@SWernerPG: #Pitt basketball coach Jamie Dixon was the university’s highest-paid employee in 2014, taking home $3.2 million http://t.co/fehKooKxx3
This will make some of your heads explode...
- Thread starter King Of All Message Boards
- Start date
No. I would have expected it. I think we all realized he was the highest paid employee. Now again, he is well compensated. He needs to do better. I don't want to hear "best record in the Big East" or "most successful Pitt coach" etc...most of these accomplishments are now 5 years old and greater. Hell, Dan Bylsma led the Pens to the Stanley Cup in 2009. He has been unemployed for over a year now. Sports isn't about what you did 5 years ago....it is the present.
I was interested that his base pay was only $1.4MM. That's a pretty incentive laden contract, if true.
Also, as promised, it appears Jamie Dixon isn't one of the 68 highest paid coaches in basketball as of this March.
USA Today Database
Also, as promised, it appears Jamie Dixon isn't one of the 68 highest paid coaches in basketball as of this March.
USA Today Database
Huh???? The list that you linked showed that he was not one of the 68 highest paid NCAA tournament coaches. That is because he was NOT AN NCAA TOURNAMENT COACH. That is the whole reason people are upset! Pitt was not an NCAA tournament team and Dixon was not a tournament coach.I was interested that his base pay was only $1.4MM. That's a pretty incentive laden contract, if true.
Also, as promised, it appears Jamie Dixon isn't one of the 68 highest paid coaches in basketball as of this March.
USA Today Database
Any more soft toss?
I posted it because everybody posted the 2014 NCAA Tournament Coach Salaries as definitive proof of where Dixon was paid relative to the rest of college basketball.
I promised to post the updated list this year, so I did.
Funny how quickly the board picks up on one, but plugs their ears and says "la la la la la" to the other.
It is probably prudent to point out, though, that 1) Bylsma was gifted a supremely talented roster entering its prime and squandered it and 2) professional sports are a bit different because everybody gets an equal crack at amateur talent.
It's why the basketball program probably shouldn't have tried to jump in the deep end of the amateur talent pool. Go the moneyball route and get guys who are undervalued, develop, and ultimately fit well together as a team. Going through old RSCI rankings, their sweet spot seemed to be in the 90 - 200 range of prospects. So, guys like Artis, Young, Wilson, Manigault, and (if they get him) Konate are nice starts. Cam Johnson was a pleasant surprise as a late bloomer as well.
Pitt won't be able to get enough high-end talent to a) deal with turmoil and turnover and b) get a bunch of mismatched guys who don't play well together but can just out-talent teams like a Kentucky or -- in their heyday -- North Carolina. Or, if they do get that level of talent, it's because they hired a coach like Lavin who can recruit well at any level but is generally undesirable in all other facets of the game.
If Dixon doesn't recognize that, then yeah, it'll probably be time to blow it up and restart with a guy like Holtmann or Mack who will. We'll see in 2017 where the roster is. If they don't have a nice core of youngsters behind the current rising juniors, it'll be an issue.
If your not writing the check why should it matter how much money JD makes? Pitt has paid him to stay here and I seriously doubt they could attract a top coach to leave their current position to come here. Hire an up and coming coach you say I'll say Ralph Willard.
And how has the Pens' firing of Bylsma worked out?
Difference is, Bylsma was not responsible for the makeup of his roster, Jamie is.
Why is it surprising that a coach who made the NCAA Tournament 11 out of 13 years is paid that much? seriously you can hate on Dixon all you want but the accomplishments are there and no coach gets their salary cut because of a few mediocre years.
Of course, which is why in 2017 we'll know better if he should be gone or not.
They changed how they recruited in 2009. They seem to have changed back in 2013. It's a little early to evaluate if the mess is due to 2010/2011/best guy in 2012 all leaving earlier than expected or something bigger.
In college, if you aren't going to cheat, you need to recruit to your circumstances. They got away from that, but seem to be trying to get back to it.
Pitt fans are funny. A football coach goes 6-6 and they complain that Pitt is too cheap with coaching salaries. The basketball coach goes to the NCAAs 11 out of 13 years and they complain that Pitt is paying him too much.
Dixon is being paid a reasonable salary for his position, tenure and accomplishments. His salary may far surpass what 99% of us will ever earn, but I doubt that any MLB utility infielder would be critical of his compensation.
Dixon is being paid a reasonable salary for his position, tenure and accomplishments. His salary may far surpass what 99% of us will ever earn, but I doubt that any MLB utility infielder would be critical of his compensation.
Because no matter what anyone says, Pitt is a football school. Our older fans don't understand college basketball. Any football coach with half the accomplishments of Dixon would be getting a lifetime contract.
Again, it is not the 11 out of 13 years. It is the last 4, which have been pretty much the definition of mediocrity for this time period. Focus. 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, etc...are losing its relevancy.
Jamie definitely has earned the chance to right this thing, but if this time next year, we are sitting here after another NIT season, or even an 11-12 seed and one and done in the NCAA's, and scrambling to fill roster spots with grad transfers from MEAC and Ivy league schools, well you got to rethink the coaching direction, staff and head coach of this program.
Right? Am I crazy for even thinking this? Or does Jamie get a lifetime pass for getting to the Elite 8 and two #1 seeds?
I don't think anyone is advocating a lifetime pass for Dixon. I've seen plenty of fair and legitimate criticism from the folks who traditionally defend the program.
Similarly, I suspect most of those posters will be in the same camp if Pitt has one, two, or three more down years with Dixon. But gnashing teeth over his salary is silly; at the time he got his last extension it was well deserved.
If he maintains Nordenberg's success in academics and research and achieves the success in athletics that he appears to be seeking, Patrick Gallagher.
Recruits, you are the one who needs to focus. The topic is Dixon's current salary, not his future job retention. Highly paid executives do eventually get replaced if they do not maintain their earlier success.
In a world that made sense...the Chancellor. Since that is now a quaint historical reference, it is now the person who brings in the most $$ PLUS favorable publicity. That's life in a Power5 school. Some schools might think a BB coach isn't worth more than a FB coach, but if you look at the BB "elites", hoops is more important than FB....by a large margin: Duke.. UK.. KU.. Indiana..UNC.. Lousyville..Cuse... UCLA...UCONN.... Are their FB teams relevant?? Not much. So the BB coach gets the big $$$. Pitt is traditionally a FB school, but the instability has placed FB behind BB in the pecking order. That could change, but not soon.
What's most funny/telling is that the Pittsburgh media publishes these articles every year dripping with contempt at the "audacity" that the Pitt men's sports coaches make so much compared to other Pitt employees, while never mentioning that this disparity is exactly the same, if not even more pronounced, at every FBS and probably even FCS schools.
And ESPECIALLY is the case at the school they adore and worship the most, up in Spittle County, where sports (well, football) means absolutely everything. Particularly when you include (as all decent people should) all the money spent to clean up from The Scandal That Pittsburgh Media Pretends Never Happened. Why isn't THIS regularly plastered on front pages meant to generate anger?
But at least these are quasi-professional sports. The real sin, if it is one, is that this situation also exists at the major high schools (and probably many of the small ones too). How much (and/or what phony high paying admin "jobs") are the coaches at the sports-centric local districts getting? Why isn't THAT reported in scandal-tone headlines?
And ESPECIALLY is the case at the school they adore and worship the most, up in Spittle County, where sports (well, football) means absolutely everything. Particularly when you include (as all decent people should) all the money spent to clean up from The Scandal That Pittsburgh Media Pretends Never Happened. Why isn't THIS regularly plastered on front pages meant to generate anger?
But at least these are quasi-professional sports. The real sin, if it is one, is that this situation also exists at the major high schools (and probably many of the small ones too). How much (and/or what phony high paying admin "jobs") are the coaches at the sports-centric local districts getting? Why isn't THAT reported in scandal-tone headlines?
I am not gnashing my teeth, look at my first line of the first response. It wasn't surprising. And Pitt WAS at that level where Jamie had deserved to be paid at the top level. But....the extension was a bit outrageous in terms, not money. Just like Nordy giving Pederson that extension before he left. It looks more of taking care of "friends" than making the best decision.
A 10 yr extension is way over the top---I think--does anyone know of any other college bb coach who recently received a 10-yr extension?
Ummmmm...I don't hate Dixon my man. Not even close. I think he should be here for at least 3 more years to see if he can get it turned around.
Although interest from other programs has dropped, Dixon was a very hot coaching commodity. I think the idea of the long contract was to lock him up long term and make it somewhat economically prohibitive for someone to entice him away.
That's what it was I believe. It's been stated on here that Dixon was strongly considering USC but was offered this extension and he decided to stay.
It's a football school with a cheap fanbase who doesn't show up or donate.
Some football school.
Maybe if the administration would show commitment to winning by taking $20MM out of the general fund instead of $10MM, or had simply cut all of the non-revenue sports that were already receiving the bare minimum support, the fans would be willing to donate more.
Or, maybe the benchmark would simply arbitrarily be moved as the can gets kicked further and further down the road.
By you I don't mean you in particular. I mean those who use Dixon's salary as a reason to pile on.
If you cut all the non revenue sports, you wouldn't be in compliance with title IX & more importantly Pitt wouldn't be able to field the minimum amount of teams for the ACC
The salary isn't terribly out of line but the length of the contract is. Dixon's contract was extended when he still had 4 years left on his existing contract and whenwhe
Not aiming this particularly at you Del.
How short the memories are in so many Pitt fans arguing this subject!
Pitt (and Nordenberg /Pederson ) did not offer Dixon a 10 year contract out of cronyism or favoritism. The offer's length and overall financial commitmnnt (10 years, $30MM) was made in response to an aggressive offer by USC. Southern Cal set the bar high with an offer they didn't think Jamie could refuse. USC also had proximity to Jamie's parents.
Pitt basically matched the offer, or came close ( USC offered basically unlimited use of a private jet for recruiting, Pitt has allotted some limited access and Pitt's contract extended his then-current deal ) and Jamie stayed here. Doesn't ANYONE remember the angst and chaos when it was reported by one poster with supposed inside access that Dixon wasn't coming back on the plane with the team but was flying directly to LA to sign the USC deal?
Dixon and his agent didn't manufacture the interest and offers that flowed in to him out of thin air. They were real, and whether our fans believe it or not, other schools still reach out to him as recently as about 6 weeks ago. The only place Dixon is dissed is in this town.
Nobody here would have originated a 10 year deal. Ten years is an awful long time in sports. But, when you are facing a competitive offer, you have limited choices: make a competitive offer or walk away. Pitt chose to match the offer and tie up a top 25 coach rather than face almost yearly attempted raids on him. If he recovers from the plateau we are in, by the end of the contract, guys like Coach K, Roy, Pitino, Boeheim etc will be gone and the market salary for top coaches may be completely different.
Matching an offer is a big difference from proactively offering a long, huge contract.,
Conveniently ignored is that a chunk of that $3.4 large was "deferred comp" not paid out in previous years. There might have been restrictions on JD getting that if he had left earlier (vesting). So the current portion of his take was quite a bit less than the total. Plans like that are common for execs at non-profits. You will probably see some of that for SP, too.
You're 100% right. But, pointing that out and stating that Pitt is taking money from the general fund in order to stay solvent seems to fall on deaf ears when it comes to Pitt's money problems being a fanbase thing.
Pitt spent as little as possible on their non-rev sports to enable itself to spend more on football and it still wasn't enough to show commitment to football for many. It came down to Pitt needing to spend money that doesn't exist.
Also probably worth saying that oftentimes the buyout amount is related to the amount of years on the contract remaining. Dixon has 3 or 4 more years here at minimum. At that point they'll probably have a good idea of what they want to do and the buyout will be manageable at that point. Especially since it doesn't appear that Pitt pays their basketball coach particularly well, and instead uses a bunch of incentives to escalate the contract.
If be defies the odds and falls flat on his face, they could buy out Dixon and take a gamble on a 2nd tier mid-major guy with minimal risk financially.
What is Pitts commitment to bb or FB ? Maybe they want competitive teams comprised of student athletes who attend classes and graduate who don't embrass the university led by a coaches who run clean programs. If that's what they want then that's what they have. Those intimately involved know what it takes to compete at the level we'd all like to see and maybe their just not willing to go there. Unless the next bb coach is swayed by the dark side those wishing for JDs tenure to be over might just mourn the day he leaves,retires or is fired.
It's a phrase used by people who have nothing to add to the conversation- as it's entirely based on looking backwards after the results are in. And completely a meaningless expression.
The only thing I will add to this conversation is I've been told we can't afford to pay a head coach $3 million or $4 million. Kinda seems like we can, huh?
Similar threads
