- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: CJJ Saving Scott Woodward
Posted on 7/1/25 at 1:48 pm to tigafighta
Posted on 7/1/25 at 1:48 pm to tigafighta
Wasn't getting much more than MM given the situation.
0
Posted on 7/1/25 at 1:49 pm to Dizz
quote:
It does but usually firings related directly to hires are ones where the AD/GM goes against the grain or makes a unilateral hire. It wasn't like Woodward hired Willie Taggart, Bryan Harsin, or Chad Morris. Those are hires that set your program back 5 years and get you fired.
Assuming for the sake of discussion LSU doesn't reach the CFP this year one could make the argument Woodward's hire set LSU back several years in terms of being a championship program due to the fact LSU would have to retain BK for at least 6, maybe 7 years, because of the amount of the buyout.
I agree with you, a big time HC is going to have all of the leverage in contract negotiations. LSU wasn't getting BK without a huge contract offer. But if the AD is going to lay it all out for such a hire, he better get the expected ROI. I doubt LSU committed 10 years/$100M to Kelly for consistent 8-4 or 9-3 seasons where LSU doesn't reach the CFP. If that comes to pass the guy who made the hire will be held responsible, fair or not. And given it would be the second time he made (or at least blessed) such a hire (Jimbo being the first), I don't think the powers that be would let him get a third shot at it.
Posted on 7/1/25 at 2:11 pm to Alt26
quote:
The immediate response is always Curly Hallman. But while it is difficult to compare different sports, there is an argument to be made McMahon has been worse. Hallman had a .320 SEC winning % McMahon's is .259 To put that in a little more context Curly won 10 SEC games in 31 opportunities. McMahon only has 4 more SEC wins despite 23 more opportunities. McMahon has a better overall winning %, but the quality of non-conference competition in basketball vs. football can be much worse. Hallman had 7 non-conf. losses in 4 years. However, 4 of those were to Texas A&M teams that finished ranked no worse than 12th in any of those seasons. Another was to (then) No. 1 Florida St. Hallman was bad. No one will argue otherwise. But I'm not sure the casual fan fully understands just how bad McMahon has been in his 3 seasons at LSU.
Curly was worst, trust me
Posted on 7/1/25 at 2:31 pm to Alt26
Another post whining about Jimbos contract at atm, Woodward did not give him that contract. He got it so Scott wouldn't steal him for LSU.
Google is your friend get facts before posting stupidity.
Google is your friend get facts before posting stupidity.
Posted on 7/1/25 at 2:47 pm to Ponchy Tiger
quote:
Curly was worst, trust me
I don't need to trust you. I was there for both. I sat in several less than sellout Tiger Stadium crowds. I remember giving No. 1 FSU all they wanted in a driving rainstorm. I remember sitting in TS on a cold afternoon in 1993 pulling like hell for LSU to beat Arkansas for a trip to the coveted CarQuest Bowl. It wasn't good.
What's happened in the PMAC the last three seasons hasn't been much better. Losing to Nichols St., nail-biter wins vs low major opponents, a 14-40 record vs. SEC opponents, the "thrill" of a home NIT game with a crowd of less than 2,000 people in a 13k seat arena. Watching literally every other program in the SEC, including two teams, Texas and OU, who have only been in the league for 1 season, reach the NCAA Tournament, all while LSU hasn't even been remotely in the conversation for such. Other basketball HC's have had bad years also (Brady, Johnson, and Jones), but they at least had one really good year to go along with that. This is as apathetic as I can remember people being about the basketball program in a long time.
Posted on 7/1/25 at 2:52 pm to Alt26
quote:
LSU would have to retain BK for at least 6, maybe 7 years, because of the amount of the buyout.
The buyout goes down he will be here through in 2026 but after that if he is not winning he will be gone. Hiring a football coach while important is not the only job an AD has. The overall health of the athletic department and his ability to fundraise play a major role in keeping an AD. You can't fire the AD just because their football hire does not win a championship.
Posted on 7/1/25 at 3:04 pm to Tigerfanindawgland
quote:
Woodward did not give him that contract. He got it so Scott wouldn't steal him for LSU.
Jimbo signed a 10 year $75M contract after the 2017 season. One where his FSU team went 6-6. Woodward was the AD...at Texas A&M. That initial contract itself would have been difficult to get out from under after just 3 seasons even if Jimbo doesn't sign an extension after the 2020 season. The extension made things worse, but that initial contract still would have locked A&M into Jimbo for 5 years, at least.
The coaching salary market inflation from the end of 2017 to the end of 2022 when BK was signed to a 10 year, $100M makes the contracts largely equivalent. In the 2018 season Jimbo was the 3rd highest paid coach in terms of annual salary. BK was the 4th highest paid coach in the 2022 season.
Posted on 7/1/25 at 3:14 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
Most big names used us to leverage a pay raise.
What big names? It’s not like anyone other than Georgia, Ohio State, and Alabama have been consistent title contenders lately. Harbaugh and Saban are gone. Swinney has taken a step back. Smart and Day weren’t going anywhere. Lanning has done well, but hasn’t won anything and was a major risk. Who else could have or should have LSU gotten instead? I know that was your point, but I think you didn’t go far enough with your point. There weren’t even guys they lost bidding wars for.
Posted on 7/1/25 at 3:20 pm to Dizz
quote:
The buyout goes down he will be here through in 2026 but after that if he is not winning he will be gone. Hiring a football coach while important is not the only job an AD has. The overall health of the athletic department and his ability to fundraise play a major role in keeping an AD. You can't fire the AD just because their football hire does not win a championship.
To a large degree the football program IS the athletic department. The revenue it generates drives pretty much everything else. The money people didn't commit to $10M annually to go 8-4 or 9-3. They made that big investment expecting championships will be the return. If this year and the next the team falls short of the CFP and LSU, through the AD, goes to the big donors asking for a $40M-$50M check to make a change, those folks are going to want (a) a different AD making the next hire or (b) the AD to get out of the way and let them make the hire.
AD's get a margin for error with hires in other sports. They generally don't get to make multiple "disappointing" hires in football. Look at Florida. They just won the NC in basketball. Their baseball program is solid year after year (no SEC school has been to the CWS more than Florida since 2008). But if Napier falls back down to earth after last season's "heater" to end the year, the powers that be are going to want the AD out along with Napier. That's just the way it works.
Posted on 7/1/25 at 3:23 pm to tigafighta
Something about newbies,
Can’t live with ‘em, can’t kill ‘em
Can’t live with ‘em, can’t kill ‘em
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News