Per JSOnline..
"Buzz Williams, head coach of the Marquette men's basketball team, earned $1,888,881 in the year ending June 30 last year, according to tax records released Thursday by the school."
Sounds dumb but wonder if there's any rhyme or reason to the figure being similar to MU's year of establishment, 1881.
"In addition, Team Buzz Williams LP, with Williams as a partner, was paid an additional $1 million for professional services."
So >$2.8m overall... Not bad. If he leaves, I don't think it'll be for money.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/marquette-coach-buzz-williams-earnings-top-18-million-b9917790z1-208768771.html?ipad=y
"We recognize the great contribution Buzz has made to this university. He is a winner, and together we will continue to develop our student athletes into leaders on and off the court while solidifying Marquette's status as a premier national athletics program." - LW
Further evidence that old Lar is attempting to turn us into SLU.
Quote from: sixstrings03 on May 24, 2013, 01:06:20 AM
"We recognize the great contribution Buzz has made to this university. He is a winner, and together we will continue to develop our student athletes into leaders on and off the court while solidifying Marquette's status as a premier national athletics program." - LW
I wish Larry would just shut his trap.
AND LARRY TAKE OFF THAT STUPID HAT
Outrageously deserved by Buzz. So, I guess that he does make 2.8 Million, you just have to look in all the pots. Marquette lacks some of the traits that go into making a top of the pyramid basketball program, but when it comes to putting their money where their mouth is its abundantly clear that from the BOT on down the commitment is there.
We're fortunate to be along for the ride.
This confirms what we said a few months ago....he's making north of $2.5M and the highest paid non Final Four coach out there. SLUesque
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 24, 2013, 08:59:59 AM
This confirms what we said a few months ago....he's making north of $2.5M and the highest paid non Final Four coach out there. SLUesque
Wouldn't go that far.
Remember, USA Today's database is about as accurate as MU's 3-point shooting last season.
Quote from: Jay Bee on May 24, 2013, 12:54:47 PM
Wouldn't go that far.
Remember, USA Today's database is about as accurate as MU's 3-point shooting last season.
30% of the time, it works every time.
Quote from: reinko on May 24, 2013, 07:00:17 AM
AND LARRY TAKE OFF THAT STUPID HAT
And take care of the pit stains on that polo shirt.
On occasion, some have written that one or more than one "someone" else pays the coaching salary. Like Dick Strong, etc.
Anyone know, first, if something like that is true .. and second, how would that work? Does a donor write a check to MU, then it flows through?
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on May 24, 2013, 01:30:59 PM
Does a donor write a check to MU, then it flows through?
Yes. The donor won't specifically say it is to pay salary, but that is the implication. If they choose not to make the donation in a specific year, the University is still on the hook however.
Quote from: Jay Bee on May 24, 2013, 12:54:47 PM
Wouldn't go that far.
Remember, USA Today's database is about as accurate as MU's 3-point shooting last season.
Most of the salaries and payments are part of public records because they are public schools. It is pulling in the information from private schools that becomes more difficult.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 24, 2013, 02:18:39 PM
Most of the salaries and payments are part of public records because they are public schools. It is pulling in the information from private schools that becomes more difficult.
But if a private school is a non-profit (which I believe most of them are) isn't there a requirement to disclose the top so-many employees' salaries? So then most likely, the head bball coach's salary would become public information???
I may be wrong on this.
Quote from: WarriorInDC on May 24, 2013, 03:08:24 PM
But if a private school is a non-profit (which I believe most of them are) isn't there a requirement to disclose the top so-many employees' salaries? So then most likely, the head bball coach's salary would become public information???
I may be wrong on this.
You are correct. It is usually listed on the University's tax forms, but those filed well after they earn the salary. For instance, this form still had Tony Benford listed...over a year after he left. You can find all of these here:
www.guidestar.org
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 24, 2013, 01:33:04 PM
Yes. The donor won't specifically say it is to pay salary, but that is the implication. If they choose not to make the donation in a specific year, the University is still on the hook however.
[DISCLAIMER - The following is pure speculation. Names like Dick and Buzz are strictly for example purposes only.]
Using this example, what if Dick Strong (or someone else) was a limited partner in Team Buzz Williams LP, Buzz was the general partner, and the partnership agreement required contributions of $500,000 per year from the limited partners but the general partner takes 95% of annual proceeds? You could actually keep the donor-to-coach money entirely off the university's books and funnel it directly to the coach.
To the donor(s), the downside is that the "donation" is no longer tax deductible (though perhaps it could be reported as a business loss to offset other income), but the upside for the donor is that if the GP's proceeds are paid out as an annuity over a period of time (say 10 years) or don't vest until he stays for X years, you could effectively keep a coach from walking off the job (as he might walk away from 7 or 8 figures in future "earnings").
From a coach's perspective, he makes a lot more money than the public record shows (which would be more of a benefit to public school coaches), not to mention that carried interest is still taxed as capital gains, not ordinary income (which would make 20% of that income "tax-free").
In other words, it could be the case that Buzz has a "rolling one-year contract" with MU, but his partnership agreement might be a 10-year deal.
I'm sure there are some gaps and pitfalls in the above, not to mention it's highly unlikely this is the case at MU, but I could see where some state schools/donors might use a similar tactic to pay [read: funnel] their top-flight coaches tens of millions of dollars over time yet only report meager six-figure salaries (*cough* Bo Ryan *cough*).
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 24, 2013, 02:18:39 PM
Most of the salaries and payments are part of public records because they are public schools. It is pulling in the information from private schools that becomes more difficult.
The issue isn't obtaining the public information. The issue is analyzing it. Most, including USA Today, is doing things at a quite a high level. Understanding a contract and its various components can be a very involved process.
"Rankings" of who is paid the most in college basketball -- you can blow a hole through the methodology used by most very easily. It's simply bad information. Incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, etc.
The private schools (and those who try to say they're private) are a different issue.
Quote from: WarriorInDC on May 24, 2013, 03:08:24 PM
But if a private school is a non-profit (which I believe most of them are) isn't there a requirement to disclose the top so-many employees' salaries? So then most likely, the head bball coach's salary would become public information???
I may be wrong on this.
Yes, but that also means you have to wait until this year to find out what he made last year. Whereas with a public school, you can get access to the entire contract through open records.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 24, 2013, 01:33:04 PM
Yes. The donor won't specifically say it is to pay salary, but that is the implication. If they choose not to make the donation in a specific year, the University is still on the hook however.
This is correct. Also not necessarily one single contributor, but there is a leading individual contributor.
Quote from: Jay Bee on May 24, 2013, 03:28:28 PM
The issue isn't obtaining the public information. The issue is analyzing it. Most, including USA Today, is doing things at a quite a high level. Understanding a contract and its various components can be a very involved process.
"Rankings" of who is paid the most in college basketball -- you can blow a hole through the methodology used by most very easily. It's simply bad information. Incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, etc.
The private schools (and those who try to say they're private) are a different issue.
Yes, I agree with this....it's meant to be a high level overview without getting into the details of things. Maybe the way to phrase it is based on a cursory review of top collegiate coaches, the salary rankings are as such. Not all sources of income may be properly vetted.
Quote from: reinko on May 24, 2013, 07:00:17 AM
AND LARRY TAKE OFF THAT STUPID HAT
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on May 24, 2013, 06:43:32 AM
I wish Larry would just shut his trap.
Haven't heard much from the I hate Larry Williams/Frank Grimes crowd lately.
(http://dubsism.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/frank-grimes.jpg)
Quote from: lab_warrior on May 24, 2013, 04:52:08 PM
Haven't heard much from the I hate Larry Williams/Frank Grimes crowd lately.
(http://dubsism.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/frank-grimes.jpg)
Ners is waiting for another email from Buzz that with marching orders.
Does Buzz have the highest Base pay (1.8) of any non final four coach, or just highest total pay?
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on May 24, 2013, 05:54:57 PM
Does Buzz have the highest Base pay (1.8) of any non final four coach, or just highest total pay?
Several coaches with final fours on their resume make more than Buzz.
Quote from: LittleMurs on May 25, 2013, 09:48:26 AM
Several coaches with final fours on their resume make more than Buzz.
Buzz was just one zone defense away from erasing the shame of that stigma