Buzz

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Bo makes like $700-800k.  Maybe the boosters and his Buick commercials add to to the $2.3?

[Litehouse]

Bo Ryan is also owed an enormous pension based on his high salary and being an employee of the UW system since 1976.

[GGGG]

Bo Ryan is also owed an enormous pension based on his high salary and being an employee of the UW system since 1976.

It's a good think Wisconsin's public pension system is fully funded because he is going to be getting some huge payments from that....

[Litehouse]

I just did a quick search of the state employee pension formula and it looks like they have caps and Bo has maxed out their system.  $500,000 is the maximum eligible salary and 70% of salary is the max payout, so Bo is set for $350,000/yr for life.

[GGGG]

I'll take that salary for life right now.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Why? Because we have to pay (overpay if needed) in order to keep top coaches here.  That is just the way it is--like it or not.  I don't care much for the alternative.  Plenty of other schools wil pay Buzz today, and the last time I checked he has 0 NCs.

I sort of agree with this...

BUT, what is MU supposed to do? Give Buzz a bigger salary EVERY time he has a good season?

That's not sustainable for MU, and it's not sustainable for Buzz either. If MU makes him the highest paid coach in the country and he has a bad season, people will turn on him in an instant. People/fans are crazy like that.

Overpay? Sure.

A raise every year? A raise every other year? Probably not a good plan.

[GGGG]

The old adage is that salary is generally what attracts people to jobs, but as long as they are paid something competitive, salary isn't going keep someone if they are unhappy.  Therefore if Buzz leaves, no amount of salary is going to keep him here. 

Marquette obviously has to be competitive and make a commitment on that level, which they have, but I'm with Guns...you just can't keep increasing the base to "make" him stay.

[Lennys Tap]

A raise every year? A raise every other year? Probably not a good plan.

Only if he's a mercenary

[Dawson Rental]

I didnt know he was making more than Crean, is that accurate? Either way with the success of Buzz and MU, no doubt that will have other schools making an offer to Buzz.

I believe that your post shows a lack of knowledge of the finances of NCAA Division I Basketball.  They are not exactly gold mines.  There is a reason why basketball has been the poor stepchild to football in conference realignment.  First, a school would need to buyout Buzz's current contract at MU.  Then they would have to find a way to make a very sizable contract offer which would almost certainly have a high front end bonus.  The only way that MU can pay Buzz top ten money is because a school donor was willing to commit to chip in on the cost.  Will other schools be able to do the same? 

The majority of BCS conference schools are losing money on football.  Can they also afford to pay their men's basketball coach so much that they lose money on basketball, too?  Very unlikely.  Will Buzz be able to offer assistant coaches as much as he can at MU?  In order to get Chew away from Illinois, Buzz reportedly had to offer quite a bit above what he was authorized to offer an assistant, but LW went to the BOT and got it done.  MU has sizable resources for its basketball program.  It has access to an arena that allows them to sell 19,000 seats.  It's located in a metropolitan area that is also fairly close Chicago, to draw additional fans from.  With the new Big East, MU will receive as much basketball TV revenue as almost anyone, far more than most.  There is a reason that Arkansas and Oklahoma came sniffing around and left without making an offer, and why Illinois didn't even try.

[GGGG]

The majority of BCS conference schools are losing money on football. 

I'm not sure that is an accurate statement. 

[Dawson Rental]

I'm not sure that is an accurate statement.  

Here's one link

http://seattletimes.com/html/collegesports/2010103078_ncaa21.html

"Twenty-five of 119 FBS schools reported overall profits, an increase from 19 in 2006.'

I thought I remembered in an earlier thread, someone was saying for a later year, 123 out of 125 were losing money.  

The above quote concerned athletic departments overall.  Here's the better quote which contradicts my point.

""Of the 119 FBS football teams, 68 (57.1 percent) finished the year in the black."

BUT

Here's another take on the 2006 numbers.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/05/16/ncaa

"In the 2006 fiscal year, the latest of three examined in the study, only 19 of the 119 Football Bowl Subdivision institutions had positive net revenue, while for the rest, expenses exceeded generated revenues. (For the entire three-year period, only 16 athletics department turned a net profit.)"

So how do numbers from the same year indicate both that only 19 of the 119 Football Bowl Subdivision institutions had positive net revenue, AND
Of the 119 FBS football teams, 68 (57.1 percent) finished the year in the black

The later article suggests that the difference is accounted for by the universities subsidizing their football programs with funds from outside the athletic department.  So, 49 (68-19) of the football programs that finished in the black only did so due to outside resources being pumped in to buoy their financial status.

[MU82]

Um, because we aren't going to get Jim Calhoun, Rick Barnes (thank god), Tom Crean, Beilein, Bo Ryan, etc...?

Yes, I would hate to get stuck with a guy like Barnes. From 1988-2012 at three different schools, he only went to the NCAA tournament 20 times in 24 years -- including 14 straight seasons at Texas. He regularly coached his team to the Sweet 16 and beyond. He now has a nice young roster that he'll win with next season. Career winning percentage .660, including .699 at Texas. What an effin'  stiff!

[4everwarriors]

Bo makes like $700-800k.  Maybe the boosters and his Buick commercials add to to the $2.3?

Couldn't you just walk over to his trailer and ax him?