Will 6.6 million be too much?
- Thread starter Summy1
- Start date
$6.6M is a lot of money. But we could probably find a high school coach who would take $165K and win 3 games a year - tripling our win total while only spending about 2.5% more than if we kept Hazell on. If Hazell is canned and Burke is allowed to hire the next coach, I would give him a $200k budget to get it done. He's almost certainly going to screw it up. So, at least we would be sure the next Burke hire is at least a cheaper mistake.
Kevin Kelley. Might implode grandly at the college level but would be heck of ride while it happened. And this year he's incorporating rugby lateral passes.
And a good read of his new innovation this year:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ach-who-never-punts-has-another-radical-idea/
It's not a black and white question.
1. Someone may provide assistance. You'd hate to see a donor have to given it's basically a donor throwing away cash, but it's happened before. If it's considered a major budgetary issue keeping him around longer (which it is - Purdue's lack of revenue is becoming a major problem), the university may step in and help in some form (whether through loans, etc.).
2. It's not just a matter of whether we should pay him that or not. Factor in lost revenue. Our ticket sales are at a low this year. Can you imagine next year? It's HARD to get ticket sales and donations back when you have alienated your fans. It's no different than a company and its customers. And it's not just regular season tickets - you're talking about suites, indoor/outdoor club seats, etc. which mean a lot for revenue. The difference between 30,000 a game and 40,000 a game is $500,000 in just ticket revenue per game. Over 7 games it's $3.5 million - in just ticket revenue.
You are correct. Ticket sales are low and this is costing Purdue money. Attendance next season would be terrible if they kept Hazell. Nobody would want to go to the games. This is one reason I think Burke has to make a decision.
wonder what would be the cost, if you could put it in dollars, of the embarrassment , by the team being the worst in college football the last 3 years. ok that was a dumb statement but couldn't help myself
The risk of this is obviously you're relying on getting an increase in the future. Coaches are certainly not guarantees. Was I super impressed with the Hazell hire? No. Did I think it'd be this bad? Absolutely not.
It's a risk/reward strategy that Burke has never really done so it'll be interesting to follow it. Making the right hire and just having a modest bump in interest can mean millions in new revenue.
I will say that while Hazell may not have ignited fans' interest himself, I don't think Purdue did any favors in how they rolled him out, marketed it, etc. And that's still part of Hazell's responsibility - the direction he had for recruiting, etc. was never really clear and that's on him too. You can only market a program if you're given some direction.
However, I think that's one advantage to doing something similar to what Maryland did. With Hope, Burke said the decision was made a while back, but obviously was kept very under wraps. If you fire a coach, your entire athletic dept. staff can get behind getting ready to promote a new coach and a new direction for a program instead of scrambling last minute (which often falls over holidays, etc.).
Burke is clearly much smarter than the rest of you. OF COURSE we have the money to pay the severance. Burke created a very marketable product to make TONS OF MONEY for the athletic department. All it takes is some simple marketing (maybe he can get help from an intern for it) and the football team will more than pay for the severance! And credit to Burke. He has created a product with this football team that NO OTHER UNIVERSITY can match!
How, you ask?
Starting next year no P5 teams can schedule FCS patsy games. You want an easy home-win in pre-conference? Schedule Purdue! Heck, we paid Indiana State almost half a million for our victory in Ross-Ade this year. Think what a home game with us is worth to a P5 school now that you cant pick on FCS talent. Alabama would pay at least one million to host us in September! Burke is a genius!
The only downside to this is that MB may want to keep Hazell and Weird Beard around forever. Once the money starts pouring into his coffers it will be hard to turn off.
OK - this was actually hard to type as I love Purdue and I have a ton of respect for the players and coaches. But I thought I'd make the point with sarcasm. I really do believe we could schedule two or three games like this over the next few years and earn some money that could go to the payout. Thoughts?
How, you ask?
Starting next year no P5 teams can schedule FCS patsy games. You want an easy home-win in pre-conference? Schedule Purdue! Heck, we paid Indiana State almost half a million for our victory in Ross-Ade this year. Think what a home game with us is worth to a P5 school now that you cant pick on FCS talent. Alabama would pay at least one million to host us in September! Burke is a genius!
The only downside to this is that MB may want to keep Hazell and Weird Beard around forever. Once the money starts pouring into his coffers it will be hard to turn off.
OK - this was actually hard to type as I love Purdue and I have a ton of respect for the players and coaches. But I thought I'd make the point with sarcasm. I really do believe we could schedule two or three games like this over the next few years and earn some money that could go to the payout. Thoughts?
My thought is do whatever it takes to get rid of this coach.I don't even want to watch this game against Wisconsin,and I don't ever recall feeling this way before.
First, the decission about Hazell wont be made by Burke, but may be at his recomendation, by the BOT.
As for Burke, his time too has come and that will be a BOT decission too.
I talked to a couple of great guys from Minny this weekend and they, like us feel the pain. They have been about as screwed up as we have been and maybe even more missmanaged...if that is possibe.
Blow the smoke out of the air and in my mind it is about commitment..the University to its fans and the fans to the University. Chicken or the egg?
Purdue isnt going away as an Institution, but athletics as we know it may. With what is going on in the Power 5 Conferences, there are a lot of schools looking at the University of Chicago model...I know...blasphamy...but maybe with some validity.
Frankly, I am a sports guy, so I believe a great University is great in all that it does including sports.
As for Burke, his time too has come and that will be a BOT decission too.
I talked to a couple of great guys from Minny this weekend and they, like us feel the pain. They have been about as screwed up as we have been and maybe even more missmanaged...if that is possibe.
Blow the smoke out of the air and in my mind it is about commitment..the University to its fans and the fans to the University. Chicken or the egg?
Purdue isnt going away as an Institution, but athletics as we know it may. With what is going on in the Power 5 Conferences, there are a lot of schools looking at the University of Chicago model...I know...blasphamy...but maybe with some validity.
Frankly, I am a sports guy, so I believe a great University is great in all that it does including sports.
Hazell annual compensation = $2.14M plus annual eligibility for $1.545M bonus ($90K awarded in '14-'15). In addition Purdue funds $120.8K/yr for each year on contract to Purdue for buyout from Kent State.
YES! I've concluded that this is the way to go given that it appears that the flinty farmers that constitute the BOT, Prez and AD really only care about making sure the athletic dept is a conduit of money for their pet projects. I actually don't have a problem with that, IF THEY WERE JUST HONEST AND UP-FRONT ABOUT IT!
Fire Hazell. Pay him the severance and just hire a reputable HS, D-III, or NAIA coach on the cheap with a gimmick system that no one in the Power 5 conferences will ever adopt. At least it will be interesting, and the BOT and Daniels will glow knowing they are getting a "good value".
Seriously, I have thought about this too. Will we even clear $1 million each from all of our non conference games next year, with attendance surely down to 20,000 or less with hazell at the helm?
This guy would at least keep me from falling asleep in the stands or on my couch.
You're right about this being a BOT decision, probably first about MB's replacement and then what to do about the football program. But to even suggest that we're going to fold up the program doesn't recognize the bonanza that we enjoy courtesy of being a legacy B1G member. The TV revenues are only going to get bigger going forward. And that is not to mention the windfall that we got from OSU's participation and winning the playoffs last year. This would also seem to be a good bet going forward. If anything I would expect more pressure coming from the B1G to improve the quality of the program.
Alabama has paid over $1.5mm to host preconference games. Per game! Just do it twice and call it a wrap. Why not do that instead of going to Marshall and getting beat?
Let's not put ourselves in a position of deliberately being embarrassed. We don't need to do that. It is not good for the university. The current situation is easily remedied. We are one good hire away from fixing this. We need to commit ourselves to excellence in every endeavor that we engage in.
The context is if Captain Clueless tells is we don't have the money to buy out hazell, this is a method to getting the cash.
$47 is too much because it would be an admission that Morgan was wrong. Morgan really likes Morgan, and he knows that Morgan cannot be wrong. So in the interest of preserving Morgan's respect for Morgan, Mr. Hazell will continue to lead the charge until Morgan retires.
Hope was terminated largely due to the beat downs we experienced in his final year culminating in the slaughter at the bowl game in Texas. That's what we wanted to get away from.
We need to hire an organization - a head coach the brings his staff - with a proven track record of success over several seasons and be prepared to pay for it. Fortunately, we are in the most prosperous conference in college football. And we as fans have demonstrated our willingness to financially support these changes. There is no excuse for allowing the current situation to continue.
Characteristic of fixed mindset people. This is why Morgan and Hazel will still be with us next year at this time. Morgan got a promotion and raise last year so getting rid of him would be admitting a mistake, which a fixed mindset person will not do.
Remember that MB used a "team of experts" to pick and vet Hazell so he is not hanging out as the lone ranger on this selection. Furthermore, everybody makes a bad hire or a bad investment decision that doesn't end up cratering them or their career and given that MB is at the end of his, I don't think this will be a major factor holding the BOT back from pulling the trigger.
I would use a similar process to ID a high priced coach. I'd find the best experts, ask lots of questions and hope for the best. In this case, It didn't go well.
yeah it was a committee that got together to make the hire. Doesn't look good for them does it? As far as Burke, he has a history of making bad hires. Its also his final decision who they hire. I put the blame on him.
The process seemed cumbersome and is problematic when you're in a competitive market for a coach and your rivals are ready to move. I would be advocating getting on with it right now behind the scenes. The selection criteria should be simple: a head coach with a demonstrated history of developing a successful program having several seasons with winning records that can bring his staff with him -- Hire a coaching team not a coach - and pay them especially with performance bonuses in the contract. Winning is contagious - bring in a team that is used to winning. There are too many specifics being suggested on this board just like at the end of the 2012 season i.e. a guy that can recruit, a guy that can sell Purdue, a guy that can sell WL, etc. The business is broken; bring in a management team with a demonstrated ability to fix it. The dynamics of the market are good - people will pay to see a winning team via tickets, fees, and merchandise; we are in the most profitable conference in the country; and there are reasonably good odds that a B1G team will be in the playoffs for the next several years. Okay we made a bad hire, cut your losses and move forward. Get the Purdue credo back to excellence and winning.
The process seemed cumbersome and is problematic when you're in a competitive market for a coach and your rivals are ready to move. I would be advocating getting on with it right now behind the scenes. The selection criteria should be simple: a head coach with a demonstrated history of developing a successful program having several seasons with winning records that can bring his staff with him -- Hire a coaching team not a coach - and pay them especially with performance bonuses in the contract. Winning is contagious - bring in a team that is used to winning. There are too many specifics being suggested on this board just like at the end of the 2012 season i.e. a guy that can recruit, a guy that can sell Purdue, a guy that can sell WL, etc. The business is broken; bring in a management team with a demonstrated ability to fix it. The dynamics of the market are good - people will pay to see a winning team via tickets, fees, and merchandise; we are in the most profitable conference in the country; and there are reasonably good odds that a B1G team will be in the playoffs for the next several years. Okay we made a bad hire, cut your losses and move forward. Get the Purdue credo back to excellence and winning.
Maryland cited the ability to use an external search group now to get a head start on their search. Obviously it gets much trickier to do any sort of "feeling out" on anyone until you have actually fired your coach. Maryland certainly didn't handle the Edsall situation extremely well, but it also goes to show how hard it is to keep these situations secretive.
Not saying you need to fire him NOW, but in mid-November it may not be a bad thing (it may rejuvenate a team to maybe win an IU game at least).
I know for a fact the committee that hired Hazell wad Burke Nancy Cross Tom Reiter and Calvin Murray. They used the Beck Hybrid helicopter to go to Kent State as the media was tracking Purdue planes. BURKE named dropped Grigson and Pollian to add credibility to the hire.
Yeah I'm not saying that we should be against using an external group that can bring some expertise to the process to better ensure a quality decision. It was the way we did it the last time seemed unreasonably late especially since there were a number of quality candidates available and many of us assumed that a decision was imminent. I would hope that we have our own external search group engaged currently so that an announcement can be made concurrent with the changes in the program leadership at the end of the year.
Reading between the lines, it appears that the transition is a done deal. Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if Daniels is directly involved in the hire(s) of the new coaching team. And, if he is, the issue won't be finding value or hiring cheap, it'll be getting it right. He can't afford to get it wrong. And this especially makes sense since MB is a lame duck.
Reading between the lines, it appears that the transition is a done deal. Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if Daniels is directly involved in the hire(s) of the new coaching team. And, if he is, the issue won't be finding value or hiring cheap, it'll be getting it right. He can't afford to get it wrong. And this especially makes sense since MB is a lame duck.
I think that maybe we are misanalyzing the issue. Purdue is going to pay CH whether as coach or observer on his couch. The added cost is whatever is paid to a successor over the life of the CH contract. Additionally, any contractual obligations to CH assistants who are not retained would continue as well as the need for replacement salaries.
I suspect then that the actual annual cost increase will be higher than the 6.6M discussed. That doesn't mean that CH should be retained necessarily.
I suspect then that the actual annual cost increase will be higher than the 6.6M discussed. That doesn't mean that CH should be retained necessarily.
The external search group is more so to talk to coaches without talking to coaches. The external group reaches out to the coaches agents on behalf of you to gauge interest, workout details, etc.
IMHO I think that they have gotten that feedback in discussions with potential replacements and needed to get that commitment out there. I'm also guessing that Daniels is personally involved in this. The university is not going to air its dirty laundry publically. They are undoubtedly all aware of what a financial mistake this has been on may levels.
I agree. Mitch Daniels had high expectations when he was in DC and as Gov. Terminating those who don't produce is something he has had a great deal of experience with. IMO the decision has been made and at it has been made at his level. He is now involved and going through the process with a focus on excellence. We may not like being patient through the remainder of the season, but its done.
Similar threads
