Why it's important that Scott Shafer has only one year left on his contract

[BVille44]

Scott Shafer told the media this morning he has one more year left on his contract which is good news in terms of a buyout.

 

[elimunelson]

Scott Shafer told the media this morning he has one more year left on his contract which is good news in terms of a buyout.

i wonder if it has language in it that if he gets another job it is offset by what is owed. Not sure how these college coach contracts work. Would behoove Coyle to get rid of him as soon as possible if that is the case so he can get in line for a new gig somewhere.

 

[Crusty]

Very interesting point.

Syracuse, N.Y. — Scott Shafer played a significant card Thursday morning when he revealed he has one year left on the contract he signed upon being promoted before the 2013 season.

It's significant because it brings to light for the first time the truth that first-year athletic director Mark Coyle has a decision to make at the end of the season, and there seems to be two main avenues.

Offer a contract extension or move on in another direction.

Full article

 

[Scooch]

Am I still the only one that thinks these extensions are transparent nonsense?

So let's say Coyle decides that he wants to retain Shafer. The logic is that he must offer him an extension, otherwise all these recruits will not commit because there's no assurance that he'll be the coach beyond next year. But don't coaches get fired with years remaining on their contract all the time? The only thing that shows tenure stability is winning games, not some phantom extension that schools buy out constantly.

*edit* And the staff surely aren't dummies, they know how this works. They know that even with an extension Shafer is on thin ice. You think that if one of them gets an offer somewhere else that's considered a promotion they wouldn't jump?

 

[CuseLegacy]

Very interesting point.

Syracuse, N.Y. — Scott Shafer played a significant card Thursday morning when he revealed he has one year left on the contract he signed upon being promoted before the 2013 season.

It's significant because it brings to light for the first time the truth that first-year athletic director Mark Coyle has a decision to make at the end of the season, and there seems to be two main avenues.

Offer a contract extension or move on in another direction.

Full article

The more important point is that the decision is not Coyles' alone but also the Chancellor and the BOT.

 

[Finwad32]

Playing out the last year of a contract is becoming more common than it ever was. It's still not commonplace, I might add, though. Most coaches will fight voraciously against it. It very well may move up the timeline though on the decision to be made in regards to the future of the program.

 

[Crusty]

The more important point is that the decision is not Coyles' alone but also the Chancellor and the BOT.

If Coyle wants Shafer gone I believe he will be gone. Why hire the guy and then prevent him from doing his job?

 

[FrancoPizza]

It's too bad he can't demote himself back to DC. Not sure that's ever happened, but that kind of thinking should happen more often. Not his fault that he's not HC material. most aren't.

 

[CuseLegacy]

If Coyle wants Shafer gone I believe he will be gone. Why hire the guy and then prevent him from doing his job?

Because with that many people involved not everyone sees it the same way.

 

[Scooch]

Because with that many people involved not everyone sees it the same way.

That would be infuriating. No matter which way Coyle wants to go he should be allowed to do his job. Decision by committee tends to have disastrous results.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

That would be infuriating. No matter which way Coyle wants to go he should be allowed to do his job. Decision by committee tends to have disastrous results.

Decision by committee leads to indecision.

 

[Crusty]

Because with that many people involved not everyone sees it the same way.

Well that is a big problem. If some self-styled athletic expert on the BOT prevents an AD from firing a coach the program might as well close up shop. That is micro management worthy of a community college not a world class university.

 

[JHarris44]

I'm sure it's been mentioned before but I for one would be grateful if the Dougie came back as HC, we worked out a deal with him to do minimal recruiting and @ss kissing, pay up the assistants and retain Shafe, Daoust, and everyone but Reed and maybe Adam. Of course some will move to bigger and better but keep the them intact as much as possible.

Say what you will about Marrone, he was/is a terrific in game manager. And when he finally started showing emotion on the field, the kids really fed off of him.

 

[djorange1989]

I'm sure it's been mentioned before but I for one would be grateful if the Dougie came back as HC, we worked out a deal with him to do minimal recruiting and @ss kissing, pay up the assistants and retain Shafe, Daoust, and everyone but Reed and maybe Adam. Of course some will move to bigger and better but keep the them intact as much as possible.

Say what you will about Marrone, he was/is a terrific in game manager. And when he finally started showing emotion on the field, the kids really fed off of him.

That bridge is burned, new AD or not. No way Doug is coming back.

 

[Macky44]

I'm sure it's been mentioned before but I for one would be grateful if the Dougie came back as HC, we worked out a deal with him to do minimal recruiting and @ss kissing, pay up the assistants and retain Shafe, Daoust, and everyone but Reed and maybe Adam. Of course some will move to bigger and better but keep the them intact as much as possible.

Say what you will about Marrone, he was/is a terrific in game manager. And when he finally started showing emotion on the field, the kids really fed off of him.

blah. Marrone can suck it.

 

[JHarris44]

That bridge is burned, new AD or not. No way Doug is coming back.

I know...and I agree...but that'd be my ideal scenario.

 

[JHarris44]

blah. Marrone can suck it.

I think we win both Pitt and Virginia and show up at USF if Marrone was HC...just saying...

 

[oldpinepoint]

Enough with Marrone. Maybe we should hire Coach Mac back. Good grief

 

[DPCuse]

I think Coyle will be judged on how the football program does. And if that's true, he's going to want "his guy" at the helm. He isn't going to want to wait one more year to get the program on the right track.

 

[Townie72]

Decision by committee leads to indecision.

Ain't that the truth.

And worse yet, committees tend to make very safe, very obvious decisions. Committees rarely come up with revolutionary or even major improvements. More often they'll select the candidates that have to most boxes checked on the criteria list. And the one that no one on the committee objects to for whatever reason.

Steve Jobs didn't let a committee make important decisions. Nor did Bill Gates.

 

[kcsu]

Coyle will get input from many sources he will make the call and it will be approved regardless of what he wants.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Ain't that the truth.

And worse yet, committees tend to make very safe, very obvious decisions. Committees rarely come up with revolutionary or even major improvements. More often they'll select the candidates that have to most boxes checked on the criteria list. And the one that no one on the committee objects to for whatever reason.

Steve Jobs didn't let a committee make important decisions. Nor did Bill Gates.

True - he didn't definitely let underlings make unilateral decisions in his company. Isn't this really the same type of thing? Isn't Syverud actually the Bill Gates of SU? Coyle, just like any department head, dean, I imagine, isn't a sovereign leader. Even Chancellor Syverud has to get approvals from the BOT. I just read an article that Alabama's Board of Trustees had to approve Saban's coaching extension so I imagine it's SOP. I imagine with a relatively new chancellor and new AD, and the issues that have arisen from the past - oversight especially over athletics and budget items etc will be stressed.

http://www.rolltide.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/060314aaa.html

 

[Scooch]

True - he didn't definitely let underlings make unilateral decisions in his company. Isn't this really the same type of thing? Isn't Syverud actually the Bill Gates of SU? Coyle, just like any department head, dean, I imagine, isn't a sovereign leader. Even Chancellor Syverud has to get approvals from the BOT. I just read an article that Alabama's Board of Trustees had to approve Saban's coaching extension so I imagine it's SOP. I imagine with a relatively new chancellor and new AD, and the issues that have arisen from the past - oversight especially over athletics and budget items etc will be stressed.

http://www.rolltide.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/060314aaa.html

There's a difference between oversight and meddling, though.

Like, if Coyle wants to retain Shafer but the BOT says no, he must be fired, I would be upset. Coyle was hired to do a job, let him do the job.

Now if Coyle wants to replace Shafer, the BOT agrees, but says we have to approve your choice of replacement, that's fine. Note, not saying the BOT gets to pick, just that they have the right to approve or deny Coyle's choice.

 

[Chip]

Am I still the only one that thinks these extensions are transparent nonsense?

So let's say Coyle decides that he wants to retain Shafer. The logic is that he must offer him an extension, otherwise all these recruits will not commit because there's no assurance that he'll be the coach beyond next year. But don't coaches get fired with years remaining on their contract all the time? The only thing that shows tenure stability is winning games, not some phantom extension that schools buy out constantly.

*edit* And the staff surely aren't dummies, they know how this works. They know that even with an extension Shafer is on thin ice. You think that if one of them gets an offer somewhere else that's considered a promotion they wouldn't jump?

I agree, but it's one of those things that you hear so much that people start believing it's true. Just the fact that recruits are asking about it.

One thing SU always has in its back pocket is being private. You don't have to tell anyone how long the contract is. But now we know.

 

[Chip]

There's a difference between oversight and meddling, though.

Like, if Coyle wants to retain Shafer but the BOT says no, he must be fired, I would be upset. Coyle was hired to do a job, let him do the job.

Now if Coyle wants to replace Shafer, the BOT agrees, but says we have to approve your choice of replacement, that's fine. Note, not saying the BOT gets to pick, just that they have the right to approve or deny Coyle's choice.

I would think the BoT is just a necessary vetting process that everyone has to go through for a hire of this magnitude. Make sure due diligence was done, there are no skeletons in the guy's closet. Just some standard checks & balances. I can't imagine the BoT saying "what type of offense does he run, does he hate punting?"