From the negotiating room

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

....because BVDV does not intend to do either of the above.

---

Is this speculation or known?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

You're not thinking prudently. It's cheaper --and more prudent-- for us to do this NOW.

Dyke's --and LA Tech-- could very likely win 10 to 12 games in 2012. Assuming we win the Poinsettia Bowl this year and 10 games in 2012, Dykes will very likely be sporting a 24-13 W-L record a year from today. He'll also have 3 full years of head coaching experience under his belt. He will VERY likely be one of America's hottest coaching commodities.



The only reason Dykes is not getting more attention today is because he's still a relatively new head coach. But next year, if he wins a minimum of 10 games (which is very possible against our watered down schedule), he'll almost certainly be poached by a bigger school. We need to renegotiate NOW, so that his contract includes the best possible outcome for LA Tech.



HD

---

My, my. HD drinking Kool-aid! That post is wrong on so many levels I can't address them all on my I-phone; but I will!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hogdawg

some of you (you & lfr included) have argued that it's makes no sense to renegotiate his contract period. That's a mistake. This thread is full of those foolish arguments.


These are also the people who have been very critical of coach dykes as a coach. Imo and from what i've read they really don't buy in to coach dykes system or coaching prowless.

This leaves the question do they think any coach is worth the type of salary that is being discussed? The arugument they have been making that he should wait one more year to prove he is deserving the contract, but then argue that if he has a great next year he is gone anyway.
That argument leads to this:
1) we should not pay a higher salary to a coach until they have proven to be a winner.
2)we shouldn't invest money into a coach who is proving to be successful due to we will not be able to retain his services.

Which means we will struggle to remain mediocre, and will never have a chance to be a successful as a program.

I don't think thats what those posters believe. I think it's a case of not buying into dykes as the future of the program.
I do think if he gets a raise they will also raise the buyout. The argument over buy outs, bonus, and contract language is just being used to muddy the waters.

In his contract dykes it states they would negotiate an extension after 2 years.

I'm sure this post will be answered with you don't know enough about business, football, life, and many other things. Also red dots will probably come. Oh well.



Hd

---

hd[/quote]

HD was one of the same guys wanting to give Coach Spoon a huge raise after last season's great "success."

This season she is on pace to shatter records... for the worst season in Lady Techster history....

wow i didnt mean for all of that to appear as a quote of hd due to i dont pretend any of what i wrote would be his opinion
not sure why that happend

How many times have I heard "We need to follow the Boise model"?

From USA Today's Salary Database; Chris Petersen's salary the last 4 years:
2006 - $511,800
2007 - $881,000
2008 - $881,000
2009 - $1,123,000
2010 - $1,494,000

Btw, Petersen reportedly just turned down $4m to go to UCLA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tangidawg

How many times have I heard "We need to follow the Boise model"?

From USA Today's Salary Database; Chris Petersen's salary the last 4 years:
2006 - $511,800
2007 - $881,000
2008 - $881,000
2009 - $1,123,000
2010 - $1,494,000

Btw, Petersen reportedly just turned down $4m to go to UCLA.

---

Boise State had BC$ money and sell out crowds to fund those salaries. We don't.

His 2006 salary is very similar to Dykes'. When he wins like Boise (11 and 12 win seasons, regular wins over top 20 teams, and BCS appearances, by all means we should pay him like the Boise model. Thanks for emphasizing my point.

Regardless of whether you think he is a good coach or not we obviously can all agree on how weak the schedule is next year.

We are likely to have a great year and double digit wins are very possible and IMO after that he will be gone. I think if we can put in a nice sized buy-out then do it. If the Buy-Out isn't going up then leave the contract alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

Boise State had BC$ money and sell out crowds to fund those salaries. We don't.

---

The point isn't too pay him Boise type money. The point is to reward the guy for winning with salary increases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tangidawg

The point isn't too pay him Boise type money. The point is to reward the guy for winning with salary increases.

---

Coach Sonny D will get between $75,000 and $100,000 in bonuses this year. That puts him between $525,000 and $550,000 in total compensation this season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DONW

The only way I would have offered a new contract is if we had gone 12-0, which we possibly could have if Dykes had known which QB to start. Why should he get a contract extension and a raise when he caused us to lose 4 games because he didn't start the best player at QB?

---

He started the right QB and replaced him at the right time.

It probably helped Peterson get to those 11-12 wins since the previous coach was averaging 10 wins a season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dphindawg

It probably helped Peterson get to those 11-12 wins since the previous coach was averaging 10 wins a season.

---

And Petersen did win a BC$ bowl in his first season.

no doubt but he was already there all he did was step from oc to hc. BOise did a good job of getting good coaches and promoting them. Tech has not.