Mixed Message?
Rodriguez's $6.6 Million Compensation Stirs Debate
See? TOLD YOU SO.
In the 1970s, Col. Steve Austin became a household name as the lead character in the dramatic television series "The Six Million Dollar Man.''
Last year, the University of Michigan had its own $6 million man: Football coach Rich Rodriguez.
Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology.
Sorry. Is this article going to be about how Rodriguez is going to make the Wolverines "Better, Stronger, Faster"? Like Steve Austin? That would be awesome. What do you need Barwis for when you have science?
According to information provided to The News through a Freedom of Information Act request, the university's athletic department paid $4.1 million to cover a portion of the buyout Rodriguez owed his former employer, West Virginia, and the associated taxes. The athletic department - which is a financially self-sustaining unit - paid Rodriguez an additional $2.5 million in salary and other compensation.
Uh oh. This is starting to feel sort of torch-and-pitchfork-y. One second.
Sorry, I'm ready now.
Well, John, this issue of the buyout has been discussed elsewhere. Just one year prior, the University, and John Beilein, had successfully negotiated the coach's buyout to half the contracted amount, and negotiated payment installments spanning 5 years - impacting the University to a relatively minor $300,000 bill per year. Wouldn't it be reasonable to think that they would be able to accomplish a similar feat with Rodriguez? Also, just remember the "athletic department - which is a financially self-sustaining unit" bit for a little later. K?
Altogether, the coach cost Michigan $6.6 million in 2008, a number that dwarfs the $553,500 earned by school president Mary Sue Coleman and the $380,368 earned by athletic director Bill Martin.
Oh man, I'm going to have to change.
Ok, back now. See what Heuser is doing? He's comparing Rodriguez's $6.6 million compensation package - which is larded by $4.1 million of buyout money to the salaries of Coleman and Martin. This is somewhat intellectually dishonest. But, let's play along, as Rodriguez's salary still out-strips that of the two administrators by a healthy margin.
Did you know that a garbage man, an HVAC repairman, and a lawyer all make different amounts of money? It's true! Do you know why? A garbage man doesn't really need any specific training. Anyone possesses the physical and mental skill to become a garbage man. This isn't a judgement of their value to society - they play a vital role. This is a fact - being a garbage man requires little education or unique talent.
In order to repair your air-conditioner, an HVAC repairman must takes classes, and pass a certification test. No one can just become one tomorrow - they must receive training, and must prove their skill through certification. The training and certification tests slim the pool of people who can become HVAC repairmen. As such, they have a higher price-tag.
A lawyer undergoes a placement test, four years of college, another placement test, 3 years of law school, and then a certification test. All these steps thin the herd of people who are allowed to practice law.
Now, would the world be OK without personal injury attorneys? Probably. Without garbagemen? No, it would be terrible. Who would pickup the Unicorn dung? The point? Salaries don't represent a person's value. They represent the market's need for their skills. There are a handful of people who have proven themselves capable of building a top-5 college football team. There are hundreds of people who have proven themselves capable of running a University. Capiche?
Finally, remember Lloyd Carr? He made $1.5 million dollars when he retired. John Beilein? He makes $1.3 million. Tom Izzo? $1.7 million. Mark Dantonio? $1.8 million. So, it seems like there are a number of targets for this attack in your local market - many of whom have been there for years. Of course, none of the people listed above were targets of media-issued fatwas.
Neither Martin nor Rodriguez responded to requests for comment made through athletic department spokesmen. But Kadie Otto, an assistant sport management professor at Western Carolina and president of The Drake Group, a national organization devoted to reforming college athletics, said the millions spent on Rodriguez speaks volumes.
"It says a lot about our value system,'' Otto said. "For an employee of higher education to be making that kind of money when faculty wouldn't even approach that in their lifetime seems to be sending a mixed message.''
Oh. So by "stirring debate", you meant "I am going to fabricate the debate by prompting someone with a vested interest in the matter. I am also not going to show the other side of said debate".
Anyway, remember the "financially self-sufficient" thing that Heuser mentioned? Heuser doesn't. As the Athletic Department and University are financially structured, the link between Rodriguez's salary, Coleman's salary, and salary of any faculty member does not exist. Know why? Because the AD is financially self-sufficient, he is paid from a completely different pool of money. The AD earns every cent that Rodriguez is paid - it is not funded by tuitions or tax-payer dollars. Comparing Coleman's salary to Rich Rodriguez's is as relevant as comparing it to Alex Rodriguez's - because Coach Rodriguez and Coleman have two separate employers that maintain two different revenue streams, two different sets of expenses, and two completely different balance sheets. A drop in Rodriguez's salary would not lead to an increase in faculty salaries any more than cutting my salary would - because the Athletic Department, as a self-sustaining financial entity, does not pay faculty salaries.
Professor Allen Sack, director of the sport management program at the University of New Haven (Conn.) and author of "Counterfeit Amateurs: An Athlete's Journey Through the Sixties to the Age of Academic Capitalism,'' said the money committed to Rodriguez by Michigan reflects the high finance that permeates big-time college athletics, where the average annual pay of major college football coaches hit $1 million two years ago.
"It is excess,'' Sack said. "It's excess if you say to yourself that greed is not always good. It's the same kind of excess that we had in the general business environment in the U.S. Maybe $6 million is not reasonable for a college coach.''
THIS is your article, John! Rather than a hit job on Rodriguez, why couldn't you provide ANY context? Like the fact that University of Tennessee, whose Athletic Department is not self-sufficient and actually borrow money from the University just hired a head coach for $2 million, a defensive coordinator for $1.5 million, and a defensive line coach for $600,000? If you want to argue that salaries for college coaches are over-inflated, that's a viable argument to make. By centering on Rodriguez, and Michigan, you remove the context of the environment in which his salary exists. Rodriguez is a data-point, he is not the problem. There is a whole debate to be held about the commercialization of college athletics. Rather than having that debate, you present a poorly reasoned, contradictory, and one-sided hit-and-run on Rodriguez.
