompson. His lineage is worth more to Georgetown than it would be to any other school in the world. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:49:24 GMT -5
Contracts can be amended if both parties agree to it. Or, he could resign and the University would not owe him anything else. This is getting silly now. I have no idea what you do prhoya, but my feeling is that if you were leaving your job and owed a substantial sum of money you would not just give it back to your employer. And what type of amendment do you suggest? Negotiate a lower salary, and then dismiss him? Even if he did renegotiate (and I wouldn't), any sensible person would negotiate a clause stating that if he was dismissed the original terms kicked in. There's no reason to give up money if you're going to get canned anyway. I don't get your response. He does not owe money to the university. As to terms, anything can be negotiated by reasonable parties. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 9, 2017 15:51:40 GMT -5
He's making that Top 10 salary because he is JT2's son, simple as that. That record did not merit a Top 5 salary at the time. The NCAA upset losses followed by a losing record and not making a post-season tournament, followed by his hirrible record in the new BE would have gotten him fired at other Top 10 salary-paying universities. He is protected by JT2 and that's why he is still around. Maybe somewhat, but JT3 would not have been brought in at a salary of $450,000 or whatever it was in that range if the sole goal was to enrich the Thompson family. It's not always logical, but in sports salaries go way, way up after NCAA success. That's why JT3's salary rose so fast. I mean, look at Brad Stevens - his base pay was $330,000 in 2008 and was $767,657 by 2011 (with total income of $1.2 million). I can guarantee you that if Stevens had stayed at Butler he'd be making a ton more now. In 2007-2008, Thompson got a boost to just over $2 million. So most of his salary boost came from the Final Four. And I think you can argue that the years following deserved increases too considering that the market has blown up for college coaches in both basketball and football in those years. And as I've said before, before the national championship Jay Wright's record wasn't all that different from JT3's, yet they both made similar amounts. BTW, in 2007 it was reported by The Hoya that Thompson got a six year extension. That means it would have expired in 2013. Assuming he got a similar extension, the university is likely committed to him for at least two more seasons, if not more. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 15:53:30 GMT -5
He's making that Top 10 salary because he is JT2's son, simple as that. That record did not merit a Top 5 salary at the time. The NCAA upset losses followed by a losing record and not making a post-season tournament, followed by his hirrible record in the new BE would have gotten him fired at other Top 10 salary-paying universities. He is protected by JT2 and that's why he is still around. Partially true I'm sure. Coming off a Final Four, being the son of the man who made the Georgetown program a nationally recognized thing, there was/is actual value to JT3 being a Thompson. His lineage is worth more to Georgetown than it would be to any other school in the world. I would bet that the majority would say that lineage is now holding th university back. As we've said before, both parties have received many blessings for being associated with one another. But, if it's not working, it may be time to part ways. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,604
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 9, 2017 16:02:06 GMT -5
He's making that Top 10 salary because he is JT2's son, simple as that. That record did not merit a Top 5 salary at the time. The NCAA upset losses followed by a losing record and not making a post-season tournament, followed by his hirrible record in the new BE would have gotten him fired at other Top 10 salary-paying universities. He is protected by JT2 and that's why he is still around. Maybe somewhat, but JT3 would not have been brought in at a salary of $450,000 or whatever it was in that range if the sole goal was to enrich the Thompson family. It's not always logical, but in sports salaries go way, way up after NCAA success. That's why JT3's salary rose so fast. I mean, look at Brad Stevens - his base pay was $330,000 in 2008 and was $767,657 by 2011 (with total income of $1.2 million). I can guarantee you that if Stevens had stayed at Butler he'd be making a ton more now. In 2007-2008, Thompson got a boost to just over $2 million. So most of his salary boost came from the Final Four. And I think you can argue that the years following deserved increases too considering that the market has blown up for college coaches in both basketball and football in those years. And as I've said before, before the national championship Jay Wright's record wasn't all that different from JT3's, yet they both made similar amounts. BTW, in 2007 it was reported by The Hoya that Thompson got a six year extension. That means it would have expired in 2013. Assuming he got a similar extension, the university is likely committed to him for at least two more seasons, if not more. We would need to know what he was making at Princeton to argue over that first salary at GU. It was not logical to pay him higher than that, no matter who his dad was. One could argue that that DaJuan-Austin-Chris NIT season and all those early exits were yellow flags for further salary raises. I'm guessiing he's signed through two seasons too. |
|
