|
|
Post by ucsdfan on Apr 30, 2012 15:54:33 GMT -5
NOW as for him leaving UCI, doubt it would happen (UCI pays more than UCLA) but again, he is the "hot poker stirring the coals." Maybe he could dictate his own contract if he chose. Curious how you support this statement other than b.s. 2010 salaries (last one listed on the SacBee Public employee registry) John Speraw at UCI $123,066.60 Al Scates at UCLA$168,469.53 www.sacbee.com/statepay/ |
|
|
|
Post by YellowJacket#9 on Apr 30, 2012 17:42:26 GMT -5
NOW as for him leaving UCI, doubt it would happen (UCI pays more than UCLA) but again, he is the "hot poker stirring the coals." Maybe he could dictate his own contract if he chose. Curious how you support this statement other than b.s. 2010 salaries (last one listed on the SacBee Public employee registry) John Speraw at UCI $123,066.60 Al Scates at UCLA$168,469.53 www.sacbee.com/statepay/I was once told by a buddy here on the EAST COAST, that UCI was paying more than UCLA. I was going on that information, but thanks for clearing it up for me. EITHER WAY...my statement about Speraw stands, he can (if he chose) dictate his own salary IF UCLA ever comes calling. But thanks for the information... :-) |
|
|
|
Post by lionsarm on Apr 30, 2012 17:52:35 GMT -5
as public schools, aren't uc's obliged to follow a strict pay scale for employees? that being said, for a team to want to pay a coach additional money on top of salary, it can come out of the team's budget beyond university funds, i.e. booster support.
John Speraw at UCI $123,066.60
Al Scates at UCLA$168,469.53
Scate's salary should not be indicative of what ucla will pay speraw if he is hired. his salary will be based on a new hire salary, and ucla boosters may have to fork out whatever they feel will be enough to lure speraw. scate's 168K vs. speraw's current 123k is based on the uc system's strict pay scale with incentives.
|
|
|
|
Post by ucsdfan on Apr 30, 2012 18:23:06 GMT -5
as public schools, aren't uc's obliged to follow a strict pay scale for employees? that being said, for a team to want to pay a coach additional money on top of salary, it can come out of the team's budget beyond university funds, i.e. booster support. John Speraw at UCI $123,066.60 Al Scates at UCLA$168,469.53 Scate's salary should not be indicative of what ucla will pay speraw if he is hired. his salary will be based on a new hire salary, and ucla boosters may have to fork out whatever they feel will be enough to lure speraw. scate's 168K vs. speraw's current 123k is based on the uc system's strict pay scale with incentives. I've never heard of a strict payscale applied to non-union positions. For several positions there is no such thing. This includes world class researchers, administrators, coaches, and similar high profile figures that require enticement to take a job. What the SacBee numbers do not include is outside income obtained as a direct result of being in that particular coaching job (seakers fees and so on). The bottomline is that money is likely not going to play much of a role in his choice, as I assume they'll each be willing to outbid the other is necessary. What UCI can offer is nice university housing. I'm not sure how UCLA would fare in that battle. |
|
|
|
Post by gouci on Apr 30, 2012 21:03:35 GMT -5
UC Irvine is John Speraw's home literally. He now has a house on campus. A big reason to stay at UCI.
If Speraw's UCI salary package included housing benefits I don't know if the housing portion's value would show up in the Sac. Bee figures.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikesmith on May 1, 2012 0:56:21 GMT -5
UCLA will offer the new coach 110-125K. They won't cave to any sort of bidding war. Actually, there won't be a bidding war on UCLA's part, just UCI. John will make more at UCI.
Al made his salary based on years of service. UCLA is going to be offered to John, but no matter what John's relationship of hire is to the current AAD's and the AD at UCLA, UCLA is a football and basketball school first.
UCLA's other olympic sports pay close to, or less than what Al made. That will never change. They can continue paying lower salaries in comparison to other schools because the standard of winning in all sports at UCLA is ingrained and expected. There is a price to pay for having the most national championships for any NCAA school in our country. At UCLA, you must win, but must take less money, even after winning. If you don't win, you'll be fired.
If Mike Sealy won 10 straight national championships for Women's volleyball at UCLA, he'd still make a minimum of 100K under what the other "established" women's volleyball coaches make around the country. That's just the way it would be.
Wherever John goes, he'll do well. But if he is the next UCLA coach, he'll be congratulated for winning NC's with a wink and a, "So... We're going to win next year? Right?"
|
|
|
|
Post by ciscokeed on May 1, 2012 8:38:40 GMT -5
well said mikesmith! Tough choices for John Speraw-and no bad outcome for him. In terms of the NT, it sure is a ton of time on the road, and takes you away from family- might not be the right time for John- maybe Ron Larson and Gary Sato could put together a staff that could keep us in medal contention....
|
|
|
|
Post by volleyfred on May 2, 2012 2:15:06 GMT -5
well said mikesmith! Tough choices for John Speraw-and no bad outcome for him. In terms of the NT, it sure is a ton of time on the road, and takes you away from family- might not be the right time for John- maybe Ron Larson and Gary Sato could put together a staff that could keep us in medal contention.... +1 It must be a nice to be sought after by the best program in the country, the National Team or stay at a powerhouse built by you. And, get paid at least $125,000 for the "trouble" of it all. He certainly has earned it. |
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on May 2, 2012 7:55:29 GMT -5
125 k isnt that much in orange county/LA
|
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on May 2, 2012 12:07:47 GMT -5
Why can't a coach do both the NT and college? They do it all the time in basketball. Krzyzewski didn't need to leave Duke nor Geno Conneticut to coach in the Olympics. If anything, Speraw could coach in the off seasons and then take the 2015-2016 year off as HC at UCLA to prepare for Brazil. One reason I could think of would be the level of development. In BBall in the US, it's already a highly developed at the elite level (not to mention more individual), as well as many of the players play with & around each other in the NBA/NCAA/WNBA. Fairly different story in volleyball. I don't think the men's program would have done nearly as well in 2008 if Hugh was only doing the gig part time. |
|
|
|
Post by gouci on May 3, 2012 8:37:41 GMT -5
John Speraw was asked at the Final 4 media session.
Can you talk about the UCLA head coaching opening, which you have been rumored to be a front-runner for?
Speraw's response.
"I've not given it an ounce of thought in three weeks. People have been asking me this for 10 years. I've been answering it for 10 year and will have to do it for a couple more months. But I'm just focusing on these two matches."
|
|
|
|
Post by gobruins on May 3, 2012 17:31:48 GMT -5
John Speraw was asked at the Final 4 media session. Can you talk about the UCLA head coaching opening, which you have been rumored to be a front-runner for? Speraw's response. "I've not given it an ounce of thought in three weeks. People have been asking me this for 10 years. I've been answering it for 10 year and will have to do it for a couple more months. But I'm just focusing on these two matches." If you really believe that Speraw has not given the UCLA job "an ounce of thought in 3 weeks" (I didn't know thought could be measured in ounces), then I have some ocean-front property in Kansas I would like to sell you. |
|
|
|
Post by notsocal2 on May 3, 2012 22:01:12 GMT -5
John Speraw was asked at the Final 4 media session. Can you talk about the UCLA head coaching opening, which you have been rumored to be a front-runner for? Speraw's response. "I've not given it an ounce of thought in three weeks. People have been asking me this for 10 years. I've been answering it for 10 year and will have to do it for a couple more months. But I'm just focusing on these two matches." If you really believe that Speraw has not given the UCLA job "an ounce of thought in 3 weeks" (I didn't know thought could be measured in ounces), then I have some ocean-front property in Kansas I would like to sell you. +1 --- but its kind of the right thing to say its nice to have options like this. this guy is a cool customer |
|
|
|
Post by cheeseburger on May 3, 2012 22:38:30 GMT -5
maybe he's thought about it in the last three weeks like "we sure do win a lot here at uci, maybe the grass isn't greener on the other side". in any case, speraw's too honorable a dude to not show uci and his boys full respect right now by at least saying he's all in on their playoff run - publically, the uci/ucla/usa men conundrum can play itself out after saturday
|
|
|
|
Post by Not Me on May 3, 2012 22:38:45 GMT -5
Speraw is a professional and he knows that the only thing that matters now is UCI in the NCAA's. Why would he think about or care about the UCLA job now?
It's his if he wants it, and they will wait a couple of weeks to approach him. UCLA isn't going to bother him now.
BTW, it's a 0% chance he takes the job.
At this point, UCI is a better supported program. They might pay him a bit more at UCLA, but overall, UCI has done everything for him and the program.
The only place he might leave is
For the US national team.
And of he does that, I gotta think that he needs to be committed for 8 years. That program has to reload, and that is goimg to take more than 4 years.
|
|
