Bitter published an article with the complete salaries for our staff. Gray went from ~$275k last year to $260k this year. Wiles went from $308k last year to $260k this year. Pretty surprised to see this.
EDIT: Looks like everyone who is 'only a position coach' (no assistant coach or coordinator responsibilities) is making $260k flat.
(photo credit - screen capture from roanoke times/bitter's blog)
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
I wish I made enough to have a $48k pay cut
I know he is still making good money, but a 16% cut still has to sting a bit
Interesting how the $ works out. Shibest got a big raise ($125k) over what he was making at Memphis.
Fuente has used all but $57k of the $3.4 mil he's been allotted - I wonder if the remainder is earmarked for the "additional recruiting support position" or if the $3.4 mil is only to be used for actual on-field coaches.
no the 3.4 million is only for assistants. Memphis ranked #4 in the country this year for special teams so I'm okay with Shibest getting a raise. Scott better be a great recruiter, as of right now he is just another part time coach
Part of me thinks there has to be a typo in there.
I can't imagine why Burden, who did a great job last year, gets an $85k raise, but Torrien gets a $15k pay cut.Edit: whoops, thought burden went to $260k, not 200.
Burden got a 15k payraise
numbers....they'll get after ya
Well math
Probably buying Powerball tickets with that 57k
Good strategy imo
I wonder if the performance bonuses have changed, offsetting what looks like a decrease?
Thats exactly what I was wondering and if that money that has been 'unallocated' will be used for the bonuses? I dont know if that pool includes bonus dollars or if its only base?
Fuentes contract says:
Assistant coaches will receive 1.5 months of their base salary as a bonus if the Hokies make a Tier 1 bowl. They will receive one month salary if the Hokies make a Tier 2 bowl.
Not sure how this stacks up to what they got under Beamer.
I see changes coming in the staff after this year. These changes don't quite seem even across the board.
Also, our new OC makes much less than our DC. I understand it's Bud, but that isn't going to sit for long with an offense minded coach in the future, unless Cornelsen's pay is less because Fuente has some of the OC duties...).
Hmmmm. Either the amount of funds available goes up next year or we will see more changes in a year. And, I don't expect TG to stay after this year.
I wholeheartedly disagree. Money is not the only factor, likely not the biggest factor, and may not even be a factor at all. Torrian and Wiles are part of the family. They're Bud's guys. They're our guys. They legitimately love Blacksburg and Virginia Tech. Also, they both have families, and kids in school, which makes it tougher to leave. Cornelson is seemingly Fuente's best friend. He probably isn't all that worried about the pay gap between he and Bud.
The only guys I think have a real shot at being gone anytime soon are Scott and Burden. I think they'll both get coordinator offers in the not too distant future.
I think TG has the best chance of getting a coordinator gig, he has been under Bud for a long time and has consistently put together great secondaries.
Oh I agree. But I don't think he leaves Virginia Tech to get it.
So you think Bud leaves?
Not at this point in time, I don't (and if he did, he'd probably try to take Torrian and Wiles with him). But Torrian is 20 years younger than Bud, and Bud will one day retire.
That may be true, but it has already been speculated in another thread that Fuentes is grooming Scott as the next DC for when Bud Foster does retire. Given the way Scott was retained, even though his defense was not the greateat at Memphis, man, I don't know. I hope this doesn't turn into the situation that Miami had with Al Golden and Mark D'Onofiro. Yikes.
Scott has no ties to Tech. He's not entrenched here the way others are, which to me makes him more likely to jump at any and all promotion offers from other schools, or even lateral moves to bigger schools. The longer Bud stays, the more likely that Scott isn't the next DC here.
I hope your right! But I want him to be successful
You guys have no idea how Torrian acts. Having first hand witnessed some of his actions I could never see him working as a Defensive Co. He has no emotional control during games. He would acts like a freaking lunatic in the pressbox not even the sidelines. After one game the coaches in the press box came down talking about how he was jumping screaming and then at the end of the game crying.
Don't get me wrong, Bud is an emotional dude when he is coaching, but there is a big difference between the way Bud acts and the way Gray acted while I was there.
Also, one of former coworkers at Tech was telling me that Gray has been in some hot water for inviting recruits he wasn't supposed to to campus or something to that extent.
He could have certainly matured since my time there, but the things I saw I don't know if that would work.
That's pretty interesting. I like these behind the scenes tidbits.
If Cornelsen can put together multiple number 1 offenses I'm perfectly fine with paying him 1 million a year.
Our new OC doubled his salary from last year (220k). Don't think he's too upset.
Just saw that Lil Beams is making $275k. So he got a raise going to UGA based on the base salaries.
If we're that competitive with Georgia on position coach pay, I feel really good about this pay scale.
I find it odd that they are taking a pay cut when most of the others seemed to get raises,but maybe there are incentives as well.
An annual salary of $ 5,778,615 is not too overly expensive for a power 5 team. Well done Whit! After the great work he's done with DBU , Torrian Gray should get a raise instead of a paycut.
Well bless their hearts!
Disappointed in Fuente. VT Asst. Coaches take $50K Paycut and Memphis Coaches get $451K Raise. I would be on Pissed Coach. I look for Wiles and Grey to leave next season. Maybe Fuente will enroll in HR course at VT. Happy Coaches = Success.
Wiles isn't going anywhere. Gray might, but only for a DC job.
Just by the nature of the two programs, the Memphis coaches were going to get big raises.
I was disappointed to see Gray get a paycut as well, but I see the logic in it. All seasoned position coaches make the same salary: 260k. The three coordinators look like fair market value. Shibest is one of the top ST guys there is.
The toughest pill to swallow for fans seems to be Scott's salary, which is higher because he holds the assistant HC title. However, It's worth noting Stinespring made ~340k last year, 30k more than Scott. It appears Fuente finds Scott an important asset in a lot of different areas and although there is no true recruiting coordinator, I assume Scott is expected to be a top contributor there.
The annual assistant increases under Beamer were unsustainable once we got a new HC, so I hope we let these guys coach at least a season before over-analyzing this.
Wiles has been at VT since Beamer. Would you take a $50K pay cut to stay at your job? Not me! He deserves better. Great man and great coach. Titles don't matter. Wins and championships matter. This time next year I hope I am wrong.
Wiles doesn't appear to be upset about it so why are you? Yes he did take a pay cut to stay at the job he loves.
It makes sense for all position coaches to start with a blank slate under Fuente. Torrian has done just as good a job as Wiles, so he "deserves" a salary that reflects that in your theory. I'm a huge fan of both coaches and I didn't like it the first time I heard it either, but dayum.
Let's take a step back and consider if these salary adjustments really should change our belief in our HC and Whit.
They should not change our belief in Fuente or Whit. But it is unusual to give seasoned position coaches a pay cut. From the outside looking in, this could be interpreted a plethora of ways.
I'm choosing to give them all the benefit of the doubt.
Fuente kept these coaches on, and he has a different philosophy about position coach pay. I see a fairness about it. How is this less fair than paying each position coach a different amount, based on what a prior administration did? I don't even see this as significant, and those coaches obviously are OK enough with it to stay another year. VT is fourth in the ACC in terms of assistant pay.
If you want change, you have to be willing to accept it.
We don't know what was happening behind the scenes. Fuente/Foster could have laid out a plan where they told Torrian/Wiles "hey, things are going to get better here, but we need a financial sacrifice from you" and they might've jumped at the opportunity. They also could've begrudgingly agreed to it after realizing that they didn't want to job search. They could have had matters in their personal lives that handcuffed them. They may be offended, they may not care. We don't know.
I've never heard of something like this happening in any industry, where management changes, seasoned workers stay on staff and get pay cuts. I'll give Fuente & Co the benefit of the doubt, but I still think it's very unusual.
On the other side of it, if Fuente can convince coaches to buy in (not pun intended) and take pay cuts, just imagine how well he'll do on the recruiting trail when talking to 17 year olds.
On the other side of it, if Fuente can convince coaches to buy in (not pun intended) and take pay cuts, just imagine how well he'll do on the recruiting trail when talking to 17 year olds.
Exactly.
On the compensation side, I've seen people in highly-compensated jobs take paycuts before, and have also seen people say "thanks, but no thanks".
I think at that pay level, it's more about principle, but I can also see Fuente explaining it as a solidarity move. Also, I'm guessing they love their jobs, location, and university, and in the big scheme of things, it's not like they can't order lattes at Starbucks if they want.
I've never heard of something like this happening in any industry, where management changes, seasoned workers stay on staff and get pay cuts.
You must be unfamiliar with Oil and Gas downturns then.
He deserves to be retained on the staff, and he was!
Let's look at it this way...How much would these guys make somewhere else? Then, subtract the cost of moving, and account for cost of living likely being different....
They might be making less than last year, but it could possibly be more than they would make anywhere else next year (short of Beamer staying).
Another way to look at this is that Bud, Gray, and Wiles aren't really staying in their current jobs. This is a different coaching staff, it just happens to be located in the same place, and the head coach happened to hire four people from the old staff.
Another way to think about it:
Fuente: Hey guys, about the salaries...everyone here gets to start with a blank slate. Doesn't matter if you're a holdover from Beamer's staff or if you came over with me from Memphis. Our goal here is to win, and win big. You don't do that by resting on your laurels. So, this is year zero.
would have been more fair to give wiles, scott and gray even salaries. at this point scott isn't even a position coach, rather just assisting the existing DL coach yet paid more. that does not seem right.
That I agree with. From the description of their past, I will be watching for a Beamer and Stiney relationship where the personal relationship runs a little too deep. I hope he proves his worth two times over, but right now looks like pretty good promotion.
No one is impressed with Scott. Awful record at Memphis yet makes more that Wiles and Gray? Who gives a Shit that he introduced Funete to his wife. Gray was deserved a raise. and Wiles had paid his dues. Pay then what they are worth.
Like you were reading my mind. Who the f()ck is this guy? Wiles and Gray should be given raises, but they should have their raises lobbied for by Fuente. Strike One for Fuente? Beamer would have requested his pay be cut to pay his assistants more. Now I miss Frank. Holy shit.
Read the article and thought the same. Frank was fair. Fuente is in uncharted waters and this now scares me as the head coach. I liked the guy up till this point.
Yeah. How dare he change things?
/s
Fuente is very impressed with Scott. He's not yet impressed by Gray and Wiles. All he has to go on is Bud's word. He is paying a great deal of respect to Bud to re-hire them. They each got a pay raise of $260K; they were due zero.
Fu wasn't brought in to run Frank Beamer's company. That company went out of business.
Fuente can look at 10 years of results for Gray, plenty of data out there to evaluate him don't need to go on Bud's word
Scott has the assistant HC title. And although there is no recruiting coordinator, I expect he will be a key player as part of that title. For comparison, Stinespring made atleast 30k more than Scott will.
He still needs to deliver now, but I see the logic.
Stinespring was a good recruiter, position coach, and had been around for forever. Maybe Scott will have more duties but that remains to be seen
It's seen now. He's the assistant HC. Fuente obviously considers this guy his protege. Obviously grooming him for something greater.
Why are we manufacturing drama over this?
Has not proved this worth. Sorry, but were are part of the "Big Time" and that's what matters. Has no 4*, 5* recruits and poor defence for time as a DC Coached under successful coaches and rode their skirts. Watched his video on HokieVision and was not impressed that he rolled his eyes and looked uninterested. The Memphis video was much better.
So just to get this in bullet point form, your argument against Galen Scott is:
Sorry, but your entire argument just sounds like butthurt.
Boy do I have a different read on what those non-verbal cues indicated.
Many titles are meaningless. Let's see what responsibilities he picks up
I read that as many titties at first. I know, not pg, but still. I can still see it.
I agree though, unless there is something behind giving him the titles, like promises down the road.
No he has a title, that doesn't necessarily mean he has more responsibilities.
Seriously? Is that the direction we're steering this now? Accusing our new head coach of creating cushy vacuous job titles for his friends?
There are numerous coaches in college football that have largely meaningless titles. You can twist it however you want
So you accuse our coach of cronyism, then when you get called out on it, you accuse me of twisting your words because you're claiming it's a widespread practice in college football.
No. Maybe the HC intends titlee to have a larger role than actually pans out for whatever reason
Maybe we shouldn't pass judgement on Fuente's actions until we see the results?
I'm not passing judgement. Please reread my original comment
"No he has a title, that doesn't necessarily mean he has more responsibilities."
No it doesn't. He's the assistant HC and Fuente said he will have a large role in day-to-day operations. He's making less than Stinespring for a similar role.
Scott might be as good or better recruiter than Stiney. We don't know. But Whit believed in Fuente enough to hire him so I will at least wait and see.
Totally agree. I would also point out that Wiles and Gray have assisted in putting together nationally ranked defenses during their time at VT. They also recruit fairly well. I am trying really hard to figure out what exactly Galen Scott has achieved during his coaching career to this point and I am not finding anything. Take a look at his 247sports list of recruited players. Not exactly impressive, to say the least. I hope coach fuente knows something I don't about coach scott's abilities. I really want this coaching staff to be successful, but at the same time, I'm mindful of that horrible situation in Miami where a certain Head Coach (Al Golden) stayed too loyal to his friend and DC (Mark D'Onofiro) even when it was obvious to everyone else that D'Onofiro sucked as a DC. It eventually cost that head coach his job.
Even if Scott sucks he cant do much damage as assistant d line coach
At first glance you're right, but have you considered that this makes it easier for Coach Wiles and Coach Gray to leave VT for greener pastures? I read somewhere that
CiachCoach Gray was already on Nick Saban's radar as a good addition to his defensive staff should he lose more coaches. We already know Texas A&M and FSU would take Bud Foster in a heart beat. I'm not saying this will happen. I'm just giving you food for thought.Depending on your point of view, you could plug in Frank Beamer for Golden and 1, if not 2, names after friend and "OC" instead of "DC"
Why is Zohn making less than the other position coaches?
Time in job and age.
With the money, this coaching staff is making either we need 10 wins or a sell out season to justify the salary. Sad to think Coach Beamer was so underpaid. Makes me sick to think we underpaid the man who built Blacksburg to what it is today.
I bet Beamer doesn't think he was underpaid and it was well documented that he wasn't out for more money. He did the university a favor, maybe it was his way of thanking them for giving him his big chance and sticking with him. Beamer could have gotten more, but the money wasn't what was important after 29 years. Now if I was in Fuente's shoes and have seen coaches getting canned after three seasons, you bet I would be getting what I could now, because who knows what happens in a few years.
The boss sets the payscale. Those who aren't satisfied may look elsewhere for employment opportunities.
And we don't even know what Fuentes's staff incentives look like.
This is a modest payroll for a P5 program.
I'm thinking this guy won't be here long. Them negative legs will get after ya.
But most of the comments which received negative legs were a difference of opinion but with the apparent intent of discourse. Echo chamber, here we come.
He has no interest in discourse. He's said the same thing about five different places in this thread, despite the fact that other posters, myself included, have critiqued his argument. He won't respond when someone gives a rebuttal to his argument, but he'll post that exact same argument elsewhere in this thread. He's actively avoiding discourse. His contribution to this conversation has been way more noise than signal.
If I were Wiles or Gray, I'd be lighting a bag of shit on fire on somebody's porch.
I think most forget that both Foster and Wiles while at Tech are State employees and after 30 years can retire with full benefits. I would stick it out to live where I like and retire. I hope they do and enjoy the Commonwealth.
While I get your point, cause i hope one day after 20 or 30 years in my career field I am lucky enough to have a retirement, with what the coaches make a year and for so many years ( all well earned) If they stay for benifits then they have some money management issues. Not knocking what you said at all.
As a fan of the VT program, I am not happy, at all, that Coach Wiles and Coach Gray have taken a pay cut. If anything, the defense has been a huge part of the reason why our program is considered a nationally relevant program in this sport and that they are a big reason for the sustained success at VT. I realize I'm just a fan and I have zero chances of changing what is happening with the staff, but I have to admit, this is the first decision that coach fuente has made since being named head coach that I find disappointing. Just my 2 cents folks.
Totally agree, I don't like making proven coaches take pay cuts and the new ones getting bigger raises. Now if they live up to the hype then its all water under the bridge, but I expect a higher PPG average than this year where I think we ended up at 51 overall which was higher than I expected.
Come on, folks!
It's really not so bad. Seems to me there was a method to the madness, and that there was an attempt at some equity among the position coaches. The coaches who were retained obviously agreed to the changes. Perhaps stability and staying at the same place ( and working with the same people) has a pretty good value. This may be why we don't all post our salaries publicly.
Instead of making the headline about Wiles and Grey, shouldn't the following be the headline?
In the ACC, only Clemson ($4.329 million), Florida State ($4.284 million) and Louisville ($3.779 million) paid their assistant coaches more than Virginia Tech last year.
Exactly, and I feel like people are forgetting that Wiles and Gray didn't have to agree to take a pay cut and could have gone elsewhere. If they were really so mad about, they would have left.
I sense some homerism and a bit of xenophobia about all these "newfangled" coaches coming in and making a lot of money while a couple of established coaches have taken a pay cut.
Fuente's payroll looks good to me, with the exception that I think Burden should be making $260K. But I also don't think Fuente is sold on Burden and originally didn't intend to retain him. So Fuente is saving $60K of payroll by giving Burden a test run.
Position coaches make the same. I can get behind that so long as Fuente expects the same output and production from each coach. Coordinators and the Assistant HC make more. I don't see the problem here.
I think the idea of an Assistant HC position is exactly how a coach builds a coaching tree. You groom one member of your staff to take the next step. I think part of the problem here is that 1) that idea is counter to the culture VT had under Beamer, where up until the very end, staff attrition was met with hostility (Hello Kevin Rodgers), and 2) the Assistant HC isn't a Beamer legacy. We wouldn't hear a peep about this if Fuente tabbed Gray as Assistant HC.
If you want some coaching changes, you can't complain every time the coach changes something.
Integrating two coaching teams can't be easy, and won't be unless everyone goes along. People are going to feel slighted here and there.
I think we have to give Fuente some credit for retaining the coaches that he has.
Gray could have another job today if he desired so I'm ok with it if he's ok with it.
Exactly. This was not a unilateral decision
That's the nature of new management! We asked for a revamping of the program, and we got it. This is what coach Fuente feels like is fair compensation for his employees.
Pretty normal to glare at the new guy, we all do it.
In terms of money no one on this staff is hurting. I only say that to point out that the only real problem I see is a possible ego thing. Which could be a real problem. Truth is the reason we love Wiles, Burden, and Gray is because they're Hokies. They're ours. They're vested. It's easy to look at this and see an us versus them mentality but guess what guys, they're all Hokies now and I'm just foolish enough to believe that they can come together in spite of a perceived injustice and do their jobs. Recruit and coach kids to play a game AND WIN. Let's give the new head Hokie a shot to show what he can do with some great coaches at a quality P5 program. I think we're in for big things and I think just the very fact that these guys were willing to take those cuts might speak the loudest to that.
As an honest question, with absolutely no negative thought toward a great guy, exactly how hard would it be to replace Torrian Gray? I'm asking because I don't know.
Luckily, we don't need to find out.
Hard. Which is why it made no sense that under the previous system he would never catch up to Wiles in salary despite the number of NFL draft picks, All-Anythings, and his contribution to the "DBU" moniker.
If anything I think this is more of a "market adjustment" for Wiles. Torrian could definitely get paid more, but consider the cost of living in some of those other places, his family, his alma mater.
Well the reason I asked is that some seem to think he made DBU. But, we have had talented secondaries prior to him. I believe he is a great coach, but I'm not sold that he is breaking new ground here.
Assuming Foster is still DC, I have no doubts that he could mentor a talented young coach.
On the other hand, as long as Foster is DC, there is no one that knows how the secondary fits his scheme better than Torrian. He played for Bud, and has now coached for Bud for several years. He knows exactly what Bud wants.
What I take from this is Bud is still getting paid like a BOSS!
Good for him. He might have been the head coach if the ball bounced a bit differently over the last few yrs, but about 1MM a yr is good compensation for the best-ever DC never to run a P5 team.
I think this is just the same contract Bud negotiated with Whit after the 2014 season. I doubt Fuente would have been able to tinker with it and retain Bud.
Whit has certainly made some good moves.
I honestly can't think of a bad one.
Extending ECU...
Oh yeah.
For some reason, my brain blocks that one from being associated with Whit. Do we really play ECU every year, and was it an actual choice someone made? Ooof.
I don't put that one on Whit. The agreement was decided and already written under Weaver, it just needed a signature. Whit gets the job and that's literally the first thing on his desk. Despite the fan disappointment, what else was he going to do? If he says, "nope, sorry, I don't want this" he's just undermined what Weaver did (a bad look to some, a good look to others) and then has to immediately set about scheduling non-conference spots that may already be locked up by "better" teams. He chose to hold steady on the current course. I will decided how Whit should be judged regarding ECU when he gets a chance to make his own decision on the matter. His hands were already largely tied here.
Just got around to reading the new comments. Been busy.
A lot of people commenting on the new coach making the changes and setting pay scale. All of that I get. I have no disagreement there.
Where I disagree is the forcing of pay cuts from performing staff that is being retained for the gain of new staff. I don't mind that the new staff all got serious upgrades in salary. They deserve it. But I am not cool with Gray and Wiles taking a cut to pay for those. Find the money elsewhere or don't.
It's too much to count this as a mistake, or nepotism, or whatever. It is simply Coach Fu making the staff work. I get that, but I personally don't believe this is how you manage a staff.
Don't consider it a pay cut. Consider it a completely different job. The jobs that Zohn Burden, Torrian Gray and Charlie Wiles had last season no longer exist. They have each accepted new jobs under Justin Fuente, and have accepted the pay that those jobs offer. Burden's new job pays more than his old one did, Gray's and Wiles' pay less.
While their checks might still be cut from the same bank, their employer has very much changed.
I get what your going for, but I can't agree with any of these analogies. It's the same title, with the same employer, just new management.
A change in management is a poor analogy here. Corporate restructuring would be more apt. Like I said, the same bank might be cutting the checks, but aside from that, we are a completely different organization than we were in 2015.
Hundreds of companies have a position entitled "Vice President of Operations." What two different people with that same title do at two different companies might vary wildly, as might their salary. And if a company restructures, the title might be kept, but the function and salary be completely different.
It doesn't matter how many years any of these coaches have been at VT. This is everyone's first year at VT under Justin Fuente. Nobody gets credit for prior work under a different coach. Fuente pays his position coaches $260K. Take it or leave it. Wiles and Gray took it.
But their years of coaching in college do matter - This is why Zohn is making less than every other position coach. It's not really logical to say worker 1 has 1 year of quality results, we'll pay him less than the norm. Workers 2 and 3 have 6 years of quality results (more than the norm) but we'll pay them the norm.
Obviously this is how business works, but I very much agree with some of the posts below:
Only if Fuente implements a pay scale that rewards prior experience. But all appearances, he is not. His pay raises appear based on titles/promotions/added duties. It looks like he's attempting a more egalitarian approach to the pay scale than Frank did. Of course, this is year one and we're operating with limited information.
I mentioned something about that elsewhere on this thread and I'm too lazy to find it. I really don't think Fuente is sold on Burden. It took a long time for the announcement that Burden was going to be retained. This and a buck fifty will buy you a cup of coffee, but I really think Burden's reduced salary is more a matter of Fuente giving Burden a shot but saving some payroll in the process. If Burden lights it up in recruiting and coaches up the running backs, I expect him to be given a raise to the base position coach salary in short order.
I kind of look at it this way. Fuente's first priority was retaining Bud. When that was accomplished, Bud vouched for Wiles and Gray. (Whether he vouched for Brown is unknown, and a whole other conversation.) Fuente obviously trusted Bud's judgement and offered Wiles and Gray positions at the full position coach salary, based on Bud's trust in them. Again, what they made before under Frank is irrelevant. This is Fuente's ship now, and they're working the job that Fuente offered them, at the salary Fuente offers his position coaches. But with Burden being an offensive coach, that's Fuente's area. He didn't feel comfortable offering Zohn the full salary he pays position coaches, so he offered him a position at a lower salary. There was no Bud Foster type figure to vouch for Burden; it doesn't matter what the outgoing OC has to say about a position coach.
I don't like that Zohn is making less than his peers for the same job, but I understand the logic. I just hope performance (under Fuente) is rewarded and Zohn is bumped up to full salary.
agree with bar1990. It's not a different job. It's just different management. That management can change the daily operations, the product, the way people execute, etc but they are still there to do the same role they were asked to perform before. Again, I don't mind Fuente's staff coming in got big raises, but that shouldn't have come at the expense of staff being asked to remain.
This doesn't mean that this cannot happen. I know managers that do that, but I wholeheartedly disagree. Unless it was a budget cut that was required for people to keep their jobs, which it wasn't, I don't see why they should be asked to take a cut to pay for others.
All that being said, as mentioned by others Wiles and Grey could have not accepted and gone elsewhere. Ultimately it's their choice. I just don't agree with that style of management with existing staff, but as I said I am not reading anything into beyond that as far as Coach Fuente is concerned.
I think it's important to note that we're also operating with limited information. I haven't seen actual contracts, but there could be other considerations that make this worth everyone's while. Perhaps Gray and Wiles have guaranteed multiyear deals now, whereas they were year-to-year before. Perhaps they have opportunities for greater incentive pay than the others do. Perhaps they agreed to take a cut this year with an understanding they will get major increases once there's more money to work with. Regardless, it's over and done with, and I'd argue that many people here are making an issue where there likely isn't one. I know it's the offseason and we need to find things to occupy ourselves, but if the men involved were willing to accept their contracts and focus on other matters, so should we.
this is a great point as well. All at face value at the moment. For me it's simply the management decision, nothing more.
I think that's a misguided way of looking at the situation. You're painting a picture where Fuente literally took money away from Gray and Wiles to pay his other coaches. That did not happen.
Basically, when Fuente got hired, he had to decide who he wanted to offer a position under him, and also what his position coaches and coordinators were going to be paid. He settled on a salary of $260K for position coaches. And at that point, nobody currently on staff had a job with Fuente. He started fresh. He decided to retain Bud Foster at his contractual salary, then he decided to offer positions to Wiles, Gray and, eventually, Burden (at a reduced salary), in addition to Vice, Shibest, Cornelson and Scott.
These were very much new hires, regardless of whether the coaches worked for Beamer at VT or Fuente at Memphis last season. None of these coaches were due anything the moment Justin Fuente accepted the VT position. What they made at last season under whoever their employer was is irrelevant. They were offered positions at the salary Fuente was offering for that position, and everyone accepted.
This is a critical distinction. Fuente isn't "new management," he's the new CEO.
Disagree, not misguided at all. There was a budget. That budget needed approval. It was up to Coach Fuente to decide how to use that money. To balance that budget where some were rewarded he had to take away from others.
Otherwise I see no reason why a new manager would come in and ask existing coaches to take a pay cut. What is the reasoning? "I want to start my staff on a balanced pay scale so everyone will will be back at the same footing for me to assess." That's not good reasoning for me from a management point of view. Frankly, no employee is equitable to another. Some have more value than others. Gray and Wiles had a value established. That did not need to be added to but it also didn't need to be deducted from.
I think this is misguided. I am willing to bet that anyone in any job everywhere would not accept that reasoning as lightly as you suggest. This is saying that Wiles and Gray were overvalued before. Do you think they were? I have been saying, along with many others, that Gray deserves a pay raise for his level of coaching over the years, not a pay cut.
They accepted so that's that. But again, the management style is not great IMO. Employees are not apples to apples, and compensation should not be apples to apples. Even employees that do the exact same role should be valued differently for a variety of reasons.
anyway, I don't mean to belabor the point to exhaustion. I just don't like that decision.
As always, you make great points. Please don't take me quoting them in bullet point form as me dissecting your argument, I just want you to know which point I'm specifically replying to at the time.
Again, Fuente is not a manager. He's the CEO. The corporation is restructuring. What you made under the old structure isn't factored in to the new pay scale. These are new positions. (I know you disagree with the sentiment that these are new positions, but if you can accept the corporate restructuring analogy, which in my mind is a way better analogy for a coaching change than hanging a "Under New Management!" banner on the outside of Lane Stadium, then every old position was abolished and new ones were created.)
To be fair, all our position coaches have a value established.
This assumes the flat position coach salary is so Fuente can assess coaches. But it's just as likely Fuente is just going to treat a position coach job as an "entry level position" with the same base salary for all position coaches. Perhaps the identical base salary will be complimented with performance incentives and bonuses, or promotions in title down the road. We don't know what the logic, or structure, of the identical base salaries is.
I disagree with this. Rather, I think it's safe to say Fuente is using different logic to arrive at his pay scale than Frank used. I don't think it's inherently insulting/devaluing to say, "I want these guys as my position coaches. I offer position coaches $260K a year," and not alter that salary based on what they made under a previous employer.
I think I agree with this in principle, but I also believe that the same job title within a company should have the same base salary. You recognize performance with incentives and bonuses, not with base salary. At least that's how I look at it. I personally feel it's more a slap in the face to have two people with the exact same job description (implying the same inherent worth to the company) have two different base salaries. That breeds a culture of favoritism, or at least the perception of one. It's a far better system, IMO, to present a level playing field where performance is rewarded on top of the base salary, for transparent and empirical reasons.
Again, we'll know a lot more when we figure out exactly what the incentive/bonus structure under Fuente is.
Completely respect that.
The bonuses etc are already set, I'll try and find them after class and post here.
Bonuses are 1.5 months pay for Tier 1 bowl, 1 month pay for Tier 2.
So for position coaches that is: $21,667 for Tier 2, and $32,500 for Tier 1 (if my math is correct)
Is making the playoffs considered a tier 1 bowl?
Fuente's contract has separate bonuses for playoffs and national titles, so I would think the assistants do, too. I feel like I read that somewhere but I am blanking on the source.
Not sure where I read it, I think Bitter, but it seems like these bonuses are bigger than what Beamer previously gave the assistants
Also all good points +1, and as I said I don't want to belabor it too much, because overall it is not such a big deal.
I understand your corporate restructuring analysis, but, and this is highly pedantic, I think that applies more to Whit than Fuente. Anyway, no need to keep going. Like I said mostly for me it is a management style I disagree with.
I've enjoyed reading fernley's and Illinois' back and forth dialogue on this topic. It's been refreshing. What I get out of it relative to the current situation for football coaches salary is that Whit is not micro-managing Fuente's decisions for setting salaries for his coaches, but his business first structural approach is all over this. I feel that Whit has provided a structure and Fuente went and implemented it and this is the result. So, some of these changes are also on Whit as well as Fuente.
I'm not sure how Wiles and Gray will react to this over time (I was initially skeptical), but this business structured salary base model makes more sense than what VT probably had before (which Whit dealt with passively through the transition and Frank's retirement - which is now over). As has been stated, these are Virginia public employees subject to some of those structural constraints as well. Whit is applying an additional business based structure within that and making the entirety of it more accountable to the state financial needs, the university, and the fan base. Fuente must implement his bosses wishes.
This all makes more sense with these assumptions I am making. Hopefully it works out for VT in the long run (Whit's approach has always shown the tendency to address the long run). If my reading the tea leaves is correct (I'm not sure), then this is another instance where Whit's style shows through and that VT sports is in good hands.
via GIPHY
Part of that is because fernley is straight up just simply the tits. I agree with 95% of what he says, and get really excited when I don't, because I know an awesome, respectful conversation is about to ensue.
By this logic, the only options on the table are to pay them at least what they made before, not retain them, or I suppose, setting the minimum position salary at Wiles level.
None of these options were acceptable to all parties.
I trust Whit and Fuentes. But I also disagree the the reduction for Coach Gray (stated before that I don't care all that much for Wiles). The question has been asked, but rarely addressed, whom would we get to step in if/when Gray leaves??
Fuente...and VT is in the mid-20's in staff salary. So we could offer pay raises to 60+% of the P5 and all of the G5 DB coaches.
No not necessarily, Foster's salary kind of skews those numbers
Gray is a fantastic DB coach. However, I don't believe he is irreplaceable. Foster's tenure is long enough that we could even fit the "Played under Bud, so knows exactly what Bud needs" requirement.
Could you be more specific? (ie: Vinny Fuller, D-Lo, etc). And (what's more), who do you think Fuentes would select??
Actual candidates? No clue. I don't even know who out of our previous DBs have gone into coaching. But it's not like TG has a magic formula for coaching the position. He's very good at it, but there's a definite type of coach we'd go after if we had to replace him. A replacement candidate for Gray should have the following on his resume:
Good points. Can I add "Ability to recruit" to that list?
I have a feeling that's going to be a requirement of every position coach Fuente hires.
Consider this...all coaches, other than Bud, had no job after Frank retired. Their contracts ended this Summer and they would be without jobs making approximately $0 until they applied for unemployment. So they had to find new ones. What a coincidence that positions were available at Virginia Tech. So they interviewed with the new head coach there, Justin Fuente. Fuente liked what he saw, appreciated that they were familiar with the players, administration, recruiting territory, and the area and saw that the Athletics Department wouldn't have to worry about moving them or housing them either. What a deal! So he hired Wiles and Gray, giving them salaries comparable with the rest of the staff that he was forming, while giving Burden a little less because he's still a little bit green in the game. Now these guys don't have to go find new jobs, move their families, and possibly take less pay elsewhere. Look, they did not receive "pay cuts" because they didn't actually have a job any longer. They were re-hired at a pay that Whit and Fuente was decided as fair. For those who want to say "well they've been loyal to VT and look, Fuente just gave them less for that." Well not quite, their loyalty was what gave them an exclusive interview for the job that they now have. THAT was their reward. They had the opportunity to go elsewhere and try to make more money. None of them did. That's on them, not the staff. Now no coach, other than one who has a title superior to theirs, can use anything above another. Length of tenure no longer matters. Pay no longer matters. Everybody is on even footing and can begin the process of moving forward TOGETHER.
I think the biggest thing from this that people fear, especially the way the team has come together is the chance for an 'us vs them' mentality. That's my only fear, at least with this hire, but I would have to imagine its the same fear that Whit and Fuente have.
I think the pay situation further fans those flames, 'your giving your guys pay raises and ours cuts'. That is an extremely valid point, and it is a little concerning for sure, but we dont know the whole pay structure situation, I havent heard about bonus structures at least, or know if there are any performance based incentives that may off set those cuts?
It is concerning for sure, companies fail all the time because they setup structures that develop these 'us vs them' atmospheres and have staff competing against each other. Based on what I have seen from them so far though, the humility of the leadership has been something, from a view of someone in their 20's, that is very rare, and makes me think the situation will and has been handled appropriately.
No, he's giving former G5 coaches the pay of P5 coaches, making all his position coaches equal. If anything, creating a level playing field eliminates the us vs them mentality that you're talking about. There's enough fuel for that when you have coaches from an old regime, but this eliminates their salary from the argument. And like I said above, it's not a paycut if it's a new job. And it is a new job. Just because they were "retained from the prior staff," doesn't mean that they didn't have to be rehired. Fuente interviewed each of them. Why? Not because he just wanted to chat, but because they were applying for a job working for him.
This a bunch.
If anything, the "us vs. them" mentality is what's being displayed in some of these comments.
I'd be interested in seeing how many P5 programs use a flat salary for position coaches, I'm guessing it's a thing.
... and what is the "normal" case when a new HC retains some of the previous HC's assistants. Is it "normal" to consider them all new hires, or is it "normal" to assume the old guard will continue making what they used to make?
I know in my place of employment we have some old timers who earn more than they're worth just because they are old timers. If we had a whole new regime (which is nearly impossible in our setting), a new CEO who failed to correct that problem would be viewed as "meet the new boss, same as the old boss." After all, Coach Gray's salary was only cut by about 5%. Coach Wiles was the only one who took a substantial pay cut. Is it conceivable that Fuente didn't really want to retain Wiles, but did so as a favor to Bud? If so, could that have been part of the bargain? ("OK, I'll keep your guy, but I won't pay him more than the other coaches.")
What's "normal" is to fire everyone and bring in all your own guys. I'm honestly surprised some people are so up in arms about this (not directed towards you, bblankin). If the coaches in question don't care, why would some random dude on the Internet care? I know, I know, that's what the Internet is for, but still.
There's a lot of knotted panties in this thread, towards no purpose I can discern other than trying really hard to find something to criticize.
I agree, and I think the rest of the post supports that.
I really dont think the staff is taking it as offense and thats just based on what weve seen from them so far, and the fact they took the position, but I think it does cause for concern of the potential.
Maybe Im just a worrier, thats why my friends call me whiskers.
I'd like to thank everyone in this thread for their viewpoints. It helped me change mine from being disappointed in the Gray "pay cut" to looking at it is a level field for position coaches.
I'm still concerned with keeping good position coaches moving forward. But that is a different concern.
Is the table comparing base salary + bonuses for 2015 to base salary only for 2016?
i think its base for 2015 vs base for 2016
link for those interested
(http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/football/assistant)
The amount of discourse (nearly 150 comments!!) on this subject is puzzling on what I thought was a simple issue. Wiles and Gray SIGNED a 1-year CONTRACT. Thus, they had an opportunity to NEGOTIATE their salary. If they didn't like the initial offer, they could have rejected the offer and entered a salary that they felt they deserved.
It's merely simple contract negotiation. It's NOT a pay cut because it's a yearly contract.
Guess it sort of makes sense to post this here:
Note that Scott is officially the DT coach + Asst HC, Wiles is now specifically DE coach. So they appear to be sharing the D-line equally with Scott pulling additional duties of some sort.
Why coaching just a single position seems so weird.
Yeah like QB coach. And RB coach. And WR coach. And TE coach
True but just seems different on the defensive side just something different to get used to.
Wvu had six defensive coaches last year
Yep, this whole thing seems to make more sense now.
Thanks. Good update. Though I genuinely wish Wiles was coaching DT and not DE.
I'm not sure how strong the dividing lines are between Wiles and Scott. I highly doubt we'll have DTs over in one corner of the Beamer Barn with Scott and DEs over in the other corner with Wiles.
But I will say, I think Wiles' mold for what he wants in a DE is much more specific and unique than what he looks for in DTs. Twitch is the holy grail of a Charley Wiles DE, and he can coach the hell out of the position. I think Dadi played one year of organized football before coming to VT, or something like that. I definitely want to keep him coaching that position.
I suppose... and yes I love twitch as well, but I always took that as something players either have or don't have, not something that is coached. And while I agree Dadi is a great success, but I think he flipflops a lot on his opinion on kids playing DE, like Mihota, and I just want to see us able to play bigger bodies out there. I know that doesn't fit the unique scheme Bud has unless they have the speed, but I still believe that until we prove that our system can play with size on the outside and not move DE size to DT, we will forever be missing elite recruits on the DL.
I've harped on that enough over number of threads, but I believe it is the case. Just my opinion though.
Other than Baron all of our DT next year are good size, heck Settle is too big. Ken is good size, all of the defensive ends taken in this cycle and last year are already bigger or the same size as Dadi give them a few years in a college strength and conditioning program and they will be bigger than him. What you are harping on has already been happening, on the oline too
I guess I'm being picky, but what is up with hokiesports changing the coaches' pictures from suits to polos back to suits and now some polos and some suits?
Currently, everyone is in a polo except Chuck Cantor and Thomas Guerry, whose pictures are re-used from last year. Probably they just haven't had theirs re-taken to conform to the new style.
As long as they don't put the players in those stupid turtlenecks from the early 2000s I'm good with whatever.