Rick Barnes discussion [merged]

Lurker

"Never go against a Sicilian...."
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
543
Likes
952
And I understand what you're saying but I couldn't and don't operate that way. If my salary commitment go up my expectations go up. If I'm running a business and have to pay you more but expect the same my ROI goes down. My goal is to turn as much profit as possible so if I pay you more, I expect more to keep my ROI the same or higher.
That is our difference in a nutshell. You view college basketball purely through the lens of a business. I understand why, I just disagree. I view it as one part of an educational institution. I'm looking for a benefit other than "profit."

I also question whether increasing a salary is or even should be always accompanied by an automatic expectation of higher profits, but that is a different subject. We have enough to disagree about with basketball coaching. Peace and Go Big Orange!
 
Last edited:

mr.checkerboards

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
23,959
Likes
39,699
That is our difference in a nutshell. You view college basketball purely through the lens of a business. I understand why, I just disagree. I view it as one part of an educational institution. I'm looking for a benefit other than "profit."

I also question whether increasing a salary is or even should be always accompanied by an expectation of higher profits, but that is a different subject. We have enough to disagree about with basketball coaching. Peace and Go Big Orange!
Peace.
 
Likes: Lurker

BisonVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
1,759
Likes
2,604
And sometimes your all isn't good enough. If I am a business owner my job is to maximize profitability. If I can pay person A 8 million and get xyz results or I can pay person B 5 million and match those results, why would I not choose person B?
In theory, you would obviously choose salesman B in that situation. However, what if salesman A had just tied the all time company record for sales in a year? Do you let salesman A take a higher paying job at another company and replace him with someone else for less money who may or may not be able to produce equal results? Or do you pay salesman A whatever it takes to keep him (assuming you can afford to do so)?
 

Lurker

"Never go against a Sicilian...."
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
543
Likes
952
If you make less money, less is expected. You live in a fantasy world and have no idea how a competitive market world works. Years ago, I was taught that if I agreed on a job with an employer to do the best I could at an agreed upon rate, then I needed to give it my all.
Exactly! If I offer you and you accept my job, the amount we agreed for your salary becomes irrelevant. For as long as you accept the agreed salary, I expect your best efforts to maintain my expectations. If you don't meet my expectations, you are gone. If you can make more someplace else, I hope I get a chance to decide to match or exceed your new offer, but if you leave for more money (i.e. market goes up), I'll look for the next man up. The salary changes nothing with respect to what I expect.
 
Likes: cardvolfan

mr.checkerboards

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
23,959
Likes
39,699
In theory, you would obviously choose salesman B in that situation. However, what if salesman A had just tied the all time company record for sales in a year? Do you let salesman A take a higher paying job at another company and replace him with someone else for less money who may or may not be able to produce equal results? Or do you pay salesman A whatever it takes to keep him (assuming you can afford to do so)?
I take my chances with B, because what if B beats A.
 

BisonVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
1,759
Likes
2,604
I take my chances with B, because what if B beats A.
That's fair. Not a right or wrong question. Just a matter of strategy. If you're certain that you'll be able to go get someone just as good or better, more power to you. If you hire someone who doesn't work out, though, you will have backed yourself into a corner by not doing everything you could to keep person A. Just a matter of how much risk you're willing to take.
 

mr.checkerboards

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
23,959
Likes
39,699
That's fair. Not a right or wrong question. Just a matter of strategy. If you're certain that you'll be able to go get someone just as good or better, more power to you. If you hire someone who doesn't work out, though, you will have backed yourself into a corner by not doing everything you could to keep person A. Just a matter of how much risk you're willing to take.
Exactly. Nothing is 100% in life. But life is about taking risks. Nobody is perfect and there is always someone better out there. My question is why not try and find it?
 

VolGee4

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
22,143
Likes
19,760
And I understand what you're saying but I couldn't and don't operate that way. If my salary commitment go up my expectations go up. If I'm running a business and have to pay you more but expect the same my ROI goes down. My goal is to turn as much profit as possible so if I pay you more, I expect more to keep my ROI the same or higher.
That’s not how supply and demand always work. Sometimes, the prices go up just to maintain status quo. In simple terms, when there is a lot of demand, for say gasoline, price goes up. You expect it to run your engine regardless if it’s 1.50 per gallon or 2.50 per gallon. The 2.50 per gallon does not do any more than the cheaper version.

Coaching salaries, very much like almost everything in life, revolve around timing and whether someone is in demand.
 
Last edited:

VolGee4

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
22,143
Likes
19,760
And sometimes your all isn't good enough. If I am a business owner my job is to maximize profitability. If I can pay person A 8 million and get xyz results or I can pay person B 5 million and match those results, why would I not choose person B?
That’s in a vacuum and just hypothetical. You don’t know that person B can match those results. You know what person A can do based on history, and you may gamble to see if person B can match. Sometimes, it works and sometimes it doesn’t. Then if person B does match results, his demand goes up, as does his salary.
 

BisonVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
1,759
Likes
2,604
Exactly. Nothing is 100% in life. But life is about taking risks. Nobody is perfect and there is always someone better out there. My question is why not try and find it?
Here's how I'm guessing Tennessee came to the decision to throw the bank at Barnes rather than letting him walk and having to hire another coach:

1) Barnes was coming off of a 31 win season. He bad just won the Naismith coach of the year award. Prior to that season, Tennessee had only won 31 games in a season one time in program history. The year before that, Tennessee won the regular season conference championship for the first time since 2008. It's fair to say that Barnes was on fire at the time. Tennessee probably wasn't sure they could find another coach who could match those results, at least not one who would take the job.
2) Tennessee was just a few years removed from the Tyndall fiasco and the Cuonzo Martin era which was, aside from the tournament run in 2014, very forgettable.
3) prior to Barnes, Tennessee had hit on two of it's last six coaches (Green and Pearl). Fulmer would have been the man to hire Barnes replacement which was probably a scary thought for Boyd and company.

Now let's say Barnes didn't have any suitors after that season. Tennessee probably gives him a raise, but not an astormical one. Let's also say UCLA or someone else came calling after this season. Does Tennessee throw the bank at Barnes now? I doubt it. They probably take the risk of hiring another coach who they believe can do just as good or perhaps better. At the time he got that big raise, there were just a lot of factors at play that led to the $5m decision being made.
 

The Dog

Because I Can
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
10,337
Likes
13,047
Here's how I'm guessing Tennessee came to the decision to throw the bank at Barnes rather than letting him walk and having to hire another coach:

1) Barnes was coming off of a 31 win season. He bad just won the Naismith coach of the year award. Prior to that season, Tennessee had only won 31 games in a season one time in program history. The year before that, Tennessee won the regular season conference championship for the first time since 2008. It's fair to say that Barnes was on fire at the time. Tennessee probably wasn't sure they could find another coach who could match those results, at least not one who would take the job.
2) Tennessee was just a few years removed from the Tyndall fiasco and the Cuonzo Martin era which was, aside from the tournament run in 2014, very forgettable.
3) prior to Barnes, Tennessee had hit on two of it's last six coaches (Green and Pearl). Fulmer would have been the man to hire Barnes replacement which was probably a scary thought for Boyd and company.

Now let's say Barnes didn't have any suitors after that season. Tennessee probably gives him a raise, but not an astormical one. Let's also say UCLA or someone else came calling after this season. Does Tennessee throw the bank at Barnes now? I doubt it. They probably take the risk of hiring another coach who they believe can do just as good or perhaps better. At the time he got that big raise, there were just a lot of factors at play that led to the $5m decision being made.
Yes, sir, u nailed it, imo
 

EZE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
10,815
Likes
10,551
I take my chances with B, because what if B beats A.
So, you would always go coach shopping in the bargain bin thinking that the grass is greener with a cheaper coach. You obviously haven’t followed Tennessee coaching hires in football and basketball in the past.

Your reasoning also is flawed for another reason. If you hire a cheaper coach B and he has Barnes-like success (which is historically very good for UT), Coach B will demand a raise or look elsewhere.

Thank goodness you aren’t running our AD.
 

mr.checkerboards

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
23,959
Likes
39,699
So, you would always go coach shopping in the bargain bin thinking that the grass is greener with a cheaper coach. You obviously haven’t followed Tennessee coaching hires in football and basketball in the past.

Your reasoning also is flawed for another reason. If you hire a cheaper coach B and he has Barnes-like success (which is historically very good for UT), Coach B will demand a raise or look elsewhere.

Thank goodness you aren’t running our AD.
It would depend on age and a lot of factors in determining if I stuck with that coach or not. But like I have said before, pointing out the past is irrelevant in this case imo. A lot of those terrible hires were made by an AD that barely knew we had sports other than football. I trust DW to find a solid replacement.
 

EZE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
10,815
Likes
10,551
It would depend on age and a lot of factors in determining if I stuck with that coach or not. But like I have said before, pointing out the past is irrelevant in this case imo. A lot of those terrible hires were made by an AD that barely knew we had sports other than football. I trust DW to find a solid replacement.
Sorta like the underwhelming football hire he just made?
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2011
Messages
31,910
Likes
23,135
It’s really ignorant to assume that anybody making $3 million/year isn’t already doing their absolute best. Coaches’ salaries are determined by simple economics and existing deals. Several coaches are going to negotiate better deals as the COVID gets behind us. Barnes lucked into redoing his deal just ahead of the pandemic. Even with the fortunate timing, his current pay is probably closer to the 25th highest paid coach than to the highest paid coach.

Barnes was bumped into his current deal because it makes more sense than resetting the program yet again. There is value in living in the Top 25. Barnes does that and the exposure from that is worth considerably more than the marginal bump in pay to retain him.
 

mr.checkerboards

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
23,959
Likes
39,699
Lmao your fixation with people age is strange...yes there’s a different in Kim English and Barnes, but when you’re arguing about coaches in their 50’s and 60’s I think you’re reaching a bit.
Who's more likely to be around longer? A 66 year old coach or a 49 year old one? Which is more likely to be more open minded to change in their style and not set in their ways?
 
Likes: TrumpedUpVol

VN Store


Sponsors
 

Top