Did Moorhead indeed receive a contract extension to the maximum of 4 years? Any other details would be appreciated particularly buyout numbers.
Hadad or Joel Coleman...
- Thread starter philduckworth
- Start date
My understanding is that yes, he was extended back to the 4-year max, as he should be or else it’s a severe recruiting handicap. Don’t have any financial details just yet. I think I’ll have some more clarity on some of this later this week.
I guess for accuracy’s sake I should have said my understanding is he will be extended back to 4 years. No idea when that will officially happen. But yes, it’s expected to happen.
Appreciate it. I don't get the recruiting handicap part though. Recruits don't know anything about coaches contracts. And rival schools have a lot more they can use against us than whether or not Joe has 3 years or 4 on his remaining contract. Also, we didn't extend Mullen one season when we were fed up with the job searches. And signing day is only 2 weeks away.
That's why I'm curious about the buyout. If we extended him without effecting the buyout, then that's fine I guess.
That's why I'm curious about the buyout. If we extended him without effecting the buyout, then that's fine I guess.
If the people on this page know how long a coaches contract is dont you think the recruits know also ? They like to see stability and if they like a coach they don't wanna sign and wind up.playing for someone else. He will always have a 4 year contract. His buy out is probly around 2 mill. Thats was what was reported a couple months ago.
Recruits know if a coach is on the hot seat regardless of the contract terms. And it’s not like we’re pulling down 5 star talent anyway. 80% of our commits would sign here no matter the coach.
I don't understand why everyone is so hung up on how long his contract is. It doesnt make any difference. It's not a 10 year $70 million contract. The University could end it anytime they wanted to. We could be like A&M and spent another $4 mill and won 7 games
Last edited:
I doubt recruits give one crap about a coaches contract. I know that's the last thing I'd consider when picking a school at that age.
A coaches contract means absolutely nothing other than what its going to cost to keep him or fire him. Doesn't guarantee anything.
Now, it may have an impact on a recruits parents if they aren't educated enough to know a 7 year coaching contract is no better than a 3 year contract, at least from a job security standpoint.
A coaches contract means absolutely nothing other than what its going to cost to keep him or fire him. Doesn't guarantee anything.
Now, it may have an impact on a recruits parents if they aren't educated enough to know a 7 year coaching contract is no better than a 3 year contract, at least from a job security standpoint.
its not that we (message board hero’s) don’t know or the recruits don’t know. It is used by the other schools, whom you can damn well bet your last dollar know. It is rarely covered by media that a coach is extended. It is covered when a coach is on a hot seat and IS NOT extended. And the other school’s recruiters will use it against us. “You don’t want to go to Mississippi State. Coach JM’s only got 3 years left on his contract. They ALWAYS extended it every year. They are planning on canning him this year at the end of the season. You don’t know who your going to be playing for.”
When in reality, the same guy that’s saying that is a phone call away from losing his job (see Matt Luke.). But it plays well to a nieve 18 year old.
Regarding contract extensions...
I don’t believe we should put the athletic department on the hook for an additional $3 million simply because the optics of not getting extended look bad. I personally think the optics of fielding an unprepared team is much worse than whether a coach has 3 or 4 years left. Besides, everybody knows you can have 4 years and be gone so I think that is a weak reason to extend and an unnecessary waste of money. Moorhead has not earned an extension and I would argue with anyone that says otherwise.
I don’t believe we should put the athletic department on the hook for an additional $3 million simply because the optics of not getting extended look bad. I personally think the optics of fielding an unprepared team is much worse than whether a coach has 3 or 4 years left. Besides, everybody knows you can have 4 years and be gone so I think that is a weak reason to extend and an unnecessary waste of money. Moorhead has not earned an extension and I would argue with anyone that says otherwise.
Referring to Texas A&M and their $70 million coach. They won 7 games this year.
Easy with the nuance, Karl. It doesn’t matter that the expectations for Jimbo was 7 wins this year as he builds the program into his mold, while playing 5 of the best 15 teams in the country. Rupert is the kind of guy who compares numbers. He’s convinced Horry is better than MJ cause of 7 rings is more than 6.
So a million bucks per expected win ? You must be an economist. They looked awesome against Arkansas and LSU
Last edited:
Jimbo was paid to build a national championship caliber program. He was not paid to go undefeated in year two.
And when you look at results on the field, he is meeting (not exveeding) expectations so far. Next year, he will need to step it up a bit.
Joe is not meeting expectations currently.
This is not a difficult concept.
If you always extend your football coach's contract to 4 years and all of a sudden you don't, it's an obvious signal that you don't anticipate him lasting 4 more years. AKA, "Recruit X, we expect you to finish your career under a different coaching staff than the one you're committing to."
That we're arguing over whether that's a disadvantage in recruiting is legitimately mind-boggling.
So you’d be OK with us paying JoMo $7 million if he just won 7-8 games this year?
Jimbo is hilariously overpaid and everybody knows it. He let FSU fall apart on his watch after Jameis left. And the annual salary is only the tip of the iceberg. It’s that he gets 10x his annual salary no matter if he wins 10 games per year, 6 games per year, or zero games per year for the rest of his tenure that is the ridiculous part.
A&M never learned their lesson with Franchione or Sumlin, and continue to think that they can just buy their way to a championship instead of doing their due diligence on finding a motivated guy who is also the right fit for the program.
Last edited:
How in the high holy living 17 is a dude who has 5 years worth of Top 15-20 recruiting classes (last couple being Top 10) considered to be “meeting expectations” when he goes a whole season in his second year without beating a Power 5 opponent with a winning record? That is comical. You don’t pay a guy $70 million to do what he’s doing, for obvious reasons. MSU was the best win he had all season. Let that sink in.
If we were in aTms shoes, I would be disappointed. But in no way shape or form would I be ready to fire Jimbo.
JoMo took a 10-11 win team and made it an 8 win team. He then took a 7-8 win team and made it a 6 win team. He’s underperforming my (and most reasonable people) expectations.
It’s not about assigning a dollar value to a win number. It’s about over or underachieving expectations.
If Luke would’ve won 6 games this year they would’ve kept him Because Of the trajectory and over performance. Not because 6 wins is some magical number that makes you keep a coach.
Their endowment is about 25 times the size of ours and the money they're 17ing off on football is chicken feed to some of the other dumb **** they've done. If you wanted to put a picture beside "got more money than they have sense" they would be the poster child.
That's the Texas way, man. It's unfortunate for them too, because they are the ag school and that whole junction boys, blue collar deal could suit them well. Jackie did it and was successful, probably one of the most successful there over a period of years. But I think most of their alumni are nothing more than tea sippers who just happened to go to A&M, so yeah they just throw money at things.
Not to mention most schools in Texas like to play this basketball on grass deal.
I like Baylor and Matt Rhule's approach. He's the one building the tough guy team in Texas. I guess Jimbo is sort of trying to instill the tough man approach, but I don't really know if it completely takes with him. Dan Mullen would have been a damn good fit for them if they just want to throw away money.
I agree but they better be winning 10 or more next year. That's the drill when you make that much money. They probably should have beaten one of the teams they lost to this year, for that salary. I acknowledge the difficult schedule, but it is what it is. You have to beat Auburn at home. That's the killer. If not, clip Georgia on the road. They were demo'ed against Alabama and LSU.
When Bama paid Saban, he went 12-0 in year 2. That's the results they are paying for. Right now Jimbo should be on the hot seat. Jimbo's not Saban, you say? Well, in money, and results at the time, he is. Saban had exactly 1 national title when he took that job. You could say Jimbo's resume was better.
Last edited:
My argument has nothing to do with how much so-and-so makes versus how many wins they output.
It's about performing above, at, or below expectations.
Maybe at aTm, they are highly pissed that they're paying a guy $7.5mil and only got 7 wins in year two. I, personaly, don't give a flying 17 about it.
My argument is that JoMo is under performing expectations by quite a bit. And that's a huge 17ing problem.
Well, Go Budaw. Let me let you in on a little secret.
Kevin Sumlin was the coach before Jimbo. Kevin recruited a roster full of 7-on-7 players and it sucked big time ***, in particular, for the latter part of his years there. Jimbo wants to be more physical. So flipping that roster from a bunch of 7-on-7 pussies to physical football players takes some time. So in year 2, when you play Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Georgia, and Auburn in the same season... you kind of temper you expectations on winning 10 17ing games. And while there isn't ANYONE in Aggieland who is jumping for joy to win 7 games, they realize that the re-build Jimbo has in front of him is not necessarily off track because they didn't upset a top 15 team this year.
And how does this differ from JoMo? Well, we had the #1 defense in the country in year #1 of JoMo. We had 2 sure first first rounders on DL. We played well enough to make someone in our secondary a first rounder. And we surrounded those 3 guys with a **** ton of talented, hard-nosed football players... some of who will also end up in the NFL. And JoMo lost 4 17ing games with that crew. There's a fancy word for that and it's called "underperforming".
You and your butt buddy Rupert can keep arguing about "$7.5mIl FoR 7 wInS iS uNaCcEpTaBlE" all you want. But that argument doesn't carry any weight with me. I don't give a 17 how much he makes vs how many wins they have. You either trending up, treading water, or trending down. Jimbo is trending every so slightly upward.
JoMo is trending downward. And that's why I'm ready to move on from him.
So you think that a coach’s salary has nothing to do with expectations? If you are paying Top 5 money, the EXPECTATION is Top 5 results, or at least Top 10-15ish results, by the end of Year 2.
And you laughably said Jimbo was meeting expectations, which isn’t even close to true. The only possible reason you would suggest that he is meeting them is to try and get another dig in at Moorhead, which is just scripting an agenda with completely unrelated and false data.
No argument, but Jimbo is too, so there is no reason for you to just prop him up for no reason. Jimbo’s won a grand total of 2 more games than JoMo his first two years, with a 17 load more talent and resources than JoMo will ever have at MSU. 12.6 average recruiting rank over the past 5 years for A&M, 24.2 for MSU.
The bar for Jimbo was never set on a 2 year time frame.
And you and I will unequivocally disagree on Jimbo meeting expectations or not. Those dumb 17s scheduled Clemson and pulled UGA from the East. If they scheduled NCState and drew Vandy... they'd be 9-3 and all would be somewhat well and on track. Prior to the season, their expected record, because of their schedule was 7-5. That's where they finished. So, yes, he is meeting expectations with this season.
In year 3 of Jimbo... they get Colorado, Fresno State, and Vandy. Which means 9 wins is the expectation floor for Jimbo and 10 may be what it takes to keep the boosters from throwing a fit.
Again, Jimbo's time frame was not put on a 2 year schedule. It was a long term plan that they certainly wish showed better results earlier... but could live with what happened this year.
You guys can accept what JoMo trotted out at Tennessee this year. At UK, UF, and LSU last year. I don't accept that kind of mediocrity.
At what point was Jimbo “not put on a 2 year schedule”? Both he and JoMo took over fairly talented rosters, and were expected to win immediately.
They have Top 12 talent and a coach with a national title and a CFP appearance on his resume. Please explain to me how 7-5 was the expectation. Explain how they should have not expected to win ANY of the 5 games against Top 15 opponents when they have Top 15 talent themselves. Explain how they should have expected to get blown the hell out by 43 points in their rivalry game.
Regarding their schedule draw, Clemson was the only thing that was abnormal. Just comparing the East draw to MSU / Moorhead, they drew an 11 win UGA, 10 win UK, 7 win USC, 4 win USC (32 total wins). MSU drew a 10 win UF, 10 win UK, 7 win UK, 7 win UT (34 total wins).
And nobody is accepting JoMo’s results either, so please don’t confuse me for some sort of JoMo backer. That’s the whole point. You are saying one guy fell way short of expectations, and one guy met them, even though their achievement relative to their talent was equal. It’s an obvious double standard.
Last edited:
Your idea and my idea of a "fairly talented roster" is not the same. Texas A+M did not have a fairly talented roster when Jimbo took over. And you can those recruiting rankings and shove them up your ***. Texas A+M had quite the talent problem 2 years ago.
We went to their place in 2017 and held them to like 60 yards in the first half. They were pretty horrible on offense and defense that year.
Wow. Settle down, Francis. It’s pretty clear your hatred of JoMo has you throwing all logic out the window. Guess what....I’m ready to move on from him too, but I don’t let it make my 17ing blood boil like some of you guys. Does the fact that JoMo has been bad mean that other people can’t also be woefully underperforming? I didn’t even jump in here to discuss Moorhead, just Jimbo.
You should maybe look at the fact that you referred to going from 8-4 to 7-5 as an “ever so slight upward trend” as pretty irrefutable evidence that you are grasping at straws on the Jimbo side of the argument.
Just because one number (8) is bigger than another number (7) does not indicate improvement or decline. The quality of the opponent must be taken into play. Nuance. Nuance. Nuance. It's not as simple as pulling out a numbers chart and pointing to the bigger one.
Let's check FEI, which takes all that into account:
2018 - 17th
2019 - 24th
Or FPI's Efficiency Rating:
2018 - 25th
2019 - 26th
They may improve next year, but they did not improve this year.
They had 7 NFL draft picks this year from last year’s team. They had some talent. Even with our “stacked” 2018 roster, we only had 5. If you aren’t looking at recruiting rankings and aren’t looking at NFL draft picks, please tell me....what the 17 are you looking at to judge the talent?
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White
Sale Extended: Join Maroon and White Daily for 75% off Annual Subscription
-
02
Maroon and White
Mississippi State LB Tyler Lockhart Q&A
-
03
Maroon and White
Mississippi State RB Xavier Gayten Q&A
-
04
Maroon and White
Will Whitson speaks on recovery and return to Mississippi State
-
05
Maroon and White
Jahron Manning and Malick Sylla practice, but still not eligible