Jim Calhoun in spat with political activist / reporter after game

[Pakuni]

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.  

As I said in my initial post, that's a different discussion and, frankly, not a point Calhoun raised. It may very well be true that applications are up since Calhoun became coach. Do you have those numbers? And I'm not sure increased applications/exposure does much, financially spoaking, for a state-funded school. It may, I just don't know that.
But it's irrelevant because my issue was not with his salary, but rather his somewhat dishonest defense of it.

An honest answer would have been:
"My compensation is the going rate for maintaining an elite college basketball program in the current climate. The powers that be at the University of Connecticut have determined it is to the school's overall benefit to have such a program and, as a result, have chosen to compensate me in this manner in order to create and maintain that program. Should the university decide it is no longer in their interests to have a high-profile basketball program -  or decide that they can do so with a lower-paid coach - they are free to let me go when my contract expires."

That's the truth.

Instead, he laid out a line of BS about how he makes the university $12 million a year, a statement that is provably false on at least two levels. Again, my issue is not with his income, it's with his misleading defense of it.

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. 

Well, if you doubled his salary then the program would be in the red. I'm not sure how one justifies paying a coach so much that it causes the program to lose money, particularly when the program is counted upon to help fund other activities within the athletic department. That would seem to defeat the purpose of having a high-profile basketball team.
And how would you guarantee that UConn would make significantly less revenue by hiring a coach who makes "only" $1 million a year? You may be right, but I think there's no way you can prove that claim one way or the other.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Pakuni,

Do you think that the University of Connecticut ... er, the basketball program of the University of Connecticut ... gets its money worth out of Calhoun? Is the salary that they pay less than the benefit in revenue that the basketball program receives on account of his being the head coach? I think you would agree that the answer is "yes." Calhoun isn't a great public speaker and, again, he's not an accountant. I think that's all he was attempting to say.

[MU111]

Apparently, the so-called "journalist" involved has been in some hot water in the past.  From the AP article on the Calhoun incident: "[Ken] Krayeske, of Hartford, is a political activist and self-described freelance journalist who has landed in the headlines after other high-profile incidents in the past.  They included his January 2007 arrest at Gov. M. Jodi Rell's inaugural parade, where Hartford police charged Krayeske with breach of peace and interfering with an officer.  The charges were later dismissed."

The guy sounds nuts.

[MUsoxfan]

As I said in my initial post, that's a different discussion and, frankly, not a point Calhoun raised. It may very well be true that applications are up since Calhoun became coach. Do you have those numbers? And I'm not sure increased applications/exposure does much, financially spoaking, for a state-funded school. It may, I just don't know that.
But it's irrelevant because my issue was not with his salary, but rather his somewhat dishonest defense of it.

Sure it's a state-funded school.  But they get their fair share of OOS students that pay 3x the in-state rate.  I would imagine that to be a cash cow for the university. 

And how would you guarantee that UConn would make significantly less revenue by hiring a coach who makes "only" $1 million a year? You may be right, but I think there's no way you can prove that claim one way or the other.

I'm assuming in my argument that Calhoun is the only guy that can coach at this great of level at the University of Connecticut.  There are revenue streams all over bringing in cash to the state because of Calhoun and the fact that his teams are consistently near the top of the NCAA.  I truly feel it's impossible to quantify the exact dollar figure he is worth to that state and university. 

[Avenue Commons]

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.

Where in the world do you get that he is a "liberal hippy tree hugging hypocrite"?

Sounds like a staunch fiscal conservative to me. Calhoun gave the perfect answer in that UConn hoops gives $12 Million back to the university.

[Pardner]

Apparently, the so-called "journalist" involved has been in some hot water in the past.  From the AP article on the Calhoun incident: "[Ken] Krayeske, of Hartford, is a political activist and self-described freelance journalist who has landed in the headlines after other high-profile incidents in the past.  They included his January 2007 arrest at Gov. M. Jodi Rell's inaugural parade, where Hartford police charged Krayeske with breach of peace and interfering with an officer." 

Yeah, but can he call a time out with the best of them?

[Desert_warrior]

Just a note of comparison, all AZ State University employees were asked to take unpaid time off. Everyone including all of the coaches. Basically a pay cut with higher paid employees taking more unpaid time off.

[Muhoops85]

Sounds like a staunch fiscal conservative to me. Calhoun gave the perfect answer in that UConn hoops gives $12 Million back to the university.

Nail...meet head.

[rocky_warrior]

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

Pakuni, another thing your omitting, is the $26,546,200 of revenue listed under "Not Allocated by Gender/Sport".   That's a lot of money, and my guess is that it's money that comes in via donations, similar to the B&G fund.  If you allocate that money as a percentage of the revenue brought in by mens hoops:

$7,333,214 (mens hoops) /  $28,175,542 (total by all teams) = 26% from men's hoops.

$26,546,200 (unallocated) * 26% = $6,902,00

So, I think it's reasonable to argue men's hoops directly and indirectly accounts for around $14 MM of UCONN's sports revenue.  And that's higher Calhoun's $12 MM numbers.

[Sponge Ruiner!]

I have absolutely no problem with Calhoun making what he does.

After all, as he said, he needs to be able to retire someday.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

LOL, I got a good laugh out of that from him. Like I said, not really a great public speaker. Obviously, it's not like he walked off the court thinking he would need to discuss the laws of economics as well as discuss his team's play.

[ChicosBailBonds]

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.

Perhaps you're missing the other revenue.  More than likely he should have said the program generates $12 million.  Some of which goes directly to the university in the form of direct revenues, other goes to operating the arena, the concessions, etc.  They may not be factored into your numbers, but his program is certainly generating that revenue nevertheless.  My guess is that is probably what he meant.  MU, for example, brought in money directly to the athletic program but it also generated money for the Bradley Center and the city of Milwaukee (parking, etc) that doesn't go on MU's books....nevertheless that revenue isn't generated without MU playing.  Same goes for UCONN.

Then we have to factor in the value the program creates.  Before Calhoun got there, UCONN was nothing nationally.  They are now a national presence and that is worth something.  I agree, that's not revenue and also agree with you that is a sidebar discussion.


My bigger beef is why this a-hole "reporter / political windjag" was granted a press pass and allowed to even ask this question in this setting. 

[warrior_jr]

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.

The revenue he produces comes from the money we spend which reflects the value which we assign to it.  Its ironic that you mention the free market, because that is exactly what enables us to assign value. 

Nothing is more annoying than a condescending post by someone that does not understand the point that they are "correcting."  What's even more irritating is that someone else gave you a +1 for your ignorance.

As for society's overvaluation of a game, I agree with swimmer-whats-his-name.  But it is great entertainment.

[Tulsa Warrior]

There is another factor in the equation.  What is the marketing value to a school of a successful athletic team?  What would UConn or Marquette have to pay to get advertising minutes on ESPN and the other media outlets?  What was the dollar and sense value of Marquette's trip to the Final Four?

Beyond the direct balance sheet the other factors to consider are increased name recognition for the school, increased enrollments and increased alum donations.

The reporter's question was a fair one and Calhoun should have been able to hit it out of the park.

[legacy]

I suggest we all get some facts before we come back and see muscoop or Calhoun!!

In seriousness, I agree 100% with Calhoun, and he responded perfectly.  Also, it doesn't make any sense to draw an artificial line between the athletic department and the rest of the university.  Universities invest in having strong athletic departments just as they invest in having strong English or chemistry departments. Good athletics are a service to the students and alumni, just as a student union is.  I agree that it's an odd statement on our values that this is so, but it is what it is.

[AZWarrior]

The revenue he produces comes from the money we spend which reflects the value which we assign to it.  Its ironic that you mention the free market, because that is exactly what enables us to assign value. 

Nothing is more annoying than a condescending post by someone that does not understand the point that they are "correcting."  What's even more irritating is that someone else gave you a +1 for your ignorance.

As for society's overvaluation of a game, I agree with swimmer-whats-his-name.  But it is great entertainment.

Warrior Jr - Feel free to attack my argument, but attacking me (condescending post by someone that does not understand the point that they are "correcting.") is tacky as well as an argumentative flaw.   My point is that their administration is free to pay Calhoun what they think he is worth.  And that is an essential element of a free market.

[Pakuni]

Perhaps you're missing the other revenue.  More than likely he should have said the program generates $12 million.  Some of which goes directly to the university in the form of direct revenues, other goes to operating the arena, the concessions, etc.  They may not be factored into your numbers, but his program is certainly generating that revenue nevertheless.  My guess is that is probably what he meant. 

Well, I'm not going to play guessing games by what he meant, nor play guessing games by what "other" revenues the program may or may not produce for the university when the university itself reports a figure. I have no idea what he meant. What he said is that the program generates $12 million for the university when, at least according to UConn, that isn't accurate. I suspect had he meant the program generates $12 million if one factors in the arena, concessions, etc., he would have said so. But he was pretty clear about saying it was for the university. Still, I can't say what the man meant.

It could well be I'm nitpicking the guy here. And, again, I doesn't bother me whatever he earns. That's between he and UConn, far as I'm concerned.

As for legacy's post ... you may not think it makes much sense to draw a line between athletic departments and universities as a whole, but many universities do think it makes sense. Many, if not most, big-time athletic departments are, in fact, run independently of the university. They have their own administrations, their own budgets, their own revenue streams, even their own endowments. While they may benefit from one another's success, there exists little "investment" between the two.

[augoman]

well, Calhoun should have just asked where he got his press pass, then ignored him and said "next question".  However, I think Pakuni is overlooking the fact that 1. Calhoun is paid less than MU paid Crean although Calhoun has a more successful program, and those dollars that flow to the athletic dept allow other dollars to provide the tools of learning.  2. Not that long ago UW had a one year 5 million dollar shortfall in their athletic dept, and it was made up by we taxpayers via a higher tax rate.  Now their teams generate sufficient revenues, but the rate will never go down.

[legacy]

As for legacy's post ... you may not think it makes much sense to draw a line between athletic departments and universities as a whole, but many universities do think it makes sense. Many, if not most, big-time athletic departments are, in fact, run independently of the university. They have their own administrations, their own budgets, their own revenue streams, even their own endowments. While they may benefit from one another's success, there exists little "investment" between the two.

This is simply gibberish.  Athletic departments may have a measure of autonomy, and there may not be cross-subsidies, but they are obviously part of the university.  Residence life is run separately from academic affairs, and use separate budgets, but they are both part of the university.  The athletic department is under the president and board of trustees just as everyone else is.  Universities do often have quasi-independent research institutions or other offices, but athletic departments do not fall under this.

[ChicosBailBonds]

As for legacy's post ... you may not think it makes much sense to draw a line between athletic departments and universities as a whole, but many universities do think it makes sense. Many, if not most, big-time athletic departments are, in fact, run independently of the university. They have their own administrations, their own budgets, their own revenue streams, even their own endowments. While they may benefit from one another's success, there exists little "investment" between the two.

I don't get this claim.  The athletic departments of ALL universities are beholden to the President and Board of Trustees of their schools, thus they are linked.  Sure they have their own budgets, but so does the department of History, the School of Business, etc, at other schools.  And yes, other departments can have their own endowments, just like the athletic departments.  Many departments at universities have their own endowments to push scholarships, fund a visiting professor, etc.

I don't understand your claims as if they are some separate fiefdom.  Perhaps I am not understanding your comments, it wouldn't be the first time.  There is no doubt that there are some athletic departments, OHIO STATE comes to mind, that is a somewhat a unit in and of itself due to it's largess.  But the AD and the department do not operate in a vacuum outside of the university, even at Ohio State.


Back to Calhoun's comments, I suspect that since he was talking off the cuff he was probably lumping several items together.  More than likely some crack journalist will give us the truth we are so deserving of in the next few days. 


Augoman, not sure if Crean was paid more than Calhoun.  There's "payment" and then there's "PAYMENT".  Many of the perks associated with coaches are not reported as a line item on their paycheck, but from outside sources.  Then there are things like their pensions, country club memberships, cars, etc that often go overlooked.  So if it says coach X makes more than coach Y because of what is "reported", that doesn't always make it so in reality.

[radome]

I don't care about the $ at this point.  I just want to find a way to make this a distraction on Wednesday.  I don't think there is a way ... just hoping.

[GGGG]

well, Calhoun should have just asked where he got his press pass, then ignored him and said "next question".  However, I think Pakuni is overlooking the fact that 1. Calhoun is paid less than MU paid Crean although Calhoun has a more successful program, and those dollars that flow to the athletic dept allow other dollars to provide the tools of learning.  2. Not that long ago UW had a one year 5 million dollar shortfall in their athletic dept, and it was made up by we taxpayers via a higher tax rate.  Now their teams generate sufficient revenues, but the rate will never go down.

It is not true that UW's athletic deficit was passed on to the taxpayers.  It was covered by extreme cost cutting and increased student fee revenue.

It is illegal in the state of Wisconsin to have any tax or tuition revenue support athletics, including salaries, unless a coach has an adminitrative or instructional aspect to their position.

[GGGG]

Calhoun unnecessarily elevated the heat of the exchange when he said "I've got some advice for you.  Shut up."

I also think the moans and groans from the other press members in the room were a little pathetic.

[PE8983]

So, how funny is it that Tan Tommy makes $700K more than Calhoun?

[Eweconfan]

Pakuni, all due respect, but what makes you an expert about what happens in the State of CT and at the University? Do you live there? Attend the University? I don't know, maybe you do. I've read your posts, and you make some valid points, but if you're going to take a stand, you shouldn't use things like "I'm assuming" and "probably". If you're arguing a point, should you assume anything?

Look, I can't argue whether what Calhoun said was right or wrong. Why? Because I don't have all the facts behind what he said, nor do I care enough to research it. I suspect you don't have all the facts, either. Do you think there's any possibility that you're missing some pieces to the puzzle?

Again, I come in peace and am not looking to stir the pot. I also admitted I don't know the right or wrong answer, I'm merely asking why you think you do.