What seems to be the problem at UoM

#1
LSUguy31

LSUguy31

LSUFANZONE.com
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
Messages
80
Likes
0
#1
Several here made comments about Carr vetoing Miles selection to UoM (because of bad blood) causing him to stay at LSU... but according to ESPN, Rutgers HC Schiano has turned down the Michigan job and will remain at Rutgers.
So my question is... what seems to be the problem at Michigan causing everyone interviewed so far to turn down this job?
 
#2
#2
Carr even being involved in the process could be one problem. :ermm:

And the fact that UofM may be trying to get a coach on the cheap. :good!: I guess they figure that coaches would just drool to come there and they wouldn't have to pay SEC $$$ for a coach.
 
#3
#3
LSUguy31 said:
Several here made comments about Carr vetoing Miles selection to UoM (because of bad blood) causing him to stay at LSU... but according to ESPN, Rutgers HC Schiano has turned down the Michigan job and will remain at Rutgers.
So my question is... what seems to be the problem at Michigan causing everyone interviewed so far to turn down this job?
Click to expand...

It has something to do with the Big 10 sucking.

Seriously though, Big 10 coaching jobs just aren't as cushy and attractive as they used to be, the Big East and Pac 10 are on their way up and the SEC is obviously better, so why would coaches from those conferences want to take a step back?
 
#4
#4
The truth is that the coaching salaries are ridiculous. No coach should make more than the highest paid academic professor in my opinion. The NCAA member institutions should just agree to some limits in this area.
 
#6
#6
it might also have a lot to do with another University about 190 miles south of UoM.
 
#7
#7
VolunteerHillbilly said:
The truth is that the coaching salaries are ridiculous. No coach should make more than the highest paid academic professor in my opinion. The NCAA member institutions should just agree to some limits in this area.
Click to expand...

It's called a free market.
 
#8
#8
Rasputin_Vol said:
Carr even being involved in the process could be one problem. :ermm:

And the fact that UofM may be trying to get a coach on the cheap. :good!: I guess they figure that coaches would just drool to come there and they wouldn't have to pay SEC $$$ for a coach.
Click to expand...
Amen BRO!!!
 
#9
#9
ukvols said:
Football brings in a lot more money than a single professor.
Click to expand...
How do you know? If you have a nobel prize winning scientist on the faculty, how much research money does it attract? how many tuition paying students will chose that school in order to study under that professor?

Business said:
It's called a free market.
Click to expand...
The NCAA is a sanctioned monopoly. They do not have to operate within the parameters of the free market. Unfortunately, now that some schools are extending contracts to assistant coaches, I see this getting worse before it gets better.
 
#10
#10
I don't think anything is wrong at UofM. I think this year is just confirming what happened last year wasn't a fluke. Good, young, coaches who are in a comfortable position are simply using these big name schools to get a raise.
 
#11
#11
VolunteerHillbilly said:
How do you know? If you have a nobel prize winning scientist on the faculty, how much research money does it attract? how many tuition paying students will chose that school in order to study under that professor?
Click to expand...

It has been shown time and time again that athletic success directly impacts the number of applications submitted to a school.

And btw, you need to show me how many research grants consistently bring in $60+ million a year at most of these universities.
 
#13
#13
one big advantage a tenured professor has over a football coach is that it's easier to fire a coach if he sucks.
 
#15
#15
VolunteerHillbilly said:
How do you know? If you have a nobel prize winning scientist on the faculty, how much research money does it attract?
given the near past absurdity in the Nobel selection processes, I'm not sure it helps. At a place like UT, I can't imagine it making a tremendous difference. Might matter at some high end hard science schools, but they don't typically need the reputation help.

Curious, does the school really get profit style benefit from research grant money. I understand that it helps build research facilities and such, but there really isn't any discretionary money involved, is there?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
#16
#16
emainvol said:
It has something to do with the Big 10 sucking.

Seriously though, Big 10 coaching jobs just aren't as cushy and attractive as they used to be, the Big East and Pac 10 are on their way up and the SEC is obviously better, so why would coaches from those conferences want to take a step back?
Click to expand...

So they could be like OSU and play maybe 1 or 2 decent teams and get a shot to play for the NC every yr??
 
#17
#17
If the NCAA members got together and tried to unilaterally fix salaries, they'd get sued into oblivion.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top