Schwartz: Kirk Ferentz’s Contract Gets Better With Each Passing Month

To be honest, I don't give a **** what people make. It's not my money. I just want my team to win.
That's my only complaint about the contract, or any big business deal or for that matter any small business deal. Is you should get what you pay for.
Look sports is about performance. You perform, you play. You up your performance, you might get drafted. However even then your guaranteed $$ is relatively low, because you still must perform.
That's life.
One could say the state of the union is in exactly the state its in because people can't perform and do what they are being paid to do.
It seems the only ones who are expected to earn their money in this country are the little guys and as history has repeatedly shown, that is a recipe for disaster.
 
Last edited:
"Surely, it would seem, an innovative university researcher working to cure cancer or an enterprising budget officer striving to eliminate excess spending deserves a higher salary than someone whose performance review hinges on how well he can teach zone blocking. It’s counterintuitive to think otherwise."

Cancer doctors deserve to make millions.

Not enterprising budget officers. We have seen what they will do. The first thing they should do is cut their own salaries.
 
The problem for me has always been that the incentives start kicking in for 7 or 8 wins.

So basically, the expectation / standard Barta set was "We're paying you a top coaches salary, and all we expect in return is to win half your games. Win any more than that, and you get a bonus."

Given the mediocre state of the B1G West (that is still what it's called, right?) and the non-con schedule, 9 or 10 wins should be the "you've exceeded expectations" bar if you're being paid like a top-10 / 20 coach.
 
This whole article is kind of silly and moot. Yea, it's never heard upon a university upgrading a coaches contract within the existing. It's not like Iowa's going to let the entire contract run its course before upgrading. He'll be in the top 10 again in no time.
 
hawkeyes87 said:
The problem for me has always been that the incentives start kicking in for 7 or 8 wins.

So basically, the expectation / standard Barta set was "We're paying you a top coaches salary, and all we expect in return is to win half your games. Win any more than that, and you get a bonus."

Given the mediocre state of the B1G West (that is still what it's called, right?) and the non-con schedule, 9 or 10 wins should be the "you've exceeded expectations" bar if you're being paid like a top-10 / 20 coach.
Click to expand...

7 wins is really a .500 season in my book, looking at the cupcakes a team should take care of in the early season.
 
4thngoal said:
To be honest, I don't give a **** what people make. It's not my money. I just want my team to win.
That's my only complaint about the contract, or any big business deal or for that matter any small business deal. Is you should get what you pay for.
Look sports is about performance. You perform, you play. You up your performance, you might get drafted. However even then your guaranteed $$ is relatively low, because you still must perform.
That's life.
One could say the state of the union is in exactly the state its in because people can't perform and do what they are being paid to do.
It seems the only ones who are expected to earn their money in this country are the little guys and as history has repeatedly shown, that is a recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...
It is funny how pro players contracts are more and more incentive based yet coaches aren't... And if so they are always one way. It's not like if they have losing records or don't meet expectations they have to play their employers back...
 
MelroseHawkins said:
7 wins is really a .500 season in my book, looking at the cupcakes a team should take care of in the early season.
Click to expand...
Agree. It's not worthy of an incentive clause. Iowa went 4-5 in the Big Ten. but managed 8 wins. Decent season - but incentive-worthy? I'm not critical of Ferentz for this, he's getting what he asked for - who would turn that down, at least I wouldn't. Maybe it's industry standard to provide these types of bonuses for low threshold performances so Iowa has to play the game with everyone else, I don't know.
 
homes said:
Agree. It's not worthy of an incentive clause. Iowa went 4-5 in the Big Ten. but managed 8 wins. Decent season - but incentive-worthy? I'm not critical of Ferentz for this, he's getting what he asked for - who would turn that down, at least I wouldn't. Maybe it's industry standard to provide these types of bonuses for low threshold performances so Iowa has to play the game with everyone else, I don't know.
Click to expand...
Exactly, you would have to be bonkers to turn it down. He doesn't even discuss this with anyone. His agent does.
I don't have any problem with it, it's not my concern.
Like I said, I just want to see my team take the next step and win enough to basically be in the hunt most of the time. I honestly think the coaches do to. If they didn't they wouldn't be very good coaches and I think they are.
Maybe not Davis so much, but even then, maybe a good coach and an awful OC, I don't know.
Let's just see how it plays out. Lots of new staff and new players.
It's easy to sit on the net and say our wr group is/was horrible, everyone in the country knew that including the coaches. In acting a strategy to fix it takes a little time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top