Jim Calhoun in spat with political activist / reporter after game

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=3924716

[esotericmindguy]

Awesome....and have you ever been to Hartford?  Awful, without UCONN Bball there wouldn't be anything going on downtown at night.

[Pardner]

"freelance journalist and political activist"...very objective

[Brewtown Andy]

I don't see how Calhoun taking a 50% pay cut is solving a billion dollar deficit....

[Warrior Forever]

Calhoun should have asked him "What portion of your salary are you giving up?"

[AZWarrior]

Activist / reporter = douche bag   

[butchbadger]

I am not a fan of Calhoun.but he was absolutely in the right here.

Guys like that reporter have never created value for anyone.

They have total disdain for the people who have actually busted azz to get ahead and male some $$$.

[Muhoops85]

I just wish that liberal hippy tree hugging hypocrites would just shut the $^^$$## up.  Could you imagine this same press conference 15 years ago with Bobby Knight as the target?  Now that would have been entertaining.

[MUBasketball]

Haha wow. Good for Calhoun, what ridiculous comments by that "journalist".

[chapman]

They just showed the exchange on ESPN.  Gotta say, for a guy I thought was going senile, I was dead wrong.

[TallTitan34]

I am not a fan of Calhoun.but he was absolutely in the right here.

Guys like that reporter have never created value for anyone.

They have total disdain for the people who have actually busted azz to get ahead and male some $$$.

+1

I generally don't care for Calhoun but he was a stud in telling that guy off.  That guy was just dumb.

[muhoosier260]

its not really his fault for getting paid but i would've felt awkward as hell if i was calhoun. good for him though, not really his problem that he is the "highest paid state employee". he did look like an ass though

[MilWarrior]

In no way did Calhoun look like an ass. The ass was the reporter. That idiot was just trying to stir something up. Like others who have posted before have said, I've never been a Calhoun fan. That having been said, job well done Mr. Calhoun. Job well done.

[swimmer]

There's nothing wrong with Calhoun making the big bucks, and I'm glad he put that reporter in his place.  I'm all for paying market value for someone's services, but I do sometimes wonder about our values as a society that drive coaching salaries so high.  It sounds kind of funny when you step back and say, "the coach of a GAME is the most valuable employee of the state." 

Kudos to these coaches for finding a market with such loyal demand and almost free "labor" to create that value for them. 

[AZWarrior]

but I do sometimes wonder about our values as a society that drive coaching salaries so high.  It sounds kind of funny when you step back and say, "the coach of a GAME is the most valuable employee of the state."  

Its not a "set of values" but rather a free market, with the emphasis on free.  He's paid that much because he produces.  If you take the revenue he produces vs. the pay he receives, he's likely the MVP of state employees.

[swimmer]

I don't really want to take this thread off topic into a debate about free markets, but I only referred to societal values because ultimately that's what creates the demand for what Calhoun is selling.  We value winning sports teams and spend a lot of money to follow them.  Calhoun is good at the winning part, so he brings in a lot of money and gets paid accordingly.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Its not a "set of values" but rather a free market, with the emphasis on free.  He's paid that much because he produces.  If you take the revenue he produces vs. the pay he receives, he's likely the MVP of state employees.

+1

Someone has read his Econ 43/44.

[Pakuni]

Its not a "set of values" but rather a free market, with the emphasis on free.  He's paid that much because he produces.  If you take the revenue he produces vs. the pay he receives, he's likely the MVP of state employees.

Maybe, maybe not.
For starters, Jim's not being completely honest.
According to the U.S. Dept. of Education, his team accounted for $7.3 million in revenues in the latest reporting year (last season). Expenses, according to the department, were about $6.1 million. I assume that includes coaches' salaries.
So, at best, he's bringing in about $1.2 million in income.

Here's the link, if it works:
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/InstDetails.aspx?756e697469643d31323930323026796561723d32303037267264743d322f32322f3230303920323a33323a303220504d

That's still a profit, but there's a catch.
The taxpayers of Connecticut don't get a dime of that money, or benefit financially from it. Nor does the university itself. Whatever operating income the program makes is poured back into the athletic department. So while it's fair to say Calhoun's efforts do quite a bit for UConn's athletic department's finances, his bluster about how he makes $12 million for the university is a bunch of baloney. And what revenue he produces helps no one outside the UConn athletic department, contrary to his implication that he's doing a lot, financially, for "the university".
(I'm sure we can get into a discussion about the economic and non-economic benefits of a having good basketball program in terms of admissions, reputation, etc., but that's another topic altogether. Calhoun never claimed his work helps the university's profile ... just its bottom line).

That being said, I have no quibble with what Calhoun earns, just his fictional accounting.
But I do take issue with your notion that one's value - at least those in the public sector - and compensation ought be tied to the revenue one produces.
The best teachers are nothing but an economic drain on their school district.
Top FBI agents don't make money for the federal government.
A health department nurse who gets neonatal to an indigent infant isn't turning a profit for the state.
Are these people lesser employees than Jim Calhoun? Maybe I've got m priorities mixed up, but a state trooper who saves a life on the road is far more valuable to my state than any college basketball coach.

Oh, and given the way Wall Street firms continue to hand out multi-million dollar bonuses amid record losses, I would suggest that the captains of industry agree that the revenue one produces and compensation have no connection whatsoever.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Maybe, maybe not.
For starters, Jim's not being completely honest.
According to the U.S. Dept. of Education, his team accounted for $7.3 million in revenues in the latest reporting year (last season). Expenses, according to the department, were about $6.1 million. I assume that includes coaches' salaries.
So, at best, he's bringing in about $1.2 million in income.

Obviously (as you know), he's not an accountant and it wouldn't surprise me if his numbers aren't accurate. But that's not the point. His point was that the investment of a coach, paid through his salary, is a net-positive investment for the University of Connecticut. According to your own numbers, he is bringing in not only $7.3 in revenue but $1.2 million in profit. A pretty good profit margin for any organization in any sector of the economy. And, as you allude to, not only the profit but the actual revenue is spent by the University in the myriad of ways that a basketball program spends money.

Overall, his point is that the University of Connecticut isn't blowing over a million on salary for him simply on a wim. It's doing so because through a cost-benefit analysis it has seen that it can reap larger financial benefits to the basketball program and the University than the cost of the salary of Calhoun.

[Badgerhater]

However many million UCONN hoops makes for the athletic department is eliminating state funding from the athletic department and is free national marketing for the university (with regard to the state money spent on UCONN).  There is an issue with big money and low grad rates in college hoops but the dipcrap activist reporter chose to grind his ideological axe rather than do his homework and understand that particular issue.

[Pakuni]

Obviously (as you know), he's not an accountant and it wouldn't surprise me if his numbers aren't accurate. But that's not the point. His point was that the investment of a coach, paid through his salary, is a net-positive investment for the University of Connecticut. According to your own numbers, he is bringing in not only $7.3 in revenue but $1.2 million in profit. A pretty good profit margin for any organization in any sector of the economy. And, as you allude to, not only the profit but the actual revenue is spent by the University in the myriad of ways that a basketball program spends money.

But you're missing one of my points: Contrary to what Calhoun, and now you, are saying he is not generating money for the University of Connecticut. He's generating money for the athletic department which, I'll assume, is like all other major athletic departments in that it is a self-sustaining operation mostly separate from the university as a whole (sans casual oversight by the board of trustees/regents).
Regular students aren't getting better lab facilities, professors aren't better paid, dorms aren't better appointed, etc., because of anything Jim Calhoun is doing. His success benefits a relatively small portion of the university community.

And while you may give Calhoun a total pass, there's a pretty substantial difference between $12 million and $7 million. And an even more substantial difference between his implication that he makes the university $12 million a year vs. making the athletic department $1.2 million a year.

As I said, I don't begrudge him his salary. Bully for him, I say. But next time he should lay off this bunk about how UConn basketball is a massive moneymaker for the people of Connecticut.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

But you're missing one of my points: Contrary to what Calhoun, and now you, are saying he is not generating money for the University of Connecticut. He's generating money for the athletic department

Okay, he's generating money for the athletic department. My point is that he is generating money, something the "reporter" clearly does not understand. All he sees is a big salary and thinks that someone else must be hurting because it has a lot of zeroes at the end of it. But yes, the University, and more particularly, their athletic department see him as a net-positive investment. That's something the reporter couldn't think through.

Regular students aren't getting better lab facilities, professors aren't better paid, dorms aren't better appointed, etc., because of anything Jim Calhoun is doing. His success benefits a relatively small portion of the university community.

I'm very sympathetic to this argument, but I hope you realize that there are probably a lot of financial benefits to the larger University in terms of exposure that aren't measured by the basketball program's revenue stream.

And while you may give Calhoun a total pass, there's a pretty substantial difference between $12 million and $7 million. And an even more substantial difference between his implication that he makes the university $12 million a year vs. making the athletic department $1.2 million a year.

LOL, I don't give him a "total pass." But he's not an accountant. Let's say that the basketball program's revenue is "only" $7.3 million. The actual figure is not as important to my point that he is still generating money for the basketball program in a real cost-benefit manner that is almost non-existent in government-funded endeavors. Let's be careful with their accounting numbers, too: they are generating $7.3m and $1.2m is allegedly profit. They are certainly "making" the entire $7.3m. The $6.1m spent on the program is going to coaches and administrator salaries, equipment costs, facility costs; it's not thrown into a vortex.

[MUsoxfan]

And while you may give Calhoun a total pass, there's a pretty substantial difference between $12 million and $7 million. And an even more substantial difference between his implication that he makes the university $12 million a year vs. making the athletic department $1.2 million a year.

I think there's also a factor in the demand he creates in prospective students wanting to attend UCONN.  You can't tell me there's not a direct correlation between the success of their men's basketball program and the number of applications flowing into the admissions office.     Ask Marquette what happened in this regard after the Final Four.   More apps means a school can jack up tuition and be much more selective about who they admit. 

I don't think there's really an accurate dollar figure about how much Calhoun has brought into that university, but I guarantee he's worth every penny of his salary even if it was doubled. 

[MU_Navy]

... but I do sometimes wonder about our values as a society that drive coaching salaries so high..." 

I do sometimes wonder about our values as a society that... is able to sit around on our computers and read other peoples' opinions and post our own thinking that they matter...
Just sayin...

That "journalist" was/is a jack ass.  Calhoun should have just given him a three word answer: "No, next question..."

[Tom Crean's Tanning Bed]

Also, what components exactly comprise that $1.6 million salary for Calhoun?  I would have a feeling that only a portion of it comes directly out from the state of Connecticut budget.  Notice too how the "reporter" asked how much he gets from Comcast; I would assume for a coaches show. 

Calhoun also probably pulls in money from camps, speaking engagements, shoe/apparel deals, and also some alumni "subsidy" as part of that $1.6 million salary. 

Obviously this guy did some HW as to where Calhoun's salary comes from to a degree, but chose to ignore the facts for his own personal agenda and attempt to embarass Calhoun.