Petition the Board of Regents

[da_coach]

OK, hear me out.

The policy of only renewing coaches on a year by year basis is antiquated, and needs to be shown the door.

This worked when everyone was a DII school or smaller.

The truth is, the move to DI put us into the big time, and we need to compensate our coaches in a similar manner.

The thought of losing AJ, just because someone else could offer him a multiple year deal is ridiculous.

I'm not volunteering to write this....maybe someone with more experience in the writing field could(rather than this old coach), but... I would sign it.

Who's with me?

[JackJD]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

Until we can start raising the money to pay more...why would a coach want a multi-year contract? If I was an SDSU coach who is getting paid near the bottom of what D-I coaches are paid (I assume that is the case), then I think I would prefer to have in my bargaining toolbox, the implied 'threat' that I may walk after any one year. I think for the short-term, our coaches are in a better bargaining position to seek more substantial raises until our pay rate is comparable to other highly successful mid-majors.

I wonder how many state schools have a similar prohibition on multi-year contracts. Anyone know? I suspect we aren't the only state but that is only my unsupported gut feeling.

[Kemo]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

I agree there needs to be a change in the policy and as soon as possible, and I second the motion for any (legal) action to help convince the board of regents this policy needs to be changed.

[valleyrabbit]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

IN this day in age, are contracts anything more than symbolic. Ask the University of Louisville or the Atlanta Falcons about Bobby Petrino's? Ask Billy Gillespie? They don't mean much. I agree that it is ridiculous that the state can't do more than a 1 year contract, but would it really help if they would. If a coach wants to leave, he or she will. If the school wants to get rid of the coach, the school will.

[SUPERBUNNY]

Petition the Board of Regents

More important than any contract is the integrity of the AD and how they deal with the situation. We have had a very stable situation where it could be shown that the AD has given coaches ample time to establish programs and that could be shown to potential coaches. If the new AD doesn't continue with the same approach then I agree the results could be disasterous. Also, the last thing we need is any AD or coach that looks at SDSU merely as a stepping stone. This needs to be a place they want to be!

I agree with valleyrabbit that a contract doesn't quite mean what it used to these days. It goes both ways. A coach may look at the lack of long-term deal as a negative, no doubt about it. With a stable staff, it could be looked at as a positive for a coach who could get rewarded for outstanding acheivement. As an AD it gives flexibility to make changes if needed which could allow for a stronger year-to-year deal for a coach without the fear of locking the school into a long-term problem.

As for AJ, if I am correct he has a pretty decent salary here at SDSU. WBB certainly like MBB when it comes to coaches contracts and their high dollars. There are a few plumb jobs out there but with those come a great deal of pressure. AJ's got a great gig here! If he continues to have the same success he will no doubt get calls from some of those top jobs. Will he go? Who knows? I hope not but there is only one person that controls that. My plan is to enjoy it while it lasts!

First things first, we need to hire the right person as our next AD! My hope is we pick someone that continues on a similar path. Why mess with the formula when things are going very well overall?

GB, GB, GJ!

SUPERBUNNY

[22jack]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

This may not be the year that anything gets changed. State employees are not getting raises this year and AJ is a state employee.

[Nidaros]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

I am with those who feel that right now is not a good time for a multiyear contract, although in the future multi year contracs will be a part of the reality in retaining coaches:

Here is an excerpt from TV yesterday's Argus article:

Acting athletic director Mylo Hellickson said that terms for 2009-10 are likely to be negotiated before a full-time AD is hired. He declined to comment specifically on what sort of salary or incentives might be extended to Johnston - who was scheduled to make a base of $114,358 this year - beyond noting that, "If you don't have good people, you're not going to have good programs."

I think what Acting AD Hellickson is avoiding here is the incentives that are in his current contract which will in effect give AJ a raise. These incentives could include winning the SL and an appearence in the Big Dance, winning 30 games etc. So despite the pay freeze, I think AJ will be getting an increase.


Another problem in multiyear contracts is buy outs, which can work both ways. You hire a high profile coach, but he has a five year contract and he is in year 2 so you have to pay the existing employer for those last three years in order to get a release. Or if you got a lemon coach with 3 years to go, you have to pay him three to get him to leave. So the multiyear deals have their problems too.

[Kemo]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

IN this day in age, are contracts anything more than symbolic. Ask the University of Louisville or the Atlanta Falcons about Bobby Petrino's? Ask Billy Gillespie? They don't mean much. I agree that it is ridiculous that the state can't do more than a 1 year contract, but would it really help if they would. If a coach wants to leave, he or she will. If the school wants to get rid of the coach, the school will.

The "buyout" is the important part of multi-year contracts, and it can be both beneficial and a hindrance when dealing with coaches.

The benefit of having multi-year contracts is that it is not only easier to retain coaches because it provides them job security, but it also compensates the university for losing a coach in the middle of a contract, for the school hiring the coach will have to buyout his/her contract. A contract buyout in women's basketball is more effective than its men's counterpart, for there are less schools willing to sign a women's basketball coach to a large contract plus buyout the previous contract (unless the school has some boosters who throw a lot of support around the women's basketball program).

The main negative to multi-year contracts is that it can get expensive to terminate coaches' contracts if the university wants to get rid of them. This may be problematic for large universities with impatient fan bases, but at the mid major level, this is not nearly as big of problem.

[Chains]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

This may not be the year that anything gets changed. State employees are not getting raises this year and AJ is a state employee.

I think any effort to make a change to longer contracts is time wasted. Don't think it will ever happen. I am not a strong supporter of multi - year contracts. I know I don't have a long term contract where I work. Both my employer and myself could move forward anytime we want. Now, that said, if you treat your employees correctly they will stay. If you excel with your responsibilities as an employee you should be free to move on as well.

I wonder what type of questions AJ gets from recruits about his long term plans? AJ has a couple of strikes against him. First he is male and if you look at the majority of big schools they look to hire female coach's and correctly so. I know there are exceptions like Uconn. If you look at other mid-major conferences just where would AJ be better off? One would think the options would be limited. We found that out with the Green Bay fiasco.

I hope AJ and his staff stay for as long as they want. Congrats on another great season.

GBGBGJ

[Crashola]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

The "buyout" is the important part of multi-year contracts, and it can be both beneficial and a hindrance when dealing with coaches.

The benefit of having multi-year contracts is that it is not only easier to retain coaches because it provides them job security, but it also compensates the university for losing a coach in the middle of a contract, for the school hiring the coach will have to buyout his/her contract. A contract buyout in women's basketball is more effective than its men's counterpart, for there are less schools willing to sign a women's basketball coach to a large contract plus buyout the previous contract (unless the school has some boosters who throw a lot of support around the women's basketball program).

The main negative to multi-year contracts is that it can get expensive to terminate coaches' contracts if the university wants to get rid of them. This may be problematic for large universities with impatient fan bases, but at the mid major level, this is not nearly as big of problem.

You hit the nail on the head. Multi-year contracts and their buyout provisions are what put the teeth into coaching contracts. If a coach stinks it up, he/she has some security in knowing that the university will have to take pause and consider the cost of paying the rest of the coach's contract before terminating him/her. For example, if Calipari signs the huge deal (reportedly 8 yrs and $35 million) that Kentucky is offering and he can't win, Kentucky has to decide whether to keep him or fire him (and eat the multimillion figure left on his contract). On the other hand, if Calipari wants to move on to say the NBA, he or his new team will have to write a huge check to Kentucky.

So, while the contracts are not ironclad (you can't force someone to perform a personal services contract), there can be considerable monetary penalties for a breach. The breaching party just has to do a cost-benefit analysis before breaching the contract.

[joeboo22]

Re: Petition the Board of Regents

I don't think its going to change.... I don't really have a problem with it.... AJ knows that unless he does something stupid that SDSU is going to renew his contract.... I really don't think that there is a problem with 1 year contracts..... South Dakota is a right to work state anyways, meaning that we can fire him for whatever reason ever, and most contracts aren't worth the paper they are printed on because if the coach is to leave the school gets a moderate at best buy out and if they fire the coach it goes to the lawyers and they negotiate a buyout.... I think that the BOR has a lot bigger deals (budget shortfalls)......