I'm serious about this.

[Norm Peterson]

I'm going to copy and paste from my latest reply in the "What we thinking" poll.

 

Coaching:

 

Might I suggest that the NEXT time we hire a coach, we do the following:

 

• Don't go all-in with an expensive name;
• Find an up-and-comer with the EXPECTATION that we'll (probably) have to fire him in 4 years;
• Don't pay him Sweet 16-level compensation unless he wins a Sweet 16;
• Minimal buyout;
• Pay him $650,000/year with ENORMOUS incentives:
  • make the NIT? You just earned an extra $300K
  • reach the NCAA? That's a cool million
  • WIN an NCAA game? That's another million
  • CONSECUTIVE NCAA appearances? Add $250K
  • Sweet 16 appearance? Another million
• After 4 years, if the MFr hasn't earned any bonuses, his buyout is WAIVED

 

Then, bring in the next guy. Wash, rinse, repeat. Don't saddle yourself with a $20 million buyout for a guy who is producing the fewest wins in a 3-year stretch of any coach in the modern history of the program. We're better off swapping out coaches every few years until we find that guy who actually catches fire. And then, once he does, THEN pay the guy a King's ransom.

 

Recruiting:

 

OK, so then recruiting. I'm really not excited about 5-star NBA, one-and-done talent. I want quality kids who will work hard and represent for a good 3 years. I don't want a 5th year senior transfer running point. I want a kid who's been with the program for 3 seasons running point.

 

I'd rather have 5 guys in the top 75-150 range who will be here for the long haul and have very limited NIL brand appeal. Not that we won't swing deals for our players, but I'd rather have a kid who's more concerned about his team winning than his brand winning. And I suspect you get there more with some 3- and 4-star kids who'll stay for 3-4 years than with a 5-star prima donna (as opposed to a pre-Madonna) who's here to bank one year before getting paid in the NBA. Now that I see what that's all about, I think I'll pass on the next one.

 

So let's use the money we saved on paying a big-name coach to get our boosters behind the recruits our up-and-comer coach targeted and bring in THOSE guys. At this point, with NIL being what it is, the money we save on coaching salaries can almost directly go into player acquisition. Find an up-and-comer coach who can actually coach, and that would be money well spent.

 

 

Thoughts?

[basketballjones]

I feel like... I've been saying all this for years. And have received constant push back. 

I also volunteer to work on that incentive-based contract you're proposing. Don't even need close to 650k. Give me 60k and I'm doing significantly better. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by basketballjones

[aphilso1]

12 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

• Pay him $650,000/year with ENORMOUS incentives:
  • make the NIT? You just earned an extra $300K
  • reach the NCAA? That's a cool million
  • WIN an NCAA game? That's another million
  • CONSECUTIVE NCAA appearances? Add $250K
  • Sweet 16 appearance? Another million

Thoughts?

 

I like that structure as a fan but not from a logistics perspective.  $3.25M in bonuses is a pretty obscene amount to have to keep in the coffers for just one coach.  That would be burning a hole in the AD's pocket, seeing that amount sitting there but untouchable.  Especially since it only gets paid if something historic happens.  So you still have to have the money available in case the bonus is triggered, but realistically it won't happen.  

[basketballjones]

1 minute ago, aphilso1 said:

 

I like that structure as a fan but not from a logistics perspective.  $3.25M in bonuses is a pretty obscene amount to have to keep in the coffers for just one coach.  That would be burning a hole in the AD's pocket, seeing that amount sitting there but untouchable.  Especially since it only gets paid if something historic happens.  So you still have to have the money available in case the bonus is triggered, but realistically it won't happen.  

That doesn't sound like a problem. Budgets are done yearly. All of the answers to the availability of that money are in by March. 

[SkersHoops]

I 1000% agree!  The key word is incentives!  Look how Antonio Brown acted when he wasn't going to make his.  You think Gronk wanted his...

 

 

[cornfed24-7]

I like this idea and I think it may be the only realistic option. I've jumped ship on Hoiberg. I don't think he gets it done. I also think he's here 1-2 more years because of his contract. I also believe there is absolutely zero chance he renegotiates his contract. Why would he? He holds all the cards. So even in 2 years it would be a significant financial hit.

 

This is the least enjoyable three years of Nebraska basketball in my life. I was firmly in the camp it was a "not spending more money for coaches" thing before this hire. Nope. I'll take the cheap hungry up and comer from here on out. 

[brfrad]

I love the idea as a fan or AD.  Not as a coach.  I don't see any coaches agreeing to this contract.  Look at Nebraska, and the coach's career after Nebraska.

 

Harry Good never a head coach again

Jerry Bush was never a head coach again

Joe Cipriano passed away

Moe Iba coached at TCU

Danny Nee coached at Robert Morris and Duquesne

Barry Collier AD at Butler

Doc Sadler coached at Southern Miss

Tim Miles coaches at San Jose State

 

Moe was the only coach at a major conference, and took over for an NCAA team.

 

So, your going to coach 4 years, and make 2.6 million during those 4 years.  The problem is if you are an up and coming coach, some big name school is going to offer you that per year for 4 years.

 

I am okay with signing coaches for 1.5 - 2 million per year for 4 years.  The problem is we are giving them an extra year with no merit.  If a team has a 7 - 25 year, don't give him an extra year on the contract.  See some results before you put that extra year in.

[jimmykc]

I vote to have Norm negotiate future coaching contracts. At least he will be aware that most successful coaches were once young up-and-comers with something to prove. Coach K. and old Roy are the first to come to mind. The trick is in separating the wheat from the chaff. The other way to success seems to be hiring someone a little bit sleazy and hope he is not caught.

[HuskerFever]

50 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

...for a guy who is producing the fewest wins in a 3-year stretch of any coach in the modern history of the program.

 

I hate that I looked this up.

 

If you look at a 3-year rolling average for every coach in Nebraska basketball history going back to 1896 (coaching tenure must be 3+ seasons), here's the results:

 

Worst 3-Year Winning Percentage in Program History:

 

1. Adolph Lewandowski (1943-1945): 10-40 (20%)

2. Fred Hoiberg (2020-2022): 20-56 (26%)

3. Adolph Lewandowski (1942-1944): 14-36 (28%)

4. William Browne (1933-1935): 16-36 (31%)

5. Jerry Bush (1961-1963): 25-49 (34%)

Edited January 12, 2022 by HuskerFever
Grammar is hard.

[hhcmatt]

48 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

Thoughts?

 

Do you hold to this if Mark Turgeon is interested?

[Norm Peterson]

2 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

 

Do you hold to this if Mark Turgeon is interested?

 

Part of having a good rule is knowing when not to apply it.

[HuscurAdam]

I get where you're coming from, but the reality is any coach that you would actually want to hire (i.e. a coach that others would want too) would never accept a deal like that.  Someone else would offer guaranteed money and they would go there.  Otherwise, the incentives would have to be *ridiculously high* in order for them to pass up the guaranteed money (I'm talking orders of magnitude more than the numbers you threw out). 

 

The market for B1G coaches is $2 million+ guaranteed for 5 years and competent, qualified coaches aren't going to accept less. Unfortunately, Moos signed a bad deal and we have to live with it, but that won't make the next coach take less than their market value. 

[Dead Dog Alley]

4 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

 

Do you hold to this if Mark Turgeon is interested?

 

Mark Turgeon could save some money by living in his dad's basement.

[cornfed24-7]

3 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

 

Do you hold to this if Mark Turgeon is interested?

Not Norm but no. If he's interested see what he wants. We haven't tried the "Power 5 Coach that needs a soft landing" approach yet. Just don't back up the Brinks truck.

[Norm Peterson]

39 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

I like that structure as a fan but not from a logistics perspective.  $3.25M in bonuses is a pretty obscene amount to have to keep in the coffers for just one coach.  That would be burning a hole in the AD's pocket, seeing that amount sitting there but untouchable.  Especially since it only gets paid if something historic happens.  So you still have to have the money available in case the bonus is triggered, but realistically it won't happen.  

 

Buy an insurance policy from Lloyds of London that, in the unlikely event we have to pay this out, they'll cover it. They'd probably charge us a premium commensurate with the risk of something like $20/month.

[Chuck Taylor]

My starting point for the next search:

 

Don't hire: 1. An assistant at a top program. 2. A young mid-major coach who got his team to the SS in his first head coaching job. Both are just lottery tickets.

 

Look for: 1. A successful mid-major coach who has dominated his league for at least 5 years. You can't do that without being a good game coach and development guy. Examples are Gregg Marshall and Steve Pikiell. Not saying to hire now, just that they are examples. (Check out Marshall's record at Winthrop.) 2. A high-major coach with proven record of success who is feeling heat from spoiled fans and wants to go somewhere to be appreciated. Examples are Rick Barnes and Shaka Smart. (Shocker, they're both from Texas!) I personally wouldn't hire Turgeon, even though he fits this criteria.

 

 

[cornfed24-7]

People seem to be discounting this idea because of the specific numbers attached to it. What I say to that is forget the numbers. Think more low end of guaranteed money but still competitive then incentives. And thats where I think this works.

[Norm Peterson]

36 minutes ago, brfrad said:

Look at Nebraska, and the coach's career after Nebraska.

 

Harry Good never a head coach again

Jerry Bush was never a head coach again

Joe Cipriano passed away

Moe Iba coached at TCU

Danny Nee coached at Robert Morris and Duquesne

Barry Collier AD at Butler

Doc Sadler coached at Southern Miss

Tim Miles coaches at San Jose State

 

Moe was the only coach at a major conference, and took over for an NCAA team.

 

That speaks more to the quality of our hires.

 

Dave Van Horn was lured away because he was REALLY good. Would love to have our hoops coach lured away rather than fired and never coach at this level again.

 

Do you have any idea what Dana Altman's record was at the juco he coached at before he was hired as an assistant at Kansas State?

 

In ONE year, they went from winning like half a dozen games to winning more than 20 (if memory serves me.) I mean, the turnaround was immediate. And compelling. And lo and behold ...

 

Finding the next Dana Altman might take a little trial and error, which is why I say you almost have to hire with an expectation the guy will probably fail and move on in 4 years. But, in the event he catches FIRE, like a Bob Devaney, you can renegotiate and pay him handsomely. Just don't saddle yourself with a huge buyout that insures you won't be able to extricate yourself from an untenable position in the event he fails catastrophically.

 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Norm Peterson

[Norm Peterson]

57 minutes ago, basketballjones said:

I feel like... I've been saying all this for years. And have received constant push back. 

I also volunteer to work on that incentive-based contract you're proposing. Don't even need close to 650k. Give me 60k and I'm doing significantly better. 

 

Reading about the secret extension has earned you a convert.

[UnicamMan]

I think we should just hire coaches and pay them by the win.

Football $500,000/win

Basketball $100,000/win

 

 

[hhcmatt]

10 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Part of having a good rule is knowing when not to apply it.

 

Your response makes this reader wonder if you are, take it or leave it, "serious about this". 

[Navin R. Johnson]

21 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

That speaks more to the quality of our hires.

 

Dave Van Horn was lured away because he was REALLY good. Would love to have our hoops coach lured away rather than fired and never coach at this level again.

 

Do you have any idea what Dana Altman's record was at the juco he coached at before he was hired as an assistant at Kansas State?

 

In ONE year, they went from winning like half a dozen games to winning more than 20 (if memory serves me.) I mean, the turnaround was immediate. And compelling. And lo and behold ...

 

Finding the next Dana Altman might take a little trial and error, which is why I say you almost have to hire with an expectation the guy will probably fail and move on in 4 years. But, in the event he catches FIRE, like a Bob Devaney, you can renegotiate and pay him handsomely. Just don't saddle yourself with a huge buyout that insures you won't be able to extricate yourself from an untenable position in the event he fails catastrophically.

 

 

This is from Oregon's website on Altman.  I think a lot of his success the 2 years before he went to Kansas State was because of a guy named Mitch Richmond.

 

While head coach at Southeast Junior College in Fairbury, Neb., his first team (1982-83) rolled to a 29-6 record and a third-place finish in the junior college national tournament and Altman was honored as both Region 9 and the Nebraska College Coach of the Year.

In 1983, Altman accepted the head coaching position at Moberly (Mo.) Junior College, with a three-year run resulting in a staggering 94-18 record (25-9 in 1983-84; 35-5 with a third-place finish at the national tourney in 1984-85; and a 34-4 mark in 1985-86 with a sixth-place finish at nationals).

He was named Region 16 Coach of the Year in both the 1984-85 and 1985-86 seasons, and was also a finalist for 1986 National Junior College Athletic Association Coach of the Year accolades.
 

[Dead Dog Alley]

6 minutes ago, Navin R. Johnson said:

 

This is from Oregon's website on Altman.  I think a lot of his success the 2 years before he went to Kansas State was because of a guy named Mitch Richmond.

 

While head coach at Southeast Junior College in Fairbury, Neb., his first team (1982-83) rolled to a 29-6 record and a third-place finish in the junior college national tournament and Altman was honored as both Region 9 and the Nebraska College Coach of the Year.

In 1983, Altman accepted the head coaching position at Moberly (Mo.) Junior College, with a three-year run resulting in a staggering 94-18 record (25-9 in 1983-84; 35-5 with a third-place finish at the national tourney in 1984-85; and a 34-4 mark in 1985-86 with a sixth-place finish at nationals).

He was named Region 16 Coach of the Year in both the 1984-85 and 1985-86 seasons, and was also a finalist for 1986 National Junior College Athletic Association Coach of the Year accolades.
 

 

It's a good thing Danny didn't offer him an assistant position to keep him from going to Kansas State.  Because Mitch Richmond would have stuck out like a sore thumb in Lincoln.

[Cazzie22]

I think we are saddled with Fred for at least one more year and I hope some improvement takes place.  

 

I believe you have to offer fair market value for any coach.  How can we attract top candidates by offering only an incentive laden contract?  I do believe we need to look for an up and comer in the profession but they may not see NU as a destination job.

 

I always wonder what if Bob Huggins was offered the job instead of Danny Née!

[jimmykc]

Random thought: Who decided to hire a coach named Adolph between 1942-45? Not the best marketing move.