Assistant Coach Pay

jdennis82 · February 23, 2014

This may've been posted in another thread, but given our recent departures, I figured I'd see where we stack up in comparison to others.

Sorting by the "Staff Pay Total" column, it looks like we're in line with our public school peers....

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/salaries/ncaaf/assistant/

I agree that it'd be ideal for us to grow our spending on the staff but with the magnifying glass on the University's budget as a whole right now, I don't know how possible that'll be near term. At least we're not significantly less than our conference mates while facing the financial scrutiny our school is looking at right now. (I admit I haven't read the entire detail of the budget issue)

cogido · February 23, 2014

Good to know, thanks for the info.

UNT90 · February 23, 2014

UNT. Where average is exceptional.

GreenMachine · February 24, 2014

UNT. Where average is exceptional.

+1 The acceptance of mediocrity is prevalent among the NT culture. Wish like hell it would change.

jdennis82 · February 24, 2014

Not sure why "average is exceptional" is how my post was interpreted. As I mentioned, we all want to increase our spending on the staff.

Really, the purpose of my post was to say that "below average is UNACCEPTABLE" so I wanted to make sure we weren't down with the likes of UTSA and others paying significantly less.

Edited February 24, 2014 by jdennis82

UNT90 · February 24, 2014

Not sure why "average is exceptional" is how my post was interpreted. As I mentioned, we all want to increase our spending on the staff.

Really, the purpose of my post was to say that "below average is UNACCEPTABLE" so I wanted to make sure we weren't down with the likes of UTSA and others paying significantly less.

Wasn't aimed at you. It was aimed at average, and how average is perfectly acceptable to so many around UNT sports.

Benford's retention after this season will prove the point.

GrayEagle · February 24, 2014

I honestly don't believe that any of us want average/mediocrity and I don't see it on the posts that I read. We will accept a lower rate of improvement probably because we've been down for so long. And, in most cases, you crawl, walk and then run.

As for Benford, the mistake was in giving him a five-year contract when he had never been a head coach before. Unfortunately, he needs a third year if he is able to pull the team up to average. You only have to look at Dan McCarney's success to understand that the first couple of years may be necessary to get your program above average. Granted, Mac started at a much lower point than Benford but any learning process is seldom immediate and we needed to be prepared for the consequences. In my opinion, next year should have been the final year of Benford's contract. If he's successful then, he gets a raise and an extension. If he's not, he's shown the door and no buyout would be necessary.

Although there have been mistakes in the past, we usually get it right. Tennis, golf, track and field, cross country, volleyball, swimming and diving and now, football are seemingly strong programs. Soccer has been strong a long time and the new softball coach seems to be a good hire. The exceptions have been men's basketball (Benford), women's basketball (Stephens), and of course, the Dodge fiasco. No AD is going to get them all right, especially those operating with a limited budget.

So, I don't see having a little patience as accepting mediocrity but admittedly it's wearing thin with Benson.

Harry · February 24, 2014

I honestly don't believe that any of us want average/mediocrity and I don't see it on the posts that I read. We will accept a lower rate of improvement probably because we've been down for so long. And, in most cases, you crawl, walk and then run.

As for Benford, the mistake was in giving him a five-year contract when he had never been a head coach before. Unfortunately, he needs a third year if he is able to pull the team up to average. You only have to look at Dan McCarney's success to understand that the first couple of years may be necessary to get your program above average. Granted, Mac started at a much lower point than Benford but any learning process is seldom immediate and we needed to be prepared for the consequences. In my opinion, next year should have been the final year of Benford's contract. If he's successful then, he gets a raise and an extension. If he's not, he's shown the door and no buyout would be necessary.

Although there have been mistakes in the past, we usually get it right. Tennis, golf, track and field, cross country, volleyball, swimming and diving and now, football are seemingly strong programs. Soccer has been strong a long time and the new softball coach seems to be a good hire. The exceptions have been men's basketball (Benford), women's basketball (Stephens), and of course, the Dodge fiasco. No AD is going to get them all right, especially those operating with a limited budget.

So, I don't see having a little patience as accepting mediocrity but admittedly it's wearing thin with Benson.

Let me say this again, since it keeps coming up again and again. You cannot hire a decent FBS level coaching candidate for less than 5 years. It rarely if ever happens and only under unique circumstances. So you can rightfully criticize the selection of a particular coaching candidate, but you can't criticize them for the length of the contract. It's a market driven issue, and it affects every school in FBS not just North Texas.

UNT90 · February 24, 2014

Let me say this again, since it keeps coming up again and again. You cannot hire a decent FBS level coaching candidate for less than 5 years. It rarely if ever happens and only under unique circumstances. So you can rightfully criticize the selection of a particular coaching candidate, but you can't criticize them for the length of the contract. It's a market driven issue, and it affects every school in FBS not just North Texas.

Agree.

The fact that we were told we were done hiring people with no head coaching experience, them were too cheap to pay an experienced head coach (Fracilla), and then hired a career assistant that had been passed over numerous times e cause the price was right tells you everything you need to know about the commitment to winning at UNT.

As far as comparing Benford to Mac, that is laughable. Several highly respected basketball sources had us as a mid major team to watch in 2012. We were the concensus pick to win the Belt west. Benford tore the house to shreds and has been allowed to start in on the foundation. He should have been fired last March, but wasn't because we are too cheap to do what real college programs do: correct a mistake.

There will be excuses after this season, and Benford will be back running hockey lines next year. And we will suck. And TCU will pass us in metroplex relevance.

But ya, we are committed to success in the major athletics programs...

emmitt01 · February 24, 2014

Let me say this again, since it keeps coming up again and again. You cannot hire a decent FBS level coaching candidate for less than 5 years. It rarely if ever happens and only under unique circumstances. So you can rightfully criticize the selection of a particular coaching candidate, but you can't criticize them for the length of the contract. It's a market driven issue, and it affects every school in FBS not just North Texas.

The operative word is bolded for emphasis.

The real question to ask is how many years does the market dictate that you have to give to a career assistant that nobody else would touch. I think we all know he would have taken less than five out of necessity.

Harry · February 24, 2014

The operative word is bolded for emphasis.
The real question to ask is how many years does the market dictate that you have to give to a career assistant that nobody else would touch. I think we all know he would have taken less than five out of necessity.

We was a finalist for the SMU job; they ended up taking Larry Brown which turned out to be a smart hire. You're right, hiring Benford moved RV away from his pledge to get a head coach. Benford - at the time - was considered a good candidate from the assistant pool and to say otherwise is just inaccurate. You can read here on this board, even some of Benford's most ardent critics on here now were ok with his hiring at the time. It's much like the Todd Dodge hire, many were behind it at the time it happened. Hindsight is 20/20.

UNT90 · February 24, 2014

The operative word is bolded for emphasis.
The real question to ask is how many years does the market dictate that you have to give to a career assistant that nobody else would touch. I think we all know he would have taken less than five out of necessity.

The realer question is why were we hiring a career assistant that no one else would touch in the 1st place?

Make the cheap hire and hope it works...

UNT90 · February 24, 2014

We was a finalist for the SMU job; they ended up taking Larry Brown which turned out to be a smart hire. You're right, hiring Benford moved RV away from his pledge to get a head coach. Benford - at the time - was considered a good candidate from the assistant pool and to say otherwise is just inaccurate. You can read here on this board, even some of Benford's most ardent critics on here now were ok with his hiring at the time. It's much like the Todd Dodge hire, many were behind it at the time it happened. Hindsight is 20/20.

I agree with this, but if our knowledge base was the standard, we would never have another winning season in any sport.

The AD is supposed to be much more informed than us. It should have been a red flag to him (and in hindsight, all if us) that no one would hire the guy. We were also promised no more assistants, but as soon as Fracilla asked for too much money, we went the cheap route, which is what this conversation was about to begin with.

So, no, we don't have a commitment to winning. The administration pays it lip service, as does ULM, Stephen F Austin, and a bunch of others that have a similar approach, but their actions belie their words.

And that was the point of bringing up the failure in basketball.

DeepGreen · February 24, 2014

May have had a chance at Danny Kaspar, HC of SFA and former player at UNT. As I understand it. We didn't even call him in for an interview.

TIgreen01 · February 24, 2014

I agree with this, but if our knowledge base was the standard, we would never have another winning season in any sport.
The AD is supposed to be much more informed than us. It should have been a red flag to him (and in hindsight, all if us) that no one would hire the guy. We were also promised no more assistants, but as soon as Fracilla asked for too much money, we went the cheap route, which is what this conversation was about to begin with.
So, no, we don't have a commitment to winning. The administration pays it lip service, as does ULM, Stephen F Austin, and a bunch of others that have a similar approach, but their actions belie their words.
And that was the point of bringing up the failure in basketball.

When you claim that the administration is not committed to winning, you should define what YOUR parameters for "winning" are. I believe that our administration is committed to having a successful overall athletic department, as graded against our peers---like minded institutions that spend roughly the same amount of money on athletics. Our budget pretty clearly announces to our alums, and fans, that we expect to be competitive in every sport. Our spending, for each sport, generally falls in the upper half to upper quarter of what other teams within CUSA are spending. If we were outspending everyone in our conference then it would be a clear sign that we expect to win the conference championship.

From the frequency of posts you make on this subject, it sure seems like you'd only be happy if we are always outspending everyone in the conference. Anything less than that is not "showing a commitment to winning"...?

UNT90 · February 24, 2014

When you claim that the administration is not committed to winning, you should define what YOUR parameters for "winning" are. I believe that our administration is committed to having a successful overall athletic department, as graded against our peers---like minded institutions that spend roughly the same amount of money on athletics. Our budget pretty clearly announces to our alums, and fans, that we expect to be competitive in every sport. Our spending, for each sport, generally falls in the upper half to upper quarter of what other teams within CUSA are spending. If we were outspending everyone in our conference then it would be a clear sign that we expect to win the conference championship.

From the frequency of posts you make on this subject, it sure seems like you'd only be happy if we are always outspending everyone in the conference. Anything less than that is not "showing a commitment to winning"...?

Failure to buy out contracts when it is painfully clear the coach is failing. From Dodge to Stephens to Benford, this is a pattern. Our peer Southern Miss fired a football coach after one season when it was clear he was a terrible failure. We refused to do the same in basketball and then had our own AD basically blame the players before the start of this basketball season.

It's a mindset that we seem to have a very hard time obtaining in our administration. One gets the feeling that they have to be drug kicking and screaming to fund athletics properly, and still look to find any way possible to cut corners and do it on the cheap.

untjim1995 · February 24, 2014

Failure to buy out contracts when it is painfully clear the coach is failing. From Dodge to Stephens to Benford, this is a pattern. Our peer Southern Miss fired a football coach after one season when it was clear he was a terrible failure. We refused to do the same in basketball and then had our own AD basically blame the players on a GMG podcast before the start of this basketball season.
It's a mindset that we seem to have a very hard time obtaining in our administration. One gets the feeling that they have to be drug kicking and screaming to fund athletics properly, and still look to find any way possible to cut corners and do it on the cheap.

Its always been my belief that the administration feels this way because the clear majority of students, alumni, faculty, administration, and Denton citizenry feel that athletics at UNT is a waste and takes away from music, arts, and education. I cannot disagree with this mindset more, and I know it has gotten better in the last decade or so, but there is still a huge majority that is anti-UNT Athletics. Its why we have kept bad coaches (and ADs) around when its obvious they aren't the right fit.

emmitt01 · February 24, 2014

We was a finalist for the SMU job; they ended up taking Larry Brown which turned out to be a smart hire. You're right, hiring Benford moved RV away from his pledge to get a head coach. Benford - at the time - was considered a good candidate from the assistant pool and to say otherwise is just inaccurate. You can read here on this board, even some of Benford's most ardent critics on here now were ok with his hiring at the time. It's much like the Todd Dodge hire, many were behind it at the time it happened. Hindsight is 20/20.

My point wasn't just that Benford hadn't been hired by anyone else as a head coach before, it was that he WOULD HAVE and WOULD HAVE HAD TO take less years. We weren't dealing with a Fran Fraschilla (or even a Danny Kaspar who we never gave the time of day). We were dealing with a career assistant who was hungry to add "head coach" to his resume.

Let's look at it from the perspective of my career. I'm a Lieutenant. While it is very rare to be at my level after 11 years it doesn't put me into the upper echelon of eligible candidates for a Chief job. There is a built in stigma against any applicant for a Chief of Police job if you've never been a Chief before. The Chief of Hickory Creek would be a more competitive candidate for the Allen job, or the Mesquite job, or hell, even the Krum job. While I could list a resume much longer and full of experience and training from being in Dallas the resume wouldn't say Chief, plain and simple. The fact that I command more people currently than there are officers employed in Hickory Creek, Corinth, Lake Dallas and Highland Village combined can't overcome the lack of the title. Therefore, I couldn't demand a long term contract or a high salary if I were to apply for a Chief job somewhere. The ex-Chief of Garland could. As could the ex-Chief of any other suburb. And, yes, there would probably be citizens of a city like Krum who would applaud the decision to hire a "career assistant" (Lieutenant) at a city the size of Dallas...but that wouldn't change the fact that I could fall flat on my face because I've never been the top man before. "Fan support" of the decision would be irrelevant.

GreenMachine · February 24, 2014

Its always been my belief that the administration feels this way because the clear majority of students, alumni, faculty, administration, and Denton citizenry feel that athletics at UNT is a waste and takes away from music, arts, and education. I cannot disagree with this mindset more, and I know it has gotten better in the last decade or so, but there is still a huge majority that is anti-UNT Athletics. Its why we have kept bad coaches (and ADs) around when its obvious they aren't the right fit.

That is why we need true leaders in place to do what is best for the university as a whole, not what others with an agenda want. We can't get rid of this mindset fast enough.

UNT90 · February 24, 2014

I think you just... did?

While I could list a resume much longer

Wag Tag · February 25, 2014

I guess there is never going to be enough money or the right way to spend it for many of us. For someone to say we have not been committed to better athletics is BULL!!

Think where we were 5 years ago! There has been a dramatic turnaround. Oh and the firing of the USM football coach after a year has really worked out well for the USM football team!

GreenMachine · February 25, 2014

I guess there is never going to be enough money or the right way to spend it for many of us. For someone to say we have not been committed to better athletics is BULL!!

Think where we were 5 years ago! There has been a dramatic turnaround. Oh and the firing of the USM football coach after a year has really worked out well for the USM football team!

If I start dating a girl that weighs 400 lbs and she then loses weight down to 350 lbs, she is slimmer than she was before I started dating her but damn, she has a long way to go. Kinda like our athletic budget, when you have spent so little towards athletics in the past, you have to increase it substantially just to get to par.

UNT90 · February 25, 2014

I guess there is never going to be enough money or the right way to spend it for many of us. For someone to say we have not been committed to better athletics is BULL!!

Think where we were 5 years ago! There has been a dramatic turnaround. Oh and the firing of the USM football coach after a year has really worked out well for the USM football team!

USM football will be back on top far sooner than UNT basketball. Mark it.

Not to rehash old arguments, but all you have to do is look back at the administration's failure to protect the athletic fee through the legislative process. A fee that was pushed through by student government leaders and that the administration had little to do with.

Wag Tag · February 25, 2014

If I start dating a girl that weighs 400 lbs and she then loses weight down to 350 lbs, she is slimmer than she was before I started dating her but damn, she has a long way to go. Kinda like our athletic budget, when you have spent so little towards athletics in the past, you have to increase it substantially just to get to par.

Good point! You don't go from 400 to 150lbs overnight! But she is better at 200 than she was at 400. When she hits 150 she is dumping you!! So you better start looking for an another 400lb girlfriend !!!

BillySee58 · February 25, 2014

My point wasn't just that Benford hadn't been hired by anyone else as a head coach before, it was that he WOULD HAVE and WOULD HAVE HAD TO take less years. We weren't dealing with a Fran Fraschilla (or even a Danny Kaspar who we never gave the time of day). We were dealing with a career assistant who was hungry to add "head coach" to his resume.

Let's look at it from the perspective of my career. I'm a Lieutenant. While it is very rare to be at my level after 11 years it doesn't put me into the upper echelon of eligible candidates for a Chief job. There is a built in stigma against any applicant for a Chief of Police job if you've never been a Chief before. The Chief of Hickory Creek would be a more competitive candidate for the Allen job, or the Mesquite job, or hell, even the Krum job. While I could list a resume much longer and full of experience and training from being in Dallas the resume wouldn't say Chief, plain and simple. The fact that I command more people currently than there are officers employed in Hickory Creek, Corinth, Lake Dallas and Highland Village combined can't overcome the lack of the title. Therefore, I couldn't demand a long term contract or a high salary if I were to apply for a Chief job somewhere. The ex-Chief of Garland could. As could the ex-Chief of any other suburb. And, yes, there would probably be citizens of a city like Krum who would applaud the decision to hire a "career assistant" (Lieutenant) at a city the size of Dallas...but that wouldn't change the fact that I could fall flat on my face because I've never been the top man before. "Fan support" of the decision would be irrelevant.

Analogies. You're good at them.