Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Samuel S" data-source="post: 129417159" data-attributes="member: 1754664">That Dana is not the biggest underachiever in college football is not grounds to sweeten the pot.The only reason to do that would be the belief he is irreplaceable at his current salary. If he was being paid below the market for mediocrity in the Power 5, he would have leverage. He's not.How many of the coaches ahead of him in total pay have a resume as thin as he has? How many have been less successful over 5 or more years? Conversely, how many of those with fewer real achievements have had 5 years to earn their stripes?Of the people above him, you could make a case Strong,&nbsp; M. Stoops and Kingbury have thinner resumes and that London has underachieved in his current job to a greater degree over a substantial period of time. Guys like Butch Jones and Franklin might arguably be similarly unimpressive to date. Other than that, those above him are there for understandable reasons.I don't think it's a stretch to say that there are more better coaches below him than worse above him.<a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/">http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Samuel S, post: 129417159, member: 1754664"] That Dana is not the biggest underachiever in college football is not grounds to sweeten the pot. The only reason to do that would be the belief he is irreplaceable at his current salary. If he was being paid below the market for mediocrity in the Power 5, he would have leverage. He's not. How many of the coaches ahead of him in total pay have a resume as thin as he has? How many have been less successful over 5 or more years? Conversely, how many of those with fewer real achievements have had 5 years to earn their stripes? Of the people above him, you could make a case Strong, M. Stoops and Kingbury have thinner resumes and that London has underachieved in his current job to a greater degree over a substantial period of time. Guys like Butch Jones and Franklin might arguably be similarly unimpressive to date. Other than that, those above him are there for understandable reasons. I don't think it's a stretch to say that there are more better coaches below him than worse above him. [URL]http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Name