Serious question about Sherri and 1.1 million salary

S

Sooner81

Banned
Joined
Jan 7, 2018
Messages
477
Reaction score
0
New to this board but I have watched Sherri become a second tier coach and OU ladies a second tier program in the Big-12 the last 4 or 5 years (not on Baylors level or WV and now not OSU). I hear Traber say that she is the most over paid coach in the country. So what is everyone’s opinion on this. I’m not bashing her but I can tell you I don’t watch many of their games like I used to because of the mediocrity. She does make over a million a year and I don’t see us compete at that level. Should we stay with her or could OU get a lot more energetic coach , recruiting etc, for that sum of money? Used to love watching because she had the talent to, at times, play with about anyone. Has she gotten lazy in recruiting or what has happened and DOES she deserve that kind of cash? Thoughts???
 
Oh, brother. This ought to generate some traffic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I’m sure that’s what you’d like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sybarite, didn’t know there is another board for this but thought this was the OU women’s hoops board so it seemed an appropriate topic.

Banjo, wow that’s harsh. I have thought this myself about Sherri but I will take note that you don’t like Traber. I sure don’t think I personally don’t have credibility because of this but that’s on you.
 
Tycat and others, please remove your hate for Traber and I guess your hate for me out of it and please tell me your thoughts. It’s Sherri, the last 5 years, worth 1.1 million per year? I say I don’t think so.

So I started this thread for a true discussion on the topic Not for people to attack Traber or myself. Also, the attendance is Way down so maybe very few care about OU women’s basketball anymore and if that is true, as it seems to be, then that brings more credibility to the argument against her high salary.

Any response on the topic??
 
I actually don't care what her salary is. Whatever a person can contract in way of salary for any job, I say good for them.

I don't even care about debating whether she deserves that money.

All I want to talk about is the program, the players and the result.

The players, the recruiting and the play has been mediocre the last few years, inconsistent and troublesome. The result has really been nothing to write home about when you consider Oklahoma's history since Sherri's arrival.

Still, as others point out, we make the tournament and have winning records.

My points are this: player performance, coaching, consistency and the end result are not what we expect at OU.

Period. That's it.

Our recruiting seems to have gotten better the last couple of seasons, so let's wait a couple of more years and see what happens. Doing that isn't going to kill us, it may just delay a complete return to prominence again.
 
I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.
 
Slow morning, Syb? That may be longest post you've ever made.

I actually agree by-in-large. They can pay her whatever the heck they want to.

I just want the team to be as great as her salary is. If it isn't, then I have a problem -- but not with the salary.
 
sybarite said:
I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.
Click to expand...



WOW, a lot of time on someone’s hands. Back to the topic, yes she does make too much money imo, of course all coaches these days make too much as well. She has become mediocre and the program has as well. But I’m done unless anyone actually wants to discuss this issue - is she still doing a good job and should we keep going down the path with her and is she worth the financial investment? But if you all are ok with 13-12 or even Just making the tourney and getting booted like the last several years and having 1,500 to 2000 butts in the seats then more power to you.
 
sybarite said:
I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.
Click to expand...
Speaking of salary..you must get paid per word
 
sybarite said:
I don't know how many times we have had this discussion on this board, and it ends up being just another thread to complain about Sherri.

I think Lady Gaga makes too much money. I can't believe Mark Zuckenberg and Mark Cuban got over a billion dollars for an internet site. How dumb are people who are out of work to buy Yankee tickets to see a $250,000,000 shortstop, even though he was pretty good a year or two earlier? It's unbelieveable that New Kids on the Block had four teenage boys worth about $75,000,000 each off of a couple of albums. Can you believe how much was made off of Star Wars?

Then, we get into colleges in which some faculty make less than highschool teachers. We built schools as soon as we settled the territory. We knew it was important. We even built a university almost immediately. We just never thought to pay the teachers that much. Then, someone discovered that alums would contribute more money if they had a winning football team. Really, is that true?

Have you ever looked at the Endowments of Harvard and Yale and compared them to OU and Alabama? Any guesses which is larger? Harvard could buy Oklahoma and Alabama's football team. But, somehow, we thought they were connected, and the alums invented Bud Wilkinson who was the perfect fit on which to build a program. But, then, half the colleges in the country had now decided that it was more important to pay football coaches than Nobel Prize winners.

Sometime, go out into the faculty parking lots to see what they are driving. Then, go to the lot for the coaches and the football players. Fascinating. And, some clown says college professors get rich off of grants proving their case. But, the real purpose of the university, to teach kids to live in our society, is performed by a lot of underpaid people who don't even have the luxury of tenure as much any more since we generated so many PhDs in response to the Viet Nam Era Draft. A bunch of underpaid people are doing a very underappreciated job, but none of the parents visiting their kids at campus really want to meet the faculty, only the coach.

So, there is too much money around the sports program that has no business at an educational institution in the first place. It really doesn't help anyone learn to write proper English, obviously (despite the fact that Bud and Sherri were English teachers), and rarely teaches any history. You wonder what would happen to OU if we went the Harvard route and took pride in our product from the classrooms and research labs. Would we have a $100 billion endowment? I think we finally did hit a billion.

Now, if you are the President of the university or the Athletic Director, you are accustomed to dealing with large sums of money. There is a reason that university professors rarely are invited to the university president's house for dinner (at least since George Lynn Cross who was a botany researcher in his heart). Professors just aren't into the discussions of interest rates, tax shelters, and 501Cs.

Then, you get a wringer thrown at you. You have always maintained a basketball program which lost money. Nobody really came to the games, except for Oklahoma A&M and Kansas. Nobody came to the wrestling matches, except when A&M was in town. Nobody even knew when we had track or swimming meets. I think they had three rows of bench seats for each, mostly empty. But, we kept the swimming teams going until about 1960. I think we either needed a new pool with Olympic dimensions or----, and we decided or. But, we kept track teams, wrestling teams, and a couple of others going, even build a fledgling gymnastics team. Then, suddenly, we got Title IX, and people started screaming about non-revenue sports.

Apparently, nobody noticed that we had always had non-revenue sports. We even had a band that wasn't generating a profit. But, suddenly, some people didn't like it that women's sports didn't generate a profit. Well, we never tried football. Wonder what outcry that would have brought? Now, we resented all of these things that took money away from football, now that profit was the primary purpose of the university, either that or football. It get's confusing. There was a little resentment of this non-football loss of money that didn't seem to be noticed until it became involved with women's sports. The track and wrestling teams weren't closed.

But, someone noticed that nobody came to the women's basketball games. Well, nobody went to the track meets, gymnastics events, swimming meets, or wrestling meets unless A&M was there. But, they closed women's basketball. Now, let's get a picture of relevance. We have a university that is costing a fortune, an athletic department managing millions of dollars, and they are making a decision on peanuts? Kind of reminds me of the guy who declares he can't pay his food bills with a case of beer in his refrigerator.

So, there is a national outcry. You cancelled the women's basketball program, a staple of Title IX, what it was all about. You notice how long it took to undo that. But, twenty-five years later, it still is in the lead paragraph in Wiki about OU women's basketball. Now, what is the price of repairing that image?

You have a retiring university President who has done a masterful job of pulling a lot of new infrastructure into the university. He's talked of creating a group somewhat like Harvard at OU, at least for some students and faculty. He was trying to build a dream. He was looking for a new conference. Everything was about image.

One of the things that he had solved was that he and his AD had got lucky. That image problem they had about closing a program had actually become an asset. The cheap hire they had made, a highschool coach because no well-known coach would have the job, built it into a respected program. But, it was more than just winning. She had generated an image around the program. She became President of the Coaches Association and a Member of the Hall of Fame. Now, exactly what is that worth? Put a price on it.

I suspect that Boren and Joe C were so relieved to have that off their backs that they were willing to pay her double what they are. She didn't approach the university with a gun. They decided what to pay her, what she was worth to them.

It becomes a bit silly to talk of profit and loss when you look at the history of minor sports at OU. If you aren't football, you have operated at a loss. If you operate as a track coach with a bad reputation, you probably won't last long. We have even found that men's basketball coaches who run afoul of the NCAA have a short shelf life. But, wrestling coaches who lose may be here for years, despite the fact that we were a storied program that has won six or seven titles. Just don't hurt the image, become a nuisance. But, if you actually enhance the image by becoming a Hall of Famer, you might be appreciated by those who have bigger fish to fry.

This is a long way to say that Boren and Joe C appear to be quite willing to pay Sherri whatever it takes to keep her happy. They offered it to her. She didn't rob them. They have that monkey off their back. Not only that, a lot of people like the way she does it. Makes them look good. I suspect that if she were as unpleasant as some other coaches, and the coaching community didn't like her, she would be gone.

But, the parts of the wheel that are doing all of the squeaking----I don't know that they think it is even worth greasing. They got the overall machine moving the way they want. There is a lot of squeaking that would have to be done to draw their attention to the difference between #3 and #30 when they are a whole lot more concerned about other matters. You are going to have to wait for it to be a 5-25 team or for Sherri to begin throwing things at refs.
Click to expand...
Can someone summarize this mess in 25 words or less?
 
Summary-
Our women's team isn't good enough
Sherri has not a good job of recruiting and retention lately(until this year)
Her salary, however, is irrelevant.
 
2 thoughts.

1. Bob the Nailer nailed that summary!! lol That post, Syb, was epic. Sorry I couldn't read it all, darn ADD

2. Is it a certain time of month? You guys are harsh on a newbie. I know this topic has been discussed ad nauseum on this board, but new folks don't know that. Geez. Talk about Mean Girls!!

Welcome Sooner81.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
New Hire Director of Recruiting, Influence and Branding Stategy
Replies
0
Views
256
Soonercuda
S
M
South Carolina at LSU
Replies
4
Views
513
Soonerguy06
S
S
Early NLI Signing Period 2024 Class
Replies
6
Views
1K
Soonercuda
S
S
Interview With Beatrice and Payton
Replies
0
Views
1K
Soonercuda
S
M
Oklahoma Daily Article on Coach Jennie
Replies
5
Views
2K
Soonerguy06
S
Back
Top