PDA

View Full Version : Coach K's salary



dball
06-24-2009, 04:34 PM
Fox Sports has a story up on Coach K's "massive" salary ($3.6 M) calling him by far Duke's highest paid employee. Unfortunately, site keeps crashing my browser so am unable to link or even read details.

Any one else able to provide link?

dball
06-24-2009, 04:36 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/9725350/At-$3.6M,-Coach-K-by-far-Duke's-richest-employee

heyman25
06-24-2009, 04:37 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/9725350/At-$3.6M,-Coach-K-by-far-Duke's-richest-employee

Yawn,so what. He generates way more revenue than the cost of running Duke basketball.

VaDukie
06-24-2009, 04:40 PM
He'll be worth every dollar if he can make it work next year.

Duke of Nashville
06-24-2009, 04:42 PM
Worth every penny if you ask me.

CameronBornAndBred
06-24-2009, 05:26 PM
The original story is reported in the Herald-Sun (http://heraldsun.southernheadlines.com/durham/4-1174320.cfm). What I'm wondering is where is Cutcliffe's salary? He isn't mentioned, but I sure hope he's getting paid well. I thought Duke gave him a sizeable package of over 1mil a year, but from the report I don't see how that can be. If he does turn the program around, others will come knocking. He seems to have us off on the right track, and while it's still early in his time at Duke, he has invigorated the football atmosphere in a way that has been absent for a long time.
I have no qualms with K's salary. The return Duke is getting on that investment is quite huge.

Bluedog
06-24-2009, 05:31 PM
The original story is reported in the Herald-Sun (http://heraldsun.southernheadlines.com/durham/4-1174320.cfm). What I'm wondering is where is Cutcliffe's salary? He isn't mentioned, but I sure hope he's getting paid well. I thought Duke gave him a sizeable package of over 1mil a year, but from the report I don't see how that can be. If he does turn the program around, others will come knocking. He seems to have us off on the right track, and while it's still early in his time at Duke, he has invigorated the football atmosphere in a way that has been absent for a long time.
I have no qualms with K's salary. The return Duke is getting on that investment is quite huge.

According to ESPN, Cutcliffe's contract was nearly $1.5 million/year. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3155086 Perhaps it's just how they cut off the dates of the salary packages?

geraldsneighbor
06-24-2009, 05:55 PM
The report was only taking who was on payroll through last June. So, Cutcliffe I assume wasn't accounted for since he was just arriving in Durham.

NYC Duke Fan
06-25-2009, 06:04 AM
Is it only me but isn't there something wrong when such a prestigeous academic university which Duke is, pays its basketball coach more than its university President ?

Coach K deserves every penny that he gets , but make the university President the highest paid employee. After all, doesn't Duke stand for academic excellence ?

bjornolf
06-25-2009, 06:50 AM
I wonder what Duke's athletic budget is. I was listening to the radio yesterday, and they said the University of Florida's athletic budget for next year was going to be $89M. That's what they're going to SPEND on the athletic program next year. That's just insane to me! Wonder how much they MAKE?

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/31496690/ns/sports-college_football/

JBDuke
06-25-2009, 08:08 AM
Is it only me but isn't there something wrong when such a prestigeous academic university which Duke is, pays its basketball coach more than its university President ?

Coach K deserves every penny that he gets , but make the university President the highest paid employee. After all, doesn't Duke stand for academic excellence ?

No, I don't think there's anything wrong with Coach K outearning Brodhead. For example, I know a couple of situations in companies where high-performing salesmen outearned the president of the company. They earned that high pay by bringing in business to the company. In a similar manner, Coach K brings so much to Duke that he's worth being the highest-paid employee. His program alone brings in enormous revenues. K himself isn't just the basketball coach, either - he's really the face of the University. His title of "Special Assistant to the President" at Duke and his winning the Duke Medal of Honor are, in part, a recognition of that. He's on the faculty at Fuqua, and his numerous off-the-court efforts for things like Fuqua, Duke Children's Hospital, and the Emily K Center all bring enormous attention and revenues to aspects of the University that have nothing to do with basketball.

Given all that he has done and continues to do for the University, on and off the court, I think it's fair that he is its highest paid employee.

whereinthehellami
06-25-2009, 08:43 AM
No, I don't think there's anything wrong with Coach K outearning Brodhead. For example, I know a couple of situations in companies where high-performing salesmen outearned the president of the company. They earned that high pay by bringing in business to the company. In a similar manner, Coach K brings so much to Duke that he's worth being the highest-paid employee. His program alone brings in enormous revenues. K himself isn't just the basketball coach, either - he's really the face of the University. His title of "Special Assistant to the President" at Duke and his winning the Duke Medal of Honor are, in part, a recognition of that. He's on the faculty at Fuqua, and his numerous off-the-court efforts for things like Fuqua, Duke Children's Hospital, and the Emily K Center all bring enormous attention and revenues to aspects of the University that have nothing to do with basketball.

Given all that he has done and continues to do for the University, on and off the court, I think it's fair that he is its highest paid employee.

I agree with this line of thought but it does add fuel to the fire that Duke is not in the academic league of an ivy. Paying a coach more than a president wouldn't fly in the Ivys.

PumpkinFunk
06-25-2009, 09:14 AM
I thought that the Chancellor of the Medical System/Med School was the highest paid employee, but perhaps he has the highest-paying contract, and Coach K gets the most because of bonuses or whatever?

gvtucker
06-25-2009, 09:17 AM
I agree with this line of thought but it does add fuel to the fire that Duke is not in the academic league of an ivy. Paying a coach more than a president wouldn't fly in the Ivys.

You're looking at it backwards. It isn't that Duke isn't in an academic league with the Ivy League schools, it is that the Ivy League schools aren't in the athletic league with Duke.

JBDuke
06-25-2009, 09:17 AM
I agree with this line of thought but it does add fuel to the fire that Duke is not in the academic league of an ivy. Paying a coach more than a president wouldn't fly in the Ivys.

But why is that? Who's to say that a university can't compete at the highest levels in both academics AND athletics simultaneously? Singlemindedness of purpose, especially in an institution, does not automatically equal superior performance.

I contend that a school can be among the academic elite while also competing for national championships.

dukeENG2003
06-25-2009, 09:57 AM
I agree with this line of thought but it does add fuel to the fire that Duke is not in the academic league of an ivy. Paying a coach more than a president wouldn't fly in the Ivys.

How much you get paid is based on a couple things:

1. Value contributed to the university. I won't argue that Brodhead and K both contribute significant value to the university. One might think based on this alone they should be paid comparable amounts, but salary is also based on. .

2. What the market pays those in a similar position. Coach Cal earns 4 million, Billy Donovan 3.5 millinon, Bill Self 3 millon. In this context, his salary seems reasonable. Lastly, Salary depends on. . .

3. How hard you are to replace. How many 800+ win coaches are there on the market who we could get to replace K?

His salary is just fine.

Shammrog
06-25-2009, 09:59 AM
Is it only me but isn't there something wrong when such a prestigeous academic university which Duke is, pays its basketball coach more than its university President ?

Coach K deserves every penny that he gets , but make the university President the highest paid employee. After all, doesn't Duke stand for academic excellence ?

No. Prices are set by the marketplace. And the supply/demand/revenue equation for top coaches at top programs carries a higher dollar figure than that for university presidents. It doesn't mean what they do is less important. It means that there is a higher dividing line in the supply/demand equation.

Bluedog
06-25-2009, 11:33 AM
Is it only me but isn't there something wrong when such a prestigeous academic university which Duke is, pays its basketball coach more than its university President ?

Coach K deserves every penny that he gets , but make the university President the highest paid employee. After all, doesn't Duke stand for academic excellence ?

Just echoing others....but...I could ask...

Isn't there something wrong with a world-leading country that pays its football coach of one of its publicly funded military academies more than the president? Yes, I'm talking about the US. Paul Johnson, the former football coach of Navy, was the highest paid federal employee in the country at around $1 million, while Obama makes around a relatively paltry $400,000.

As others have said, it's what the market dictates. Not to get into a political discussion, but I'd even be so audacious to argue that Obama contributes more to the value of this country than Johnson did. ;) In the case of K vs. Brodhead, I'd say clearly Coach K contributes more value, at least from a PR/reputation perspective. The marketplace determines that Coach K should clearly get paid more.


But why is that? Who's to say that a university can't compete at the highest levels in both academics AND athletics simultaneously? Singlemindedness of purpose, especially in an institution, does not automatically equal superior performance.

I contend that a school can be among the academic elite while also competing for national championships.

Agreed. Just Ivies don't give scholarships and aren't as flexible with admitting athletes (obviously, it's a lot harder to find great 1300+ SAT V+M football players). The combo of athletics and academics makes Duke (and Stanford) so unique - but it's a lot easier for us to accomplish it due to our scholarship situations and more flexible admissions. Truly two of a kind, in my mind. I guess you could stretch and include Notre Dame, Wake, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Michigan, and a few mores. But the list is short. Especially when only considering private institutions with undergraduate enrollments less than 10,000. It is very limited.

Kfanarmy
06-25-2009, 02:01 PM
You're looking at it backwards. It isn't that Duke isn't in an academic league with the Ivy League schools, it is that the Ivy League schools aren't in the athletic league with Duke.
how you proffer the statement would seem to highlight your perspective on whether its a school that has a great athletic program or a great athletic program that has a school...in other words what you think is most important. My personal view, and i'm a huge fan of NCAA athletics, is that all of the athletic programs in the country could go belly up and the colleges would still be important, but if all the colleges went belly up, we'd all probably be to busy scratching out a living to worry much about sports.

Kfanarmy
06-25-2009, 02:20 PM
Just echoing others....but...I could ask...

Isn't there something wrong with a world-leading country that pays its football coach of one of its publicly funded military academies more than the president? Yes, I'm talking about the US. Paul Johnson, the former football coach of Navy, was the highest paid federal employee in the country at around $1 million, while Obama makes around a relatively paltry $400,000.

As others have said, it's what the market dictates. Not to get into a political discussion, but I'd even be so audacious to argue that Obama contributes more to the value of this country than Johnson did. ;) In the case of K vs. Brodhead, I'd say clearly Coach K contributes more value, at least from a PR/reputation perspective. The marketplace determines that Coach K should clearly get paid more.

I would agree with anyone who says "there -is- something wrong with a world-leading country that pays its football coach of one of its publicly funded military academies more than the president," teachers, and others who have significant impact on the country's future. (I would suggest that the president makes far more on the side of his salary than either coaches, probably shouldn't but most presidents, representatives, senators etc do...amazing how much their total wealth grows while encumbent...and yes we could have a lively debate on whether or not President Obama contributes more to the value of this country than pick-any-coach.)

However given the current system, I have zero problem with Coach K's salary compared to other coaches in the country. If the highest paid coach in the country made $200k a year, Coach K should be right there. Not only is he a great coach and representative of the University, he is also a well educated individual who provides an example to potential students.

NYC Duke Fan
06-25-2009, 09:36 PM
Just echoing others....but...I could ask...

Isn't there something wrong with a world-leading country that pays its football coach of one of its publicly funded military academies more than the president? Yes, I'm talking about the US. Paul Johnson, the former football coach of Navy, was the highest paid federal employee in the country at around $1 million, while Obama makes around a relatively paltry $400,000.

As others have said, it's what the market dictates. Not to get into a political discussion, but I'd even be so audacious to argue that Obama contributes more to the value of this country than Johnson did. ;) In the case of K vs. Brodhead, I'd say clearly Coach K contributes more value, at least from a PR/reputation perspective. The marketplace determines that Coach K should clearly get paid more.



Agreed. Just Ivies don't give scholarships and aren't as flexible with admitting athletes (obviously, it's a lot harder to find great 1300+ SAT V+M football players). The combo of athletics and academics makes Duke (and Stanford) so unique - but it's a lot easier for us to accomplish it due to our scholarship situations and more flexible admissions. Truly two of a kind, in my mind. I guess you could stretch and include Notre Dame, Wake, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Michigan, and a few mores. But the list is short. Especially when only considering private institutions with undergraduate enrollments less than 10,000. It is very limited.


The President's salary is set by law, the Navy Football Coach's salary is not.

I am not saying that Coach K does not deserve what he is getting I just think that it is a bad example for a basketball coach to make more than the President of one of the top universities in the Country.

Would Duke still be a great academic University if it somehow decided to drop basketball or de-emphasize it. Nobody would like it but of course it would still be one of the top universitiies in the US.

Look, I am obviously in the minority here, but it is just my opinion.

This is probably a silly suggestion but I will try it anyway. Suppose in 2118 Barack Obama became the President of Duke University, would you think that Coach K , all things being equal, should be paid more than The Duke President?

If Brodhead was a more prominent figure would your opinion still be the same today ?

Indoor66
06-25-2009, 09:56 PM
The President's salary is set by law, the Navy Football Coach's salary is not.

I am not saying that Coach K does not deserve what he is getting I just think that it is a bad example for a basketball coach to make more than the President of one of the top universities in the Country.

Would Duke still be a great academic University if it somehow decided to drop basketball or de-emphasize it. Nobody would like it but of course it would still be one of the top universitiies in the US.

Look, I am obviously in the minority here, but it is just my opinion.

This is probably a silly suggestion but I will try it anyway. Suppose in 2118 Barack Obama became the President of Duke University, would you think that Coach K , all things being equal, should be paid more than The Duke President?

If Brodhead was a more prominent figure would your opinion still be the same today ?

I seriously doubt that, outside of Duke alum (and many of them probably could not), not 1 person in 200,000 could tell you the name of the Duke President. I further would guess that 1,000 out of 100,000 could tell you the name of the Duke basketball coach. K brings tremendous name recognition and prestige to Duke and much of that translates into donations and income for Duke.

Supply and demand, as earlier pointed out, dictate the market. Many, many people could quite successfully serve as the president of a university. Only a precious few could successfully serve as it's basketball coach and fewer of them could succeed at the highest levels. K is among the five or so at the highest level of his profession. An exceedingly rare commodity.

As to Obama in 2118 (?), he would have to, in the spirit of Babe Ruth, have a great year.

weezie
06-25-2009, 10:29 PM
Worth every penny if you ask me.

Plus one mil, if I'm asked.

godukecom
06-25-2009, 11:16 PM
When was the last time 9000+ came out to watch the President work?

K deserves every penny

COYS
06-26-2009, 02:09 AM
Just echoing others....but...I could ask...

Isn't there something wrong with a world-leading country that pays its football coach of one of its publicly funded military academies more than the president? Yes, I'm talking about the US. Paul Johnson, the former football coach of Navy, was the highest paid federal employee in the country at around $1 million, while Obama makes around a relatively paltry $400,000.

As others have said, it's what the market dictates. Not to get into a political discussion, but I'd even be so audacious to argue that Obama contributes more to the value of this country than Johnson did. ;) In the case of K vs. Brodhead, I'd say clearly Coach K contributes more value, at least from a PR/reputation perspective. The marketplace determines that Coach K should clearly get paid more.



This is probably geared toward the public policy board more, but I think that it's important that the government does NOT make the presidency so high paying that people would seek the office simply because its the highest paying job in the land. To attract the best coaches, you have to pay them. It's an important incentive. To attract the best people for the presidency, you don't necessarily have to pay them millions upon millions. In theory, a sense of public service should at least be part of the incentive to become president.

NYC Duke Fan
06-26-2009, 03:19 AM
I seriously doubt that, outside of Duke alum (and many of them probably could not), not 1 person in 200,000 could tell you the name of the Duke President. I further would guess that 1,000 out of 100,000 could tell you the name of the Duke basketball coach. K brings tremendous name recognition and prestige to Duke and much of that translates into donations and income for Duke.

Supply and demand, as earlier pointed out, dictate the market. Many, many people could quite successfully serve as the president of a university. Only a precious few could successfully serve as it's basketball coach and fewer of them could succeed at the highest levels. K is among the five or so at the highest level of his profession. An exceedingly rare commodity.

As to Obama in 2118 (?), he would have to, in the spirit of Babe Ruth, have a great year.

I think that you missed my point. I just think that it is wrong for a great university to pay its basketball coach more than its President. I guess that you would think that it would ok to pay Billy Donovan or Rick Pitino
or Jim Calhoun if they were to become the Harvard coach, more than the President of Harvard.

I am certain that the President of a great university raises more money than its basketball coach, and while I do not have the figures I am certain that Brodhead raises much more money for Duke than Coach K does. Most donors to Duke do not give because Coach K is the baskdetball coach, they would give the same amount if you or I were the coach.

As to Coach K being at the highest level of his profession, I couldn't agree more, but by that arguement I guess that if John Roberts decided that he wanted to become President of Duke he should be the highest paid because noone, not even Coach K , has reached that level. He has reached THE HIGHEST level of his profession.

Once again it is only my opinion and obviously in the sole minority here because noone has agreed with me.

Kfanarmy
06-26-2009, 02:53 PM
I think that you missed my point. I just think that it is wrong for a great university to pay its basketball coach more than its President.
Conceptually I've agreed with you. Realistically it won't happen until there are University message boards fervently demanding Number one rankings for all their individual Schools/departments and fans driving advertising dollars to watch academic competitions.

Duke of Nashville
06-26-2009, 03:04 PM
Plus one mil, if I'm asked.

I'll second that

DukeUsul
06-26-2009, 03:05 PM
I think that you missed my point. I just think that it is wrong for a great university to pay its basketball coach more than its President. I guess that you would think that it would ok to pay Billy Donovan or Rick Pitino
or Jim Calhoun if they were to become the Harvard coach, more than the President of Harvard.

I am certain that the President of a great university raises more money than its basketball coach, and while I do not have the figures I am certain that Brodhead raises much more money for Duke than Coach K does. Most donors to Duke do not give because Coach K is the baskdetball coach, they would give the same amount if you or I were the coach.

As to Coach K being at the highest level of his profession, I couldn't agree more, but by that arguement I guess that if John Roberts decided that he wanted to become President of Duke he should be the highest paid because noone, not even Coach K , has reached that level. He has reached THE HIGHEST level of his profession.

Once again it is only my opinion and obviously in the sole minority here because noone has agreed with me.

Since you think it's wrong, then which of these scenarios do you prefer:

1) Cut the basketball coach's salary to just below that of the president of the university's.

2) Raise the salary of the president of the university so that it is just higher than that of the basketball coach.

Any other choices?

In case 1, we lose out on being able to compete and hire a great coach. There goes the basketball program. In case 2, we are vastly overpaying for a university president.

Why should I support the board of trustees over-paying the president of the university by an order of magnitude? What benefit is that to the university other than that it is the "right" thing to do? Is it a responsible use of the university's funds? Why not use that money to fund scholarships or community programs?

ETA: And in response to your question, if we wanted Obama to be the president of the university in 2018, we'd probably HAVE to pay him a Coach K salary since that's what he'd demand on the market. We could have an intelligent debate on whether that would be of value to the university, but that's for another time and place.

Kfanarmy
06-26-2009, 03:20 PM
What benefit is that to the university other than that it is the "right" thing to do?

This quote is priceless...what a statement.

pfrduke
06-26-2009, 03:47 PM
I think that you missed my point. I just think that it is wrong for a great university to pay its basketball coach more than its President. I guess that you would think that it would ok to pay Billy Donovan or Rick Pitino
or Jim Calhoun if they were to become the Harvard coach, more than the President of Harvard.

I am certain that the President of a great university raises more money than its basketball coach, and while I do not have the figures I am certain that Brodhead raises much more money for Duke than Coach K does. Most donors to Duke do not give because Coach K is the baskdetball coach, they would give the same amount if you or I were the coach.

As to Coach K being at the highest level of his profession, I couldn't agree more, but by that arguement I guess that if John Roberts decided that he wanted to become President of Duke he should be the highest paid because noone, not even Coach K , has reached that level. He has reached THE HIGHEST level of his profession.

Once again it is only my opinion and obviously in the sole minority here because noone has agreed with me.

Can you identify any manner in which paying Coach K the salary he is paid lessens Duke's ability to be a world-class academic institution? Arguing the symbolism of it is kind of silly if there's no tangible harm.

NYC Duke Fan
06-27-2009, 04:13 AM
Since you think it's wrong, then which of these scenarios do you prefer:

1) Cut the basketball coach's salary to just below that of the president of the university's.

2) Raise the salary of the president of the university so that it is just higher than that of the basketball coach.

Any other choices?

In case 1, we lose out on being able to compete and hire a great coach. There goes the basketball program. In case 2, we are vastly overpaying for a university president.

Why should I support the board of trustees over-paying the president of the university by an order of magnitude? What benefit is that to the university other than that it is the "right" thing to do? Is it a responsible use of the university's funds? Why not use that money to fund scholarships or community programs?

ETA: And in response to your question, if we wanted Obama to be the president of the university in 2018, we'd probably HAVE to pay him a Coach K salary since that's what he'd demand on the market. We could have an intelligent debate on whether that would be of value to the university, but that's for another time and place.

Obviously, neither will be done.

My question then for you is this, take Coach K out of the equation, when any academic institution hires a big time basketball or football coach, do you support that said coach should be the highest paid employee of that university ? If you do, that is fine, I respect your opinion as I hope you do mine on this subject.

Do you actually think that if Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn et. hired a big time basketball coach that said coach would be paid more than their school's Prresident ?

As I have previously said, what if Duke de-emphasized basketball, ( a position I would vehemently be against ), would Duke still be a great university ? Absolutely...Great Universities, such as Duke, are based upon its academic standing, not by its athletic programs. If it were based on the latter, then The University of Florida would be hailed as one of the top 1 or 2 of the Great US Universities. I am not diminishing Gainsville, it probably is a fine institution but I think you get my point.

mgtr
06-27-2009, 04:31 AM
I am a total copout. I want Coach K to coach Duke = period He has already won gold medals for the USA. Why tamper with success?
Now it is time to win some national championsips!!!!!

CameronCrazy'11
06-27-2009, 04:54 AM
Also keep in mind that Brodhead costs the school quite a bit of money. I used to work for Duke's annual fund, and there are quite a few alumni who told me they will not give money until he's gone, because of how he handled the lacrosse case.

ice-9
06-27-2009, 06:32 AM
how you proffer the statement would seem to highlight your perspective on whether its a school that has a great athletic program or a great athletic program that has a school...in other words what you think is most important. My personal view, and i'm a huge fan of NCAA athletics, is that all of the athletic programs in the country could go belly up and the colleges would still be important, but if all the colleges went belly up, we'd all probably be to busy scratching out a living to worry much about sports.

This logic doesn't work. It's like saying we should pay more for water than oil, because without oil, we'd still be fine, but without water we'd be dead.

As many others have said, value is determined by supply and demand. (Externalities aside.)

ice-9
06-27-2009, 06:41 AM
As I have previously said, what if Duke de-emphasized basketball, ( a position I would vehemently be against ), would Duke still be a great university ? Absolutely...Great Universities, such as Duke, are based upon its academic standing, not by its athletic programs. If it were based on the latter, then The University of Florida would be hailed as one of the top 1 or 2 of the Great US Universities. I am not diminishing Gainsville, it probably is a fine institution but I think you get my point.


One major consequence of not having a high profile, revenue generating basketball program is that it will negatively impact funding of non-revenue sports. Other sports will have to be cut or more donations will have to be raised or tuition will be increased.

Having Coach K around is a win-win situation. Coach K is happy because he gets paid a market wage and the University is better off as a result of that success. If Duke is not better off paying Coach K $3.5 million a year or whatever the amount is, it simply would stop doing so.

Again, this is all supply and demand; what you think is "right" is irrelevant.

To me, "stars" like Britney Spears are ridiculously overcompensated, but guess what, the market doesn't care what I think.

NYC Duke Fan
06-27-2009, 08:30 AM
One major consequence of not having a high profile, revenue generating basketball program is that it will negatively impact funding of non-revenue sports. Other sports will have to be cut or more donations will have to be raised or tuition will be increased.

Having Coach K around is a win-win situation. Coach K is happy because he gets paid a market wage and the University is better off as a result of that success. If Duke is not better off paying Coach K $3.5 million a year or whatever the amount is, it simply would stop doing so.

Again, this is all supply and demand; what you think is "right" is irrelevant.

To me, "stars" like Britney Spears are ridiculously overcompensated, but guess what, the market doesn't care what I think.

Hey, this is only a sports forum, nothing more. I was only expressing an opinion on a subject. Noone is going to take any action based upon whether I think it is right or wrong. What I think is , " relavent", is only to a discussion nothing more.

I never, ever said that Coach K wasn't worth every penny that he is paid or of his tremendous value to the university. It was just my opinion, that conceptually, a great university such as Duke should not be paying its basketball coach more than its president.

Would your position be the same if right now it was reported that Coach Cutcliffe was the second highest paid employyee at Duke ?

Comparing Brittany Spears and the entertainment mileau to the academic world is in my mind a poor analogy.

Stray Gator
06-27-2009, 12:38 PM
Also keep in mind that Brodhead costs the school quite a bit of money. I used to work for Duke's annual fund, and there are quite a few alumni who told me they will not give money until he's gone, because of how he handled the lacrosse case.

Here we go again....

Just for the record, despite all the dire predictions by Brodhead-bashers that contributions to Duke and applications for admission to Duke would fall precipitously unless and until Brodhead was dismissed, the facts are that (a) total giving to Duke for the 2006-07 fiscal year increased by 11%, exceeding the prior year's record by nearly $40 million; (b) Duke Annual Fund contributions for the 2006-07 fiscal year surpassed the prior year's total for the 32nd consecutive year and exceeded its $26.5 million cash goal; and (c) applications for admission to Duke for the class entering in 2008 (the first year after the lax controversy) increased by more than 1000 and exceeded a total of 20,000 for the first time in Duke history.

I have no doubt that many of the vocal Brodhead-bashers told people soliciting contributions for the Annual Fund that they would make no donations and would discourage prospective students from applying to Duke so long as Brodhead remained President of the University. But your statement that "Brodhead costs the school quite a bit of money" rests on the assumption that the people making those threats were, in fact, already making substantial contributions to the Annual Fund, and that significant amounts would be lost if Brodhead remained in office. Either that assumption is unfounded, or other contributors more than compensated for those who threatened to "vote with their checkbooks."

I know that, despite the vicious and unrelenting denunciation of Brodhead by a vocal minority who insisted that he should be using his influence and that of the University to defend the accused lacrosse players, some alumni agreed with my view that Brodhead acted in the best interests of the entire University community by reserving judgment and not attempting to interfere with the criminal prosecution until the investigation produced sufficient evidence to support a conclusion about the truth or falsity of the charges. I like to think that the final results, as measured by the net increase in financial contributions and in applications for admission, confirm that reason prevailed.

NYC Duke Fan
06-27-2009, 01:03 PM
Here we go again....

Just for the record, despite all the dire predictions by Brodhead-bashers that contributions to Duke and applications for admission to Duke would fall precipitously unless and until Brodhead was dismissed, the facts are that (a) total giving to Duke for the 2006-07 fiscal year increased by 11%, exceeding the prior year's record by nearly $40 million; (b) Duke Annual Fund contributions for the 2006-07 fiscal year surpassed the prior year's total for the 32nd consecutive year and exceeded its $26.5 million cash goal; and (c) applications for admission to Duke for the class entering in 2008 (the first year after the lax controversy) increased by more than 1000 and exceeded a total of 20,000 for the first time in Duke history.

I have no doubt that many of the vocal Brodhead-bashers told people soliciting contributions for the Annual Fund that they would make no donations and would discourage prospective students from applying to Duke so long as Brodhead remained President of the University. But your statement that "Brodhead costs the school quite a bit of money" rests on the assumption that the people making those threats were, in fact, already making substantial contributions to the Annual Fund, and that significant amounts would be lost if Brodhead remained in office. Either that assumption is unfounded, or other contributors more than compensated for those who threatened to "vote with their checkbooks."

I know that, despite the vicious and unrelenting denunciation of Brodhead by a vocal minority who insisted that he should be using his influence and that of the University to defend the accused lacrosse players, some alumni agreed with my view that Brodhead acted in the best interests of the entire University community by reserving judgment and not attempting to interfere with the criminal prosecution until the investigation produced sufficient evidence to support a conclusion about the truth or falsity of the charges. I like to think that the final results, as measured by the net increase in financial contributions and in applications for admission, confirm that reason prevailed.

Well written and well thought out !!!

bill brill
06-27-2009, 02:09 PM
to answer a variety of comments on this thread. unless something miraculous happens in the next year, david cutcliffe will indeed be duke's no. 2 salaried employee, at well more than double brodhead's salary. this is no surprise. in recent years, coach's salaries have grown enormously. I'm certain that every football and basketball coach in the ACC makes much more than their presidents. I'm not even certain that some ivy coaches don't. on an interesting note, denver -- DENVER! -- just hired princeton's lacrosse coach at a salary that made him the highest paid in his profession. it's the market place. also, having been in this business for over 55 years, I am of the firm opinion that no coach, anywhere, ever, has done as much for his school than K. the fuqua seat, the leadership program each fall, K lab in duke sports medicine, scholarship support, beginning the legacy fund and the fund raising for the practice building, plus other things like the V foundation and the emily K center at his church. I've never heard of any coach as involved in so many things beyond his job. wonder what lou saban does for his $4M plus?

CameronCrazy'11
06-27-2009, 02:10 PM
Here we go again....

Just for the record, despite all the dire predictions by Brodhead-bashers that contributions to Duke and applications for admission to Duke would fall precipitously unless and until Brodhead was dismissed, the facts are that (a) total giving to Duke for the 2006-07 fiscal year increased by 11%, exceeding the prior year's record by nearly $40 million; (b) Duke Annual Fund contributions for the 2006-07 fiscal year surpassed the prior year's total for the 32nd consecutive year and exceeded its $26.5 million cash goal; and (c) applications for admission to Duke for the class entering in 2008 (the first year after the lax controversy) increased by more than 1000 and exceeded a total of 20,000 for the first time in Duke history.

I have no doubt that many of the vocal Brodhead-bashers told people soliciting contributions for the Annual Fund that they would make no donations and would discourage prospective students from applying to Duke so long as Brodhead remained President of the University. But your statement that "Brodhead costs the school quite a bit of money" rests on the assumption that the people making those threats were, in fact, already making substantial contributions to the Annual Fund, and that significant amounts would be lost if Brodhead remained in office. Either that assumption is unfounded, or other contributors more than compensated for those who threatened to "vote with their checkbooks."

I know that, despite the vicious and unrelenting denunciation of Brodhead by a vocal minority who insisted that he should be using his influence and that of the University to defend the accused lacrosse players, some alumni agreed with my view that Brodhead acted in the best interests of the entire University community by reserving judgment and not attempting to interfere with the criminal prosecution until the investigation produced sufficient evidence to support a conclusion about the truth or falsity of the charges. I like to think that the final results, as measured by the net increase in financial contributions and in applications for admission, confirm that reason prevailed.

I know for a fact that a lot of these guys were making substantial contributions that stopped after the lacrosse scandal because that information was all in the computer. I'm not saying I dislike him or that he doesn't do other good things for the school, just that his presence is costing the university some money at the margins with a certain, not inconsequential set of donors.

bass-piscator
06-27-2009, 02:15 PM
"This is probably a silly suggestion but I will try it anyway. Suppose in 2118 Barack Obama became the President of Duke University, would you think that Coach K , all things being equal, should be paid more than The Duke President?"

Yes, of course. A liberal with no experience demands that sum, since you brought it up.

bass-piscator
06-27-2009, 02:47 PM
Oops, I meant of course not, of course.

Stray Gator
06-27-2009, 03:07 PM
I know for a fact that a lot of these guys were making substantial contributions that stopped after the lacrosse scandal because that information was all in the computer. I'm not saying I dislike him or that he doesn't do other good things for the school, just that his presence is costing the university some money at the margins with a certain, not inconsequential set of donors.

Your statement that "his presence is costing the university some money at the margins with a certain, not inconsequential set of donors" once again rests on two unsubstantiated assumptions. First, you're assuming that if Brodhead was dismissed based on his handling of the lacrosse scandal, those people who say that they are withholding contributions because of Brodhead would, in fact, resume giving. Second, you're assuming that all of the people who have continued to make donations, and in some cases have increased the amount of their donations, would continue to give at the same level if Brodhead was dismissed or forced to resign. While there is no way to prove or disprove either of those assumptions, I believe the first is questionable, and the second is almost certainly erroneous.

The bottom line is that during the period when the lacrosse controversy was raging, net contributions to the Annual Fund and to Duke increased to record levels. Whether the dismissal of Brodhead would have resulted in a greater increase (because some of the Brodhead opponents who withheld their donations would have continued to give) or a net decrease (because some of those who felt that Brodhead did not deserve to be dismissed would have discontinued their donations) is a matter about which we can merely speculate.

But in any event, it should be clear by now to those who thought their withholding of financial support would force the dismissal or resignation of Brodhead that they were mistaken. To continue withholding contributions to Duke now is certainly their right. In doing so, however, they should recognize that they're not hurting Brodhead. Instead, they're hurting all those members of the Duke community who depend on donations to the Annual Fund for financial aid, research grants, support of cultural activities, and other resources that are essential to maintain and build upon Duke's stature as a top-tier institution of higher education.

Their financial support would certainly be of benefit to Duke. But Duke will be fine with or without their support. To the extent that their lack of support is impairing the ability of Duke to become even better, it seems to me that they are, in a sense, hurting themselves by inhibiting Duke's realization of a potential greatness in which they, like everyone associated with Duke, would enjoy the right to share as a source of personal pride. But if it gives them greater satisfaction to feel that they are "punishing" Duke, then it is their right to do with their money as they please.

CameronCrazy'11
06-27-2009, 03:12 PM
Look, you're picking the fight with the wrong guy. I don't think Brodhead should be fired or have to resign. My point was in reference Krzyzewski and Brodhead's relative earning power for the university.

Stray Gator
06-27-2009, 04:16 PM
Look, you're picking the fight with the wrong guy. I don't think Brodhead should be fired or have to resign. My point was in reference Krzyzewski and Brodhead's relative earning power for the university.

I'm not trying to pick a fight--and I apologize if my posts came across that way. I'm simply responding to the assertion that Brodhead is "costing Duke money," and trying to explain why, in my opinion, that statement is based on assumptions that may not be warranted. Simply stated, I don't believe we have enough information to draw a sound conclusion about whether and to what extent Brodhead's continued service as President of Duke is affecting the University's income; and I don't think it's fair to present to the readers of DBR as "fact" an assertion that may or may not be correct.

I'll admit that I'm growing weary of the negativity and incessant criticism that has become prevalent on this board during the past week. Duke is not perfect, and doesn't profess to be. President Brodhead is not perfect, and doesn't profess to be. Coach K is not perfect, and doesn't profess to be. Nonetheless, I'm immensely proud to be an alumnus of Duke, and to be a Duke parent (times two). I'm also immensely proud of our athletic programs, our student-athletes, and our coaches. More specifically, as someone who began following Duke basketball long before the Coach K era, I feel enormously proud, appreciative, and fortunate that we have Mike Krzyzewski as our head coach. IMO, he is worth far more to Duke than he is being paid. And I think President Brodhead would readily agree.

I understand that Duke, like any successful program, has attracted a certain segment of fans who seem to operate under the delusion that they are entitled to see "their team" consistently sweep its rivals, and play in the Final Four every year, and land a top 3 recruiting class without fail. But it still astounds and disappoints me to see so many posting on the DBR Boards who seriously suggest that Coach K is overpaid, or even that Duke should dump Coach K if he doesn't agree to forego other activities such a coaching the Olympic team, because the basketball program, after an incredibly long and sustained run of success, seems to be "declining."

I don't have any idea who these people think Duke could hire to replace Coach K based on the understanding that a 30-win season and ACC Championship and Sweet Sixteen appearance will be considered "unsatisfactory job performance." Nor do I have any idea how these people think our current players will feel about their "fan support" when they read the many posts on this board lamenting the players who have left and predicting that the upcoming season will be some kind of disaster. But then I think, maybe the departure of Coach K and a series of losing seasons would be therapeutic. If nothing else, it would probably lighten the bandwagon and improve the level of appreciation for the efforts and accomplishments of Duke's players and coaches.

Devil in the Blue Dress
06-27-2009, 05:48 PM
I'm not trying to pick a fight--and I apologize if my posts came across that way. I'm simply responding to the assertion that Brodhead is "costing Duke money," and trying to explain why, in my opinion, that statement is based on assumptions that may not be warranted. Simply stated, I don't believe we have enough information to draw a sound conclusion about whether and to what extent Brodhead's continued service as President of Duke is affecting the University's income; and I don't think it's fair to present to the readers of DBR as "fact" an assertion that may or may not be correct.

I'll admit that I'm growing weary of the negativity and incessant criticism that has become prevalent on this board during the past week. Duke is not perfect, and doesn't profess to be. President Brodhead is not perfect, and doesn't profess to be. Coach K is not perfect, and doesn't profess to be. Nonetheless, I'm immensely proud to be an alumnus of Duke, and to be a Duke parent (times two). I'm also immensely proud of our athletic programs, our student-athletes, and our coaches. More specifically, as someone who began following Duke basketball long before the Coach K era, I feel enormously proud, appreciative, and fortunate that we have Mike Krzyzewski as our head coach. IMO, he is worth far more to Duke than he is being paid. And I think President Brodhead would readily agree.

I understand that Duke, like any successful program, has attracted a certain segment of fans who seem to operate under the delusion that they are entitled to see "their team" consistently sweep its rivals, and play in the Final Four every year, and land a top 3 recruiting class without fail. But it still astounds and disappoints me to see so many posting on the DBR Boards who seriously suggest that Coach K is overpaid, or even that Duke should dump Coach K if he doesn't agree to forego other activities such a coaching the Olympic team, because the basketball program, after an incredibly long and sustained run of success, seems to be "declining."

I don't have any idea who these people think Duke could hire to replace Coach K based on the understanding that a 30-win season and ACC Championship and Sweet Sixteen appearance will be considered "unsatisfactory job performance." Nor do I have any idea how these people think our current players will feel about their "fan support" when they read the many posts on this board lamenting the players who have left and predicting that the upcoming season will be some kind of disaster. But then I think, maybe the departure of Coach K and a series of losing seasons would be therapeutic. If nothing else, it would probably lighten the bandwagon and improve the level of appreciation for the efforts and accomplishments of Duke's players and coaches.

An excellent post which covers several important points. Perhaps what separates the two groups of fans you have identified, Stray, is that one group feels a broader relationship with Duke as an institution and the other group relates to Duke primarily in terms of the athletic programs, and, in some cases, the basketball program alone.

As important as the men's basketball program is, Duke is, and always has been, so much more. I consider myself to be in the first group, those having a much wider view of my relationship to Duke. Those of us who identify with the more all encompassing view of Duke support and expect excellence across all phases of Duke operation. However, supporting excellence is very different than micromanaging from a keyboard.

msdukie
06-27-2009, 10:43 PM
An excellent post which covers several important points. Perhaps what separates the two groups of fans you have identified, Stray, is that one group feels a broader relationship with Duke as an institution and the other group relates to Duke primarily in terms of the athletic programs, and, in some cases, the basketball program alone.

As important as the men's basketball program is, Duke is, and always has been, so much more. I consider myself to be in the first group, those having a much wider view of my relationship to Duke. Those of us who identify with the more all encompassing view of Duke support and expect excellence across all phases of Duke operation. However, supporting excellence is very different than micromanaging from a keyboard.

Both are excellent posts. I agree 100%

brevity
06-27-2009, 11:49 PM
The classic struggle between academics and athletics aside, I don't understand why a salary comparison is being made between THIS basketball coach and THIS university president.

Coach K has 24 years more seniority at Duke and is a more public figure than President Brodhead. I don't fully buy the corporate analogy -- Duke's basketball coach is more than, say, a high-earning salesman. He's closer to a Special Projects CEO or something.

This issue doesn't bother me at all. Generally I find myself more concerned with the devastatingly underpaid, not the devastatingly overpaid.

Kimist
06-28-2009, 10:29 AM
Also keep in mind that Brodhead costs the school quite a bit of money. I used to work for Duke's annual fund, and there are quite a few alumni who told me they will not give money until he's gone, because of how he handled the lacrosse case.

I was one of those alumni, although out of respect for Duke I did not eliminate all of my gifts.

But the last Alumni Fund gift I made was for 88¢ in recognition of the Gang of 88. I actually received the usual "thank you for your support" letter.

k

sagegrouse
06-28-2009, 10:38 AM
Is it only me but isn't there something wrong when such a prestigeous academic university which Duke is, pays its basketball coach more than its university President ?

Coach K deserves every penny that he gets , but make the university President the highest paid employee. After all, doesn't Duke stand for academic excellence ?

Academic excellence = the President is the highest paid university employee. This deserves a prize as a non sequitur.

I think the figure that Duke pays Brodhead (something under one million IIRC) is exceeded by, I would guess, the earnings of a lot of docs in the med center and probably profs in Law and Fuqua as well. The same would be true at the Ivies with medical schools.

K's compensation from Duke is probably under the market for his credentials but then his outside earnings from lectures and books is considerable.

sagegrouse
'I am sorry to report that there are no grouse species in Costa Rica, where I have been for the past 12 days on an ecotour with my grandson. However, there were some compensating attractions, such as the great cassowary and the crested guan, not to mention scarlet macaws and toucans. Also, as I guy who grew up in Charleston eating rice ten times a week, I am happy to report that rice and beans (gallo pinto) is on every breakfast table -- yum!'

RelativeWays
06-28-2009, 11:15 AM
Coach K makes fair market value to his contemporaries considering his success, visibility and overall positive influence in regards to the University. I don't see how comparing Duke to an Ivy League school dean or president is accurate since none of them have a comparable representative or ambassador as well known as Coach K is in the public eye. K has said before that Duke is not just academics or athletics, it is pushed as a brand of excellence in all its endeavors. In that regard Coach K more than earns his salary by promoting that brand.

sagegrouse
06-28-2009, 11:35 AM
Your statement that "his presence is costing the university some money at the margins with a certain, not inconsequential set of donors" once again rests on two unsubstantiated assumptions. First, you're assuming that if Brodhead was dismissed based on his handling of the lacrosse scandal, those people who say that they are withholding contributions because of Brodhead would, in fact, resume giving. Second, you're assuming that all of the people who have continued to make donations, and in some cases have increased the amount of their donations, would continue to give at the same level if Brodhead was dismissed or forced to resign. While there is no way to prove or disprove either of those assumptions, I believe the first is questionable, and the second is almost certainly erroneous.



I spent some time on Duke fund-raising in the past year in connection with a class reunion. I would add two more points to what Stray has offered:

3. Those who are not giving because of LAX or Brodhead will say so when asked to give.

4. Those for whom the LAX case is an issue are more typically donors to athletics than to the academic side of the university (although almost all the athletic donors give something to the University as a whole).

In my class there may have been one donor who had a reduced donation because of LAX. I don't think there were others.

In general, fund-raising in the current economic environment has been tough for every group I am affiliated with.

sagegrouse