Ketch's 10 Thoughts From the Weekend (Trying to explain the thing that you're going to hate...)

[RLong68]

It's different, but calculators don't care about backstories.

But yet, you still are projecting one more year which goes back to the whole question of "what the hell does $3 million matter?" Let's wait until after we lose to KU then miss the tourney and revisit this discussion. My gut tells me CDC won't simply say, "well, it's too much money so let's give him one more year." While it's cool to say "we can't keep throwing money to fix the problem" the reality is that's PRECISELY what it's going to take. Granted, you have to make the right hire but CLEARLY Shake is not the answer for the basketball problem. And the reality is the $13 mil is already spent. Either we pay it sooner to actually fix the problem sooner or continue to languish and damage the brand. And we are going to have to hire a new HC anyway. So again, either make a big-time hire now, or wait and have it be likely even MORE costly AND risk losing what is a rather obvious top candidate.

 

[tzrider]

Swallowing 15 million after just 2 seasons of Charlie is different than 13 million after 4 seasons of Shaka.

How much revenue does basketball generate compared to football? Techs basketball success has led to an $800k increase in ticket sales revenue. That won’t pay $13mm in a buyout even before you add in the assistants.

 

[CoachBobbyFinstock]

The Smart thing is garbage. The whole situation is.

However, if you know he isn’t the guy, you end it now. Being held hostage by a contract and losing on the court to save money is pathetic.

His contract is guaranteed. You owe him regardless. Waiting solves nothing. It says you’re ok with the program being mediocre and losing. It’s a discredit to the fans and kids. The current regime didn’t give him that contract but they can fix it.

 

[ZachattheDisch]

The clown did this says he wasn't drunk, he has a two-year old child and another on the way.

He put the welfare of his family at risk. Unreal.

The Robbie's said it right as well. There is a lot of history in the UK with knife violence, especially the Ultras and hooligans in football history. Everyone is very very lucky that the guy didn't have a knife as this could have been much worse.

Unreal agreed!

 

[RLong68]

How much revenue does basketball generate compared to football? Techs basketball success has led to an $800k increase in ticket sales revenue. That won’t pay $13mm in a buyout even before you add in the assistants.

TWO sports on this campus make money. Football and Hoops. And both are EASILY the highest-profile sports as it relates to college sports. How long do we want to continue to suck is really the only question. It's going to cost money either way given Shaka will need to be replaced. We can either kick the can down the road and continue to suck and risk an even harder turnaround and costlier new hire or we can bite the bullet and get sh*t done like a big boy.

 

[tzrider]

The Smart thing is garbage. The whole situation is.

However, if you know he isn’t the guy, you end it now. Being held hostage by a contract and losing on the court to save money is pathetic.

His contract is guaranteed. You owe him regardless. Waiting solves nothing. It says you’re ok with the program being mediocre and losing. It’s a discredit to the fans and kids. The current regime didn’t give him that contract but they can fix it.

Assuming the new coach will work for free?

 

[styrbjorn]

Not sure who you are talking to but they aren't real bright when it comes to the financial impact of buying out Shaka

Did you think to mention that waiting a year saves about 3 million. Drop in a bucket at Texas.

Looking at the entire number is pointless because he is owed that whether we fire him this year or next.

Beard or the next coach will have a buyout and a new contract.

The cost to fire Shaka is just his salary. Not sure why its so hard. I trust CDC can make this argument relatively easy.

Also, you need to figure in the long term damage to the brand. Keeping Smart around to save a few bucks when EVERYONE knows he is a dead man walking (which was not the case with Charlie) sends a clear message to fans, recruits, potential coaching hires and other schools that UT does not GAF about winning in basketball.

That's a tell to whoever we hire next, it's something that will be used ruthlessly against us in recruiting, and it's a big "Eff You!" to an already dispirited fan base. I'm not sure UT men's basketball would ever recover from that.

 

[RLong68]

Not sure who you are talking to but they aren't real bright when it comes to the financial impact of buying out Shaka

Did you think to mention that waiting a year saves about 3 million. Drop in a bucket at Texas.

Looking at the entire number is pointless because he is owed that whether we fire him this year or next.

Beard or the next coach will have a buyout and a new contract.

The cost to fire Shaka is just his salary. Not sure why its so hard. I trust CDC can make this argument relatively easy.

Yep. The money is gone. The only question is whether we want to simply continue sucking or actually fix the f'n problem. And the longer we wait, the harder it very well could be to fix the problem.

 

[RLong68]

Assuming the new coach will work for free?

He didn't say that. Like I said, it's clear Shaka will be canned and a new HC will be hired. Whether it happens this spring, next spring or in spring of 2023, the money will get spent. So we aren't really going to "save money" by kicking the can down the road.

 

[tzrider]

TWO sports on this campus make money. Football and Hoops. And both are EASILY the highest-profile sports as it relates to college sports. How long do we want to continue to suck is really the only question. It's going to cost money either way given Shaka will need to be replaced. We can either kick the can down the road and continue to suck and risk an even harder turnaround and costlier new hire or we can bite the bullet and get sh*t done like a big boy.

Basketball revenue and profits are a tiny sliver of what football generates. Football generates 80% of our revenue. So if we spent $15mm to get rid of Charlie, the equivalent would be spending $3mm to get rid of Shaka. Not $13mm, or $17mm including his assistants

 

[Ketchum]

“ I knew that swallowing 10 figures worth of dead money“
Ten figures is over $1B

doh!

 

[RLong68]

So, what does if save Texas financially if they wait one more year to fire Shaka (assuming he has another sub-par season in 2020? $3-4 million ?

In reality it doesn't. Barring some reworking of the buyout, Shaka is getting the remaining 4 years whether he coaches here or not.

 

[tzrider]

He didn't say that. Like I said, it's clear Shaka will be canned and a new HC will be hired. Whether it happens this spring, next spring or in spring of 2023, the money will get spent. So we aren't really going to "save money" by kicking the can down the road.

He said the money was already spent and getting rid of Shaka wouldn’t cost us anything. If the new coach will work for free, he is right. Otherwise, not so much.

 

[RLong68]

Basketball revenue and profits are a tiny sliver of what football generates. Football generates 80% of our revenue. So if we spent $15mm to get rid of Charlie, the equivalent would be spending $3mm to get rid of Shaka. Not $13mm, or $17mm including his assistants

AGAIN, the money is going to have to be spent. The hire didn't work. Having 4 remaining years sux. But at the end of the day, the money is gone. At this point it's about turning the program around and keeping Shaka even one more year makes that even harder.

 

[Ketchum]

But yet, you still are projecting one more year which goes back to the whole question of "what the hell does $3 million matter?" Let's wait until after we lose to KU then miss the tourney and revisit this discussion. My gut tells me CDC won't simply say, "well, it's too much money so let's give him one more year." While it's cool to say "we can't keep throwing money to fix the problem" the reality is that's PRECISELY what it's going to take. Granted, you have to make the right hire but CLEARLY Shake is not the answer for the basketball problem. And the reality is the $13 mil is already spent. Either we pay it sooner to actually fix the problem sooner or continue to languish and damage the brand. And we are going to have to hire a new HC anyway. So again, either make a big-time hire now, or wait and have it be likely even MORE costly AND risk losing what is a rather obvious top candidate.

again, it's not about three million. It's the difference from being committed to 12 million vs. the commitment of likely spending $30 million in the same time frame.

Anyone that speaks of this in terms of three million isn't using their brains.

 

[GeoffDolezal]

I will choose not to believe Ketch's info on Shaka coming back just like I did when he predicted Garrett Gilbert would be the All Big 12 QB his sophomore season.

and its not even 85% close

 

[tzrider]

AGAIN, the money is going to have to be spent. The hire didn't work. Having 4 remaining years sux. But at the end of the day, the money is gone. At this point it's about turning the program around and keeping Shaka even one more year makes that even harder.

Paying two coaches is twice as expensive as paying one. Your logic is flawed.

 

[RLong68]

He said the money was already spent and getting rid of Shaka wouldn’t cost us anything. If the new coach will work for free, he is right. Otherwise, not so much.

A 6 y.o. would understand that a new HC is going to be hired anyway. Either this spring or after next spring. So again, the money is going to be spent one way or the other. Waiting does nothing but make the situation harder, not better.

 

[RLong68]

again, it's not about three million. It's the difference from being committed to 12 million vs. the commitment of likely spending $30 million in the same time frame.

Anyone that speaks of this in terms of three million isn't using their brains.

Anyone that thinks we aren't going to eventually replace Shaka isn't using their brains. In other words, a new HC is going to be hired. Whether it's now, next spring, the spring after or the spring after after. The money is going to have to be spent. And waiting only invites possible higher costs for the new HC.

 

[RLong68]

BUY or SELL: Chris Beard is the next hoops basketball coach?

(Buy) 2020.

So much for not being about $3 million.

 

[tzrider]

A 6 y.o. would understand that a new HC is going to be hired anyway. Either this spring or after next spring. So again, the money is going to be spent one way or the other. Waiting does nothing but make the situation harder, not better.

If we wait a year, we save a years pay to the new coach and his assistants. Two years is two years pay, etc. That’s 6 year old math. It’s not that hard.

 

[Ketchum]

So much for not being about $3 million.

I simply think another year would press them into doing something they don't want to, similarly with Charlie.

 

[Ketchum]

and its not even 85% close

It's Austin.

Now we've covered the three big ones from the last 19 years.

 

[marka1]

If we wait a year, we save a years pay to the new coach and his assistants. Two years is two years pay, etc. That’s 6 year old math. It’s not that hard.

Apparently it is too hard for many posters to understand

 

[RLong68]

I simply think another year would press them into doing something they don't want to, similarly with Charlie.

There would seem to be a LOT of difference in giving a HC a FIFTH year as opposed to a third year. Maybe Shaka is still here next season. But I'm not convinced that's anywhere near a slam dunk. Saturday's loss was BAD. BAD. And the season was beyond underachieving. Again, let's see what happens after the next 6 days which will almost certainly include an ugly loss to KU and very likely a missed bid on Selection Sunday.

 

[mwolf1005]

Anyone that thinks we aren't going to eventually replace Shaka isn't using their brains. In other words, a new HC is going to be hired. Whether it's now, next spring, the spring after or the spring after after. The money is going to have to be spent. And waiting only invites possible higher costs for the new HC.

The difference in firing him now vs next year is the difference in paying double salary for one year for the head coach and assistants. That's really it. The remainder of Shaka's contract and new coaches' buyout will be there this year or next. Now some of that savings could be offset by an increase in the buyout of the next coach due a contract restructuring that Beard likely deserves. Leaves me in one of two camps.

If Beard is your guy and you think Tech gives him an extension with a higher buyout you HAVE to move now. You're probably saving very little money by waiting one year as the increase in buyout will offset much of the year's worth of salary savings.

If Beard makes it clear that he isn't taking the job, then sure wait till you have the right candidate in mind and save 3.3 million. I don't like it, but I understand the math and can live with it.

I have all the confidence in the world that CDC is doing his due diligence on this behind the scenes and gauging Beard's interest. Until he gets an answer, there is ZERO reason for him to do anything other than fully support Shaka. It would only hurt recruiting and the program.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

Not sure. I'll see if I can get an answer.

If nothing else, he would be depth and keep OU from a starter.

 

[GeoffDolezal]

It's Austin.

Now we've covered the three big ones from the last 19 years.

the two I referenced were just in the last 5 years. To go back 19 years would be like flipping through an unabridged dictionary.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

Ketch, why do you think the Longhorns wouldn't reach out to Kelvin Sampson, he might have a checkered past, but he has moved on from that and has done one heck of a job at Houston? Just imagine what he could do being at UT!

Hard pass. Texas can get almost anyone it wants. Sure not coaching legends like Coach K or Calipari or Izzo, but only a handful or so of coaches are unobtainable. They don't need anyone that ever has "checkered past" in their description.

 

[Ketchum]

If nothing else, he would be depth and keep OU from a starter.

They just didn't view him as an impact arrival.