men tennis coach's salary in D1 and D2

#1
What is a typical salary for a D1 men tennis coach of the ACC conference such as UNC, UVa, VA Tech, Clemson, WF, FSU (aka Free Shoe University as Steve Spurier called it)? I was at WF yesterday watching the men tennis NCAA final and had a conversation with someone in the stand about this. I was surprised that the salary of the men tennis coach is between 95k-110k. WTF!!!

I can't believe that the men tennis coach at an elite program is making less than a junior software developer :-(
 
#2
You can look them up at the public universities and if I recall correctly Ty Tucker at OSU makes $250,000 per year or thereabouts (but he is the director of tennis and oversees both programs to an extent)
 

Nacho

Professional
#3
What is a typical salary for a D1 men tennis coach of the ACC conference such as UNC, UVa, VA Tech, Clemson, WF, FSU (aka Free Shoe University as Steve Spurier called it)? I was at WF yesterday watching the men tennis NCAA final and had a conversation with someone in the stand about this. I was surprised that the salary of the men tennis coach is between 95k-110k. WTF!!!

I can't believe that the men tennis coach at an elite program is making less than a junior software developer :-(
Just like any job it depends on the coach, their experience, the school, their budget, etc. A guy like Ty has been coaching the Buckeyes for 20 years, and was an Assistant before that, so he has moved up the ranks at OSU receiving promotions and raises on his performance which has been outstanding when you look at the history of the program before 2000. Probably should be making more considering he is the equivalent of tennis coaching as ole Urban is to football coaching.

Most college tennis coaches are paid very little, and asked to do a lot which is why so many good ones get out of college tennis altogether and go into club teaching. Most athletic departments have to report their coaches salaries so you can look up the ones you want, but keep in mind the discrepancies are based on many factors. The fact is college tennis coaching is an underpaid, under-appreciated position in the hierarchy of college athletic coaching. You have to recruit, be a manager of the team, try to improve players with very little time, work through the NCAA/ITA oversight which makes the job harder, and then be accountable for the performance while barely making a living.
 

JW10S

Hall of Fame
#4
As has been stated the salaries vary pretty greatly. A lot of college coaches, if not most, also augment their salaries by running summer and holiday tennis camps using the school facilities. A well attended summer camp can bring in some substantial money.
 
#5
Just like any job it depends on the coach, their experience, the school, their budget, etc. A guy like Ty has been coaching the Buckeyes for 20 years, and was an Assistant before that, so he has moved up the ranks at OSU receiving promotions and raises on his performance which has been outstanding when you look at the history of the program before 2000. Probably should be making more considering he is the equivalent of tennis coaching as ole Urban is to football coaching.

Most college tennis coaches are paid very little, and asked to do a lot which is why so many good ones get out of college tennis altogether and go into club teaching. Most athletic departments have to report their coaches salaries so you can look up the ones you want, but keep in mind the discrepancies are based on many factors. The fact is college tennis coaching is an underpaid, under-appreciated position in the hierarchy of college athletic coaching. You have to recruit, be a manager of the team, try to improve players with very little time, work through the NCAA/ITA oversight which makes the job harder, and then be accountable for the performance while barely making a living.
almost every bcs schools coach makes over 100k
 

Doubles

Hall of Fame
#7
Where I got to school I know that the head coach of the men’s team makes somewhere in the 40-50k range. It wouldn’t surprise me if most schools in the midmajor D1 range all the way down to smaller programs are in this range. I would doubt that most D2 and D3 coaches make a lot unless their school has a massive amount of money or their team consistently wins titles.
 

Nostradamus

Talk Tennis Guru
#9
What is a typical salary for a D1 men tennis coach of the ACC conference such as UNC, UVa, VA Tech, Clemson, WF, FSU (aka Free Shoe University as Steve Spurier called it)? I was at WF yesterday watching the men tennis NCAA final and had a conversation with someone in the stand about this. I was surprised that the salary of the men tennis coach is between 95k-110k. WTF!!!

I can't believe that the men tennis coach at an elite program is making less than a junior software developer :-(
Junior software developer makes over >100,000 dollars ? Is this only in Cali or all across USA ? Cause even the Computer engineers with masters degree Starts at lower salary than that.............
 
#10
Junior software developer makes over >100,000 dollars ? Is this only in Cali or all across USA ? Cause even the Computer engineers with masters degree Starts at lower salary than that.............
When it comes to money and jobs, Borna's trash talk exceeds what even you manage to muster on tennis! :D
 
#11
When it comes to money and jobs, Borna's trash talk exceeds what even you manage to muster on tennis! :D
:)

I can't say if it is the "norm" but there are several "junior" software developers at my company and all of them makes between 101k and 104k. Two of them graduated from Carnegie Mellon and the other two graduated from UCLA and University of Florida. Not sure if that makes any differences.
 
#12
:)

I can't say if it is the "norm" but there are several "junior" software developers at my company and all of them makes between 101k and 104k. Two of them graduated from Carnegie Mellon and the other two graduated from UCLA and University of Florida. Not sure if that makes any differences.
The biggest difference is software developers are typical responsible for a product or service the generates or supports revenues that that far exceed their salary. College tennis coaches are typically not producing revenues that exceed their budget.
 

ClarkC

Hall of Fame
#14
:)

I can't say if it is the "norm" but there are several "junior" software developers at my company and all of them makes between 101k and 104k. Two of them graduated from Carnegie Mellon and the other two graduated from UCLA and University of Florida. Not sure if that makes any differences.
Location? Cost of living? Dollars without context mean nothing.
 
#16
The salaries of coaches from public universities are available to the public. For example, UCLA mens head coach Billy Martin makes about $350k a year, UCLA womens head coach Stella Sampras Webster makes $213k, Cal mens head coach Peter Wright makes $138k.
 
#18
The salaries of coaches from public universities are available to the public. For example, UCLA mens head coach Billy Martin makes about $350k a year, UCLA womens head coach Stella Sampras Webster makes $213k, Cal mens head coach Peter Wright makes $138k.
I am not a lawyer but the women head coach needs to sue UCLA for title IX in gender discrimination. She makes 40% less than the men coach. WTF!
 
#27
Sorry about a side note not related to the topic of this discussion. There are great coaches out there who, as any great teachers, deserve high salaries for their vision and ability to help their students. Great coaches and great teachers are hard to find, but those who had the privilege of meeting them and working with them can consider themselves lucky.

My problem is that I have difficulties understanding the purpose and value of college sports. Sports have many virtues, when taken separately from professional career, but college is to get education. Most kids who participate in college sports teams barely have time to study. They have to train and compete. I have met a number of people who played tennis at college. They are not prepared for any other career than a tennis instructor at a local tennis facility. This is a much worse paid and much less fulfilling job that the job which they could have gotten if they focused on studies while at school and got the skills and knowledge required to get a real job. They may have gotten a tennis scholarship to graduate from college, but if this ruined their career opportunities, who cares? They do not get a higher pay rate when they end up working as tennis instructors because they have college degrees. They do not need a college diploma to do it. There may be people who succeeded in both sports and career, but somehow it seems that they are minority.
 
Last edited:
#28
I have difficulties understanding the purpose and value of college sports. College is to get education. Most kids who participate in college sports teams barely have time to study. They have to train and compete. I have seen a number of people who played tennis at college. They are not prepared for any other career than a tennis instructor at a local tennis facility. This is a much worse paid and much less fulfilling job that the job which they could have gotten if they focused on studies while at school and got the skills and knowledge required to get a real job. They may have gotten a tennis scholarship to graduate from college, but if this ruined their career opportunities, who cares? They do not get more money as tennis instructors because they have college degrees.
I see it differently. If you are a college tennis athlete and also study hard in field such as Finance, Economics, Accounting or Engineering (if you have the brain to do so), upon graduation, you will have opportunities to meet wealthy and influential people a lot more than just "regular" college students. Wealthy and important either play tennis or golf and they want to hit with good players. That's how connection and relationship are formed. You use your tennis skills along with your education to advance your career. My company hires a lot of student athletes with degree in Finance and they get paid extremely well.

For college tennis players that don't care about education, they will be tennis instructor at a local tennis facility. Very few will ever be successful.
 
#29
I am not sure that having to focus on tennis "ruined their career opportunities" so much as there is a lot of desire to try to become a pro tennis player. I remember a number of years back Scott Green and Ross Wilson from OSU won a NCAA doubles championship and thought about trying out the pro tour. Scott started a career (in finance, I believe) and so Ross pursued that a little and became a tennis coach after it did not pan out (I think, maybe he went straight to coaching). Many people lamented Scott not trying it out, "He could make it big." I think there is an allure to becoming a professional athlete that hides that it is a really tough way to make a living if you are not in the top 50. A lot of these guys are at the top of the tennis game in the NCAA and want to try to make it on the tour, but 1-5 years to try out the pro tour may make it hard to get hired in a different field.

Many fall back on teaching tennis as something that they feel comfortable in and can make a good living. Good tennis pros can do pretty well, better than some jobs.
 

Nacho

Professional
#30
Sorry about a side note not related to the topic of this discussion. There are great coaches out there who, as any great teachers, deserve high salaries for their vision and ability to help their students. Great coaches and great teachers are hard to find, but those who had the privilege of meeting them and working with them can consider themselves lucky.

My problem is that I have difficulties understanding the purpose and value of college sports. Sports have many virtues, when taken separately from professional career, but college is to get education. Most kids who participate in college sports teams barely have time to study. They have to train and compete. I have met a number of people who played tennis at college. They are not prepared for any other career than a tennis instructor at a local tennis facility. This is a much worse paid and much less fulfilling job that the job which they could have gotten if they focused on studies while at school and got the skills and knowledge required to get a real job. They may have gotten a tennis scholarship to graduate from college, but if this ruined their career opportunities, who cares? They do not get a higher pay rate when they end up working as tennis instructors because they have college degrees. They do not need a college diploma to do it. There may be people who succeeded in both sports and career, but somehow it seems that they are minority.
I completely disagree with this. Tennis, of all sports out there, probably leads in graduation rates, and career choices. Most tennis athletes are fantastic students, and the balance between athletics and school gives many of them a leg up in the business world. They learn discipline, time management, work ethic, and most of all go through the mental ups and downs of an individual sport that has gladiator like parameters. And, tennis players are not given the fake classes and grade help that some college sports are. Not because they don't ask, but because they don't need too. And, many get into tennis instructing as an option, because they have options. Other then other kids who have to linger in retail or wait tables. Teaching tennis or participating as a coach gives a lot of players opportunities to expand in the sport, and those that choose to do it should.

As for the payment of tennis coaches, I would never suggest that a head coach for tennis should be paid the same as a head coach in other sports. It is really up to the school and the situation. If a school wants an administrator running tennis, then a low paying coach is perfectly acceptable. Many schools do this as tennis is not a revenue generating sport. College athletics in general is a money loser. Much of it is paid for through endowments, revenues from events, selling merchandise, generous donors, and our taxes. There is a terrible misconception that bigger supported sports are money generators, but many of them are in the red. Football and basketball especially, and these take a toll on other sports which is why you see so many get cut. Football commands a big chunk of the salary, budget, and is mis-understood as a revenue sport when in reality it is the sport every school chases by over paying coaches hoping for some big payday with wins. Just ask any MAC school, which basically have all had to get rid of every sport to maintain budget equity with women's sports and meet the standards of D-I football and basketball.

If your a good college tennis coach, at a well supported school running a program that is perennially in the top of the rankings, and you recruit kids that graduate with GPA's above the average, then you should be paid as such. The cool thing about many college tennis coaches these days is that they don't do it for money, but enjoy giving back to the game and doing it at a school they love, which is why guys like Manny Diaz, Ty Tucker, and Brad Dancer are in the business. It's not a lucrative job for most, but a fulfilling one
 
#31
CHtennis - Perhaps. I am not an expert in this, I only can make some observations based on conversations with people who I interacted with in the past years. There can be a lot of variations, and there could be regional differences, too. According to the Glassdoor, the average salary of a tennis instructor is $31,299 per year and of a tennis coach is $40,640 per year. In our area, most tennis instructors charge privately $50-$60 an hour which, I admit, is not bad, but it is not a steady income and it is not 40 hours a week. It is more like a few supplementary hours per week, mostly during summer. I know that a local tennis facility instructors in temp positions get in the ballpark of $15 an hour and permanent positions are extremely hard to get. An even larger problem, long term, is an uncertain career development path. On top of it, some great players may discover that being a successful athlete does not automatically make them a great coach.

I am not saying that there are no great jobs for great coaches, all I say that not every former successful athlete becomes a good coach, and only few of them get good career opportunities.

It is so true that the glamorous life and level of income of top 50 or top 100 athletes look very attractive, but the odds of getting to the top are probably comparable to the odds of winning in a lottery.


Nacho
- so well said! Great teachers (or coaches, in case of sports) became teachers because they enjoy every moment of teaching and they find great joy in seeing their students succeed! They need money for living but making money is not their main goal.

Having said that, I find it hard to imagine how a student can train for several hours a day and after that have enough energy to fully engage in the learning process. I must admit, I have never been on the athlete's side, but I supervised PhD students at Berkeley for a number of years, my older kid is at grad school at Harvard, from what I saw myself and what I hear, I cannot imagine how these two worlds can be combined, at least not a top level colleges, and not concurrently. A fully engaged learning process takes a lot of time and energy, maybe more than the student has. If you play recreational tennis for 45 mins, you get recharged and energized. If you train for several hours on a pro level and give everything you got during the training, you get drained.

I can understand that if a kid sees sports as the main thing that he or she wants to do, a college team and a sports scholarship is a logical way to proceed. You get on a team, you get coaching, and your tuition and training is covered. Basically, you graduate from college with a degree in tennis, but since there is no such thing as a degree in tennis, your diploma says something different. If you are bright and mature, you may be able to catch up and start a post-college professional career, but I am not sure if all kids are ready for it. I suspect that most kids are not ready for it and they do not realize when they get onto this path that it will be very difficult to find the right balance.

I may be missing something, and I am honestly trying to understand...
 
Last edited:

Nacho

Professional
#32
Perhaps. I am not an expert in this, I only can make some observations based on conversations with people who I interacted with in the past years. There can be a lot of variations, and there could be regional differences, too. According to the Glassdoor, the average salary of a tennis instructor is $31,299 per year and of a tennis coach is $40,640 per year. In our area, most tennis instructors charge privately $50-$60 an hour which, I admit, is not bad, but it is not a steady income and it is not 40 hours a week. It is more like a few supplementary hours per week, mostly during summer. I know that a local tennis facility instructors in temp positions get less than $15 an hour and permanent positions are extremely hard to get. An even larger problem, long term, is an uncertain career development path. On top of it, some great players may discover that being a successful athlete does not automatically make them a great coach.

It is so true that the glamorous life and level of income of top 50 or top 100 athletes look very attractive, but the odds of getting to the top are probably comparable to the odds of winning in a lottery.
Making a living on the pro tour is rare, grinding, and not something many can achieve. So, with respect to that you are correct. Tennis is not the sport you make a living on playing, but there are many reasons for this that go beyond opportunities and have a long sordid history.

Tennis people are more then instructors, and are more involved then just hitting balls. For the sport they run clubs, serve on advisory boards, work with different tennis communities, work in the tennis merchandise industry....Who do you think is running play sight? Promoting Wilson? Working at the USTA? Working the different ATP tournament events? Running country tennis associations? There are lots of opportunities in tennis, and lost of different avenues. But most student athletes get into other things. Look up Jim Thomas, played at Stanford, got to 6 in the world in doubles, serves on many advisory boards, and oh yea has a law degree....Many other stores like this
 
#33
Having said that, I find it hard to imagine how a student can train for several hours a day and after that have enough energy to fully engage in the learning process. I must admit, I have never been on the athlete's side, but I supervised PhD students at Berkeley for a number of years, my older kid is at grad school at Harvard, from what I saw myself and what I hear, I cannot imagine how these two worlds can be combined, at least not a top level colleges, and not concurrently. A fully engaged learning process takes a lot of time and energy, maybe more than the student has. If you play recreational tennis for 45 mins, you get recharged and energized. If you train for several hours on a pro level and give everything you got during the training, you get drained....
Many 5 star juniors are choosing D3 schools to balance tennis and academics. One parent told me they were using tennis to get in the most selective school possible. These are kids who went to regular high school, took multiple AP courses, and still trained for tennis and played tournaments taking a rigorous curriculum so college is a less of an adjustment for them that those who were home or virtually schooled. We know one player who got in a school with less than 10% acceptance due to his tennis, had a very successful freshmen year in both tennis and academics, making great grades in a premed major, and garnered a summer internship at a prestigious medical center. It is a lot harder in D1 where NCAA says tennis athletes average 32 hours a week in sports related activities. While practice is limited to 20 hours a week, the 20 hours does not include match play, travel, compliance meetings, recruit hosting, etc. At GA Tech, where regular students mainly choose engineering or computer science majors, most of the athletes are business majors. If an athlete is focused more on the tennis than the academics, as long as the player makes decent grades, the player has the option of trying the tour and then returning to college to get a MBA or graduate degree. If the player had a sizeable scholarship for undergrad, parents may be able to fund the grad school when the player's sole focus is academics.

The advantage of D3 and Ivy League schools though is if it becomes too hard to balance tennis and academics, a player can quit tennis without losing funds as any scholarship $ would be need or merit based. D1 players on mixed athletic and merit scholarships have the toughest road as they have to keep up the grades and win the matches. However, there are some premed D1 majors but probably not at top 30 D1 schools; I know of one female D1 player, biology premed who graduated high honors while playing 1S/1D.
 
Last edited:
#34
Many 5 star juniors are choosing D3 schools to balance tennis and academics. One parent told me they were using tennis to get in the most selective school possible. These are kids who went to regular high school, took multiple AP courses, and still trained for tennis and played tournaments taking a rigorous curriculum so college is a less of an adjustment for them that those who were home or virtually schooled. We know one player who got in a school with less than 10% acceptance due to his tennis, had a very successful freshmen year in both tennis and academics, making great grades in a premed major, and garnered a summer internship at a prestigious medical center. It is a lot harder in D1 where NCAA says tennis athletes average 32 hours a week in sports related activities. While practice is limited to 20 hours a week, the 20 hours does not include match play, travel, compliance meetings, recruit hosting, etc. At GA Tech, where regular students mainly choose engineering or computer science majors, most of the athletes are business majors. If an athlete is focused more on the tennis than the academics, as long as the player makes decent grades, the player has the option of trying the tour and then returning to college to get a MBA or graduate degree. If the player had a sizeable scholarship for undergrad, parents may be able to fund the grad school when the player's sole focus is academics.

The advantage of D3 and Ivy League schools though is if it becomes too hard to balance tennis and academics, a player can quit tennis without losing funds as any scholarship $ would be need or merit based. D1 players on mixed athletic and merit scholarships have the toughest road as they have to keep up the grades and win the matches. However, there are some premed D1 majors but probably not at top 30 D1 schools; I know of one female D1 player, biology premed who graduated high honors while playing 1S/1D.
How many 5 stars signed this year for D3? I looked on Tennis Recruiting and only found one 5 star girl and no boys. Am I missing them somewhere else?
 
#35
How many 5 stars signed this year for D3? I looked on Tennis Recruiting and only found one 5 star girl and no boys. Am I missing them somewhere else?
You are right-no boys for 2018. In 2017 eight 5 star boys committed to D3 schools. I thought it was a new trend, but maybe 2017 was an anomaly.
 
#37
I worked in the tennis industry full time for 15+years. Small clubs to finally a 5 star resort. Did everything from lessons to stringing...you name it, I did it. Long hours, good money but it's a grind. After that many years on court, it wasn't fun anymore so the choice was to get a "real Job" as my family would say and be able to play league tennis or continue with the grind. Chose to enjoy the game and I'm pretty happy with my choice. Ive been around D1 and teaching pro lifers and it's a grind. For the most part, you earn as much as your able to work. But very few have paid vacations or employee benefits. Respect the teaching pro's and coaches always
 
#38
The average salary of those coaches is higher than the salary of the President of Indonesia.
Would that be before or after the embezzlement. I know IND is a Muslim country with sharia law and the President is a dictator who pretty much takes most of their oil money into his personal bank account.
 
#39
Would that be before or after the embezzlement. I know IND is a Muslim country with sharia law and the President is a dictator who pretty much takes most of their oil money into his personal bank account.
The current Indonesian President Jokowi has done an amazing job in reducing corruption and bribes, improving infrastructure, and reducing the government’s redtape.
 
#40
This thread is interesting. I was talking to two mid major division one coaches who said it is rare that a tennis coach makes over two hundred grand a year. They cited three or four names, ohio st, Baylor and ucla, among them.
 
#41
Actually no. In what other market, except the closed, non-profit, have-to-spend-so-much-of-your-revenue is there a demand for tennis coaches that is so fierce that it drives salaries that high? Tennis brings next to no revenue. So what is it exactly they are being paid for? Don't tell me it's so kids get a degree. Particularly tennis players, the only difference would be that the school paid for their degree to some extent. But they would have been finance majors or whatever either way. Same as Severin Luthi is not the greatest coach in the world because he happened to come upon Roger Federer at the right time.

Note as well that whatever reason coaches should be paid as much you say, it should also be applicable to volleyball coaches and water polo coaches. UCLA's coach makes $530k. Based on what? Water Polo coaches makes $100k. In sports that have far less interest than tennis.

It's because so much money comes in through various sources that they have to spend it, or risk scrutiny. It's why facilities keep being updated, more suits get hired every year, and coaches see their salaries inflated to ridiculous degree where there is no market for them.

I like readin gyour posts and hearing a lot of what you have to say, but we disagree in this instance.
 

Nacho

Professional
#43
Actually no. In what other market, except the closed, non-profit, have-to-spend-so-much-of-your-revenue is there a demand for tennis coaches that is so fierce that it drives salaries that high? Tennis brings next to no revenue. So what is it exactly they are being paid for? Don't tell me it's so kids get a degree. Particularly tennis players, the only difference would be that the school paid for their degree to some extent. But they would have been finance majors or whatever either way. Same as Severin Luthi is not the greatest coach in the world because he happened to come upon Roger Federer at the right time.

Note as well that whatever reason coaches should be paid as much you say, it should also be applicable to volleyball coaches and water polo coaches. UCLA's coach makes $530k. Based on what? Water Polo coaches makes $100k. In sports that have far less interest than tennis.

It's because so much money comes in through various sources that they have to spend it, or risk scrutiny. It's why facilities keep being updated, more suits get hired every year, and coaches see their salaries inflated to ridiculous degree where there is no market for them.

I like readin gyour posts and hearing a lot of what you have to say, but we disagree in this instance.
I was talking about Brad Dancer in particular. He has been the coach at Illinois since 2006, he has an .800+ winning percentage which puts him the elite of college tennis coaches. His teams have won the BIG, and are in the top 20 in college tennis every year, many times competing in the final rounds of the NCAA tournament. There maybe 5 or 6 coaches that have equaled this performance or are close to it. I would also say he does this getting mostly American kids, and has improved a tennis program that was already good, so made it even better. This to me is an exceptional performance in a conference with 4 legitimate top tennis programs year in and year out (NW, OSU, MICH, MINN). Not all his players turn into these amazing pro's, (Anderson, Delic and Ram predate him) which tells me he is making players play at a higher level for the team. So in my view, he should be incurring a salary consummate with that. At least in the raises every year I would think he would be higher..... The Volleyball coach at Illinois is in his first year, and hasn't yet had that sort of track record but any coach that is successful over a period of many years and has provided consistency to the schools sports program, should be kept and paid well amongst coaches in their league.

But for coaches, you must feel strongly then that football coaches are over paid right? Love Smith gets $3 million a year, and has a $16 million dollar buy out. His team went 2-10, can't even make a bowl game. That is overpaid for a football program that has been mediocre for years and now is worse. And to add insult to injury actually may be in the red so isn't the "revenue" sport everyone says it is. And Smith has a dozen assistant coaches, trainers, sports marketers, probably two secretaries...I can bet that Dancer gets none of that support on an assistant level. Surprised Illinois hasn't cut tennis, they may have to if the football continues down this path.

Hell for giggles, Maryland pays their football coach $2.4 million a year, and that team stinks. They can't even budget $400,000 for a mens tennis team, they are trying to make their football team profitable. Cut their mens program a few years ago, used to be a great tennis team. Lets over pay a football coach and cut other programs

I get what your saying, but I would think we would want the best coaches in college athletics. For tennis, college tennis coaching is underpaid, and college tennis is under appreciated compared to other tennis coaching avenues. Good coaches are poached from college, willingly, moreso compared to other sports. TO have a few coaches who are dedicated and can serve as role models for the game at that level, making $150,000 is ok with me. To add to what I have already mentioned: they recruit, they're spokesman for the game, they develop young people, grind out schedules, hold camps, many have to run their facilities as clubs, do all sorts of other functions for the athletic departments; I could go on and on...And most, like Dancer, do it because they value their job as coach and love the university, not because its the only job they can get. If we value them, maybe schools will try to do more to invest in them instead of fly by night football coaches like Butch jones who made 4.1 million at Tennessee. His way to motivate players? Drive a porsche to work to show them what success looks like (https://fanbuzz.com/college-footbal...n-insanely-expensive-car-to-impress-recruits/). I'll take Dancer any day...

Cool if we still disagree, I think there is some worth to what your saying, some coaches just aren't coaches. We'll agree at least on that, but I think any worthwhile program should reward coaches who are tenured and consistently do a great job, no matter the sport.

thanks for liking my posts, appreciate the banter ;)
 
Last edited:
#44
^Thanks gents, for that poast. And the one above it.
I am all for a high level coach enjoying the fruits of his labor, driving a high performance car while recruiting and mentoring high performing student-affaleats. But....
Wow, Butch Jones is a dbag. Prolly awesome attracting kids....like Bernie Tomic.
 
#45
I was talking about Brad Dancer in particular. He has been the coach at Illinois since 2006, he has an .800+ winning percentage which puts him the elite of college tennis coaches. His teams have won the BIG, and are in the top 20 in college tennis every year, many times competing in the final rounds of the NCAA tournament. There maybe 5 or 6 coaches that have equaled this performance or are close to it. I would also say he does this getting mostly American kids, and has improved a tennis program that was already good, so made it even better. This to me is an exceptional performance in a conference with 4 legitimate top tennis programs year in and year out (NW, OSU, MICH, MINN). Not all his players turn into these amazing pro's, (Anderson, Delic and Ram predate him) which tells me he is making players play at a higher level for the team. So in my view, he should be incurring a salary consummate with that. At least in the raises every year I would think he would be higher..... The Volleyball coach at Illinois is in his first year, and hasn't yet had that sort of track record but any coach that is successful over a period of many years and has provided consistency to the schools sports program, should be kept and paid well amongst coaches in their league.

But for coaches, you must feel strongly then that football coaches are over paid right? Love Smith gets $3 million a year, and has a $16 million dollar buy out. His team went 2-10, can't even make a bowl game. That is overpaid for a football program that has been mediocre for years and now is worse. And to add insult to injury actually may be in the red so isn't the "revenue" sport everyone says it is. And Smith has a dozen assistant coaches, trainers, sports marketers, probably two secretaries...I can bet that Dancer gets none of that support on an assistant level. Surprised Illinois hasn't cut tennis, they may have to if the football continues down this path.

Hell for giggles, Maryland pays their football coach $2.4 million a year, and that team stinks. They can't even budget $400,000 for a mens tennis team, they are trying to make their football team profitable. Cut their mens program a few years ago, used to be a great tennis team. Lets over pay a football coach and cut other programs

I get what your saying, but I would think we would want the best coaches in college athletics. For tennis, college tennis coaching is underpaid, and college tennis is under appreciated compared to other tennis coaching avenues. Good coaches are poached from college, willingly, moreso compared to other sports. TO have a few coaches who are dedicated and can serve as role models for the game at that level, making $150,000 is ok with me. To add to what I have already mentioned: they recruit, they're spokesman for the game, they develop young people, grind out schedules, hold camps, many have to run their facilities as clubs, do all sorts of other functions for the athletic departments; I could go on and on...And most, like Dancer, do it because they value their job as coach and love the university, not because its the only job they can get. If we value them, maybe schools will try to do more to invest in them instead of fly by night football coaches like Butch jones who made 4.1 million at Tennessee. His way to motivate players? Drive a porsche to work to show them what success looks like (https://fanbuzz.com/college-footbal...n-insanely-expensive-car-to-impress-recruits/). I'll take Dancer any day...

Cool if we still disagree, I think there is some worth to what your saying, some coaches just aren't coaches. We'll agree at least on that, but I think any worthwhile program should reward coaches who are tenured and consistently do a great job, no matter the sport.

thanks for liking my posts, appreciate the banter ;)
Oh don't get me started on the whole athletics complex. I'm actually with the other poster, what on earth are athletics doing at schools? Just because you can get to a quarterback, grab 13 boards a night, serve 25 aces a match, does not mean you should have to also sit through a calculus class. A musical prodigy doesn't have to. Why athletes?

If you really sit there and analyze it, you have how much money spent on facilities that only 2%, if that, of the student population can ever use, yet you have locker rooms with lockers with videos. A research facility doing that? Again, the more I age, the less I see the need, other than the status quo and protection of cushy jobs for those inside the vortex, for colleges to have sports period, at least against other schools. Intramurals where students can get out and break a sweat is a different thing. People decry NFL teams holding cities hostage and expecting stadiums to be paid for by taxpayers, yet no one bats an eye at the fact donations to athletic departments are tax deductible so they can keep building these facilities. Not saying all the money would go elsewhere in the school, but the money would be far better used if it went to research some things, or even better, keep it out of the administration-laden world of academia and put it into the economy in general.

And I have to take exception with "develop young people." I have three nephews who are or were college baseball pitchers. Their coaches impact on them was nil other than the fact they decided when they went into games. And the number of people who never were anywhere near any athletic endeavor yet turned out just fine without some coach, making that kind of money, to "develop" them. I'm not saying no coaches ever have any kind of impact, but it's IMHO inflated to a very large degree when it comes to doing exactly what you are doing: justifying an inflated salary that no free market would ever create.

The football coaches are a bit of a different story. The fact 100,000 show up to see a game changes the dynamic somewhat. The problem there is that the wrong people are getting the money. The players are the ones who should be seeing the money, but given the shamateurism the NCAA likes to keep alive, the money has to go somewhere, which is where football coaches cash in. Hell, strength coaches make $500k, and a number of them are idiots. But because they work with genetic freaks who can make anything look good, they look smart. I'd look like a genius too if I was John Isner's serving coach. But again, you can't keep your non-profit status if you don't spend the vast majority of your revenues. So this is what happens.

As far as sports being cut, don't look at football, look at Title IX and the administrators who have created the environment that counts hooks in locker rooms as the measurement of whether a school is in compliance.
 
#46
^Thanks gents, for that poast. And the one above it.
I am all for a high level coach enjoying the fruits of his labor, driving a high performance car while recruiting and mentoring high performing student-affaleats. But....
Wow, Butch Jones is a dbag. Prolly awesome attracting kids....like Bernie Tomic.
The thing is, it really is a job, but rather than interviewing and offering a salary to come work for him, they have to do all this other crap, because people like the NCAA continuing the sham that the school's chemistry department is what will make a kid matriculate. Of course, ask Kain Colter how well his medical school plans worked out with football.
 

Nacho

Professional
#47
Good discussion...A few responses:

Oh don't get me started on the whole athletics complex. I'm actually with the other poster, what on earth are athletics doing at schools? Just because you can get to a quarterback, grab 13 boards a night, serve 25 aces a match, does not mean you should have to also sit through a calculus class. A musical prodigy doesn't have to. Why athletes?
Its an arms race, and many schools can't keep up just ask the MAC conference. But goes deeper then athletics it happens in general with endowments and misguided approaches to philanthropy. Malcolm Gladwell has an awesome series of podcasts on this if you really want to take a deeper dive. Essentially, the schools that are rich just keeping getting donations and money, and put it towards frivolous things while the schools that could really use money are having to penny pinch. Stanford has enough endowment money to not charge a tuition to any student for the next 30 years, yet thy keep getting donations, and from people who have nothing to do with Stanford but just want the publicity. I bet UC Santa Cruz would love to have some donations like that, and what would be the impact to students there? Think about it.

If you really sit there and analyze it, you have how much money spent on facilities that only 2%, if that, of the student population can ever use, yet you have locker rooms with lockers with videos. A research facility doing that? Again, the more I age, the less I see the need, other than the status quo and protection of cushy jobs for those inside the vortex, for colleges to have sports period, at least against other schools. Intramurals where students can get out and break a sweat is a different thing. People decry NFL teams holding cities hostage and expecting stadiums to be paid for by taxpayers, yet no one bats an eye at the fact donations to athletic departments are tax deductible so they can keep building these facilities. Not saying all the money would go elsewhere in the school, but the money would be far better used if it went to research some things, or even better, keep it out of the administration-laden world of academia and put it into the economy in general.
I don't fault schools for trying to have great facilities to attract recruits, but many AD's come from revenue sport backgrounds and put all their time and effort into those sports rather then looking big picture. Butch Jones example is just stupid, why I used it. But it shows the mentality of many of these guys. And schools like Texas and Ohio State that get tons and tons of money donated by benefactors and corporations who want to see Football Championships so they can afford to spend 2 million dollars to reside the football practice field or have videos playing highlights in kids lockers in their practice facility. Its when the conferences start mandating amenities that the schools have to get frugal with their other sports to do it. Its a myth that football makes money, it basically breaks even except for some of the schools that really have a following.

And I have to take exception with "develop young people." I have three nephews who are or were college baseball pitchers. Their coaches impact on them was nil other than the fact they decided when they went into games. And the number of people who never were anywhere near any athletic endeavor yet turned out just fine without some coach, making that kind of money, to "develop" them. I'm not saying no coaches ever have any kind of impact, but it's IMHO inflated to a very large degree when it comes to doing exactly what you are doing: justifying an inflated salary that no free market would ever create.
I played tennis all through Jr's and in D-I. Have had really inspiring and great coaches, and coaches that were clueless. Thats just life, and having been in the working world now 25 years its the same thing. I personally believe that a coach is the same as a good teacher or good manager, and they are fortunate to have an immediate impact on the life of students, one that can last a lifetime and change the course of what a student does or becomes. Countless stories of coaches who have inspired people to greatness and to achieve things beyond their capacities. They make movies about this. Your nephews clearly had a bad coach, but I wouldn't judge the industry on that communicated experience. Coaches have one job, and its to lead the team. Defining leadership takes many forms, but the baseball coaches you refer to I would imagine reap what they sow

The football coaches are a bit of a different story. The fact 100,000 show up to see a game changes the dynamic somewhat. The problem there is that the wrong people are getting the money. The players are the ones who should be seeing the money, but given the shamateurism the NCAA likes to keep alive, the money has to go somewhere, which is where football coaches cash in. Hell, strength coaches make $500k, and a number of them are idiots. But because they work with genetic freaks who can make anything look good, they look smart. I'd look like a genius too if I was John Isner's serving coach. But again, you can't keep your non-profit status if you don't spend the vast majority of your revenues. So this is what happens.
100,000 showing up is a myth. Sure, Ohio State, Alabama, Michigan achieve those sort of numbers, but look at any conference outside of the power 5. I agree with you on the football coaches, way overpaid, over supported, and the assistant coaches are now commanding more. Certainly if someone has proven themselves they should be paid or courted, but schools are so desperate for a "winner" they have an arms race of coaching going on. People are getting wise to this and students are starting not to show up. People are tired of the salaries, and the non-sense associated with the programs. As stadiums empty the salaries will too...

This is an interesting set of articles on the University of Buffalo that will help with the perspective on Football and its impact
https://www.buffalo.edu/ubnow/stories/2017/04/UB-sports-reduction.html (read the comments here....)
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/728690-college-football-2011-18-quietest-fanbases-in-the-country

As far as sports being cut, don't look at football, look at Title IX and the administrators who have created the environment that counts hooks in locker rooms as the measurement of whether a school is in compliance.
Ah, they go hand and hand. Would encourage you to dive deeper into this. Title IX has been around since the 70's, and just calls for equal sports. That happened...but its a combination of the demands of conferences, TV packages, sports channels, Betting agencies, boosters for high revenue sports, regulations for scholarships in mens sports (not part of title IX), and the strain football and basketball have on athletic programs from a budgetary perspective. I can go on and on about tennis in particular but I have done that in other threads.

Have a lot of thoughts on how they could do this, but money and marketing dictate the calls....
 
#48
Junior software developer makes over >100,000 dollars ? Is this only in Cali or all across USA ? Cause even the Computer engineers with masters degree Starts at lower salary than that.............
grads from top schools will demand that... (CMU being a top school), in big tech cities (NYC, Silicon Valley, Austin, etc...)

seems reasonable that a software engineer > tennis coach...
an engineer;s code can be scaled to multi-$M
college tennis coach scales to what? a few dozen guys, in a sport that doesn't generate much revs?
running a junior tennis program on the other hand is big $... ie. you're defining the program, selling to parents of juniors, etc... and if your program is successful, can generate >$1m yearly

For interest, here is a link to the operating budgets for tennis by school. Its safe to say that anything below $500,000 most likely accompanies a salary below $100,000
http://cummingsathletics.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2014CollegeTennisOperatingBudgets.pdf
where the heck is the money coming from? presuming it's not from ticket sales, and tv viewing,... is it just an overflow of cash from tuition revs? maybe just having a big name sports program, is additional marketing to add to the prestige of the school which in turn attracts more kids paying tuition, etc...?

education in general is big business... tuition rises, but the quality/quantity of teachers doesn't... instead it goes into admin & infra (the infra being buildings, stadiums, tennis courts, etc...)
 

Nacho

Professional
#49
where the heck is the money coming from? presuming it's not from ticket sales, and tv viewing,... is it just an overflow of cash from tuition revs? maybe just having a big name sports program, is additional marketing to add to the prestige of the school which in turn attracts more kids paying tuition, etc...?

education in general is big business... tuition rises, but the quality/quantity of teachers doesn't... instead it goes into admin & infra (the infra being buildings, stadiums, tennis courts, etc...)
I am speaking generally, as all athletic budgets are not built the same and are dependent on the type of school (public/private) and what the requirements are from a sports participation perspective. There is usually a portion that comes from tuition, money generated by merchandise revenues, money from the state especially if its a public institution (so taxes), budgets from endowments, donations/philanthropy, ticket sales for games that charge money, money from advertising, conference revenues from tournaments, for football bowl games, and TV packages. Of course this will vary from the demand of the school by supporters, and the one component that seems to make a big difference is the philanthropy portion because this is just "bonus" money and cannot always be planned for in the budget process. Some schools have to raise tuition to meet demands which is why you hear about this on occasion, or the state needs to raise taxes.

Where does the money go? Administration management (Directors, managers, admins, legal fees), coaches salaries, facility upkeep, new facility builds, Facility event management, team uniforms, team amenities (lockers, study areas, dorms), team travel (travel costs, travel equipment-buses, planes), trainers and medical, supplies, advertising (the fancy commercials you see on ESPN during games), money back into the conference memberships, and I can't leave out athletic scholarships....Probably other stuff, but thats a rough outlook.

Whats the payoff? Great sports programs are a way to generate philanthropy and notoriety to schools. Also help with engagement of students and provide a great atmosphere of support. Are they necessary? Not for every school, but I think most American students would insist on attending a school with opportunities to belong socially, and support different organizations. Traditionally for most this comes in the form of athletic opportunities and support, but I personally think this is changing or shifting. This is something maybe parents care about, but todays generation is caring more about financial implications, academic reputation, Geography and school amenities, which is why you are seeing so many empty seats at athletic events except at big Power 5 schools that fill seats with benefactors.
 

Nostradamus

Talk Tennis Guru
#50
grads from top schools will demand that... (CMU being a top school), in big tech cities (NYC, Silicon Valley, Austin, etc...)

seems reasonable that a software engineer > tennis coach...
an engineer;s code can be scaled to multi-$M
college tennis coach scales to what? a few dozen guys, in a sport that doesn't generate much revs?
running a junior tennis program on the other hand is big $... ie. you're defining the program, selling to parents of juniors, etc... and if your program is successful, can generate >$1m yearly



where the heck is the money coming from? presuming it's not from ticket sales, and tv viewing,... is it just an overflow of cash from tuition revs? maybe just having a big name sports program, is additional marketing to add to the prestige of the school which in turn attracts more kids paying tuition, etc...?

education in general is big business... tuition rises, but the quality/quantity of teachers doesn't... instead it goes into admin & infra (the infra being buildings, stadiums, tennis courts, etc...)
I thought Cal tech was the best school in the country for coders?
 
Top