A couple of coach Fry questions

[cmhawks99]

Not 2 or 3 on the regular

When Hayden first got here back in 79 they played about 4 straight years of all big conference type competition. After that he started feathering in a lot of Drakes, Kent Sts & Northern Illinois, etc…There is some merit to your premise. However we still play nine conference teams and we also play a greatly improved Iowa State every year not to mention college football as a whole is exceedingly tougher now even the mid major programs have very good talent at some positions… So it’s not in anyway shape or form a fair trade off.

 

[Pawkhawk1]

Not 2 or 3 on the regular

I'm pretty sure they did.

 

[rchawk]

I think Hayden is held in such high regard by older Iowa fans because of where he brought us from. The last winning season was 1961, four coaches coaches came and left (fired) in the interim. Many of us thought we would continue in the dumps and be another Indiana.

Then Hayden came, full of drive. Took Iowa to the Rose Bowl in the third season of his five-year contract. He recruited well (Del Miller deserves some credit there) and Iowa football was not a one-hit wonder.

If Bump had not hired Hayden Fry Iowa could very easily have a similar history to Indiana over the last 42 years. I think that's why us old-timers like Coach Fry so much.

 

[cmhawks99]

So leave out ISU as they're P5, fair enough. (though you must admit KFz lost to them far too many times when he shouldn't have) The rest are still teams you should never lose to at home.

Champion or not, you said it best w regard to NDSU. "FCS". Period.

WMU was 5-7 in 2007

NIU was good in 2013. But MAC is still MAC, especially when they have to come into your house.

CMU 2012 played in the Little Caesar's bowl...but they were a whopping 7-6 and 4-4 in the MAC (a shining example of too many bowls). Not exacly 2017 Central Florida.

Again, both good coaches. Hayden was imperfect too. But KFz laid a lot more eggs.

I honestly don’t see how you can objectively say KF has laid more eggs. We have been rolled out of the building many times against top end Big Ten competition during Haydens tenure and I think it’s pretty rich to say a 2-9 or 3-8 Big Ten team is better than a 7-5 Mac team.

We both agree we’ve had some real bullshit losses to Iowa State. Bad teams, 2-10 & 3-9 type teams. I think twice that happened but if you’d like I’ll start pouring through the record books and show you a lot of really good teams that lost to similar competition, in a rivalry game in particular.

Did you know Oklahoma has lost like 10 or 11 times in the last 10 years to teams they’ve been favored over by double digits,l?! Multiple times favored by 20 to 30 points!

Remember when that was a thing for the negative folks on KF… A good coach should never lose to a team that they’re favored by double digits over… Well Bobby Stoops & Lincoln Riley made a career of it.

They did it twice in one year.. I’m not sure if it was the end of Bobby’s term or the start of Lincolns.

The cold hard reality is fans…like all people, of course that makes sense. Look at things through their own prism & they rarely, rarely look at the totality of the landscape. If they did they’d be less critical.

 

[Pawkhawk1]

Was it Hayden that went hard after Jim Eckert from the CR Gazette?
For the record, I thought he deserved it, and never liked the dude after that

 

[jberesford]

Fry had the qb quick kick punt on 3rd down - to catch them off guard - a few times.

Those were in the early Fry days and Im not old enough to remember any of those but I recall hearing my dad talk about it. I've seen it a few random times by other teams in my life though. It takes a QB with a leg but if you're a team like Iowa that will just waste a down on 3rd and long for a 4 yard gain, why not rocket a punt down the field with no one to catch it.

 

[SLarew]

Was it Hayden that went hard after Jim Eckert from the CR Gazette?
For the record, I thought he deserved it, and never liked the dude after that

Don’t remember him going after Ecker. I do recall Ron Maly being a target

 

[blhawk]

Hayden Fry was a stud and there is no Iowa as we currently know it without him:l. With that said the old “scratch where it itches mentality“ is way over done… Go back and look at how many times Iowa scored 14 points or under during his career…It will open your eyes a little bit.

Not to mention we are remarkably better versus high end teams than we ever were under Hayden!

Limiting scholarships was huge for teams like Iowa, Kirk would not have fared as well in the true blue blood era with way less bowl options like in Haydens day.

 

[cmhawks99]

I think Hayden is held in such high regard by older Iowa fans because of where he brought us from. The last winning season was 1961, four coaches coaches came and left (fired) in the interim. Many of us thought we would continue in the dumps and be another Indiana.

Then Hayden came, full of drive. Took Iowa to the Rose Bowl in the third season of his five-year contract. He recruited well (Del Miller deserves some credit there) and Iowa football was not a one-hit wonder.

If Bump had not hired Hayden Fry Iowa could very easily have a similar history to Indiana over the last 42 years. I think that's why us old-timers like Coach Fry so much.

And on that topic, he deserves to be revered and your premise I totally agree with… No chance we’re where we are right now without Hayden.

I just grow a little irritable of the people that lambaste our current coach like the previous one was somehow vastly superior.

Now to be fair at some point in time 10-12 years ago I started looking back through old schedules. Not just Iowa but lots of teams. So I readily admit I’m probably a little bit more versed on the subject than most. But all the same the memories came flooding back to me, here’s a couple refreshers.

I think we all agree Hayden‘s first 8 to 10 years were his most dominant and in 1982 we were a pretty damn good 8-4 but we somehow managed to lose to 4–6–1 Iowa State 7 to 19 and 3–8 Purdue 7-16.

In 83 we had a terrific team. We were 9-3 and yet somehow went to Illinois and looked completely and woefully unprepared and got our doors blown off 0 to 33… Now that was a hell of an Illinois (10-2) team but honestly what do you think the fan fall out would be on the board today if that happened?

In 1984, 8–4 Iowa lost 17 to 23 to 4 - 7 Minnesota, the week before we lost 16-17 to 6-6 MSU… that as I said before was that infamous holiday bowl team that laid 55 on Texas. But they scored 33 points total against 2 average to poor big 10 teams.

In 86 again a very good 9–3 Iowa team lost 16 to 20 to 4 & 7 Illinois.

Then in 1987 we were 10-3 with no bad losses, but we did look awful vs an 8-4 Michigan, 10 to 37…

All outcomes that would draw huge angst and hostility from the message board haters today!

Thats my point!

 

[cmhawks99]

Limiting scholarships was huge for teams like Iowa, Kirk would not have fared as well in the true blue blood era with way less bowl options like in Haydens day.

Meh…Do you know when and how they reduced the scholarships… By 1978 it was down to 95 and in 92 they changed it to 85 so it definitely didn’t help Hayden in his career.

I actually propose the opposite. They spread the talent out enough it is part of the reason it’s just that much harder to win games against the nobodies now than it was back then.

The scholarship limitation is the only reason the lower division P5 schools & the mid majors have become competitive.

As far as bowl games, go yeah sure. There are more bowl games now but that also started changing in the middle Hayden's term.

 

[nbanflfactory]

When Hayden first got here back in 79 they played about 4 straight years of all big conference type competition. After that he started feathering in a lot of Drakes, Kent Sts & Northern Illinois, etc…There is some merit to your premise. However we still play nine conference teams and we also play a greatly improved Iowa State every year not to mention college football as a whole is exceedingly tougher now even the mid major programs have very good talent at some positions… So it’s not in anyway shape or form a fair trade off.

Doesn't seem to be the norm in the 90s. In the 70s could be I dunno

 

[nbanflfactory]

I'm pretty sure they did.

Not so much in the 90s,maybe earlier?

 

[cmhawks99]

No, I remember Hayden quite well...and accurately. He had his flaws too and yes social media would have gone after him today (who doesn't get that treatment?). Some reporters did, just like today with KFz.

KFz's record against Top 25 teams is better. His record against lesser teams he should have beaten is worse. So...ya know. It tends to balance out.

That said Hayden still beats KFz 7 out of 10 head-to-head with similar talent.

Why couldn’t he beat Michigan and Ohio St more often. Or the Oregons or Miamis or Colorados, etc….

See I just don’t get this?! You’ve readily told me KF is better against the top-notch teams and I think we both must agree Hayden was not and yet somehow the coach that has done better against better teams is going to lose seven times out of 10 to the coach who didn’t?

Help me out on that…..

I can only assume you must figure Hayden is going to bring a pretty average team (10 times) with average to losing records into the stadium and Kirk is going to somehow find a way to piss it away… That’s the only way this makes any sense to me.

and hell if that’s your premise maybe you’d be right. But if they both came in, in the top 15. I put my money on Kirk every single time!

 

[flaiawis]

If Hayden knew he had a better team than you, he was somewhat conservative in his game plan. He also wasn't afraid to blow people out and continue to run the offense to the gun.
Flipside. When he knew he was overmatched, he would pull out the "exotics". The Rose Bowl versus Washington comes to mind.
In 1990 we hosted Ohio St. Iowa had the ball in our own territory at the 20, up 5, with just less than 2:00 left. Ohio St had all of it's timeouts. Hayden played the percentages and ran 3 plays into the line, making Ohio St use it's timeouts. Punted the ball just past midfield and lost on a skinny post in front of Merton Hanks as time expired. 27-26 OSU. He took some heat postgame for that offensive approach. In todays social media world, it would have been uglier.
Hayden was a great coach and someone Iowa desperately needed at the time. He really wasn't that much different, in philosophy, to other successful coaches. He just went about it differently.

 

[pistachio1999]

May have been Arizona 82. Long started his first game against Nebraska and got beaten up pretty badly. I think (not certain) Grogan played the next week against ISU and the offense wasn't any better. I can imagine Hayden was looking for one of them to show he was the guy. Hawks won that night and the Chuck Long legend began.

Chuckie tossed chunder on Fry’s white pants in that Nebraska game. Was so nervous.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

And on that topic, he deserves to be revered and your premise I totally agree with… No chance we’re where we are right now without Hayden.

I just grow a little irritable of the people that lambaste our current coach like the previous one was somehow vastly superior.

Now to be fair at some point in time 10-12 years ago I started looking back through old schedules. Not just Iowa but lots of teams. So I readily admit I’m probably a little bit more versed on the subject than most. But all the same the memories came flooding back to me, here’s a couple refreshers.

I think we all agree Hayden‘s first 8 to 10 years were his most dominant and in 1982 we were a pretty damn good 8-4 but we somehow managed to lose to 4–6–1 Iowa State 7 to 19 and 3–8 Purdue 7-16.

In 83 we had a terrific team. We were 9-3 and yet somehow went to Illinois and looked completely and woefully unprepared and got our doors blown off 0 to 33… Now that was a hell of an Illinois (10-2) team but honestly what do you think the fan fall out would be on the board today if that happened?

In 1984, 8–4 Iowa lost 17 to 23 to 4 - 7 Minnesota, the week before we lost 16-17 to 6-6 MSU… that as I said before was that infamous holiday bowl team that laid 55 on Texas. But they scored 33 points total against 2 average to poor big 10 teams.

In 86 again a very good 9–3 Iowa team lost 16 to 20 to 4 & 7 Illinois.

Then in 1987 we were 10-3 with no bad losses, but we did look awful vs an 8-4 Michigan, 10 to 37…

All outcomes that would draw huge angst and hostility from the message board haters today!

Thats my point!

Thank you for this great post.

HF was a wonderful guy, and great coach and the savior of Iowa Football. But for some reason people think that was way better than KF. I don't think that's true at all,

It seems we can no longer honor someone without diminishing someone else.

 

[cmhawks99]

If Hayden knew he had a better team than you, he was somewhat conservative in his game plan. He also wasn't afraid to blow people out and continue to run the offense to the gun.
Flipside. When he knew he was overmatched, he would pull out the "exotics". The Rose Bowl versus Washington comes to mind.
In 1990 we hosted Ohio St. Iowa had the ball in our own territory at the 20, up 5, with just less than 2:00 left. Ohio St had all of it's timeouts. Hayden played the percentages and ran 3 plays into the line, making Ohio St use it's timeouts. Punted the ball just past midfield and lost on a skinny post in front of Merton Hanks as time expired. 27-26 OSU. He took some heat postgame for that offensive approach. In todays social media world, it would have been uglier.
Hayden was a great coach and someone Iowa desperately needed at the time. He really wasn't that much different, in philosophy, to other successful coaches. He just went about it differently.

That is a very reasonable sound perspective… In totality he really wasn’t much different he still wanted to play great defense and he still wanted to run the ball and control the time of possession…

 

[cmhawks99]

Thank you for this great post.

HF was a wonderful guy, and great coach and the savior of Iowa Football. But for some reason people think that was way better than KF. I don't think that's true at all,

It seems we can no longer honor someone without diminishing someone else.

Thank you and much appreciated and in the spirit of what you said. I feel guilty pointing out Hayden‘s flaws or supposed failures but my goodness gracious the way they treat Kirk Ferentz some of these guys it’s like they’ve never watched any other coach of any other team ever!?

 

[nbanflfactory]

Thank you for this great post.

HF was a wonderful guy, and great coach and the savior of Iowa Football. But for some reason people think that was way better than KF. I don't think that's true at all,

It seems we can no longer honor someone without diminishing someone else.

If you were around for both, it could very well be nostalgia, unless you're really old

Same could be said for td vs Fmac?

 

[cmhawks99]

If you were around for both, it could very well be nostalgia, unless you're really old

Same could be said for td vs Fmac?

I have to tell you I don’t really take message boards that seriously or personally. I guess is what I really mean. But you are so obnoxious I really hate to agree with you on anything…

But that is an extremely valid point as far as Tom Davis & Fran McCaffrey go…

Although I would say I believe overall McCaffrey is still a better recruiter & a better offensive coach in totality. But both of their weaknesses were half court defense and seemingly always will be .

I was talking to my son or I should say one of my sons last night about how remarkably incredible it is to have a basketball team that routinely finishes in the top 40 in offensive efficiency, often times in the top 10 & yet their defense almost always finishes outside the top 100 and our football team has played top shelf defense for the most part of 20+ years & the NFL is littered with our defensive players. Yet our offense does indeed struggle mightily, some years way worse than others…

There are times I actually enjoy our offense but it is very weird to see the dichotomy of the two programs.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

If you were around for both, it could very well be nostalgia, unless you're really old

Same could be said for td vs Fmac?

Indeed, nostalgia is a powerful force that can be used for good! I'm as big of an HF fan as there is.

Yes, I'm old, but I think I have all my mental faculties!

TD and Fmac is a somewhat similar discussion. Fans want to think Bowlsby screwed up by letting Davis go, but it was the fans and the boosters that had enough of TD's "mediocrity" and wanted him gone. Of course, Bowlsby could have handled it better.

The difference is social media IMO. Social media has survived on criticism and hyperbole. Davis would have been torched on HR had it been there in the day, It would have been a little gentler about HF I imagine, but the 90's would not have been kind to him here on HR.

 

[JupiterHawk]

There is absolutely no reason not to hold Hayden in such high regard. There is also no reason to knock the current guy when remembering Hayden.

 

[kceasthawk]

Hayden Fry was a stud and there is no Iowa as we currently know it without him:l. With that said the old “scratch where it itches mentality“ is way over done… Go back and look at how many times Iowa scored 14 points or under during his career…It will open your eyes a little bit.

Not to mention we are remarkably better versus high end teams than we ever were under Hayden!

THis. Not to mention Iowa had 4 TIES in one season. Kind of hard to believe for a guy that "played to win" don't you think? As I've said revisionist history is a great thing. It will be interesting if many of us are around in 20 years to see what tall tales are told of KF's Hawkeyes....

 

[nbanflfactory]

Indeed, nostalgia is a powerful force that can be used for good! I'm as big of an HF fan as there is.

Yes, I'm old, but I think I have all my mental faculties!

TD and Fmac is a somewhat similar discussion. Fans want to think Bowlsby screwed up by letting Davis go, but it was the fans and the boosters that had enough of TD's "mediocrity" and wanted him gone. Of course, Bowlsby could have handled it better.

The difference is social media IMO. Social media has survived on criticism and hyperbole. Davis would have been torched on HR had it been there in the day, It would have been a little gentler about HF I imagine, but the 90's would not have been kind to him here on HR.

Social media doesn't help that's for sure...but even ole kf has been forced to allow it

Another thing could be salary. I wouldn't be surprised if kf makes more next year than hf did in his entire career. This obviously is similar for any coaches in these eras(business is booming,), but some still probably expect to see better results when you're paid like 50x as much

 

[kceasthawk]

Indeed, nostalgia is a powerful force that can be used for good! I'm as big of an HF fan as there is.

Yes, I'm old, but I think I have all my mental faculties!

TD and Fmac is a somewhat similar discussion. Fans want to think Bowlsby screwed up by letting Davis go, but it was the fans and the boosters that had enough of TD's "mediocrity" and wanted him gone. Of course, Bowlsby could have handled it better.

The difference is social media IMO. Social media has survived on criticism and hyperbole. Davis would have been torched on HR had it been there in the day, It would have been a little gentler about HF I imagine, but the 90's would not have been kind to him here on HR.

Exactly........

 

[kceasthawk]

Social media doesn't help that's for sure...but even ole kf has been forced to allow it

Another thing could be salary. I wouldn't be surprised if kf makes more next year than hf did in his entire career. This obviously is similar for any coaches in these eras(business is booming,), but some still probably expect to see better results when you're paid like 50x as much

Regardless of what people think, Salary should have little to do with it. Both Fry and KF were or are being paid commensurate with their standing and the current economic times we live in today. I bought my first house (in Davenport) in 1982, (Frys third season) for 42,000. Just bought a house here last year and paid 225,000. Bought my first car a few years before Fry got to Iowa. $3000 brand new. Bought a new truck three years ago and paid almost 60,000. Different time, different economy. People that don't understand that need an economy lesson...

 

[nbanflfactory]

Regardless of what people think, Salary should have little to do with it. Both Fry and KF were or are being paid commensurate with their standing and the current economic times we live in today. I bought my first house (in Davenport) in 1982, (Frys third season) for 42,000. Just bought a house here last year and paid 225,000. Bought my first car a few years before Fry got to Iowa. $3000 brand new. Bought a new truck three years ago and paid almost 60,000. Different time, different economy. People that don't understand that need an economy lesson...

Inflation doesn't come anywhere near the difference in their salaries just FYI.

Tbh I'm not sure kf deserves a raise to 7m the way the season ended....jmo

 

[cmhawks99]

THis. Not to mention Iowa had 4 TIES in one season. Kind of hard to believe for a guy that "played to win" don't you think? As I've said revisionist history is a great thing. It will be interesting if many of us are around in 20 years to see what tall tales are told of KF's Hawkeyes....

Wow great perspective there!! Now to be fair you and I have always tracked pretty close over the years, even with my sabbaticals, but I have to tell you I have never even thought about that 4-ties perspective?!

Doesn’t exactly equate to “riverboat gambler“ does it! I’m not kidding you…I’ve never ever in my life thought about that particular piece of insight and I fancy myself a deep thinker… LOL

Just goes to show you I don’t know shit about anything… And yes I’m expecting this to get a lot of likes from my critics…LOL!

Hopefully everyone because it’s true !!

 

[wneff]

Wow great perspective there!! Now to be fair you and I have always tracked pretty close over the years, even with my sabbaticals, but I have to tell you I have never even thought about that 4-ties perspective?!

Doesn’t exactly equate to “riverboat gambler“ does it! I’m not kidding you…I’ve never ever in my life thought about that particular piece of insight and I fancy myself a deep thinker… LOL

Just goes to show you I don’t know shit about anything… And yes I’m expecting this to get a lot of likes from my critics…LOL!

Hopefully everyone because it’s true !!

No. They didn’t have a four tie-season. It’s not true{

 

[cmhawks99]

No. They didn’t have a four tie-season. It’s not true{

You are of course right 6– 4–3. What A bizarre year now that I look back further…

Played seven teams that year with a losing record and somehow finished 6 - 4- 3. Hard to believe?!

 

[Orion52245]

Iowa has been fortunate that both worked out real well and I do not have a favorite, but please be fair to those that may hold HF in too high of a regard according to your eyes...Keep in mind that when HF came on campus, Iowa had not had a winning season in 19 years. 3 years later we were in the Rose Bowl. That is common knowledge. What is not often remembered (or known) is that for any football team in the Big Ten, it was Rose Bowl or nothing until 1976. ANY bowl game, for ANY big ten team other than OSU or Michigan, was off the charts rare. HF's arrival was an abrupt shift that is hard to fathom today.

Side note: I don't recall a quick kick on 3rd down being all that exotic back in the day. I could be wrong. HF did not, however, punt on first down.. That was a Steve Martin move (too obscure, I know).

Part of my point is that it can be fun, and I will never stop entering such discussions, but it is impossible to compare the different worlds. One recent example: I was just watching a 1977 replay of ISU-Iowa game and the announcers were wondering out loud if ISU was going to risk a pass near own 30 on 3rd and 5. That also may have been a function of the announcers, but it was a frequent mindset of the day. (They did try and it failed.)

 

[cmhawks99]

Iowa has been fortunate that both worked out real well and I do not have a favorite, but please be fair to those that may hold HF in too high of a regard according to your eyes...Keep in mind that when HF came on campus, Iowa had not had a winning season in 19 years. 3 years later we were in the Rose Bowl. That is common knowledge. What is not often remembered (or known) is that for any football team in the Big Ten, it was Rose Bowl or nothing until 1976. ANY bowl game, for ANY big ten team other than OSU or Michigan, was off the charts rare. HF's arrival was an abrupt shift that is hard to fathom today.

Side note: I don't recall a quick kick on 3rd down being all that exotic back in the day. I could be wrong. HF did not, however, punt on first down.. That was a Steve Martin move (too obscure, I know).

Part of my point is that it can be fun, and I will never stop entering such discussions, but it is impossible to compare the different worlds. One recent example: I was just watching a 1977 replay of ISU-Iowa game and the announcers were wondering out loud if ISU was going to risk a pass near own 30 on 3rd and 5. That also may have been a function of the announcers, but it was a frequent mindset of the day. (They did try and it failed.)

Another excellent example of a well rounded post… Not even sure I 100% agree, I’m certain I don’t 100% disagree… Lol and All-bullshit aside I respect it 100%!?

 

[kceasthawk]

Inflation doesn't come anywhere near the difference in their salaries just FYI.

Tbh I'm not sure kf deserves a raise to 7m the way the season ended....jmo

Inflation may not totally, but they were both paid commensurate with the current market for D1 coaches. As for KF's raise, again its market driven. I'm sure that only brought him up to just above the medium for the BIG. Both Franklin and Tucker got huge raises up to the 9 mil or so area. Franklin has done no more in his tenure at PSU then KF, and as for Tucker he's had one shit year, and one good year that ended up basically the same as Iowa after he tanked every game after signing his new deal. Honestly now, you think that KF the dean of BIG coaches should have stayed at 4.5 mil, or basically HALF of what Tucker, Franklin, and Harbough are making? I mean its all bat shit CRAZY, but I don't see how you can pay the guy with his tenure half what a bunch of the other coaches are making....

 

[kceasthawk]

No. They didn’t have a four tie-season. It’s not true{

Oh jees, you got me, my bad. I thought they were 6-3-4 that season, but they were 6-4-3. The point stands. Coach Fry was not nearly the GAMBLER that many want to paint him as. Just like people act like he scored at will on the league teams. I remember alot of games we didn't get to 20 point under Hayden as well. I think that people confuse the fact that he used to piss pound the crappy teams so bad and run up the score on them, that it made his average points per game look much better then it was. You have to also remember how bad, ISU, NW, Indiana, Minnesota, and Wisconsin were back then also....

 

[nbanflfactory]

Inflation may not totally, but they were both paid commensurate with the current market for D1 coaches. As for KF's raise, again its market driven. I'm sure that only brought him up to just above the medium for the BIG. Both Franklin and Tucker got huge raises up to the 9 mil or so area. Franklin has done no more in his tenure at PSU then KF, and as for Tucker he's had one shit year, and one good year that ended up basically the same as Iowa after he tanked every game after signing his new deal. Honestly now, you think that KF the dean of BIG coaches should have stayed at 4.5 mil, or basically HALF of what Tucker, Franklin, and Harbough are making? I mean its all bat shit CRAZY, but I don't see how you can pay the guy with his tenure half what a bunch of the other coaches are making....

That's true if those numbers are correct.
Coaches pay just continues to get more crazy. Really weird when you can have your donors pay players now...

 

[cmhawks99]

That's true if those numbers are correct.
Coaches pay just continues to get more crazy. Really weird when you can have your donors pay players now...

I am not an anti-rich guy…but I concur 100%!! Even the salaries for executives is way way out of hand. The general partner in control of Edward Jones is a woman and she got a $14 million raise this year?!?

 

[kceasthawk]

I am not an anti-rich guy…but I concur 100%!! Even the salaries for executives is way way out of hand. The general partner in control of Edward Jones is a woman and she got a $14 million raise this year?!?

TAX her, TAX her......

 

[cmhawks99]

TAX her, TAX her......

LOL

 

[grayhair81]

Inflation may not totally, but they were both paid commensurate with the current market for D1 coaches. As for KF's raise, again its market driven. I'm sure that only brought him up to just above the medium for the BIG. Both Franklin and Tucker got huge raises up to the 9 mil or so area. Franklin has done no more in his tenure at PSU then KF, and as for Tucker he's had one shit year, and one good year that ended up basically the same as Iowa after he tanked every game after signing his new deal. Honestly now, you think that KF the dean of BIG coaches should have stayed at 4.5 mil, or basically HALF of what Tucker, Franklin, and Harbough are making? I mean its all bat shit CRAZY, but I don't see how you can pay the guy with his tenure half what a bunch of the other coaches are making....

If you didn't bump him 55%, what would happen? Was he going to bolt for the NFL? Which blueblood program was going to steal him away? Bump him 10% and spend the extra 2 mil on an OC and QB coach. Put Brian back as OL coach.

 

[kceasthawk]

If you didn't bump him 55%, what would happen? Was he going to bolt for the NFL? Which blueblood program was going to steal him away? Bump him 10% and spend the extra 2 mil on an OC and QB coach. Put Brian back as OL coach.

I get your point, BUT its just the way things are. For years lots of people complained that KF was way overpaid vs his peers in the league. Before his last bump many of his peers were making twice what he was, and none of them have conference championships etc either. As for his assistants same deal. Many bitch that his assistants are overpaid now, and you want to give them big raises. Okay, thats not it you want them gone and someone else in their place. But you see that has nothing to do with money. Those guys are in place because their the people that KF wants in those positions which is the way it is at every school. As long as he's the HC, he's going to decide who is working for him. Those are two seperate issues.