(03-21-2020 02:55 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  

(03-21-2020 10:48 AM)TXGiant Wrote:  What I know is that there were different people involved in the process and they were very impressed with Byington and feel like he is a great fit (obviously). The perception that JMU “leadership” is ok with the past run of dismal performance is acceptable is incorrect. I have been, and will remain, in the camp that believes that our path to national prominence (or at least recognition) through athletics is in basketball, not football.

I am encouraged by the focus and support that will be put behind the Men’s program. In the near future, look for an Alpha Dog type program for the basketball team. I will be participating. I encourage those of you who want to see JMU return to “glory” talk to your Duke Club rep and consider joining. I figure instead of complaining and longing for the days of basketball relevance, I can get involved and, hopefully, be part of the solution. We have a near-total rebuild ahead of us. It’s going to take time and money and it will be difficult. However, we have to start somewhere and I am looking forward to the journey. I hope some of you that are concerned with JMU’s investment in the program will step up and put your money where your mouth’s are.

Go Dukes! Stay safe, and healthy.

Too late for me Tex. The time to raise money was before this huge basketball hire leading into a once in a lifetime arena grand opening. I will not support Alger or Bourne going forward. They can go find some suckers to give money to an incompetent basketball leadership group. I’ll be waiting for a new prez and a new AD before I consider the alpha dog basketball group.

We all should be asking who made the decisions that put this program in “a near-total rebuild” as you describe it? It is the same people you are suggesting to give more money to.

To be in this situation with a new $100 million arena opening is inexcusable. I know the collegiate world is an insulated environment, but in most environments the well paid decision makers get fired for exhibiting incompetence for this long.

Nothing is going to change. All we can do is wait out retirements (not long) and hope the BOV is woke.

(03-21-2020 07:57 AM)Top Dawg Wrote:  

(03-20-2020 09:59 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Something that Bourne and Alger have to answer for...

JMU has the 61st largest athletics budget in the country and #1 of any mid-major nationally.
https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

If you look at schools ranked 55 to 65 as financial peers of JMU, how can they justify what JMU is paying its basketball coaches compared to others?

55 Cincinnati $1.5 million football 2.3 million
56 Air Force $525k plus incentives - just got fired
57 San Diego State $855k plus incentives football 878k
58 Memphis $1.6 million football 2.66 million
59 Houston $3 million football 3.7 million
60 Colorado State $750k football 1.8 million
61 JMU 450k Football 425k
62 Fresno State $550k plus $240k bonus football 1.6 million
63 UNLV $1.1 million football 600k
64 Boise State $725k plus incentives 1.75 million
65 UMass $750k football 635k


If you look at JMU vs CAA schools, they crush them all in total athletics spending, but do not spend the most for the men’s basketball coach.
Do other hoops programs want to win more than JMU?

What do all of those other schools pay their football coaches? I thought JMUs athletic budget was so high because we are fully funding all sports.

Okay, so I went ahead and looked up what the above “peer” schools are paying football head coaches and we are actually closer in basketball compared to football. So it isn’t that we are paying for football but not funding basketball. Now if his argument is compared to other CAA schools then please provide that data.

Regarding your Football info, yes all of those schools are FBS. JMU is the only school in the nation spending that kind of money on athletics and still playing in the kiddie pool FCS.

For CAA basketball salary purposes (which we should all hope that it is not JMU’s intent to stay in the low-major CAA) Charleston pays Earl Grant $650k/year. That is the rate for a coach that has made the NCAA tourney once in his 6 years.

JMU is paying 2/3 of the top rate for the CAA. That is why we have hired a bridesmaid. JMU is unwilling to pay what is required to attract a proven and accomplished coach.

(03-22-2020 07:52 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  JMU is paying 2/3 of the top rate for the CAA. That is why we have hired a bridesmaid. JMU is unwilling to pay what is required to attract a proven and accomplished coach.

You’re not going to get a “proven and accomplished coach” at JMU unless you really open up the checkbook. Either pay over market value and/or the guy is damaged goods and is trying to re-invent his image. No matter how you slice it, JMU would only be a stepping stone, so at this point you’re hoping the guy you bring in proves it and is successful to have used you for that next step. That is a good problem, it means he’s made enough noise others with the bigger checkbooks are looking.

Grant wasn't at $650k when he started but he was an assistant with no head coaching experience as well. My question is - what's the number- what would it have taken to lure a quality mid major or ex coach with an extensive NCAA T resume to come to Harrisonburg- would $750K have been enough- $1M+? Do you really think JMU was going to more than triple their budget for a men's coach in one season with one coach? Even Iona in hiring Pitino didn't really increase their coaching budget.

Mike Jones had NCAAT appearances- I think he would have been in the mix for what we are paying Coach Byington. Wes Miller had 1 NCAAT appearance yet I don't think he had interest in the JMU job. It's easy for us to say on a message board go get Forbes or Becker or JTII but we don't know if those guys would have even had interest (some may be happy where they are, waiting for the perfect high major opportunity, etc.) even if JMU threw $1M per year at them.

I don't think you can look at JMU's budget vs other schools in a vacuum. A lot of the schools you list are more mature than us. We have continued to grow our budget- we are building towards something but still very much in the growing stage. You can critique how quickly we are getting there and our plan. I've heard the argument that we aren't getting a good ROI or what's the point of spending if we scrimp on men's basketball. I've heard the argument that we shouldn't have such a high budget as a member of the CAA or as a school that is in FCS- so I guess you think we should lower the budget to our level and not have a budget that fits our plan or aspirations? UMass is on your list- how have their recent basketball hires at that salary level worked out for them? It doesn't guarantee anything.

I look at the bigger picture. The money for head coaches is going up at JMU, the spending on the flag ship sports is increasing. We are an athletics program that believes in fully funding our other sports and that will continue. We are growing on our terms and in line with our vision and plan for athletics. I believe with success you will see our next head coach contract (whether it is in the form of an extension for Coach Byington or 4 years from now for another head coach) will approach that $750K level. We will get there we just can't expect to get there overnight.

(03-22-2020 07:52 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Regarding your Football info, yes all of those schools are FBS. JMU is the only school in the nation spending that kind of money on athletics and still playing in the kiddie pool FCS.

For CAA basketball salary purposes (which we should all hope that it is not JMU’s intent to stay in the low-major CAA) Charleston pays Earl Grant $650k/year. That is the rate for a coach that has made the NCAA tourney once in his 6 years.

JMU is paying 2/3 of the top rate for the CAA. That is why we have hired a bridesmaid. JMU is unwilling to pay what is required to attract a proven and accomplished coach.

So why are you comparing JMU to those schools? Is your argument JMU compared to the schools you listed, other CAA schools, or other mid-majors that we should be considered peers with?

Argument is if you are spending $52 million you have to get way more than JMU is getting in men’s basketball.
Of course Alger and Bourne think they are right and all other college athletics programs are wrong in spending more on basketball. The fact of the matter is that Bourne has presided over a losing basketball program in 15 of his 21 years on the job. It is clear who is wrong.


Here is a quick look at Alger and Bourne trying to convince themselves they have won the JMU fan base by going cheap and hiring a bridesmaid.

(03-22-2020 11:27 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Argument is if you are spending $52 million you have to get way more than JMU is getting in men’s basketball.
Of course Alger and Bourne think they are right and all other college athletics programs are wrong in spending more on basketball. The fact of the matter is that Bourne has presided over a losing basketball program in 15 of his 21 years on the job. It is clear who is wrong.


Here is a quick look at Alger and Bourne trying to convince themselves they have won the JMU fan base by going cheap and hiring a bridesmaid.

I have noticed a bit of a contrarian streak in Alger over the years.

(03-22-2020 11:27 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Argument is if you are spending $52 million you have to get way more than JMU is getting in men’s basketball.
Of course Alger and Bourne think they are right and all other college athletics programs are wrong in spending more on basketball. The fact of the matter is that Bourne has presided over a losing basketball program in 15 of his 21 years on the job. It is clear who is wrong.


Here is a quick look at Alger and Bourne trying to convince themselves they have won the JMU fan base by going cheap and hiring a bridesmaid.

So the entire athletic department, not just basketball. You’re trying to compare total athletic spending and then concluding that they aren’t spending enough on basketball, but if you start comparing all of the individual sports, JMU is much lower than those that spend around $52 million in total. Seems that some would have been happy to just overpay Byington so that we are in line with your expectations. With the current state of our program what good coach would choose to come to JMU even for $750k? They’d have much better options.

(03-21-2020 02:55 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  

(03-21-2020 10:48 AM)TXGiant Wrote:  What I know is that there were different people involved in the process and they were very impressed with Byington and feel like he is a great fit (obviously). The perception that JMU “leadership” is ok with the past run of dismal performance is acceptable is incorrect. I have been, and will remain, in the camp that believes that our path to national prominence (or at least recognition) through athletics is in basketball, not football.

I am encouraged by the focus and support that will be put behind the Men’s program. In the near future, look for an Alpha Dog type program for the basketball team. I will be participating. I encourage those of you who want to see JMU return to “glory” talk to your Duke Club rep and consider joining. I figure instead of complaining and longing for the days of basketball relevance, I can get involved and, hopefully, be part of the solution. We have a near-total rebuild ahead of us. It’s going to take time and money and it will be difficult. However, we have to start somewhere and I am looking forward to the journey. I hope some of you that are concerned with JMU’s investment in the program will step up and put your money where your mouth’s are.

Go Dukes! Stay safe, and healthy.

Too late for me Tex. The time to raise money was before this huge basketball hire leading into a once in a lifetime arena grand opening. I will not support Alger or Bourne going forward. They can go find some suckers to give money to an incompetent basketball leadership group. I’ll be waiting for a new prez and a new AD before I consider the alpha dog basketball group.

We all should be asking who made the decisions that put this program in “a near-total rebuild” as you describe it? It is the same people you are suggesting to give more money to.

To be in this situation with a new $100 million arena opening is inexcusable. I know the collegiate world is an insulated environment, but in most environments the well paid decision makers get fired for exhibiting incompetence for this long.

I will root
I am supportive of coach Byington
I hope we win fcs championships while we are fcs

I will donate caa-fcs level cash and try to see a few games live wile we are in the caa.

In the meantime I am waiting out leadership retirements before I can turn up the athletic engagement metric.

(03-22-2020 11:46 AM)Top Dawg Wrote:  

(03-22-2020 11:27 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Argument is if you are spending $52 million you have to get way more than JMU is getting in men’s basketball.
Of course Alger and Bourne think they are right and all other college athletics programs are wrong in spending more on basketball. The fact of the matter is that Bourne has presided over a losing basketball program in 15 of his 21 years on the job. It is clear who is wrong.


Here is a quick look at Alger and Bourne trying to convince themselves they have won the JMU fan base by going cheap and hiring a bridesmaid.

So the entire athletic department, not just basketball. You’re trying to compare total athletic spending and then concluding that they aren’t spending enough on basketball, but if you start comparing all of the individual sports, JMU is much lower than those that spend around $52 million in total. Seems that some would have been happy to just overpay Byington so that we are in line with your expectations. With the current state of our program what good coach would choose to come to JMU even for $750k? They’d have much better options.

No Hart is saying that JMU should have spent more for someone with proven success getting his team to the NCAA tournament. The flaw is that he targeted Steve Forbes and if you’re Steve Forbes would you even come to JMU if we paid $1m when you are next in line for a high major job- the way Nate Oates was - which pays multiple million per year. Forbes can only damage his brand and standing by taking the JMU job regardless of how my $ JMU threw at him.

(03-21-2020 08:55 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(03-21-2020 08:26 AM)HyperDuke Wrote:  

(03-21-2020 07:57 AM)Top Dawg Wrote:  

(03-20-2020 09:59 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Something that Bourne and Alger have to answer for...

JMU has the 61st largest athletics budget in the country and #1 of any mid-major nationally.
https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

If you look at schools ranked 55 to 65 as financial peers of JMU, how can they justify what JMU is paying its basketball coaches compared to others?

55 Cincinnati $1.5 million
56 Air Force $525k plus incentives - just got fired
57 San Diego State $855k plus incentives
58 Memphis $1.6 million
59 Houston $3 million
60 Colorado State $750k
61 JMU ?
62 Fresno State $550k plus $240k bonus
63 UNLV $1.1 million
64 Boise State $725k plus incentives
65 UMass $750k


If you look at JMU vs CAA schools, they crush them all in total athletics spending, but do not spend the most for the men’s basketball coach.
Do other hoops programs want to win more than JMU?

What do all of those other schools pay their football coaches? I thought JMUs athletic budget was so high because we are fully funding all sports.

Hart doesn’t support that equity. He thinks the other sports don’t deserve that $.

Huh?

Hart is questioning why we out spend other CAA schools for most, if not all sports, except men's basketball?

Simpler question. Why do we outspend every CAA school for football, but not basketball? Why wouldn't we invest in a more proven coach walking into a new arena?

This is not an equity question, it's more a lack of equity for Men's basketball -relatively speaking.

I agree. Given our total athletics budget, we should be able to come up with a couple hundred thousand dollars a year to draw a high-caliber coach, and I'm not saying that Coach B isn't one. That is yet to be proven. I hope he is.

Correct me if my math is off, but $250,000 represents less than half of one percent of our athletic budget, a tiny amount. We should be able to come up with that from a number of places. Heck, it is less than the athletic fees we would charge an extra 100 students. Or a couple dollar price increase of football tickets. Lots of other ways to come up with the dough too.

That little difference moves the head coach's salary from $450,000 to $700,000, much more in line with the spending of schools whose company we seek to keep. I just don't get the champagne taste and Natty budget thing.

The risk/reward just seems way out of whack going the El Cheapo route. The risk of going El Cheapo is totally destroying any hope we have of getting into the AAC, forcing us to continue playing football against the likes of Norfolk State and STFU. The reward - we save $1.5 million of over $300 million over a six-year period ($50 million annual budget), which my crappy laptop calculator says is one half of one percent.

I actually calculated our current annual athletics spending a few weeks ago. The data I had said student athletic fees are over $2,700 per student per year, which is 3/4 of the budget. At those figures, I calculated our 2020 budget at $66 million, multiplying the foolishness of the El Cheapo strategy.

As we all know, there is a lot more to it than that and with accounting shell games, the powers that be can make the budget say whatever they want it to say. I was going strictly off the hard data that I had.

El Cheapo is dangerous!

(03-22-2020 12:04 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(03-22-2020 11:46 AM)Top Dawg Wrote:  

(03-22-2020 11:27 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Argument is if you are spending $52 million you have to get way more than JMU is getting in men’s basketball.
Of course Alger and Bourne think they are right and all other college athletics programs are wrong in spending more on basketball. The fact of the matter is that Bourne has presided over a losing basketball program in 15 of his 21 years on the job. It is clear who is wrong.


Here is a quick look at Alger and Bourne trying to convince themselves they have won the JMU fan base by going cheap and hiring a bridesmaid.

So the entire athletic department, not just basketball. You’re trying to compare total athletic spending and then concluding that they aren’t spending enough on basketball, but if you start comparing all of the individual sports, JMU is much lower than those that spend around $52 million in total. Seems that some would have been happy to just overpay Byington so that we are in line with your expectations. With the current state of our program what good coach would choose to come to JMU even for $750k? They’d have much better options.

No Hart is saying that JMU should have spent more for someone with proven success getting his team to the NCAA tournament. The flaw is that he targeted Steve Forbes and if you’re Steve Forbes would you even come to JMU if we paid $1m when you are next in line for a high major job- the way Nate Oates was - which pays multiple million per year. Forbes can only damage his brand and standing by taking the JMU job regardless of how my $ JMU threw at him.

I mostly agree with you except that if we paid ACC-level coaches salaries we'd get ACC level coaches coming here. Louisville was not part of any Power 5 conference but they paid top dollar and were able to get quality coaches who won a lot and took them to bowls and Final Fours, which is partially why they got into the Big East and later ACC.

JMU Football salary head coach 2015 (Withers) $300K 2016 (Houston): $300K, 2017 (Houston) $375K, Houston late 2017 $515K , Cignetti $425K
JMU Football assistant coaches salaries: 2015 (Withers) $625K, 2016 (Houston) $715K, Cignetti (+ $1M)

JMU Basketball salary head coach $300K Matt Brady, Louis Rowe $260K, ark Byington $450K

Important to note during this time- new training facility for football, COA for all sports (football and basketball included), new basketball arena, also seems like the men's assistant coaching pool has increased with more guys on staff.

This is progress. If Coach Byington has success JMU has shown they will extend/renegotiate to keep a head coach. If he doesn't succeed we will be positioned to have another increase with the next hire.

(03-22-2020 01:20 PM)JMaddy Wrote:  

(03-22-2020 12:04 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(03-22-2020 11:46 AM)Top Dawg Wrote:  

(03-22-2020 11:27 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Argument is if you are spending $52 million you have to get way more than JMU is getting in men’s basketball.
Of course Alger and Bourne think they are right and all other college athletics programs are wrong in spending more on basketball. The fact of the matter is that Bourne has presided over a losing basketball program in 15 of his 21 years on the job. It is clear who is wrong.


Here is a quick look at Alger and Bourne trying to convince themselves they have won the JMU fan base by going cheap and hiring a bridesmaid.

So the entire athletic department, not just basketball. You’re trying to compare total athletic spending and then concluding that they aren’t spending enough on basketball, but if you start comparing all of the individual sports, JMU is much lower than those that spend around $52 million in total. Seems that some would have been happy to just overpay Byington so that we are in line with your expectations. With the current state of our program what good coach would choose to come to JMU even for $750k? They’d have much better options.

No Hart is saying that JMU should have spent more for someone with proven success getting his team to the NCAA tournament. The flaw is that he targeted Steve Forbes and if you’re Steve Forbes would you even come to JMU if we paid $1m when you are next in line for a high major job- the way Nate Oates was - which pays multiple million per year. Forbes can only damage his brand and standing by taking the JMU job regardless of how my $ JMU threw at him.

I mostly agree with you except that if we paid ACC-level coaches salaries we'd get ACC level coaches coming here. Louisville was not part of any Power 5 conference but they paid top dollar and were able to get quality coaches who won a lot and took them to bowls and Final Fours, which is partially why they got into the Big East and later ACC.

Louisville had a long heritage- Denny Crum, etc. bigger school at the time, more revenue, more people attending their events. JMU can get there in time but even a Wichita State- they raised their level in order to keep Gregg Marshall in conjunction with a high level of basketball success. They didn't do it first. When they hired Marshall away from Winthrop they paid him $750K (the same Turgeon who had success before him was getting) and then he kept getting raises to stay but they already had the revenue from hoops to justify the payment.

You want to say that JMU neglected men's hoops for years in terms of salary I 100% agree- Brady was even at a lower level than the coach should have been at that time. Rowe was paid commensurate with his experience. Now they have taken steps to change that. It's incremental progress and going the right direction.

Many are saying that JMU can't hire a named mbb coach even if the salary were $750k because the program has become a dumpster fire. Why is the program a dumpster fire?

I believe Hart id suggesting asset mismanagement

(03-22-2020 11:46 AM)Top Dawg Wrote:  

(03-22-2020 11:27 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Argument is if you are spending $52 million you have to get way more than JMU is getting in men’s basketball.
Of course Alger and Bourne think they are right and all other college athletics programs are wrong in spending more on basketball. The fact of the matter is that Bourne has presided over a losing basketball program in 15 of his 21 years on the job. It is clear who is wrong.


Here is a quick look at Alger and Bourne trying to convince themselves they have won the JMU fan base by going cheap and hiring a bridesmaid.

So the entire athletic department, not just basketball. You’re trying to compare total athletic spending and then concluding that they aren’t spending enough on basketball, but if you start comparing all of the individual sports, JMU is much lower than those that spend around $52 million in total. Seems that some would have been happy to just overpay Byington so that we are in line with your expectations. With the current state of our program what good coach would choose to come to JMU even for $750k? They’d have much better options.

This is my thing. Byington was a solid candidate for this job, and $450k is what it took to land him. If someone like JTIII was interested but it would've taken $700k would JMU have spent that? I don't know but I hope so. What if it would've taken $600k? I'd start to lean more towards that they would have at that point.

But even if we're willing to pay $1m, it's still JMU. Suddenly spending AAC money isn't going to be all it takes to attract the coaches the AAC would. It's still a team that's been bad for 20 years, it's still a one bid league. We spent $450k and got a guy that's worth $450k. If we spend $700k I still don't think we're real likely to attract guys that are worth $700k. Maybe that would've been enough to convince Richey, but that's more like spending $700k on another guy that's worth $450-500k in my opinion. Spending $300k again would've severely limited our options, but I'm just not so sure that spending $600k(which I would guess is the upper limit realistically) would've added many options if any.

Byington may be the best hire in the world, I am not qualified to have a strong opionion.

It would be interesting to know if the admin even tried to make a splash. I doubt it.

If we had landed a-the JTIII we would be mentioned on espn 100 times this week and our scheduling options would significantly change which leads to better recruiting options more sold tickets.

Splash this splash that. You guys are beyond ridiculous. Anyone with any sense reads your posts and rolls their eyes. Your answer to everything is spend more money. As if that guarantees anything.

The list of coaches interviewed was pretty dang good and about what any reasonable person could expect. JT III? If he was so great, he would have been hired by a P5 long ago. Pitino? Really? You want him banging hookers on a restaurant table in Harrisonburg? You folks blow me away with your posts. What in the world are you thinking?

There was never going to be a splash hire. Many of us close to the university told you this over and over but you kept posting about how you wanted washed up BIG names. You kept posting about how JMU should spend $1 million on a name hire with multiple NCAA tournament appearances. That guy isn’t coming to JMU!!!!!!! How on earth could you ever expect he would? If you were that coach, would you? I sure as hell wouldn’t.

Can we just move on and support the hire and hope like hell he isn’t another Dean Keener?

Why would he be Dean Keener? He has 7 years plus half a season at CoC of head coaching experience. 5 1/2 of those seasons he has had a winning record. He’s never lost 20 games but he’s won 20 3 years in a row. He may not be proven at the level some of us wanted but there’s no denying he’s proven that he’s a solid winning coach. Keener was not.