Board may alter hiring process

[MeanGreen61]

UNT board may alter process for hiring

Regents considering proposal to allow signing of coaches without approval

09:34 AM CST on Friday, December 2, 2005

By Brett Vito / Staff Writer

The process for hiring most North Texas head coaches could become much shorter under a proposal the board of regents will consider today.

The provision would allow UNT president Dr. Norval Pohl or a university employee he designates to enter into contracts with new head coaches and extend the contracts of current head coaches as long as the total base salary for the coach does not exceed $500,000 for the term of the contract.

UNT athletic director Rick Villarreal said the provision would allow the athletic department to hire coaches in every sport except football. UNT head football coach Darrell Dickey currently earns a base salary of $178,500 and has a contract that runs through 2008.

UNT head men’s basketball coach Johnny Jones a base salary of $153,154 this season while women’s coach Tina Slinker is earning a base salary of $117,418

All three coaches’ current contracts are for multiple years and include stipends and incentives boosting their salary.

Dickey earns an extra $55,000 from a radio stipend and for maintaining NCAA Division I-A status in the Sun Belt Conference to push his salary to $233,500.

“We work in a situation that is completely different than most other university entities,” Villarreal said. “When we have to hire a coach, usually we have to get somebody in place pretty quickly and it may come between board meetings. An athletic director has to have the ability to hire a coach pretty much on the spot. The dollar limit is there because the board still wants to have some control over how much money you are obligating the university to.”

The current policy requires that the board of regents approve all contracts with coaches. Under the current policy, if UNT needed to hire a coach on short notice, it would have to call a meeting of the school’s regents.

The delay could cost the athletic department valuable time.

“When you are in negotiations with a coach, a lot of times it’s with someone who already has a job or has other offers at the same time,” Villarreal said. “So when you go in and negotiate, you need to be able to go in and tell them that this is what I can do for you.”

While the proposal would give Pohl and the athletic department the ability to hire coaches without approval from the board, Villarreal said he would keep regents informed.

“We would continue as an athletic department to make sure the board knows who we are hiring anyway,” Villarreal said. “Regardless of the fact that we would have the ability to sign those contracts, I would take them to the board so that they would know who our new tennis, golf or any of our coaches might be.”

If approved, the new provision would last until Aug. 31, 2006, when a review of the policy will be completed. Any changes necessary to the policy would be presented at that time.

[Stan R]

I guess I don't see what the big deal is with this.. Sounds more political than anything else..

[untgirl04]

It sounds like a good idea. It makes sense that we want to give our contract negotiators (RV) the best possible chance to close the deal. I disagree that they exclude football from the provision. It's like saying RV is competent and should be able to do what's necessary, except for football. Too many strings attached.

But other than that, we need every advantage and strategy we can get to remain competitive.

[Eagle1855]

agree with untgirl04, football seems to be where this would be needed most, wouldnt you think?

[j0nat8an]

does it cover firings also?

[Mad Hatter]

Sounds to me like now RV can go out and hire new coaches and pay them $500k without getting approval. Too bad it's not for football but I think it sounds like a good idea. Especially if you consider that some of our coaches will be Cherry picked from time to time and we may have to move pretty quickly to get a quality coach in. Being able to offer up to $500k sounds good compared to $125k.

[NT80]

This seems a strange time for this subject to have come up. Maybe some questions were asked about the process as a whole recently?

I see it mentions DD under contract through 2008. At least we know the make or break limit we have to endure. Would that be D-Day then?

[Cerebus]

Being able to offer up to $500k sounds good compared to $125k.

←

Take foot, tap brakes.

RV wasn't given the FUNDING to pay $500k, he was given clearance to do so, if the AD budget can pay for it.

[Mad Hatter]

If he has the permission to do it, then isn't it someone else's responsibility to come up with the cash. Don't tell him he can do something, but then say "Really you'll have to come to the Board to see if we can afford that". That's not really permission at all. I'd go out and find somebody to pay $500k to be the coach of our baseball team and then see what happens. (By the way, I don't have any expereince with baseball, but I am willing to learn. RV? Can you hear me? Is this thing on? Call me.)

Edited December 2, 2005 by Mad Hatter

[Cerebus]

If he has the permission to do it, then isn't it someone else's responsibility to come up with the cash.

←

No, it's his.

If the AD can raise enough money to pay someone $500k, then they can do it, if they can't, then they can't.

[PlummMeanGreen]

No, it's his.

If the AD can raise enough money to pay someone $500k, then they can do it, if they can't, then they can't.

←

Strangely enough, though, anyone else think that UNT officials have (in a way) most subtely raised the bar with future football hires, that is with that $500,000.oo figure that one day just may be made available for the right "higher profile" hire?

Many of us older Mean Green barnacles have seen our BOR's in the past come up with monies for salaries of new personel they really wanted on get on the UNT coaches staff. So one might say that a UNT BOR's can do what they want to do at most anytime they want to do it.

And FWIW, UNT had to go outside its usual box even back in the 1970's to hire a former SWC head football coach for a similar job opening at UNT, a coach that most know by now is in the College Football Hall of Fame.

GBT!

Edited December 2, 2005 by PlummMeanGreen

[SilverEagle]

Why is the head football coach's contract excluded from this new rule?

[Cerebus]

Why is the head football coach's contract excluded from this new rule?

←

Good question, but my best guess is:

Sounds to me like the Board doesn't care who gets hired for any coaching position in any sport except football, but that football is important enough that they want input.

←

[NT80]

Why is the head football coach's contract excluded from this new rule?

←

It sounds like the BOR sees football as the most visible and only meaningful sport we have and they still want a say in who coaches it. Actually why? Maybe someone on the board is protecting DD?

[Arkstfan]

Good question, but my best guess is:

←

You mean OUR best guess?

[Cerebus]

You mean OUR best guess? 

←

You were quoted! Prima donna.

[MootPoint]

Uh, it is 500k for the "term of the contract." So if you offer $170,000 a year for 3 years, that is $510,000 and you need to go to the Board. The only way RV could hire a football coach at the amount we currently pay without the Board's approval is to offer a 1 or 2 year contract. How many coaches are going to be awestruck by a 1 or 2 year deal?

[GreenN'walinsVet]

Uh, it is 500k for the "term of the contract."  So if you offer $170,000 a year for 3 years, that is $510,000 and you need to go to the Board.  The only way RV could hire a football coach at the amount we currently pay without the Board's approval is to offer a 1 or 2 year contract.  How many coaches are going to be awestruck by a 1 or 2 year deal?

←

thank you Moot. I was wondering when someone would bring this up? The Football coaches contract is NOT excluded in this revision, its just not practical that a football coachs contract would fall under the terms of this provision.