Hat tip to Kaiser: I don't want to hear we don't have the $$$ to buyout Scott Shafer if we wanted | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Hat tip to Kaiser: I don't want to hear we don't have the $$$ to buyout Scott Shafer if we wanted

Unless they are paying off debt (back to the general fund) that accumulated under Gross for the last decade. Are you saying that it is a bad idea for them to balance those accounts, that they should not be allocating money toward that (yet?)? Because to the best of my knowledge, there is not enough money - even with the "windfall" - to take care of everything that they want to and have enough left over this year to buy out Shafer's contract.

If it's not debt repayment, what else would you forego in order to buy out Shafer this year?
I would love to know where all this debt has come from. I don't have a problem paying back debt but if Metlife really gave us 5 million dollars for each of these games we should have the money if we wanted to make a move to have the ability to make a move.

I don't think all of the football money earned played in these Metlife games should be used to cover all the debt that Dr. Gross ran up. That is really frustrating to know if true. Football games should be played at the Dome and if Gross used these games to pay off his overspending that is terrible. What the hell has he spent on?
 
All these threads about $$$ reveal how many people here have never had to manage a budget.

Money can't just be magically moved around like pixie dust.
 
If it's not debt repayment, what else would you forego in order to buy out Shafer this year?

I'd say start with academic bonuses paid to coaches and admins. Graduating students shouldn't earn you extra money. Dump whatever money is being spent on Giansante and put that into a coaching salary pool- someone will have to explain to me what he does that is of any value to SU because no one I've spoken with has been able to so far.

I just wonder what the SUAD finances would look like if Melo didn't write that $5 mil check?
 
I don't think all of the football money earned played in these Metlife games should be used to cover all the debt that Dr. Gross ran up. That is really frustrating to know if true. Football games should be played at the Dome and if Gross used these games to pay off his overspending that is terrible. What the hell has he spent on?

Football money?

It's "Athletic Department" money.

Daddy brings home the paycheck, so Mommy can buy food and clothes for the kids.

At SU, we're all one big happy family.
 
All these threads about $$$ reveal how many people here have never had to manage a budget.

Money can't just be magically moved around like pixie dust.
I used to wonder what an audit of the FED would reveal nowadays I wonder what an audit of the SUAD would show. GoSu has posted financials for our AD which show we are doing pretty well. These Metlife games have brought in huge windfalls for the AD.

We underpay Jim Boeheim, we don't pay Scott Shafer a lot I just want to know how the SU AD is in as bad shape financially as we hear it is.
 
All these threads about $$$ reveal how many people here have never had to manage a budget.

Money can't just be magically moved around like pixie dust.
who knows how SU controls budgets. it's not magic to spend money recklessly if it's not being monitored.
 
All these threads about $$$ reveal how many people here have never had to manage a budget.

Money can't just be magically moved around like pixie dust.
clearly you need to bone up on your fairys and pixie dust...its the dust that makes things magically move, it doesnt move on its own. :eek:

i think what we are guilty of (myself included) is that we want $$ earned by the football team to be spent on the football team...and thats clearly not the case. whether its paying down debts or just spread out so the womens field hockey team travels with more luxury...its just gone when it gets here.

the thing is, if we've been running a budget on bigeast $$ for 20 years, then in theory we really should have a surplus sitting someplace right now, because there is no way they could amp up and spend down all that has just come in or will come in. treat it like an annual bonus that may or may not come, run your team budget the same as always...and if we find we have extra $$ we will give it to you, but just know that the 1st priority is getting the football team right.

i dont think anyone (a coach of an olympic sport) would have a problem with it...and if they did, then fire them too.
 
clearly you need to bone up on your fairys and pixie dust...its the dust that makes things magically move, it doesnt move on its own. :eek:

i think what we are guilty of (myself included) is that we want $$ earned by the football team to be spent on the football team...and thats clearly not the case. whether its paying down debts or just spread out so the womens field hockey team travels with more luxury...its just gone when it gets here.

the thing is, if we've been running a budget on bigeast $$ for 20 years, then in theory we really should have a surplus sitting someplace right now, because there is no way they could amp up and spend down all that has just come in or will come in. treat it like an annual bonus that may or may not come, run your team budget the same as always...and if we find we have extra $$ we will give it to you, but just know that the 1st priority is getting the football team right.

i dont think anyone (a coach of an olympic sport) would have a problem with it...and if they did, then fire them too.
The only non-fungible monies within the AD are (if I recall) donations specifically earmarked for a sport/purpose. Even within football you can stipulate that donations go toward recruiting. Same with the $44K IPF fund we ran here.

I think that we should be out of the hole and in splendid shape by the end of Shafer's 4th year. If we need to make a move, we can do it then, and go "big".
 
who knows how SU controls budgets. it's not magic to spend money recklessly if it's not being monitored.

That's really the point. No one knows. So all these threads that basically amount to "SPEND MONEY SO WE CAN WIN TEH GAMEZ!!!1!1!!!" are working off of zero knowledge or facts.
 
clearly you need to bone up on your fairys and pixie dust...its the dust that makes things magically move, it doesnt move on its own. :eek:

i think what we are guilty of (myself included) is that we want $$ earned by the football team to be spent on the football team...and thats clearly not the case. whether its paying down debts or just spread out so the womens field hockey team travels with more luxury...its just gone when it gets here.

the thing is, if we've been running a budget on bigeast $$ for 20 years, then in theory we really should have a surplus sitting someplace right now, because there is no way they could amp up and spend down all that has just come in or will come in. treat it like an annual bonus that may or may not come, run your team budget the same as always...and if we find we have extra $$ we will give it to you, but just know that the 1st priority is getting the football team right.

i dont think anyone (a coach of an olympic sport) would have a problem with it...and if they did, then fire them too.

I think the problem is that people who might donate to a significant degree don't give a rat's ass about the football team.
 
I used to wonder what an audit of the FED would reveal nowadays I wonder what an audit of the SUAD would show. GoSu has posted financials for our AD which show we are doing pretty well. These Metlife games have brought in huge windfalls for the AD.

We underpay Jim Boeheim, we don't pay Scott Shafer a lot I just want to know how the SU AD is in as bad shape financially as we hear it is.

I don't believe those financial reports as far as I can throw them.

Jeffrey_Jones_plays_Edward_R._Rooney_in_Ferris_Bueller's_Day_Off.jpg
 
The only non-fungible monies within the AD are (if I recall) donations specifically earmarked for a sport/purpose. Even within football you can stipulate that donations go toward recruiting. Same with the $44K IPF fund we ran here.

I think that we should be out of the hole and in splendid shape by the end of Shafer's 4th year. If we need to make a move, we can do it then, and go "big".
even that money specifically earmarked for whatever sport frees every other penny not earmarked. so you give your dollar to the football team and only the football team and some other unearmarked dollar that would've gone to the football team might go to the field hockey team

i think that explains why non rev sports have gotten better all of a sudden. gross wants titles, he doesn't care what sport.
 
Again why are the AD's financials so bad? Where has the spending gone and what has it done? These Metlife games are bringing in 5 million dollars a game. With that money we should not be in bad financial shape. If we are in bad financial shape then Dr. Gross should be removed.
As we underpay our revenue sports coaches. UConn can pay Geno 1 million dollars a year because UConn WBB makes a lot of money. If Metlife money is being used to pay for coaches in other sports then the SUAD is not committing enough resources for football. As football/basketball winning can increase donations.

Texas A&M was able to fund the expansion of Kyle Field with donations from the Johnny Manziel ERA. Syracuse was able to fund the Melo Center thank to a huge donation from Carmelo Anthony. Syracuse was able to build the weight room thanks to a huge donation from Donovan McNabb.

I am okay with spending money on Men's soccer, Women's field hockey, Women's Softball, Women's Lax, Men's XC, but the salaries we are talking about aren't a lot. Syracuse doesn't even sponsor that many Division 1 sports. It is ridiculous with the cashcow that is Men's BB along with the Metlife windfall money that our spending is out of control.
 
even that money specifically earmarked for whatever sport frees every other penny not earmarked. so you give your dollar to the football team and only the football team and some other unearmarked dollar that would've gone to the football team might go to the field hockey team

i think that explains why non rev sports have gotten better all of a sudden. gross wants titles, he doesn't care what sport.
Agree, it's the same argument raised in our local elections when a new school revenue measure is floated, "The money can only be used to fund in-classroom things, it can't be used to pay administrator salaries, etc." It doesn't constrain the overall budget process. While it does create non-fungible budget-local revenue, it doesn't constrain the overall budget process.

The issue with Gross' contract and its criteria for measuring success has been discussed here before. If the reports were true, it is structured in a way that rewards him for performance in the non-revenue sports. I teased this with a comment the other day about how Gross seems to understand how to boost the performance of the olympic sports in short order, but can't figure it out for football. My real suspicion is that every dollar he doesn't allocate toward football is another dollar he can use to invest in a sport whose accomplishments affect his personal bottom line.

We're coming out of that period, and whether Gross remains AD or not, the contract should be restructured (IMO) to be sport-neutral, or even to favor revenue sports. And we'll soon have enough to go around, without skimping on football coaches.
 
i think that explains why non rev sports have gotten better all of a sudden. gross wants titles, he doesn't care what sport.

He wants to earn his incentives?If FB isn't a priority for his employer,that's not on him.They say he's being brought in to fix FB but his contract says otherwise.
 
He wants to earn his incentives?If FB isn't a priority for his employer,that's not on him.They say he's being brought in to fix FB but his contract says otherwise.
i didn't realize his contract was like that. even without that contract, if he's thinking about the next job and feels like football's hopeless, he can at least hang his hat on field hockey and soccer.

i should've known that cantor would screw up his contract like she screwed up everything else.

hopefully his contract isn't too hard to unload. it probably is, thanks to that dopey baby hobgoblin in newark
 
Whitey23 said:
Giansante said last week the deal was the best neutral-site deal ever signed when the Orange agreed to it. That means Syracuse made more than $4.7 million for the game, more than Alabama and Michigan were paid in 2012. That paragraph comes from the below link. The link inside the paragraph links to his Q&A http://www.syracuse.com/orangefootb...ks_metlife_series_and_yankee_stadium_p_1.html

He said deal not game. We've had this discussion before so not worth going in circles again.
 
He said deal not game. We've had this discussion before so not worth going in circles again.
So either they are trying to make the deal look better than actually is or they have acquired a boatload of money that could theoretically be used to buyout the coaching staff that so choose to.
 
So either they are trying to make the deal look better than actually is or they have acquired a boatload of money that could theoretically be used to buyout the coaching staff that so choose to.
or they said...hey this SS guy is really hardnosed and can coach!! lets spend it all on the IPF!!!...

wa, waa, waaaaaa...
 
But I think it still begs the question, what is this new revenue being spent on? The salaries for the staff are the same relatively speaking as when we were receiving Big East money (15+ million less) add on an additional 3-5 million every other year for games at NYC and there is a monumentally LARGE difference in funding from 3-4 years ago to today. Were talking 10-15 million more, concretively. We have the new practice facility, as far as big budget items are concerned, but that’s about it. I don't mean this to be an incitement by any stretch, it’s just a question I can’t seem to find an answer for.
My big worry is that the administration is not interested in supporting the football program the way that a P5 program should be supported. I worry if they let SS go they just try to plug another coach in there and not "pay up" for a coaching staff because they are interested in pinching pennies. I am not saying you can afford to get a Kelly/Saben/Miles type, more along the lines of a Tressell/Kiffen/Tuberville (just examples of levels not who I am suggesting).
The AD pays the school for each athletes scholarships. Thats $60k +/- per athlete. If 150-200 full scholarships, that's $9M-$12M off the top. Coaches and support staff probably $5-7M. Physical upkeep.,etc likely at least half a,million. Advertising is huge figure as well.
 
It would be far cheaper to keep SS as our coach, as we are already contractually obligated to pay him as well as not turning off any potential hires by firing our current HC only 2 years in, and just up the salary for a qualified, experienced, successful OC dramatically. I recognize that means you have to bump up DC and probably HC up too. Its still cheaper than a buyout. SS would be just fine by me if we had a new, well-paid, qualified, experienced, successful OC who got this offense up to Div. 1 P5 levels of production and scoring, which would mean we would likely have won 7-8 games this year and that or more into the future.
 
Might not need to bump up other salaries. The defense has done well, so a few more $ for Chuck might be OK. My initial reaction following the Pitt game (as expressed in another thread) was to tell HCSS to hire a proven D-I OC or pack his bags. There will be several candidates that become available over the next few weeks. Spend some money and get one.
 
Might not need to bump up other salaries. The defense has done well, so a few more $ for Chuck might be OK. My initial reaction following the Pitt game (as expressed in another thread) was to tell HCSS to hire a proven D-I OC or pack his bags. There will be several candidates that become available over the next few weeks. Spend some money and get one.
Absolutely. That is exactly my position as well.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
170,355
Messages
4,886,657
Members
5,996
Latest member
meierscreek

Online statistics

Members online
139
Guests online
981
Total visitors
1,120


...
Top Bottom