Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board

BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Football
Topic:  RE: Sook!

Topic:  RE: Sook!
Author
Message
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,052

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 10:05:38 AM 
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Yes, but Akron has shopping malls.

Yes, those are quite the assist with recruiting, too, I hear. Here are some photos of one of the Akron malls:
http://www.countryliving.com/life/a145/rolling-acres-mall... /



“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,052

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 1:53:11 PM 
I mentioned in my prior post the strong correlation between these facilities rankings and the recruiting rankings. I thought it might be best to put them side by side. Here are the numbers for recruiting (a composite number of the last five year's classes, predicting which teams will be best in 2017), followed by the facilities ranking from above. I grouped them in groups, to make it easier to see. I also stuck the MAC winning percentage over the three years on for reference as well:

A Group
WMU 2032 +12.5 .833
Toledo 1902 +15 .792
NIU 1678 +16.5 .750
BG 1670 +12 .625
Miami 1612 +17 .417

B Group
Ball St 1550 +10 .292
Ohio 1538 +6 .625
CMU 1530 +7 .583

C Group
Buffalo 1367 +3 .304
EMU 1361 -9 .208
Kent 1357 -3 .217

E Group
Akron 1317 +19 .458

As you can see, the recruiting rankings and facilities rankings are almost exactly the same, except for Akron. The top 5 schools from a facilities ranking are consistently the top 5 schools from a recruiting ranking, while the bottom 3 schools from a facilities perspective are the bottom three from a recruiting ranking, and the three in the lower-middle in facilities are also in the lower-middle in recruiting.

The winning percentages match up fairly well with facilities, but not quite as well as the recruiting rankings. Ohio and CMU have won more than you'd expect from the facilities rankings, while Miami, Ball State and Akron have won less.

Why is Akron out of place? I have no clue. They have facilities, and should be able to get the recruits, but I guess they have been so focused on transfers they haven't bothered. Or, maybe the recruits are worried that due to financial concerns the whole school will close, I don't know.

In any case, it appears that generally, if you want to improve the results, you have to improve recruiting, and to improve recruiting, you have to improve facilities, but Akron is a warning as to what can go wrong in trying to accomplish that.

Last Edited: 4/26/2017 1:57:58 PM by L.C.


“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 2:15:48 PM 
L.C. wrote:

In any case, it appears that generally, if you want to improve the results, you have to improve recruiting, and to improve recruiting, you have to improve facilities, but Akron is a warning as to what can go wrong in trying to accomplish that.


Seems to me Akron proves the relationship you describe is not a direct correlation. Maybe better to say: facilities impact recruiting, which impacts results. The amount of impact and the cause-and-effect of impact differs from school to school.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,052

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 2:31:00 PM 
Very true, Robert. It's also possible that the relationship is very different. Another plausible hypothesis that reverses the presumed cause and the presumed effect, and therefore leads to entirely different (and bleak) conclusions, is this:
A bleak hypothesis wrote:
Perhaps results are most directly related to the ability of a school to reliably draw from a local recruiting pool of high quality, and that good results ultimately lead to good facilities, which in turn assists in recruiting, creating a feedback loop that repeats itself. When a school, such as Akron, attempts to short circuit the loop by building facilities, that doesn't change its ability to reliably draw from a local high quality recruiting pool, and therefore does not effectively alter the ultimate results significantly, so they don't have the results they had hoped for.


I certainly hope this isn't correct. If it is, the rich will always be rich, and the poor will always be poor. Yet, as you look around the college landscape, schools like Texas, USC, Alabama, and Ohio State are may have a bad year now and then, but seem to be consistently near the top.

Last Edited: 4/26/2017 2:33:21 PM by L.C.


“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 2:52:50 PM 
Much as I hate it, I fear that is closer to the truth. I venture to say the top 25 schools or so are virtually the same as they have been for the past 75 years. Having said that, there is some new blood, and it's interesting to consider how those teams broke through. Is it formulaic? I don't know.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,052

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 5:18:26 PM 
I fear it is, too, Robert, but for parity's sake, I hope it isn't. We will see a few tests in the coming years. For example, with Snyder at Kansas State, they have dramatically improved their facilities, and their profile, but there is still no local recruiting pool other than the Kansas Juco schools. Will they be able to sustain their progress, or will they slide back where they have been in the past?

Nebraska is another data point that may support this hypothesis. Because of past successes they have fantastic facilities, but no strong local recruiting pool. Despite their facilities and what seems to be unlimited funds to throw at prospective coaches, they have slid back to mediocrity, and I tend to think they will stay there, changing coaches every four or five years.

Last Edited: 4/26/2017 5:21:31 PM by L.C.


“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,151

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 5:32:15 PM 
L.C. wrote:
I fear it is, too, Robert, but for parity's sake, I hope it isn't. We will see a few tests in the coming years. For example, with Snyder at Kansas State, they have dramatically improved their facilities, and their profile, but there is still no local recruiting pool other than the Kansas Juco schools. Will they be able to sustain their progress, or will they slide back where they have been in the past?

Nebraska is another data point that may support this hypothesis. Because of past successes they have fantastic facilities, but no strong local recruiting pool. Despite their facilities and what seems to be unlimited funds to throw at prospective coaches, they have slid back to mediocrity, and I tend to think they will stay there, changing coaches every four or five years.


Nebraska has consistently paid their FB coaches much less than the top programs as far as I can remember. I don't know about the unlimited part of your discussion.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,052

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 6:37:46 PM 
It costs a lot to keep buying out contracts.


“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,151

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/26/2017 6:52:28 PM 
L.C. wrote:
It costs a lot to keep buying out contracts.


Good one LC. Still a lot less than what top teams are playing even with the buyouts figured in.
Back to Top
  
Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 12:07:41 AM 
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


Well, looks like we won't find out for a tenure.




Where's the band?!
WHERE"S THE BAND?!


DesignspiritUSA.com
The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags
The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping!

Back to Top
  
Campus Flow
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 4,951

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 12:29:36 AM 
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 2:27:40 AM 
Apparently.


But it is clearly something that...hello, this is year 13...is reasonable--very reasonable--to ask for.



Where's the band?!
WHERE"S THE BAND?!


DesignspiritUSA.com
The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags
The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping!

Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,495

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 6:44:09 AM 
Robert Fox wrote:
L.C. wrote:

In any case, it appears that generally, if you want to improve the results, you have to improve recruiting, and to improve recruiting, you have to improve facilities, but Akron is a warning as to what can go wrong in trying to accomplish that.


Seems to me Akron proves the relationship you describe is not a direct correlation. Maybe better to say: facilities impact recruiting, which impacts results. The amount of impact and the cause-and-effect of impact differs from school to school.


A good example of cost/effect is Rutgers.

Beginning with Schiano, they spent a ton of money on new facilities including a bubble,stadium expansion,visitors center and weight room.
Hasn't helped with football recruiting,even with their joining the B1G.

Now they're trying the same thing for basketball,with a new multi-sport practice facility.

Interesting thing is that their overall best sport is wrestling.They have the worst training facilities I've ever seen for any D1 program.



Back to Top
  
Buckeye to Bobcat
General User

Member Since: 9/10/2013
Post Count: 1,772

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 11:06:41 AM 
Uncle Wes wrote:
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


You say adjusted and I say softening up. I've covered this time and time again our schedule is set to get 8 wins at most. Until there is a bonus for Solich to go win a MAC Championship, this is not going to happen. It's absurd that the contract only calls to go win 7 or 8 games a year. So I ask yet again, what incentive is there for this program to improve?
Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,007

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 11:18:03 AM 
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


You say adjusted and I say softening up. I've covered this time and time again our schedule is set to get 8 wins at most. Until there is a bonus for Solich to go win a MAC Championship, this is not going to happen. It's absurd that the contract only calls to go win 7 or 8 games a year. So I ask yet again, what incentive is there for this program to improve?


A bonus to win a MAC championship? Are you kidding me. The sense of accomplishment of winning a championship is all of the "bonus" any coach needs. If you are telling me adding a bonus to a contract for winning a championship makes a coach work harder or better you're crazy and obviously have never coached at the high school varsity level or higher. If that bonus is what motivates a coach to work harder, I'm not sure I want that coach.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,052

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 11:42:33 AM 
Yes, the more I think about it, the more I suspect the second, grimmer hypothesis is correct. Facilities are probably a result, not a cause, and if you just build facilities, hoping for results (as Akron, Rutgers did), it's not going to work. For longer term success, Buckeye to Bobcat is probably right that Ohio needs to expand and solidify its natural recruiting area.


“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Buckeye to Bobcat
General User

Member Since: 9/10/2013
Post Count: 1,772

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 12:50:08 PM 
Alan Swank wrote:
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


You say adjusted and I say softening up. I've covered this time and time again our schedule is set to get 8 wins at most. Until there is a bonus for Solich to go win a MAC Championship, this is not going to happen. It's absurd that the contract only calls to go win 7 or 8 games a year. So I ask yet again, what incentive is there for this program to improve?


A bonus to win a MAC championship? Are you kidding me. The sense of accomplishment of winning a championship is all of the "bonus" any coach needs. If you are telling me adding a bonus to a contract for winning a championship makes a coach work harder or better you're crazy and obviously have never coached at the high school varsity level or higher. If that bonus is what motivates a coach to work harder, I'm not sure I want that coach.


I have worked around folks at those levels and trust me, build in benefits and they will listen. It ain't high school athletics at college level anymore Toto. There's a reason why even the AD at O$U gets bonuses for national championships for the wrestling team. Usually means go find good coaches who can get you those results, find coaches who understand recruiting territory, and most of all won't put ya on probation in said process.

Bottom line, that's why they're called incentives. Incentivizes the person to go for those goals. So when our bar is only set for 8 wins, why would you go for more than that? Same question I ask when your bonus is tied to how much you sell and anything beyond that doesn't get incentivized. Human nature is to want incentives and keep driving them for more than what they got.

Last Edited: 4/27/2017 12:50:29 PM by Buckeye to Bobcat

Back to Top
  
Bcat2
General User

Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 12:56:47 PM 
Alan Swank wrote:
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


You say adjusted and I say softening up. I've covered this time and time again our schedule is set to get 8 wins at most. Until there is a bonus for Solich to go win a MAC Championship, this is not going to happen. It's absurd that the contract only calls to go win 7 or 8 games a year. So I ask yet again, what incentive is there for this program to improve?


A bonus to win a MAC championship? Are you kidding me. The sense of accomplishment of winning a championship is all of the "bonus" any coach needs. If you are telling me adding a bonus to a contract for winning a championship makes a coach work harder or better you're crazy and obviously have never coached at the high school varsity level or higher. If that bonus is what motivates a coach to work harder, I'm not sure I want that coach.


+1


"Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men." JFK

Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,007

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 1:50:49 PM 
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


You say adjusted and I say softening up. I've covered this time and time again our schedule is set to get 8 wins at most. Until there is a bonus for Solich to go win a MAC Championship, this is not going to happen. It's absurd that the contract only calls to go win 7 or 8 games a year. So I ask yet again, what incentive is there for this program to improve?


A bonus to win a MAC championship? Are you kidding me. The sense of accomplishment of winning a championship is all of the "bonus" any coach needs. If you are telling me adding a bonus to a contract for winning a championship makes a coach work harder or better you're crazy and obviously have never coached at the high school varsity level or higher. If that bonus is what motivates a coach to work harder, I'm not sure I want that coach.


I have worked around folks at those levels and trust me, build in benefits and they will listen. It ain't high school athletics at college level anymore Toto. There's a reason why even the AD at O$U gets bonuses for national championships for the wrestling team. Usually means go find good coaches who can get you those results, find coaches who understand recruiting territory, and most of all won't put ya on probation in said process.

Bottom line, that's why they're called incentives. Incentivizes the person to go for those goals. So when our bar is only set for 8 wins, why would you go for more than that? Same question I ask when your bonus is tied to how much you sell and anything beyond that doesn't get incentivized. Human nature is to want incentives and keep driving them for more than what they got.


Where is this 8 win bar coming from?
Back to Top
  
Buckeye to Bobcat
General User

Member Since: 9/10/2013
Post Count: 1,772

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 2:18:45 PM 
Alan Swank wrote:
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


You say adjusted and I say softening up. I've covered this time and time again our schedule is set to get 8 wins at most. Until there is a bonus for Solich to go win a MAC Championship, this is not going to happen. It's absurd that the contract only calls to go win 7 or 8 games a year. So I ask yet again, what incentive is there for this program to improve?


A bonus to win a MAC championship? Are you kidding me. The sense of accomplishment of winning a championship is all of the "bonus" any coach needs. If you are telling me adding a bonus to a contract for winning a championship makes a coach work harder or better you're crazy and obviously have never coached at the high school varsity level or higher. If that bonus is what motivates a coach to work harder, I'm not sure I want that coach.


I have worked around folks at those levels and trust me, build in benefits and they will listen. It ain't high school athletics at college level anymore Toto. There's a reason why even the AD at O$U gets bonuses for national championships for the wrestling team. Usually means go find good coaches who can get you those results, find coaches who understand recruiting territory, and most of all won't put ya on probation in said process.

Bottom line, that's why they're called incentives. Incentivizes the person to go for those goals. So when our bar is only set for 8 wins, why would you go for more than that? Same question I ask when your bonus is tied to how much you sell and anything beyond that doesn't get incentivized. Human nature is to want incentives and keep driving them for more than what they got.


Where is this 8 win bar coming from?


Article:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2016/10/27/mi... /

From the article:
Ohio Frank Solich $5,000 Athletic 7th win
Ohio Frank Solich $5,000 Athletic 8th win

So once again, tired of people questioning me where I find these things or hear from my sources. Not only that, feel free to do a public record request and you will find the same thing I did.

And you wonder why I question the direction of the program when our motives are only tied to solely win #. It's why PJ Fleck at WMU got bonuses for going to the Cotton Bowl. Sure it will say non-CFP bowl game, to get there you have to win a conference title to be automatically qualified.
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,016

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 3:12:12 PM 
Lots of misinformation here. Solich's contract has all kinds of incentives, including one for winning a MACC.

Look here: https://tinyurl.com/mc9tps2

Key section of above URL:

additional guaranteed annual compensation: $30,000 personal service deal with Ohio Bobcat Sports Network
$15,000 for shoe/apparel contracts
$30,000 for work as Associate AD - special projects
retention bonus: $275,000 on Dec. 31, 2012
$50,000 at completion of 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 seasons
conference regular season: 5% of base salary
conference championship: 10% of base salary
non bcs bowl bid:
non bcs bowl win: 10% of base salary
bcs bowl appearance: $100,000
bcs bowl win:
college football playoff:
national championship bid:
national championship:
conference coach of the year: $10,000
national coach of the year: $25,000
national poll: Final top 25: $25,000
miscellaneous team performance based incentives: Wins
7: $5,000
8: $5,000
9: $5,000
10: $10,000
11: $10,000
12: $10,000
academic or off field incentives:


The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,007

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 4/27/2017 3:13:57 PM 
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Monroe Slavin wrote:
Perhaps a way to break out of the lack of facilities, lack of success cycle is to have a dynamic, change-agent coach who brings real winning, who brings a MAC title.


We're in the midst of another facility wave right now. New scoreboard for '17. New academic center for '18. New players lounge by '19. Schaus adjusted the schedules for a better chance to win 11 or 12 games. Frank has back 2 back 8 win seasons going into this year. You're asking for something that isn't in the cards at the moment.


You say adjusted and I say softening up. I've covered this time and time again our schedule is set to get 8 wins at most. Until there is a bonus for Solich to go win a MAC Championship, this is not going to happen. It's absurd that the contract only calls to go win 7 or 8 games a year. So I ask yet again, what incentive is there for this program to improve?


A bonus to win a MAC championship? Are you kidding me. The sense of accomplishment of winning a championship is all of the "bonus" any coach needs. If you are telling me adding a bonus to a contract for winning a championship makes a coach work harder or better you're crazy and obviously have never coached at the high school varsity level or higher. If that bonus is what motivates a coach to work harder, I'm not sure I want that coach.


I have worked around folks at those levels and trust me, build in benefits and they will listen. It ain't high school athletics at college level anymore Toto. There's a reason why even the AD at O$U gets bonuses for national championships for the wrestling team. Usually means go find good coaches who can get you those results, find coaches who understand recruiting territory, and most of all won't put ya on probation in said process.

Bottom line, that's why they're called incentives. Incentivizes the person to go for those goals. So when our bar is only set for 8 wins, why would you go for more than that? Same question I ask when your bonus is tied to how much you sell and anything beyond that doesn't get incentivized. Human nature is to want incentives and keep driving them for more than what they got.


Where is this 8 win bar coming from?


Article:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2016/10/27/mi... /

From the article:
Ohio Frank Solich $5,000 Athletic 7th win
Ohio Frank Solich $5,000 Athletic 8th win

So once again, tired of people questioning me where I find these things or hear from my sources. Not only that, feel free to do a public record request and you will find the same thing I did.

And you wonder why I question the direction of the program when our motives are only tied to solely win #. It's why PJ Fleck at WMU got bonuses for going to the Cotton Bowl. Sure it will say non-CFP bowl game, to get there you have to win a conference title to be automatically qualified.


Matt - his contract does not call for winning 7 or 8 games a year. He gets a bonus for achieving those win totals. The two are vastly different.
Back to Top
  
DelBobcat
General User



Member Since: 8/26/2010
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 1,135

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 5/2/2017 12:28:16 PM 
L.C. wrote:
As for dedicated bike lanes, will anyone use it? They built put one in a street here, but I've never seen anyone in it. Then, due to the fact that it wasn't used, they put one in another street, but this time spent several million dollars to put a median between the bike lane and the traffic lanes, and special lights at the intersections with separate lights for the bike lanes. I have seen a couple people in that bike lane, but 95% of the time I go down that street there is no one in the bike lane. On a per-user basis, that bike lane was outrageously expensive.


Chicken or the egg? Here in Philly people complained about bike lanes because "nobody bikes anyway" and "it'll never get used" then a couple years into the first bike lanes being installed those people said "see, no one uses it" and "what a waste of money." Now, many years later, we have a great system of bike lanes and trails that is the envy of many big cities. Philadelphia has more bike commuters per capita than any of the other largest 10 cities in the U.S. The Schuylkill River Trail was also named best urban trail in the country by the American Planning Association. To top it all off, traffic on streets with bike lanes, and traffic on streets in the vicinity of those with bike lanes, has decreased markedly--as more people are choosing to bike instead of drive.

Bike lanes are cheap compared to most roadway projects, and the data is out there to show that they are a great investment from a public health standpoint, from a traffic congestion reduction standpoint, and from a pollution reduction standpoint.


BA OHIO 2010, BS OHIO 2010, MA Delaware 2012

Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,495

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 5/2/2017 12:39:51 PM 
I can see bike lanes getting a lot more use in a city like Philly,then in a more suburban area where I live.
Around here the bike lanes are pretty much abandoned from early November to early April.
There are also very few riders on rainy days.



Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,052

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Sook!
   Posted: 5/2/2017 1:54:55 PM 
DelBobcat wrote:
Chicken or the egg? Here in Philly people complained about bike lanes because "nobody bikes anyway" and "it'll never get used" then a couple years into the first bike lanes being installed those people said "see, no one uses it" and "what a waste of money." Now, many years later, we have a great system of bike lanes and trails that is the envy of many big cities....

We have a great system of bike trails that were build on abandoned rail right-of-ways. Those are heavily used, and I have no complaint about them. They first built a dedicated bike lane with a poorly conceived idea of taking a lane of traffic, and replacing it with a bike lane in the center of the road. That means that cars, trucks, and buses are constantly traversing the lane if they want to change from the left to the right lane. I personally would never bike on that lane, and few people do. It was just a bad idea. Not all bike lanes are good ideas.

Now, the new lane is all different. They separated it from the regular traffic with a median, which should make is safer. As of now, there is no one using it, but perhaps with time there will be. I found the project objectionable because of how they financed it, however. The city had only a certain amount of funds available that year, and wanted to do several projects. They went ahead and paid for the bike lane with their cash, and then did a bond issue for a new pool and for a new fire station. Bond issues have to be voted on, while things they spend cash on do not.

It seems to me that they should pay for the essential things with cash (the fire station), and then put the optional things (bike lane) in the bond, and then let the voters decide whether it is a worthwhile investment. That's not how they do things here, however. They pay for the most controversial and/or frivolous things with cash, since voters might not approve them, and then put the mandatory things in the bonds, which they know will be approved.


“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  26 - 50  of 93 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2 | 3 | 4    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             







Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties