Arguing against invoking JH’s salary in your complaint

Submitted by CarrIsMyHomeboy on October 31st, 2020 at 2:02 PM

If you oppose Harbaugh, fine. I may not oppose him to your extent of recommending another coaching transition (because a dice roll on the offseason carousel probably ends up worse, IMO), but I don’t fully hate the take. 
 

That said: Stop bringing up the salary. It’s entirely irrelevant. The salary is neither based on a specific output nor does it promise one. The salary is wholly about market value. Except that it grows over time, for any one year it is a relatively fixed and predictable variable — and for our sake and the attractiveness of the job, it should be. 


Arguing against this means you are both swiping at ghosts and counter-productively hoping that the position is less attractive for the next guy...be it few or 10+ years from now. 
 

/tl;dr — self-defeating, reductive arguments are a bore

CarrIsMyHomeboy

October 31st, 2020 at 3:12 PM ^

That’s a good point. But this is not the common argument. The common argument is to either reduce his salary (less common) or fire him because of return on investment, specifically. Your point goes in a different direction, arguing that when he gets fired, we’ll be glad his salary was this high in the first place and in that sense, sure, it’s technically relevant.

 

I see nothing to quibble with there.

FrozeMangoes

October 31st, 2020 at 3:19 PM ^

Yeah, his salary tends to be an easy target.

His ROI has been very solid. He has stabilized the program and has been worth every penny.  I just don't think he is the coach to take a program over the hump in the modern game. He has tried but his inner being will always revert back to what he knows best. 

Last straw for me was not moving on from Brown after OSU last year.  He had the chance to improve, he didn't. 

JonnyHintz

November 1st, 2020 at 9:17 AM ^

So would you be okay with the results on the field if he were making $3 million instead? 
 

Results are results. Whether they’re good enough or not really isnt contingent on how much money the guy is making. Which is kinda the point. We wouldn’t feel any better about not making it to Indy, not beating OSU, and losing yesterday if Harbaugh was paid less. Period. So the amount of money he makes is completely irrelevant and has no place in the conversation. 

CarrIsMyHomeboy

October 31st, 2020 at 2:13 PM ^

I’m not offended. Just pointing out that the salary is a correlate of expectations, not a driver of expectations.

Our expectations of Harbaugh are this high only because he’s the coach at this school. Coincidentally, being coach at this school also guarantees a maximally high market value.
 

I’m just asking that we have enough attention to nuance to draw those lines the right way.

 

trueblueintexas

October 31st, 2020 at 2:29 PM ^

What?!? Milton is keeping Michigan in this game.  Last I checked Milton wasn’t repeatedly getting burned playing corner, getting pushed around on the o-line, not getting penetration on the d-line. There’s plenty to be disappointed in today, Milton is no where near the top of the list so far. 

Bluesince89

October 31st, 2020 at 2:46 PM ^

So, why isn't Ryan Day getting paid more with its history, recent success, fan base, and money machine? 

This is a dumb argument.  Harbaugh is getting paid the money he makes because we expected Stanford/San Francisco results.  Michigan doesn't NEED to pay it's coach $7MM+ a year just because.  Ryan Day will get paid more when he proves he's worth it.  

If you're a top 5 paid coach in the country, is it too much to expect top 5 results on occasion? 

FWIW, I don't really care what Harbaugh makes; just pointing out your argument makes no sense.

CarrIsMyHomeboy

October 31st, 2020 at 3:04 PM ^

I didn’t address it because it’s a separate conversation. Yes, Harbaugh’s starting salary at Michigan was a function of both Michigan’s (relatively fixed) position in the market and his career before arriving here. That doesn’t undo my position. Because neither of those items is changeable nor is either pinned to his performance at Michigan. And this is predictable, common. 

Bluesince89

October 31st, 2020 at 3:17 PM ^

Not really.  Starting salaries are a function of both positions in the market and career before showing up, but to suggest that it's more of market position rather than prior track record I believe defies common sense.  Otherwise, Ryan Day would be getting paid a lot more at OSU, which has probably as good if not better of a position in the market given their recent success.  Same for say, Tom Herman.  

I do agree he has been disappointing.  I think part of that is because what we expected when we got him, which was a top 5 coach.  So we paid him like a top 5 coach.  And we haven't gotten those results, which is why I think a lot of people bring up salary.  

Sparty Doesn't Know

October 31st, 2020 at 2:19 PM ^

I was an early adopter of the "Fire Harbaugh" stance, but have never been a fan of the salary argument.   I have been a fan of recruiting good players, designing good game plans around the players you have, developing said players, and preparing them for game day....Literally none of this happens with any regularity.  Therefore, whether he is paid $15/h or $15mil per year, it is time for somebody else.

UM_Ftown

October 31st, 2020 at 2:59 PM ^

Yeah, the main argument should be that he’s not a good coach. Not top 15-20 at least. 
 

People bring up salary because expectations come with it. If I’m paid to be the top 3 best CEO in the country and my performance doesn’t match it, of course that would be a talking point. But people should firstly be asking why I continue to suck. 

pdgoblue25

October 31st, 2020 at 2:53 PM ^

Should be winning this game by 50 pts.  Every rivalry game the other team cares more, unacceptable.

Keep running man coverage and beating Rutgers Don.