LSAClassOf2000

June 3rd, 2014 at 6:27 PM ^

"...Alabama's football program had $88.7 million in operating revenue during the 2012-13 fiscal year. That powered the Crimson Tide athletics department to $143.8 million in total operating revenue that year..."

There are many metrics which we could use here to determine if he is worth it, but when football is responsible for approximately 62 cents of every dollar of revenue as is the case in Alabama (and probably at many other schools in Division I), I can see why they are willing to offer such contracts. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130603

WolverineMac

June 3rd, 2014 at 6:29 PM ^

I felt like his decisions in the Auburn game as well as his teams obvious letdown against OU were pretty big and actually classic old Saban, but at this point he's allowed or at least will be allowed a hiccup or two. More money more scrutiny coming his way if they don't win and I don't think Dennis the Menace as his OC is going to be looked at as a wise decision in a few years.

Joined: 02/14/2010

MGoPoints: 2509

Avon Barksdale

June 3rd, 2014 at 6:35 PM ^

The demise of a dynasty always starts with QB issues: Miami and USC being the most recent examples. If Coker isn't good, that opens up 8-4. One bad season and the wheels can come off quick for three straight mediocre seasons.

I know Alabama recruits incredible athletes, but let's not lie about it. Who thought it was humanely possible for USC and Miami to both go nearly a decade without a conference championship with the way they both were recruiting.

Joined: 04/27/2013

MGoPoints: 12859

gwkrlghl

June 3rd, 2014 at 6:50 PM ^

Look at how well Alabama football is doing and the amount of positive exposure their athletics department and university are getting. Off course he's worth it.

Will some be offended and say "A coach shouldn't make that much"? Yes they will. But monetarily, Saban is worth it and it's not even a question.

Joined: 04/13/2012

MGoPoints: 72

991GT3

June 3rd, 2014 at 7:07 PM ^

money than the best pro coaches in a league where he failed?

I like Saban and think he is a terrific coach but the contract Alabama just gave him is obscene. When he took the Alabama job it was not like it was taking over a losing program. The Alabama brand in football is better than Michigan.

This is the tipping point for college football. Handing out this kind of money will only embolden college players to demand some type of pay for play. 

Joined: 12/14/2013

MGoPoints: 1133

WolvinLA2

June 3rd, 2014 at 7:14 PM ^

Why does it matter what NFL coaches are making?  Is there a rule saying NFL coaches need to make more than college coaches?  College football makes a ton of money at the college level, and due to recruiting, the Head Coach plays a much bigger role in the program's success.  

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

SWPro

June 3rd, 2014 at 8:10 PM ^

Any chance big colleges start to lure coaches from NFL gigs?

 

The NFL was always the big pay day and coaches would just there because of the money. If the big college start offering more than NFL positions seems like it would be possible.

 

I always understood that college coaches got more of an "off-season" than NFL coaches and now the NFL is trying to shorten that (moving the draft and free agency).

 

Could be an interesting dynamic.

Joined: 06/08/2013

MGoPoints: 1516

Danwillhor

June 3rd, 2014 at 8:25 PM ^

I've always said that CFB is (by far, IMO) the sport most dependant on coaching for success. A very talented football team can dominate or crumble due to coaching. Basketball? Great coaching helps but it's a totally different sport in that an average HS coach could win with Kentucky talent. It's more on the kids individually than football. Baseball is almost totally on the players and hockey is up there near basketball, IMO. Always exceptions but those sports have a few guys (college & pro) that stand out before getting to the rest, all basically on the same "average-below average" level. That's both college & pro basketball, baseball, etc. Football is different. The NFL less so but no sport is more dependant on coaching for success. Just like the others, there is a hierarchy of coaches but after the top guys there isn't the HUGE drop that the other sports have. That said, those top guys in football are worth their weight in gold and especially CFB due to recruiting and the things you must do outside of teaching/scheme to win. A few schools can afford those top guys and Alabama is one. So is Michigan and that is what makes it such a shame that we don't spend like it. We do as a school BECAUSE of the UM Football brand and it's seemingly "open ATM" profits but, oddly, we don't invest in coaching to sustain (or enhance) said income. In CFB, Saban is worth it.

Joined: 12/02/2008

MGoPoints: 8609

Danwillhor

June 3rd, 2014 at 10:07 PM ^

However, GMatt was more of a life and NFL casualty who just happened to have a stellar CFB career, a daughter in AA as well as a grandchild. Brandon paid this staff more in line with what UM should but it's still to (IMO) some wrong coaches and not enough overall. As for Nuss, again, a guy Saban didn't want anymore whether we like it or not. Our gain? We'll see soon enough. Yet, that was a "can't pass this up" hire due to Borges and what we want to be offensively. If we truly spent and attacked the hiring process the way other programs in our realm do, we'd be fine. The fact that this is the first staff to get competitive salaries in modern UM history says a lot. Even then, when you have a couple major names out there and you're MICHIGAN.....you pay....just like Bama. No knock on Hoke but should he have been the first HC to buck the "UM discount" trend? No. If you give 2010 Hoke that much money, you add a couple million and get a proven guy. Period. We're not poor. Michigan can make it impossible to say no because at the end of the discussion, money talks.

Joined: 12/02/2008

MGoPoints: 8609

B1G_Fan

June 4th, 2014 at 2:43 AM ^

You're entitled to your own opinion. Without a question right now it's not even close and i cant comment on the 40ies since I was even thought of but, for most of my life 1975 till now, I'll say Michigan  was equal to  and in most cases better than the Alabama brand.

It's hard to really seperate schools like Alabama, Michigan, USC, Nebraska, Ohio State and Notre Dame as far as historical greatness goes.

Joined: 10/11/2012

MGoPoints: 3411

MGoGrendel

June 4th, 2014 at 6:48 AM ^

That is a long time. Michigan has been historically a great team with a great brand. We go through some years where we don't win as much as we like. But the brand is still strong. Other schools have similar traditions and I wouldn't say Alabama, USC, Texas, etc. have similar brand loyalty as Michigan.

Joined: 01/21/2013

MGoPoints: 70269

WolverineHistorian

June 4th, 2014 at 9:20 AM ^

"When he took over the Alabama brand, it's not like he was taking over a losing program." It amazes me how short people's memories are. Look at the several seasons leading up to Saban's arrival for Alabama. 3-8, 7-5, 4-9, 6-6, 7-5, 6-7 with 2 random 10 win seasons in-between. Not a losing program all time but at THAT time pretty bad. They had some pretty horrid seasons in the 90s as well. It's kind of like USC before Pete Carrol arrived in 2001 and got them the best players money can buy. 60+ losses over an 8 year span, the college football world jokingly referring to them as SC Community College. The 25 years before Mack Brown arrived, Texas was about as bad to a mediocre program as one can be. Oklahoma and LSU in the 90's? Awful.

Joined: 08/10/2009

MGoPoints: 55466

991GT3

June 4th, 2014 at 12:49 PM ^

Mckay at SC had a great program. Darrel Royal at Texas also had a terrific program.

I agree there will be years where the performance is not up to the school standards. Yet even in losing seasons like Michigan's recent run under RR, Hoke was able to attract top talent. No one would consider Michigan, Alabama, Texas or Oklahoma losing programs. Despite recent downturns, most would consider these schools elite schools in football.

Joined: 12/14/2013

MGoPoints: 1133

SECcashnassadvantage

June 3rd, 2014 at 11:14 PM ^

Saban doesn't prepare his teams to play and is a failure. They need Hoke in Alabama to fire them up.

Joined: 01/25/2014

MGoPoints: 2662

UMgradMSUdad

June 4th, 2014 at 6:45 AM ^

I'm not sure what point the OP is trying to make about Kiffen and Nussmeier, but yes, Saban is worth it, and Nussmeier is worth more than Kiffen as well.  

Joined: 07/02/2011

MGoPoints: 13185

maize-blue

June 4th, 2014 at 10:29 AM ^

Yeah, as much I hate to admit it, Saban probably is worth the money. At least right now. Nussmeier is worth more in my opinion as well, even though I haven't seen the team play a down in an actual game. I wouldn't want Kiffen around my program if I was an AD or head coach.

Joined: 01/10/2013

MGoPoints: 44662

Tater

June 4th, 2014 at 9:05 AM ^

If Brady Hoke started winning multiple National Championships, would you say he was "worth it" at $6.9 million a year?

Until he stops winning championships, Saban may be worth as much as $20 million a year to any school with a big budget and NC aspirations.

Joined: 08/13/2008

MGoPoints: 30584

ca_prophet

June 4th, 2014 at 3:01 PM ^

Success on the field? Check. Dollars in the coffers? Check. Would others pay him equal or more if he left? Beyond a doubt. Heck, as of October 2013, Alabama's football graduation rates were 73%, same as Illinois and Maryland, and better than Oregon, Wisconsin, MSU and Indiana. http://web1.ncaa.org/GSRSearch/exec/homePage Whether or not you think coaching salaries are out of control, there's little doubt that he should be at the top of the scale.

Joined: 09/07/2010

MGoPoints: 7027