My parents never encouraged me to take chances but I'm doing it here anyway.
IIRC this DL hire is supposedly happening soon. A couple names have been discussed (Temple guy and recent Texas DL guy, perhaps others I missed); I got no problems with whomever. One thing that sticks with me though is this... If we are to make the right statement and create the big splash all of us long for in each of our hires, we ought to at least reach for it if we ever expect to build champions. Upon that I would hope we agree.
We made huge strides in Odom's first season with the Offense, that despite the anemic year it endured previously. We anticipate greater things from our Offense in '17. The defense of 2016? Nothing needs to be said. The question now is how do we turn that D around QUICKLY for 2017 to pair it with an even better Offense to create a complete team?
Right now is where I suggest you prepare to roll your eyes. But if yeh balk at the possibility you shouldn't complain Mizzou isn't serious about coaching hires (I mean, if we at least explore this).
It's my understanding the contract settlement Texas has with Charlie Strong includes a provision where for the next two years what is otherwise his $10 million buyout, it's diminished by 50% from future money earned. If you think about this it means he REALLY doesn't have complete incentive to be a head coach anywhere over being a DC for us because he gets cut in half financially while Texas saves 50% of his earnings for two years, up to that $10 million buyout. Since he gets that money from Texas if he doesn't earn it elsewhere, it gives us a crease to possibly hire him. So I'm starting out and saying I don't know why anybody in Missouri gives a hoot about what happens to the U. of Texas and their Ding Dong Network. And so far as I'm concerned... I never liked Texas anyway.
The Phone.
"So Charlie, will you listen to us if at the end of four years of coaching with us, when combined with your Texas buyout you'd have ~$20 million for being our DC?"
We meet with him and confidentially propose a contract that pays $100,000 for each of the next (first) three years at Mizzou DC. Texas might be pissed off at all the recruits we poach but remember, we don't care about Texas. ~AND~ If we structure an agreement where it's contingent on year four, and hear me out on this because it has explainable nuance. But year four pay him as much as $8-10 million. I question where Strong in a different situation matches a $10 million opportunity for the upcoming four years while being a HC for some rebuild at institution unknown. And here's how this makes sense for Mizzou and Charlie...
If we go ahead and guarantee what is no big deal insofar as what a DC would have made for these upcoming four years IF Charlie REMAINS the DC through that fourth year? Mizzou is obligated to that anyway so we grant him that unless he vacates prior to the end of the fourth year. We presumably wouldn't want him flying out of here at the end of two years. So what he will essentially be paid FOR in that fourth year is what somebody else would have made in the same position had they coached through the previous 3 (+1) years and that's guaranteed minimum at year four. If he leaves early he just gets up to three years at ~$100k.
Where he makes his money is if/when he remains with Mizzou and reaches performance-based incentives that make this worthwhile and he only gets all that if he's still here in year four and it's paid to him FOR year four. He only gets the $8-10 million IF the Tiger's reached the milestones (division championship, league championship, etc.) related to both defensive performance and the team's general accomplishments that lead-up to the huge sum. We aren't paying a premium unless there's the great success he's expected to achieve from that list of milestones. Bonus for Texas because they save $100k.
What are we buying?
If Strong succeeds with the Defense the wager & expense are justified for both he and Mizzou because if our Defense succeeds, paired with our expectations for the Offense, we are contenders to much greater things than otherwise. With several SOLID years and an authentic opportunity to rise up the ranks quickly, we get traction for the program and lay a foundation for success thereafter. With Mizzou contending, it fills the stands, mucho cash pours into the AD, and our facilities peak at about the same time it's great to be a Tiger.
Okay, if Strong is a disappointment? We ain't makin' it rain fer Charlie, that's just the way it goes. If he's hired away prematurely? Mizzou's contract gets bought-out. If he's here for four years and only average? We have to pay him par for having stuck around and tried. We should also afford this because we hooked-up with Odom on the low side for an SEC coach. Odom shouldn't blink at it either. His general success arrives and brings more for him down the road. His highest position is that of a giant standing upon the shoulders of giants and he probably sees it the same way.
So, unless I'm misunderstanding something (completely possible) or the above aspects are inaccurate re: Strong's situation, etc., I'm curious to learn why that's implausible or just simply a bad idea? Then we could get the recruits and IMMEDIATELY begin fixing special teams. Bruised egos oughta be shored-up in time for 2017 because it's an opportunity for all the coaches to elevate their pedigree, experience winning in the SEC, strengthen relationships across the board, and stretch their knowledge base so who's worse for it. We'd have to move quickly though because Strong is now being mentioned for South Florida. But if money and success have anything to do with Strong's decision, I'd think he gets more of both from Mizzou. Unless of course somebody else does the same idea but has deeper pockets.
I dunno... What's a better way? >>blush<<
Thanks
IIRC this DL hire is supposedly happening soon. A couple names have been discussed (Temple guy and recent Texas DL guy, perhaps others I missed); I got no problems with whomever. One thing that sticks with me though is this... If we are to make the right statement and create the big splash all of us long for in each of our hires, we ought to at least reach for it if we ever expect to build champions. Upon that I would hope we agree.
We made huge strides in Odom's first season with the Offense, that despite the anemic year it endured previously. We anticipate greater things from our Offense in '17. The defense of 2016? Nothing needs to be said. The question now is how do we turn that D around QUICKLY for 2017 to pair it with an even better Offense to create a complete team?
Right now is where I suggest you prepare to roll your eyes. But if yeh balk at the possibility you shouldn't complain Mizzou isn't serious about coaching hires (I mean, if we at least explore this).
It's my understanding the contract settlement Texas has with Charlie Strong includes a provision where for the next two years what is otherwise his $10 million buyout, it's diminished by 50% from future money earned. If you think about this it means he REALLY doesn't have complete incentive to be a head coach anywhere over being a DC for us because he gets cut in half financially while Texas saves 50% of his earnings for two years, up to that $10 million buyout. Since he gets that money from Texas if he doesn't earn it elsewhere, it gives us a crease to possibly hire him. So I'm starting out and saying I don't know why anybody in Missouri gives a hoot about what happens to the U. of Texas and their Ding Dong Network. And so far as I'm concerned... I never liked Texas anyway.
The Phone.
"So Charlie, will you listen to us if at the end of four years of coaching with us, when combined with your Texas buyout you'd have ~$20 million for being our DC?"
We meet with him and confidentially propose a contract that pays $100,000 for each of the next (first) three years at Mizzou DC. Texas might be pissed off at all the recruits we poach but remember, we don't care about Texas. ~AND~ If we structure an agreement where it's contingent on year four, and hear me out on this because it has explainable nuance. But year four pay him as much as $8-10 million. I question where Strong in a different situation matches a $10 million opportunity for the upcoming four years while being a HC for some rebuild at institution unknown. And here's how this makes sense for Mizzou and Charlie...
If we go ahead and guarantee what is no big deal insofar as what a DC would have made for these upcoming four years IF Charlie REMAINS the DC through that fourth year? Mizzou is obligated to that anyway so we grant him that unless he vacates prior to the end of the fourth year. We presumably wouldn't want him flying out of here at the end of two years. So what he will essentially be paid FOR in that fourth year is what somebody else would have made in the same position had they coached through the previous 3 (+1) years and that's guaranteed minimum at year four. If he leaves early he just gets up to three years at ~$100k.
Where he makes his money is if/when he remains with Mizzou and reaches performance-based incentives that make this worthwhile and he only gets all that if he's still here in year four and it's paid to him FOR year four. He only gets the $8-10 million IF the Tiger's reached the milestones (division championship, league championship, etc.) related to both defensive performance and the team's general accomplishments that lead-up to the huge sum. We aren't paying a premium unless there's the great success he's expected to achieve from that list of milestones. Bonus for Texas because they save $100k.
What are we buying?
If Strong succeeds with the Defense the wager & expense are justified for both he and Mizzou because if our Defense succeeds, paired with our expectations for the Offense, we are contenders to much greater things than otherwise. With several SOLID years and an authentic opportunity to rise up the ranks quickly, we get traction for the program and lay a foundation for success thereafter. With Mizzou contending, it fills the stands, mucho cash pours into the AD, and our facilities peak at about the same time it's great to be a Tiger.
Okay, if Strong is a disappointment? We ain't makin' it rain fer Charlie, that's just the way it goes. If he's hired away prematurely? Mizzou's contract gets bought-out. If he's here for four years and only average? We have to pay him par for having stuck around and tried. We should also afford this because we hooked-up with Odom on the low side for an SEC coach. Odom shouldn't blink at it either. His general success arrives and brings more for him down the road. His highest position is that of a giant standing upon the shoulders of giants and he probably sees it the same way.
So, unless I'm misunderstanding something (completely possible) or the above aspects are inaccurate re: Strong's situation, etc., I'm curious to learn why that's implausible or just simply a bad idea? Then we could get the recruits and IMMEDIATELY begin fixing special teams. Bruised egos oughta be shored-up in time for 2017 because it's an opportunity for all the coaches to elevate their pedigree, experience winning in the SEC, strengthen relationships across the board, and stretch their knowledge base so who's worse for it. We'd have to move quickly though because Strong is now being mentioned for South Florida. But if money and success have anything to do with Strong's decision, I'd think he gets more of both from Mizzou. Unless of course somebody else does the same idea but has deeper pockets.
I dunno... What's a better way? >>blush<<
Thanks
