Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 3294203, member: 622"] It would probably be an interesting study to define when and how to pay the larger salaries. Generally, you get better coaching by paying more, but at what point do the lines of supply and demand cross and the result of higher pay become a diminishing return? Venables at Clemson is clearly worth it because he is a great DC and offers a lot more than just coaching; i.e. stability, recruiting, development of younger coaches. Whereas just paying a good to very good coordinator or assistant coach big bucks because you can does not always translate to the top tier. Obviously, this is anecdotal, but where would VATech have been without Bud Foster as DC for all those years?* Sure, they could have scored another DC that might have been as good or better, but who would have gone to VATech in Beamers' early years to transition VATech to a perennial winner. While Saban has gone through a lot of coaches because they move up and out and this is likely to have cost Alabama a few wins because of a lack of stability. We know Saban is worth the money and many of his coaches were, too. But will a Mississippi State gain enough talent and wins to make a significant difference? Serious question, will they stop Alabama, LSU and TAMU annually? Most of the staff that Urban Meyer, Nick Saban, and Dabo Swinney are good coaches, but they still have misfires, too. (See Meyer's staff: Ash and Schiano) Lane Kiffin got paid lots of money, but was he worth it? How do other factors affect the numbers. Let's be honest, several schools play weak OOC schedules, some conferences are tougher than others, sometimes the divisions are heavily lopsided. This could be a cool study by one of our own syracusefan.com researchers. * Yes, I trash VATech for their paper tiger scheduling (which was only superseded by Schiano's scheduling), but Bud's defenses were generally very good at worst. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?