Another way of looking at it would be that given the revenue and attention he brings to both the University of Oregon and the city of Eugene (without him, the OT may not even be there) that Lananna is underpaid.
Perhaps the only track coach in the nation whose program pays its own way (relatively speaking)?
gh wrote:Another way of looking at it would be that given the revenue and attention he brings to both the University of Oregon and the city of Eugene (without him, the OT may not even be there) that Lananna is underpaid.
Perhaps the only track coach in the nation whose program pays its own way (relatively speaking)?
According the Oregon's athletic department books, their track program loses money. Keep in mind that I'm not arguing that Lananna is overpaid, I'm just pointing out that based on JumboElliott's logic, he's overpaid since he makes more than Oregon's governor and he coaches a program that loses money.
gh wrote:Another way of looking at it would be that given the revenue and attention he brings to both the University of Oregon and the city of Eugene (without him, the OT may not even be there) that Lananna is underpaid.
Perhaps the only track coach in the nation whose program pays its own way (relatively speaking)?
Helps having a billionaire as your best supporter. Who also helps keeps the football coach from going.
that's why I said "relatively speaking"; the track operation itself undoubtedly loses money, but Lananna's work makes money elsewhere, for both university and city.
gh wrote:Another way of looking at it would be that given the revenue and attention he brings to both the University of Oregon and the city of Eugene (without him, the OT may not even be there) that Lananna is underpaid.
Perhaps the only track coach in the nation whose program pays its own way (relatively speaking)?
According the Oregon's athletic department books, their track program loses money. Keep in mind that I'm not arguing that Lananna is overpaid, I'm just pointing out that based on JumboElliott's logic, he's overpaid since he makes more than Oregon's governor and he coaches a program that loses money.
Overpaid? Pocket change in Nikeland....as is Chip Kelly's salary.
gh wrote:Another way of looking at it would be that given the revenue and attention he brings to both the University of Oregon and the city of Eugene (without him, the OT may not even be there) that Lananna is underpaid.
Perhaps the only track coach in the nation whose program pays its own way (relatively speaking)?
Helps having a billionaire as your best supporter. Who also helps keeps the football coach from going.
Oh, absolutely (and on the football side, anybody who was surprised that Kelly stayed at home wasn't paying attention). But note how well Lananna's predecessor did in forging a working relationship with Knight and turning Eugene back into TrackTown.
JumboElliott wrote:What is the head coach of a non-revenue generating sport doing making over two times what the governor of Texas is making?
If we're comparing the salaries of non-revenue coaches at public universities to the salary of that state's governor, there are literally hundreds of coaches all over the country in a variety of sports who are overpaid, not just Bev Kearney. The two most egregious examples are probably women's basketball coaches Pat Summitt ($2.2 million) and Gino Auriemma ($1.8 million), with Vin Lananna being the most overpaid in track and field.
UConn and Tennessee both turn (small) profits for women's basketball.
Yes, Lananna has done a wonderful job and knows how to play the game. The program had been going downhill for quite a while before he got there.
As for Kelly:
What I believe now is that Kelly, who makes $3.5 million in guaranteed salary and has the blessing of Nike-infused infrastructure, knows his current gig is the best amateur coaching job in America.
I now suspect he would only trade it for the dream gig of every little kid who grows up in New England -- head coach of the Patriots.
gh wrote:Oh, absolutely (and on the football side, anybody who was surprised that Kelly stayed at home wasn't paying attention)...
Considering the looming NCAA sanctions, I'm shocked he didn't get out while the getting was good(ala P. Carroll).
The one thing that Roger Goodell did that I agree with is enforcing NCAA sanctions on Terrell Pryor and Jim Tressell when the left college to avoid punishment. I wish he had done the same with Pete Carroll who left USC one step ahead of the NCAA mob. I wouldn't have a problem if in the future, the NFL formalized this symbiotic relationship and refused to accept coaches under these circumstances until they settled things with the NCAA.
Conor Dary wrote:Yes, Lananna has done a wonderful job and knows how to play the game. The program had been going downhill for quite a while before he got there.
I'm not debating that Lananna's teams have been better than Smith's, but as I recall, Smith's teams were markedly better than the teams late in the Dellinger/Heinonen eras.
Conor Dary wrote:Yes, Lananna has done a wonderful job and knows how to play the game. The program had been going downhill for quite a while before he got there.
I'm not debating that Lananna's teams have been better than Smith's, but as I recall, Smith's teams were markedly better than the teams late in the Dellinger/Heinonen eras.
As I said the program had been in decline for quite a while.
26mi235 wrote:The timing is part of the picture here. My guess is there that she had a few strong enemies and that they decided this was the time to stop her rather than enshrine her and found a way to transform rumors in action, and given the climate change since Penn State (but also, the climate has been progressively changing in that direction from when I started teaching in the early '80s).
Maybe. There might also be at least a slim chance that in the absence of a conspiracy, a former athlete from that 2002 team returned after quite a while to be coached by Bev recently, and that maybe something happened during their latest coach-athlete association that made the athlete choose to reveal details of the past relationship, or threaten to go public. Stranger things have happened, so I'm not ready to accept the conspiracy theory as having the highest probability of explaining the situation just yet, although I won't rule it out either.
A lot of folks have brought up the timing of this issue, but don't forget that Jerry Sandusky's Penn State crimes were also nearly ten years old but that didn't save the University from having the hammer dropped on them.
jazzcyclist wrote:A lot of folks have brought up the timing of this issue, but don't forget that Jerry Sandusky's Penn State crimes were also nearly ten years old but that didn't save the University from having the hammer dropped on them.
I don't think the NCAA would drop the hammer on UT though, unless it turns out that the coach also committed crimes that were covered up. In comparing this to Penn State, whether or not higher officials were previously aware and covered things up at the time could be one ace in the hole that Coach Kearney could be holding since it could further damage the institution's reputation and put them more at risk of possible civil suits by the athlete (or athletes) involved. If there's an ugly lawsuit between Coach Kearney and UT, I wonder if more former and present UT women's track and field athletes and staff would tend to feel more loyalty to their University and possibly to the athlete involved, or to their coach if they have to be involved. Hopefully it won't come to that.
polevaultpower wrote:I've never heard of the NCAA punishing a school for a non-criminal relationship between an athlete and a coach?
Prior to the Jerry Sandusky scandal, I had never heard of the NCAA punishing a school for criminal actions at all unless it violated NCAA bylaws. Even when there was a murder and a coverup involving Baylor basketball players, the NCAA let the criminal justice system handle it.
Blues wrote:a former athlete from that 2002 team returned after quite a while to be coached by Bev recently, and that maybe something happened during their latest coach-athlete association that made the athlete choose to reveal details of the past relationship, or threaten to go public.
You must have contacts. That is the exact story that is being passed around locally.
There's also a conspiracy theory like you mentioned but the above is most likely what happened.
At this point let me interject that these are real people with real feelings we're talking about here, and speculation on specifics on who the person might be should stop at this level. Thanks for understanding.
gh wrote:At this point let me interject that these are real people with real feelings we're talking about here, and speculation on specifics on who the person might be should stop at this level. Thanks for understanding.
Sorry gh. I've followed blues' lead and erased my error.
thanks for erring on the side of caution, but there was no need to yank your originals. If I'd objected to their presence I would simply have excised them myself. I merely said that the investigative trail should end at that point.
However, in this case it's not specified whether the student was an athlete, and the university has already disciplined him years ago.
It was a student, and though the two situations are not identical, it makes you wonder how things would have been handled with Kearney had she not voluntarily resigned.
That said, Applewhite far from out of thw woods. From ESPN -
While Dodds and Applewhite both said in their statements that the matter had been dealt with, Texas has called a special meeting of the board of regents for Sunday at 1:45 p.m. ET.
"We are first and foremost concerned with the safety, health and well-being of our students on all 15 UT campuses and wherever they travel under the auspices of our institutions," the board said in a statement. "As a result, it was with great disappointment and sadness that we learned a short time ago about the reprimand given in February of 2009 to one of the assistant football coaches employed by UT Austin for inappropriate conduct during the football team's trip to the Fiesta Bowl in January 2009."
The agenda for the Sunday meeting states there will be a personnel matters discussion, as well as a "discussion regarding legal issues concerning individual athletic personnel" and a "discussion regarding legal issues related to inappropriate relations between employees and students."
I dont think it matters if she was an athlete or not. Obviously the woman wasn't a football player under Applewhite's purview, while Kearney was involved with an athlete she coached(an important, and key, distinction).
guru wrote:I dont think it matters if she was an athlete or not.
I think it matters. A college athlete (especially one on a scholarship) is much more vulnerable to coercion and authoritative influence by a coach than a non-athlete student would be, even if that coach is of a different sport. There's still more influence compared to students who don't fall under the jurisdiction of the athletic department in any way.