The best things in life are free.

If you haven’t been reading the series in USA Today on the escalating costs associated with coaches’ salaries, you should.  It costs money to have a winning program, and it costs more money to keep a winning program together.

When you’ve got Wake Forest – Wake Forest! – having to defend itself on what it pays Jim Grobe, that should give you an idea of where things have gotten.

The reason I mention this is because if you’re one who believes there’s substance to the rumor mongering that currently engulfs the Dawgnation regarding the fate of certain assistant coaches, you’d best realize that bringing in a high-profile assistant or assistants won’t be cheap.  And while Georgia certainly hasn’t stinted on what it pays Mark Richt, it’s fair to characterize the level of compensation directed to its assistant coaches as strictly middle of the pack by SEC standards.  There’s also Georgia’s reluctance to offer multi-year contracts to its assistants to consider, something that’s becoming commonplace elsewhere around the conference.

In other words, if changes are coming, they’re going to be sea changes in how the athletic department has done business since the dawn of time.  Do Damon Evans and Michael Adams strike you as the kind of folks who are ready to make those kinds of changes?  I’m not being snarky when I ask that – I honestly don’t know.  But be aware that it won’t be Mark Richt alone who is likely to face a tough call about where to go with the coaching staff in this offseason.


Filed under Georgia Football, It's Just Bidness

6 responses to “The best things in life are free.

  1. Joe B.

    Obviously, Damon knows that things cannot be done as they had been for the last 100 years.

    Depending on how the last 3 games go, the AA’s revenue could drop significantly heading into next year.

    In the grand scheme, it will be cheaper to have a DC with a buyout than an unenthusiastic fanbase.


  2. Left to Right

    We’re going to have to offer a high paying, multi -year deal to attract a good DC, because the perception (perhaps accurate) is that the DC next year is going to be coaching to save everyone’s job.

    The new DC is going to have to figure out how to stop a variety of offenses-including pro style, several variations of the spread, the triple option and whatever it is Spurrier is trying to run these days. This learning curve is going to be steep, but is going to have to be overcome quickly for the Dawgs to have even a decent season next year. Right now, our offense for next year looks frighening, and as difficult as this is to believe, the defense will probably have to carry the team. Potential DC candidates are going to be aware of all this, and I’m afraid its going to limit the candidates for what should normally be a very in-demand position.

    To return to the subject of an earlier post, this is why I believe changes in the staff after this season will be more disruptive than if they had occurred after last season. Most Georgia fans saw this year as a rebuilding year anyway (given the losses of Stafford and Moreno) and a new DC this year would have consequently had some breathing room to get up to speed on the various offenses Georgia faces. But Georgia fans are going to be looking for more blood (possibly up to and including the HC) if the team goes 6-6 or 7-5 next year. The new DC will have no margin for error, and that is going to hurt our search. The new DC will be stepping into a difficult situation. And so I think our best method of attracting is to offer lots of money and time (in the form of a multi-year deal) to whoever takes the job.


    • Joe B.

      Ummm, our offense looks frighteningly good for next year.

      You realize that Clint Boling is our only upperclassman on the offensive line, right? Do you know how ridiculous that is in the SEC?

      We have the best WR in the country returning.

      King and Ealey have the look of a good enough 1-2 punch.

      Orson Charles has been good this year, but he should be much better next year, and the return of Figgins is huge.

      Obviously, the one thing missing is the trigger man, but we are in a much better position to start Murray than we were in 2006 with Stafford, not to mention that Murray will have had 2 springs and 2 falls to get prepared.

      Our defense needs to improve, drastically, but our offense should be among the top 3 in the SEC in 2010.


      • Left to Right

        You make good points, but I’m still very concerned about our running game and who we are going to start under center. No player has shown much at either position.


      • Hackerdog

        A young, but experienced offensive line was seen as our strength heading into this year. It hasn’t worked out so well. Until our line shows something, I won’t view having the same players back next year as necessarily positive.


  3. RedCrake

    True enough about the requirement of a multiyear contract for an incoming DC, but I’m happy we’ve had the policy against them in the past. The only thing worse than having to put up with CWM for the last few years would be having to pay him more money to leave.