OT: Sark gettin paid!
Slow day on the board, so I hopped over the r/cfb to see what’s going on in the college football world. It looks like Sark’s proposed contract will pay him $10 million/year, making him the 3rd highest paid coach behind Kirby Smart and Dabo Swinney (and tied with Lincoln Riley). From what I could gather, his previous contract was for a measly $5.6 million/year. Here’s the tweet with the details (not sure if this is going to work. I miss the media embed button):
Details of Steve Sarkisian's new contract, via the UT System Board of Regents meeting agenda for Feb. 21-22. pic.twitter.com/poQ18YWZm0
— Inside Texas (@InsideTexas) February 17, 2024
Some of the relevant details:
- Jumps to $10.3 million in 2024, with annual increases of $100,000 through 2030 (gotta cover the cost of inflation, yo!).
- Payments go to “Sark Enterprises”. Is this for tax purposes?
- The contract says “guaranteed”compensation. Is this a Jimbo contract that is fully guaranteed even if he is fired?
Other perks:
- 2 automobiles from a dealer
- 20 hours of private airplane for personal use per year.
There are also a bunch of performance incentives, including:
- $100,000 for making a bowl game (any bowl game)
- $300,000 for winning conference championship
- $1.25 million for winning CFP.
What do you think? Is this a good move by Texas? An overreaction to one good season (he’s gone 5-7, 8-5, & 12-2 at Texas so far)?
February 18th, 2024 at 12:30 PM ^
Embed didn't work like I planned. Hopefully I can copy-and-paste the images:
February 18th, 2024 at 1:02 PM ^
Interesting that’s it’s 20 hours private flight time for personal use. He’ll have to pay income tax on that, I wonder if that’s what the one time payment of 300k is for
February 18th, 2024 at 1:49 PM ^
Question: why would one have to pay taxes for flying private ?
February 18th, 2024 at 2:14 PM ^
His income and benefits are taxable. The private plane perk has monetary value that would need to be determined at fair market value.
At least Texas has no state income tax.
February 19th, 2024 at 9:07 AM ^
Correct. The technical term for this is imputed income. Fringe benefits and perquisites (where we get the word "perks") are absolutely taxable.
February 18th, 2024 at 1:11 PM ^
I'm really curious about what exactly they do at Sark Enterprises
February 18th, 2024 at 4:00 PM ^
It’s very likely an S corp
February 18th, 2024 at 8:00 PM ^
Sark gettin overpaid
February 19th, 2024 at 8:43 AM ^
This: Sark is grossly overrated. Ten seasons at blue bloods with a record of 71-49, one season with 10 wins or more. One 9-4 season, two 8-5 seasons, leaving 6 seasons with 7 or fewer wins. Pretty much the definition of mediocrity. Texas about to have a Charlie Weis moment.
February 18th, 2024 at 8:06 PM ^
Why is it so easy for Texas to generate such a contract for its head coach and so hard for Michigan to do so years in advance?
February 18th, 2024 at 10:24 PM ^
Probably because they're not trying to jerk him around with clauses about potentially getting fired over burger receipts.
February 19th, 2024 at 5:30 PM ^
Serious question:
Can Sark Enterprises donate to the Texas NIL collective?
February 18th, 2024 at 12:33 PM ^
Sark is vastly overrated. My $.02 - Texas was exposed by Washington, Michigan rolled over Washington
Contract reeks of desperation and many years with lousy coaches for Texas.
February 18th, 2024 at 1:43 PM ^
After watching their CFP game, I don't think for a second that they could've beaten the end-of-season Alabama team that we did. Especially if their special teams has shit the bed like ours.
February 18th, 2024 at 2:47 PM ^
I still can’t believe how significant our bad special teams play was. I honestly think we win by at least 10 in regulation if they simply did their job.
February 18th, 2024 at 7:27 PM ^
Agree 100%!
February 19th, 2024 at 8:48 AM ^
Bama had one drive the whole game, two bomber FG's and a gimme gaffe from us to get 20. No way Bama generates more than 13 points without help, and were lucky (incredible kicker and punter) to be in that ball park. Also, refs loving on Bama. That drive-killing joke of a personal foul against Bredeson comes to mind. The lack of a personal foul when the DB pile-drives JJ on the sideline, etc. On a different day we could have beaten Bama 34-13. Our DL dominated Bama more than we did Washington.
February 18th, 2024 at 1:50 PM ^
I think that he's overrated, too. A competent organizer/facilitator should be able to oversee Texas football to the tune of at least nine wins a year on the absolute regular.
But beyond that it's fascinating and crazy to note that it's worth it, in terms of profit generation and dependability, to pay someone that much. And what a gamble it is.
And--if, like me, you have a tenured professor of considerable achievement and two published books in the family, a third book on the way--to note that they make less than one percent of that, in an institution nominally devoted to scholarship. . . such numbers beggar belief. And possibly, if we come to our senses, insurrection.
It's also instructive, and not encouraging, that in a period where bloody everyone is recognizing that the athletes need to get paid, how warped it all is, all of the numbers continue to skew for--well, management, and not labor.
February 18th, 2024 at 1:52 PM ^
I don’t think he is over rated. Reality is he is top 5 college coach now. The talent pool has diminished. Sark won the Big 12 and a birth to the CFP…Texas has to secure him,
compared to Lincoln Riley, Sark is, as of right now, a better coach at playing winning football
February 18th, 2024 at 3:22 PM ^
Hello recency effect!
February 18th, 2024 at 10:16 PM ^
Exactly, why do you think Harbaugh is in the NFL?
February 18th, 2024 at 10:25 PM ^
If you're suggesting it was to get away from Sark, I'm going to disagree with you on that one.
February 18th, 2024 at 7:35 PM ^
Reality is he is top 5 college coach now.
OK, Saban and Harbaugh are now gone, but would you have considered Sarkisian a top seven coach one year ago?
A single season shouldn't move the needle that much.
February 18th, 2024 at 10:17 PM ^
No, but I do know. Who is left? That’s my point: it’s about a head coach that is willing and able to deal with BS that is college football, which is no longer about coaching football
February 19th, 2024 at 8:54 AM ^
It took him 10 years to get a season with 10 wins. So why has he "now" arrived to be a top-5 coach? Please list all the great coaches who took 10 years to get to 10 wins? It took Harbaugh 4 years at a horrible Stanford program. It took him one at UM. Sark's career (59%) is close to Charlie Weis at ND (56%). He's also had the benefit of being in two of the weaker Big 5 conferences.
February 19th, 2024 at 9:10 AM ^
Sark won the Big 12 and a birth to the CFP
*berth
And that has been your daily dose of pedantry.
February 20th, 2024 at 12:54 AM ^
Spelling counts
February 18th, 2024 at 1:57 PM ^
Sparty paid Mel tugger the same rate for pilfering KWIII and beating Michigan.
Q: With JH, Urbz, Saban out of the game - name me your top 10 coaches.
He would be in there. If not name me another 10 you put ahead of him. Riley looks like a fraud with the defenses he trots out.
In fact name the next 4 after Smart at this point. (I'd have Whittingham in there for what he does with lack of resources and recruiting base decade after decade)
Its supply and demand.
February 18th, 2024 at 3:29 PM ^
This would be great thread on it's own--top 10 coaches before 2024 season.
Good call on Whittingham. I'd put DeBoer on the list based on his lengthy accomplishments at multiple levels. Respect for both of them, well beyond just the W/L numbers.
February 18th, 2024 at 5:44 PM ^
Mel Tugger, that’s gold!!!!😂
February 19th, 2024 at 9:03 AM ^
Give me a break. 59% winning percent at 3 blue bloods.
Here are the coaches better (provable by record), just off the top of my head (and I'm sure the list is much more exhaustive). And there are some coaches on this list whom I would never want (Franklin) but who are provably more accomplished than Sark.
Smart, Kiffin, Swinney, Day, Franklin, Ferentz, Wittingham, Lanning, Dykes, Rhule, Bielema, Stoops, Tedford, DeBoer, Leipold, Gunda, Brohm, Kelly, Jerry Kill, Mike Norvell.
Sark had a Gene Chizik/Ed Ogeron year this year, coming out of a weak conference, in which he still lost a game and almost managed to lose to Houston. The guy coaches sloppy teams who aren't mentally tough, which from what I've seen of Sark, roughly mirrors his personality.
February 19th, 2024 at 2:14 PM ^
LOL goor or not is irrelevant. He's getting paid and the number one job is perception of direction. He has that in his favor at this point. He's also getting paid at a place that will pay him all that money to go away! Same as other schools paying their coaches to go way. But it's at least for the immediate future looks like a great investment for Texas.
Made the CFP, Beat Bama in the regular season and the greatest sales job every coach can possibly make is Next year can e even better! IE, Hope!
February 18th, 2024 at 12:35 PM ^
I don't think he's that great but coaches seem to have the leverage these days so maybe it makes sense.
February 18th, 2024 at 12:40 PM ^
I guess the question I have is can he be fired for cause without compensation if NCAA sanctions come down?
February 18th, 2024 at 12:53 PM ^
Sanctions for what, though? Isn't Texas one of those states that basically made their schools immune from NCAA recruiting sanctions?
February 18th, 2024 at 1:19 PM ^
I think Michigan is the only program in the country where this is a legitimate concern. Other major programs have leadership that will stand in front and make sure that never happens.
(apologies in advance to those of you who still believe in Santa)
February 18th, 2024 at 1:45 PM ^
I don't think that's really on Ono himself. He's more of a sports fan than just about any president we've had. There's just a very strong institutional mindset here of deference to the NCAA that is hard to shake.
February 18th, 2024 at 2:17 PM ^
... or apologies to those of us without paranoid ideations
February 18th, 2024 at 1:23 PM ^
In a free market people are paid EXACTLY what they are "worth". Every employee at every organization made a decision to go to work for the amount of money the company they work for agreed to pay them. Nobody is forced (hopefully) to work anywhere they dont want to.
And, conversely, what a company decides to pay their employee is EXACTLY what they are worth. So the concept of over or underpaid is bullshit - Sark is "worth" 10MM/year plus benefits because that's what U of T agreed to pay him. Not a penny more and not a penny less.
This is a lesson our athletic department leadership needs to learn and learn fast IMO. Regardless of what they fell an NIL program or a football HC salary should look like, the market is screaming otherwise.
February 18th, 2024 at 1:39 PM ^
Sure, except a free market only exists in theory.
February 18th, 2024 at 1:54 PM ^
You only exist in theory.
February 18th, 2024 at 3:23 PM ^
Is our men's basketball coach worth the $3.5 million he's getting paid this year?
February 18th, 2024 at 4:33 PM ^
This view is naive at best.
February 19th, 2024 at 6:50 AM ^
In a free market people are paid EXACTLY what they are "worth".
People are paid what they have the leverage to get.
The rise in CEO pay has dwarfed even that of the 0.1% (link). That isn’t because CEOs are worth more than their 0.1% peers. They haven’t driven a corresponding rise in productivity, or in stock value, and they don’t possess rare talent (in the same way, say, a bankable actor or star athlete does). It’s because CEOs have more influence with the people deciding their pay (their boards).
Worth and leverage get conflated. They’re related—worth is one of the factors that leads to leverage—but they’re not the same thing. Worth is the value you bring. Leverage is control.
February 19th, 2024 at 9:05 AM ^
Hmmm.......so you live in a mistake-free world. I like it.
February 19th, 2024 at 11:21 AM ^
mGrow I mostly agree with you. Until you reach the ends of diminishing returns. Building on mercenaries and going full A&M no bueno. Taking a Chip Kelly or Brian Kelly no bueno. It might not work but I prefer what Sherron Moore is doing and how he is building on young coaches with upside. Hopefully we continue to have to compete with the NFL as this seems the cutting edge vs the old guard. Sark is DEF and old guard investment so hard pass for what seems to be the future of college football being the NFL minor leagues.
The Saban/Sark at your school for 20 years VS up and comers grooming for eventual NFL in 5-7 seems the way. As for players - Sabb and Anthony are a hit but at what cost? Even if you have the $ (as M likely has or can) are you best served paying everyone top $ or invest on that hungry upper 3* lower 4* and paying to keep starters at competitive/keep hungry rates.
Time will tell and it is all a chance but I prefer this risk over the latter.
February 18th, 2024 at 12:46 PM ^
Where was the flight risk?
February 18th, 2024 at 1:32 PM ^
probably in the 20 hours of free private jet usage
February 18th, 2024 at 12:54 PM ^
Seems like a good move.
Sark overperformed last year. Sure, he lost to Oklahoma and Washington/Penix, but he beat everyone else including Alabama in Tuscaloosa.
He has been recruiting very well. Texas throws money, sure, but Texas A&M is in their backyard. Every competitive team will be firing the money cannon going forward.
February 18th, 2024 at 12:58 PM ^
It just seems like there's a lot of uncertainty now, though. Joining the SEC this year is going to mean a pretty big step up in competition. Ewers will be gone after this year. Etc.
If it's not fully guaranteed salary, then it's probably not that bad of a contract, depending on the buyout. Texas has the money to spend. But if it's fully guaranteed, well...🤷♂️