We are in one of the toughest financial times in our nation's history. Companies are shutting their doors every day. Americans are losing jobs at an alarming rate. Retirement accounts are dwindling down to nothing leaving people wondering how they'll make it.
Most people are holding their pocketbooks a little bit tighter. On the other hand, there's the University of Tennessee Athletic Department. It is one of the few businesses in America that is going to the other extreme, using the old phrase, "you have to spend money to make money."
It was July 1, 2008, that UT athletic director Mike Hamilton announced Phillip Fulmer had received a contract extension. Hamilton said, "I am very proud to have Phillip as our head coach for many years to come. We're fortunate to have such a talented and proven coach leading our program."
Then 125 days later it was worth a $6 million buyout of Fulmer and nearly $4 million to buy out the assistant coaches. As the assistant coaches take jobs, they are slowly going off UT's books and off the debt line, but the $6 million to Fulmer isn't going off any line except the budget line.
What is amazing to see is how much this change will end up costing the athletic department. The Fulmer buyout was a given as soon as it was announced Fulmer wouldn't be retained. To see what Lane Kiffin has been given to work with is incredible.
UT didn't go out and spend $4 million to get a Nick Saban. The school kept the head coach's salary right in line with what they had been paying. Nothing has been done there to raise the market value for a head coach. Where UT is raising the market value is on the assistant coaching front.
In 2008, the total pool for assistant coaches was $1.935 million. That was for the entire staff. As Kiffin hires his assistant coaches, the salaries UT is handing out are astounding.
Consider that John Chavis made $340,000 as UT's defensive coordinator. Multiple sources at UT have reported that Monte Kiffin will make $1 million. Defensive line coach Dan Brooks made $190,000. Sources say that Ed Orgeron will make in the neighborhood of $650,000.
Those two assistant positions alone raised UT's assistant coaching spending by $1.12 million. That's for just two positions. Lane Kiffin said at the time of his press conference that we all would be impressed with the staff that he would put together. Yeah, I think we're all pretty impressed with all of the NFL coaches that he's bringing in.
I understand the need to be able to tell high school kids how, "No one will put you in the NFL quicker than the NFL grooming factory we are putting together at Tennessee." I get that. I also understand that the athletic department's budget is different than the university's for academics.
Football fans can scoff at the argument about why this blank-check mentality works for the football program when the university is financially struggling like never before. Fans can say, "It's a different budget. Athletics are funded by donors and boosters."
We hear from the university that one answer to the financial crisis is to put more students in each class and raise tuition. In other words, compromise the education of our children to survive. There are tough decisions being made every day in our country that are difficult to deal with.
But, if I were Phillip Fulmer I'd ask, "Where were the blank checks when I was head coach?" Imagine if Hamilton had told Fulmer that he could spend as much money as he wanted on a new offensive coaching staff? Heck, with more than a million dollars more to play with Fulmer could have gotten awfully creative.
Monte Kiffin and Ed Orgeron's combined salaries will be nearly $300,000 less than what all the assistant coaches made last year combined. When you throw in all these other NFL guys, it's obvious Hamilton is trying to buy an instant turnaround.
Just days after the Lane Kiffin hire was announced, Hamilton sent out a letter to all UT season-ticket holders. He signed off on the letter with the phrase, "Expect to win!" It's become his phrase, and for very good reason. With the money the athletic department is spending, we all should expect every Tennessee team to win.
And, with the staff that Lane Kiffin is putting together we will find out very quickly if the money Hamilton is spending on assistant coaches will pay off. This spending is not just important to the success of the football program, it's important for all sports at UT.
Football is the "cash cow" at Tennessee. Back to when Hamilton gave Fulmer that extension, he said, "Coach Fulmer's success on the field has allowed all 20 sports the opportunity to compete at the highest level."
Don't think our failing economy doesn't affect the football program and the entire athletic program. It affects them just like any other business. What Hamilton is doing right now with this big spending is like a broker on Wall Street hoping to hit it big with one huge gamble. And, just like the gamble of that broker only time will tell if the big spending pays off or bankrupts him.
Mark Packer hosts the Locker Room, presented by Parkwest Medical Center, on Sunday at 10 p.m. on MyVLT2.
Tennessee 69, South Carolina 57 men's…
Tennessee 73, Georgia 62 men's…
Tennessee 60, Connecticut 57 men's…
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 129
HonoluluVol writes:
Mark Packer, what is your problem? Are you trying to insight heated arguements amongst VOL fans all the while, we are trying to heal and unite. Who gives a rats nest how much money the new coaches are paid. It's not out of your salary, so why the concern? It has nothing to do with the Universities economic situation. They are paid by donors and boosters. If they had a problem paying then the hires wouldn't hvae happened. Why don't you write about something like our incoming recruits, status of someone looking at UT, or how a recruits recent visit went. You could have safe your paper and ink on this article. Thing before you write.
FLAVOLS writes:
packer = bonehead
Looking for some relevant news other than positivity. He hopefully will be on the outside looking in.
hotrodvol writes:
Sounds like someone is tryng to stir up a big pot of crud. Would that be you Packer?
LiveToRide writes:
Well Mark....it IS a different budget. Not only that, but Fulmer had ample opportunity over the last 10 years to make "change" happen. Didn't budge. Let's be honest here...you have no more idea of what kind of money Fulmer had at his disposal than I do. Really wouldn't have mattered anyway since Fulmer was resistant to change, and he would have simply increased the salaries of the current staff with any additional funds so what's your point? Perhaps he wasn't given this sort of money because his staff wasn't perceived as being worth it? Weak article...and that's being polite.
HonoluluVol writes:
I don't think he was badgering Fulmer, I think he was saying what if Fulmer had been given the blank check? Well, probably if Fulmer had ask for it, or had the vision to go the route the program is going now, maybe he would have been given it. Changing is good. Especially if they want your head. So, in hind site, he should have done just that, go big. What did he have to loose. Might have been more selective in looking for a OC. I'm not saying Clausen was bad, but his, offense wasn't given the chance to mature, cause we want immediate results. Kiffin can expect the same if he don't produce.
cobbwebb writes:
my guess is that packer hopes we go "bankrupt" these media clowns in knoxville, think it is sexier to right about negative situations rather than positive ones! i would think they would sell more papers and have better ratings if tenn football were winning rather than losing, but for some reason it is hard for them to figure this out! like i said on earlier threads the smear campaign is already beginning, the i told you sos are already being written!
wagee12 writes:
Hey Jethro,
You might want to stick to something you really know about in the future. None of these salaries is coming out of your pocket so go take a long walk off a short pier. You pencil necked goobers never cease to amaze me.
massivevol writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
mike_d writes:
The whole idea of this for the people who live their lives on the outcome of football games. Complain if they dont spend money, complain if they do. Complain if they lose, complain if they dont win by enough. How bout doing your job, paying your bills, raising your kids and enjoying a football game once in awhile. Think of the highest person on the food chain where you work. The people who make ALL the decisions at these progams phooey these people. Just enjoy a game someday and if you dont like the people who write an article. QUIT READING THEM.
cainclifton23 writes:
Okay, Our football program brings in MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars.
We will sale out virtually every game this year almost.
so i dont think we will be hurting for money after this year
hueypilot writes:
Well, genius, if we put people in the seats it'll be a good deal just like it was when Bruce filled up Thompson Boling and if we don't fill the seats, you know kinda like it was going this year with losing to Wyoming at homecoming, then it'll be a bad deal. It will all be decided on performance. You must have really been searching for something to write about. Having just watched the Colts lose to the Chargers,how about reducing a pro football season to a 64% to 36% choice of prolonging vs ending your season based on a coin toss. Now that's some controversy. Think about it, You have a 177% better chance to win if you win the toss than if you lose it.
zqvol writes:
Probably one of the most insightful articles written within the past 8 weeks.
The real question is when does the bubble burst? The money for all of these salaries has to come from some place. Let's see increase ticket prices, and increase minimums for seats. The tickets are already overpriced, concessions are laughable, and they want more.
If the economy as a whole doesn't turn around no one is going to be able to pay to see them play.
Hamilton went out on a big limb with the blank check he gave Kiffin and it is his backside that is on the line. How long until he is gone?
orangevolz writes:
Duhh! Packer...are you getting bored and trying to stir up some controversy. Yes, you really scooped all of us. We did not know Kiffin had such a large pool of money to buy the best possible staff. What would you rather have: (1) spend less money and keep Fulmer and staff while fan and donor support gets lower and lower, or (2) hire a great coach and staff that costs you more money, but rebuilds the program and increases fan and donor support. I don't understand why anyone would care about how much money we pay the coaches. It does not take anything away from the academics, so quit trying to stir up something. Hamilton is doing a great job and I am sure Kiffin and his staff will repay him many times over.
ccjackson40#254643 writes:
What an idiot! There is more to it than donations. What other sport can the team make up to 15 million dollars for a bowl game? And if you spend this kind of money then you have to expect to make a BCS game at least every third year and if you do that combined with a sold out stadium every game and increaded donations you are not only going to easily pay this staff and Fulmer's buyout but the rest of the athletic department as well. Gamble maybe but one well worth taking.
WeLoveTennesseeVols writes:
You would, it's the have versus the have nots, and I guess you and Mark are the have nots! does the economy matter to you guys? H...no! You guys just want to leverage a "bad economy" into a few more haves versus have nots, therefore having a neverending audience, and of a "I told you so"! Hypocrites, WOE, to those who say WOE, Just go read your Bible. Praise the Lord, praise Jesus, thanks be to God for Fulmer, the AD, money, and the new coaches. This is what money is for. Mark Packard is just like Judas checking on the money, saying we need it for the poor, why should we spend it on this precious ointment. May this ointment be a value for our UT program and a winning ointment for our future. Go Vols. Mark Packard is weak and we are strong!!
RJ_Vol writes:
Though I was not an advocate of Fulmer's dismissal, I will say that these hires should(time will truly tell if I'm right) create a top tier recruiting program. As long as they keep the program clean, this will be money well spent IMO. It is also a bit of a new coaching model in the SEC where the assistants are given high value and high priority...instead of just the head coach. The coordinator hires are impressive.
debaser11 writes:
This staff represents a paradigm shift. Time we all recognize the professional/business nature of major college football. As a business risk, it seems a lot better risk than that taken by Alabama. They put all their egg(s) in one basket. If Saban leaves, the basket's empty.
And yes, one more KNS writer to avoid!
orangevolz writes:
zqvol writes:
Probably one of the most insightful articles written within the past 8 weeks.
The real question is when does the bubble burst? The money for all of these salaries has to come from some place. Let's see increase ticket prices, and increase minimums for seats. The tickets are already overpriced, concessions are laughable, and they want more.
If the economy as a whole doesn't turn around no one is going to be able to pay to see them play.
Hamilton went out on a big limb with the blank check he gave Kiffin and it is his backside that is on the line. How long until he is gone?
------------------------
How long until Hamilton is gone? Well, seems like you and your buddies should give Kiffin and his staff a chance first. It is not an overnight fix, but by year 2, you will be kissing Hamilton's butt and thanking him for the courage to finally hire a great coach. Until then, I will be watching a great coaching staff while you are watching for that bubble.
rockytopatl writes:
It doesn't support your argument too well when you misspell I-D-I-O-T.
rednekmuslTN writes:
This is just another example of a "talking head" making enough "noise" in the far far corner of the room to get someone to notice him.
When he says imagine what Fulmer could have done with a blank check for an offensive staff, I believe he'd STILL go out and get a Clawson. And STILL run the same ole predictable, unimaginative offense that took a Saban or a Mayer three minutes into film to figure out how to stop.
I, for one, applaud what Kiffin is doing, whether he wins or not. At least he is reinventing the design. At least he is taking the "potential" of our facilities and tradition and imagining higher mountain tops.
Fulmer achieved greatness because he played to his strengths: father figure who had an open door to kids far from their homes. But after you realize that today's athlete wants to win more than be "fathered" you have an out of date, out of touch coach who promises greatness but when the kid hits the field HE realizes it's NOT play to win, its play not to lose.
Just ask Vivian Springer what the difference means between those two philosophies.
GO VOLS! GO KIFFIN!
flstf writes:
It will be interesting to see how everyone is reacting if in three years we're still 5-6.
I can hear it now "What the hell was Hamilton thinking?" "Hamilton is an idiot" "With the kind of money we're paying these bums we should be playing for the National Championship every year"
Say what you want, but Packer has a point.
SemperVol writes:
zqvol...
Our ticket prices are right in line with everyone else in the SEC. Concessions stands aren't that bad. Who goes to games to eat anyway????? Screw the food... I want W's.
"Blank Check" seems to be the buzz word in this article. I think this paints a wrong picture. He has to ask for money from donors to get the money. Ya'll are getting way to antsy about Blank checks here. Don't like it... stay at home.
There are few things in this world (at this point in my life) that I enjoy more than going to Knoxville and watching games. A $50 dollar ticket and gas money is pretty freaking reasonable in my mind for the amount of enjoyment I get from it. Win or lose... that money has taken me on a roller coaster. As an alum I hate to see students pay for tickets but we are one of the last schools in the conference to request such.
That said....Go Vols!!!
golfnfire writes:
You know, I read the article 2 times to make sure I could digest it all. Looks like some of the comment makers should have done the same thing.
I did not take anything away from the article except, UT is spending a BUTT load of money on the "new" and unproven guys at this level. Just because someone was an NFL coach doesn't mean they would do good in D1 NCAA. Look at an old Redskins coach, a SC coach, a KY/NBA basketball coach. Heck Kiffen himself didn't work out well in the NFL.
It is also a slap in the face for Chavis who was a proven defensive leader and mastermind to leave and his replacement make so much more. ANYONE of you would feel the same as this article describes if your job let you go and brought in someone new making more than you did say after 10 years.
This is a well written article and I for 1 am glad to see all the dollar figures put together because I had no idea that UT was paying so well. Looks like I should have been a football coach.
Yes the academic and sports sides are seperate and have different money pools but I assure you if the same people who were donating all of this money to the sports programs would make their voices heard concerning the problems and utter shambles of the academic side then UT would not be in the shape it's in now. After all they are the same ones who called Hamilton to get Fulmer OUT.
boze367#216560 writes:
Mark Packer,
This is a business decision Mike Hamilton and the board of directors has made. I did not see you complaining when we were 9th in football payroll that we were paying too little to get quality coaches. Every coach on Fulmer's staff that has a gotten a higher base salary than they had here while coaching at UT. Mike Hamilton has more money to spend because the boosters said they would back the program and pay for the best assistant coaches. Not one dime comes from the University or taxpayers funds. In 2006 the TN football program reported a $18 million profit and that profit paid for all the other sports that are non-revenue producing. The times have changed it costs more to get the top coaches. Jimmy Hyams reported that LSU offered Ed Orgeron $900k, I don't believe it but LSU thought he was worth similar to what we are going to pay him. What about Bob Stoops making $6.9 million a year? We are inline the SEC and are spending less than TX, OK and Notre Dame.
If you are going to challenge Mike Hamilton get your facts straight. This type of yellow dog journalism has no place in Tennessee. You might find yourself being shipped back to your roots.
Sincerely,
Mark Carter
Southpaw_Vol writes:
If Haslam and Thorton (and on down) want to dish out more money so we can have better coaches, then let them! Unless Pilot all of a sudden jumps gas up higher than everyone else, none of this is coming from our pockets! (Even if they do, you can buy gas elsewhere). Ticket prices are always going to go up, regardless of who the coach is. Nothing stays the same year after year.
And Mark Packer, why always a one-sided (100% negative) article? Do any of you morons at KNS know how to write 1 friggin positive article about the football program? How come you didn't pitch this idea as well...
Let's say the coaches start bringing SEC Championships, top notch recruiting classes, and maybe a NC. Don't you think it might draw in a few more students as well? More students = more tuition = more money for the university. And, doesn't the Athletic Department give money to the University? Maybe if the AD dept is bringing in more money from the new success of the new "highly paid coaching staff", then maybe the University will get more money? But that wouldn't be a negative story. Apparently thats all you're allowed to write at the KNS.
I quit buying the KNS in 2005. Since then, 4 different family members, and at least 3 friends of mine have also quit buying and cancelled subscriptions. Your negative articles fueled it all. That's 8 subscriptions cancelled because of morons like Packer, Adams, and Pennington.
wantingthevols2win writes:
Packer's story irrelevent. The SEC is the premier college football conference. When Hamilton fired Fulmer he knew he was going to have some extra money to throw around with the new ESPN TV deal kicking in next season.
According to the deal:
Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal reported the deal is worth $2.25 billion over the life of the deal. The SEC will get about $150 million a year. CBS reached a 15-year deal with the conference in mid-August that is also worth about $55 million per year. The two deals mean each SEC school will get close to $20 million a year from the two contracts.
The key words in the deal is 20 million a year to each school. That's 20 million more than Hamilton had this year no matter what they decide to spend on coaches.
Wins and loses will justify the coaches contract, but the economy of college football is alive and strong
GO Vols!
Southpaw_Vol writes:
...and to think a "credible" sports writer could have included that in his article. Maybe when the KNS staff hires one, they'll include something like that.
Nice mention. I guess this shoots down Packer's "blank check" propoganda.
HonoluluVol writes:
Here, Here!!!!!
Berry14 writes:
Packer. Where do you get off? Don't you think Mike Hamilton knows what he is doing? If he didnt think that they could pay all of them, then we probably wouldn't have our Monte Kiffin and our Ed Orgeron. He knows what he is doing so lets spend our time on other things. I didn't come to this site to read about "financial problems with our economy." I came here to read about some football!!
HonoluluVol writes:
Chickem She-ot poser. Man-up!! Hiding from the big bad wolf, for fear of retribution. Come play, like the rest of the adults.
Couchdummy writes:
Who thinks that giving Fulmer more money for staff salaries would have improved anything? The fierce loyality of Fulmer to his existing staff and his resistance to change (both coaches and philosophy)is why he was removed! To have given him more money would not have changed his steadfast refusal to put the best players on the field-- underclassmen and transfers, e.g. B. Warren. Packer needs to see the bigger picture.
tway14 writes:
You are right. Alabama spent the same amount of money but on one person not a whole staff but they are not complaining! Get over the money and look at the big Picture
pdhuff#552644 writes:
My thoughts exactly.
Moving in a new family cost $$$. Vols are trying to leave the 5-7 highway and start bowling again.
Packer is getting high fives for roiling.
newtonrail writes:
We know all your biases Naffy, but that wasn't what he's writing about. It's something I've tried to get across for 2 weeks. In this economic downturn we PROBABLY can't afford this. The economy has affected everyone out there, except Jim Haslam, and that's where Mikey gets his marching orders. I'm tired of writing about it because the Kiffin kool aid drinkers who don't even buy season tickets or contribute won't listen. You see I've paid attention over the past few years to when posts are made, and it's easy to tell who's TV only fan and who pays the freight. I'm out. I'll be there on my grandfathered tickets if the Good Lord allows it for the Grand Experiment. I hope it succeeds.
volroadwarrior writes:
Packer is like all other media types. He doesn't understand economics. What do you think these coaches are going to do with their money? Will they burn it? Put it under a mattress?
No, you idiot. They will spend it and put it back into economy to pay waiters, store clerks, salesmen and whoever. Or, they will save and invest it which results in seed money for business and JOBS. That money, as Packer points out, will bring people into the stands and pay for popcorn hawkers, swimming coach salaries, bus drivers, construction workers building new facilities and on and on.
It is a great investment if Hammy picked the right guy. It would be a much larger gamble if he tried to do it on the cheap.
A little common sense is rare these days among reporters, politicians and those who blindly follow them over a cliff.
jimr07 writes:
and that point is? it is hard for me to believe that a newspaper who depends on the support of the local community endlessly runs down the thing that keeps the community excited. almost every article ends with some kind of slam on the UT football program.
Flyfisherman writes:
Was Mark Packard a band geek...someone who always hated football players...?? Or was he on the fencing team...a sport that no one cares about, but one that is always happy to receive money from the university that was gained from football incomes...??? Just a thought
turner_c writes:
Packer should know that the real problem in giving Fulmer more salary money is that it would be thrown away and not one penny would have gone to improve the FB program. Fulmer would merely increase the pay of existing staff, not hired a better staff.
yeavols#228407 writes:
I think someone left out that when you build championship teams, you go to bowls. We lost a boat load of money this year by not going to a bowl. Maybe if we invest in our staff, we can get money in return. Contracts, endorsements, bowls, etc. makes money. Sitting home with a losing team each year doesn't.
WhitePineVol77 writes:
In < 8 years, 6 million will be cheap for a high profile college football coach, not to mention the staff salaries. BTW, Coach Phil looked good on ESPN...he just acted real uneasy, like he was a little nervous. I have other ways to desribe it, but they would get me tossed :-)
rusty_shackleford writes:
Fudge is at it again. Not really adding anything except to stir the pot to create controversy. If UT wins, no one remembers this silly article. However, if UT loses, Fudge can point back to this and crow "I told you so!"
1982_35_28 writes:
These "journalists" really don't understand the economics. Packer, do you really not understand that the excitement surrounding this staff will increase revenue in 2009 and beyond more than enough to cover a meager $1-$2 million increase in payroll? Say it with me now...$70 million athletic department revenues in 2008, all of which came from four main sources; ticket sales, donations, licensing and TV money. I think it's safe to assume that all of these will increase in 2009 by a total of more than the $1-$2 million. I believe that the athletic department will be fine, Mark.
vut56#231073 writes:
One of the most sensible responses to be posted. Reading through these, all venom aside, the (coaching hires) make economic sense, and we will not know the results for a year or two. If it pays off, the University could be positively impacted.
However, a point that tends to be hooted down is that IF football fans and those who support that program gave equal support to the academic side, our current fiscal situation would not be so great. Haslam, and others, actually do; those who donate only to the VASF, would appear loyal only to the jocks and Football Time in Tinuhsea. In the long run, that is misplaced emphasis.
CrankE writes:
...if I were Phillip Fulmer I'd ask, "Where were the blank checks when I was head coach?"
___________________
Mark, do you know for certain that this didn't happen already with Fulmer?
I'm with HBK, I think if Fulmer had been given that kind of money, he'd have just given raises to the existing staff and called it good. Or the AD could have vetoed that idea and we'd have never heard about it.
Pack, I've been thinking the same thing with regards to the staff. UT didn't spend all their money on the head coach ($4M-Saban) but chose instead to spread that kind of money on the assistants to build a top notch coaching staff. (Now that I think of it, I can't name any assistant on Saban's staff.)
If it doesn't work out, then it'll be awful costly to fix. If it does work out, then Ham will be a genius and Kiffin will have an alley or street named after him. Either way, UT couldn't go on as before expecting things to get better simply workin' like heck.
92volalum writes:
bottom line fulmer had to go and MH had to THINK OUTSIDE OF THE BOX on hiring a new football coach... he couldn't make a safe decision because todays sports world doesn't allow it and tn is a very proud program that demands a quick turnaround...
will these quys do it??? only time will tell but MH made the right decision in going this direction....
stroker writes:
Right on. What would the writer have done continue to lose at homecoming or maybe go hire some in-expensive high school coaches and hope. Sucess most times requires some risk and investment. Hamilton is outside the box with a supreme venture. I hope it works.
1982_35_28 writes:
"rabbit ears"? How old and tired are you? There's nothing like personal attacks on people you know nothing about to show true ignorance and prejudice. The laughable part is that you really believe that you are in some way educating someone with your drivel. You never did mention what Hamilton should have done differently. Was keeping Fulmer and co. your solution to all the problems that you mentioned?
smokyredbone writes:
I wish you would back up your babble with ounce of proof. I have a son that is a student in knoxville and I will defy you to show me one example of how UT is falling in its ability to compete academically. This year it was harder to get accepted at Ut than Vandy!!!! Reason, The hope schollies have opened many more doors to gifted students that secondary education may not have previously been an option! The average ACT score for entering freshman at UT was 26 (never been higher) and there were 2700 applicants for the Honors program from incoming freshman with an average ACT score of 32!!! I've listened to your tired rants about our football program,not exactly sure what your angle is,(maybe a fired professor?) but you need to STFU about academics you troll.Hamilton was forced into this drastic move because of falling donations and booster unrest. CPF ran this program down, if Hamilton hadn't made this move the entire athletic department would have been heading for disaster!
smokyredbone writes:
Please!!!!!!! Somebody research total coaching budgets for the top teams in the country(ALA,FLA,LSU,OKLA,TEXAS)Lane Kiffin is in the bottom 1/3 in HC pay in the SEC! He choose to distribute (possibly at Hamilton's suggestion) extra funds to attract top notch staff. More coaches should take this approach!!!! He is making up for his preceived lack of experiance in this manner!!!! I don't have time to do this research,but I know Nick Satan makes 4mil and Less Smiles makes 1 dollar more! LSU even while paying Miles 4mil+, OFFERED CEO $900,000 ($250,000 more than UT)!! CEO came to UT because of the opportunity to work with Monte (good hire,saved us $250,000). I promise that once these figures on successful programs is compiled Ut may be in the top 10 in coach's saleries!! If we want a top ten type program you have to pay for one,and securing top level coaches is the first step!!!! GO VOLS, DESPITE THESE LOCAL HOME BOY WOULD BE JOURNALISTS!!!!!!!
GerryOP writes:
Mikey is taking a big gamble and he's going double or nothing ... and he knows it.
Better than hiring dark-horse, unproven-up-and-comer Herbie Schwartz and hoping he hasn't risen to his level of incompetence. Better than spending giga-bucks on big-name, hero-of-the-day super-coach (we had one of those) and watching him peak-out, rest on his laurels, and then the inevitable fall from excellence. Brilliant move Mikey.
I like it. A new day ... a new game. The Orange Nation is attracting interest from kids who previously wouldn't even give us the courtesy of returning a 'phone call/text message.
The fans should be trembling with excitement. The current scholly players should be either investigating xfer possibilities or over in the gym busting their butts ... while making danged sure they show up for every academic class.
Doubt if we will be seeing any smokin' and jokin' on the sidelines next Fall. Also probably won't be seeing our HC immitating Maxwell Smart.
Be well ya'all ... Go Vols ... and ... Fear The Kiffin.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.