I thought I heard on the radio earlier that Ray was employing a search firm to help with the search. I'm not sure why.....but OK. But if he is, somebody please tell me that Eddie Fogler won't have anything to do with this effort.
Coaching Search
- Thread starter midline
- Start date
Hell I just heard someone else has hired Fogler consultants for their search. I guess it's a respectable business he does. I believe Fogler likes us, and would try his best to find what they believe is the best guy for the job. That doesn't mean I'll like it, but apparently others trust them.
He's the one who recommended Horn.....and dismissed Marshall at Winthrop supposedly because Marshall reminded him of Donovan at UF.
It's not Fogler. He's doing the Missouri search. They'll probably use the people that helped to hire Beamer.
I'm glad Fogler isn't doing it. He's more of an advisor it seems - I don't want someone with personal feelings toward the school (but no accountability or investment) advising on a hire.
I'm glad Fogler isn't doing it. He's more of an advisor it seems - I don't want someone with personal feelings toward the school (but no accountability or investment) advising on a hire.
I heard that Ray has decided on a bball coach and the search is just a smoke screen. It will be Will Muschamp. He said well he wasn’t good at football, so let’s give basketball a try. Plus it looks like he carries a basketball around under his shirt.
of course, my stomach looks the same.
of course, my stomach looks the same.
So we pay someone to do what the AD is paid to do?
Word is that we were already interviewing people yesterday, same day this came out. It seems as though this was settled a few days ago and was just waiting for the right time to announce it. They had to wait until we did not get NIT nd then moved forward and were fully prepared to do so.
I hope we get someone good but I personally feel we will be set back a few years with this decision. I hope we dont lose Carter and that whoever comes in will work to keep Couisnard and Stevenson to stay.
For what its worth, I think we are priced out of Boynton hiring with all the buyouts we are dealing with and such. This leads me to hoping for Jerome Tang at Baylor of Matt Mcmahon at marquette. Both great recruiters and seem like highly respected. Im not sold on Furman coach or Tenn Chat coach. will see where it goes though.
I hope we get someone good but I personally feel we will be set back a few years with this decision. I hope we dont lose Carter and that whoever comes in will work to keep Couisnard and Stevenson to stay.
For what its worth, I think we are priced out of Boynton hiring with all the buyouts we are dealing with and such. This leads me to hoping for Jerome Tang at Baylor of Matt Mcmahon at marquette. Both great recruiters and seem like highly respected. Im not sold on Furman coach or Tenn Chat coach. will see where it goes though.
Well you can look at the list of potentials in the state, eliminate the best candidates and Tanner will hire between 2 or 3 of the worst candidates. Based on history we'll end up with Pitino, who will be here for 3 years and flame out badly. See Holtz and Spurrier.
Last edited:
Well, let's look at what the AD has done on his on, I would say he needs all the help he can get
This will probably stretch out until late March or April. Medved, McMahon and Paris are still coaching. Richey is done for the the year as is Boynton. I agree that Boynton is probably priced out - though OSU might be sorry they signed that big contract. He's only 17-17 this year. Sean Miller is not coaching now so I hope they are doing some DD to figure out if he will be subject to a Show Cause Order from the NCAA. (That may not be possible.)
Real world scenario. I have 3 different job responsibilities that each provide 1/3 of my annual income. If I paid someone to do one of those jobs I now make 2/3 of my normal annual income. I’d like to see these people suffer the same consequences. Reduce Ray’s pay by the amount the consultant firm charges to find a qualified candidate. Who else just rolled their eyes and said “yeah right”
A search firm doesn't hire the person. They do the initial essentials so the AD isn't wasting time calling people who aren't interested- which could put the coach in a tough position because ADs are supposed (professional courtesy) ask for permission to talk to a coach. A search firm doesn't have to do that.
The search firm can also interview other coaches for references and keep their name out of what could be potentially negative information about a particular coach.
It's no different than a company using private recruiters- which many do.
There was a time 10 years ago when I'd get a recruiter contacting me once every 6-8 weeks to gauge my interest in certain jobs. Plausible deniability was one reason those companies used recruiters. But I'm a little older now and not in their target demographic anymore.
Many schools use these coaching search firms and they do it for a reason.
IMO, search firms are about as useful as brokerage firms in 2022.
Why would you pay an intermediary hundreds of thousands of dollars when you can head straight to the source? No one knows your product better than you.
Why would you pay Edward Jones ridiculous amounts of hidden fees when you can use Vanguard or an S&P index ETF or SPY?
Why would you pay an intermediary hundreds of thousands of dollars when you can head straight to the source? No one knows your product better than you.
Why would you pay Edward Jones ridiculous amounts of hidden fees when you can use Vanguard or an S&P index ETF or SPY?
Last edited:
Im not sure how it all works but my fear on hiring firms is you are basically hiring an agency to talk to a coach's agent. I just dont see any upside to that practice. First you got to cut through the bs. Id have a hard time if a middle man that I hired told me I couldnt get this or that. Then what kind of coach has an agent? One that has failed but coached at a high level? One that is successful at a high level? What are the odds of the latter coming here?
Personally I think I'd prefer a small school guy or an up and coming assistant and take a hard pass on the firm. And if they have an agent, they can express their concerns with me directly.
Personally I think I'd prefer a small school guy or an up and coming assistant and take a hard pass on the firm. And if they have an agent, they can express their concerns with me directly.
Last edited:
Agree. It's an antiquated model. The person that hires them ends up doing the vast majority of the work.
Brutal. Front-Load, Back-Load, Revenue Sharing, 12b1, intra-fund activity to trigger more front load, ,etc. And they are experts at hiding those fees. It's borderline criminal. Even their BBB has been taken down.
If you're with them, don't listen to a word they say or those feel good calls and cards. Just determine what your liquidation price is today and compare it to your initial investment for your performance. I just helped back a friend out of that madness. Over seven years, he was earning 5.83% while SPY was yielding 22% a year on average. It's the same deal in a down market too - EJ customers just bleed harder.
Some are, some aren't. You'd probably have to hire a firm to weed them out.
The SEC is another government agency that comes across as corrupt. They go out of their way to protect Goldman and JP, yet don't protect the average American from this type of stuff. Sad. Basic finance should be taught to everyone.
Ha. They sure are. At least Elon Musk gives it to them every chance he gets.
The Edward Jones system is quite complex. For example, they are not obligated to report fees certain funds outside of the network for some odd reason. It's very difficult to determine what is going on by looking through your statement and the figures they report. My friend believed he was only paying them a few hundred dollars a year but his cost was close to $200K per year in terms of opportunity cost. All because of unnecessary fees and slight of hand compounding over and over again. They are creative resellers.
Someone please remind me why Fogler was so bad. When he was let go I thought it was Carolinas loss
He wasn't bad at all.....he just made the mistake of saying that Carolina was a school that on average should make the NCAAs one of every 4 years and that didn't make McGee happy.
EDIT: Also I think he was tired of coaching in the new recruiting environment with all the emphasis on AAUs.
Nailed it and that pissed McGee and some of the fan base off. But yeah I’d take once every four years. It’s a lot more trips than we’ve had in my lifetime
As far as I have heard, he is not currently coaching anywhere. Doesn't really have to with his $7,75M buyout from Wichita State. As competitive as he is, however, I would think he'd love another opportunity.
Edward Jones is for people who still live in 1987 before the internet arrived. There's plenty of Boomers out there that have a generalized fear of finances. They happily fill that gap for a huge cost under the premise of being a full-service, boutique brokerage. Can you imagine paying 6% plus all of the front load fund costs before they lift a finger? Yikes! On top of everything else, they also have revenue sharing agreements with funds so they are incentivized to place you in the highest sharing yields, not the best performers.
Vanguard actually has a department dedicated to getting people out of Edward Jones and other brokerages that operate in this manner. They also have an free App where you can include all of the funds you've been in to demonstrate just how bad the bend-over has been from Jones over the years. Fees galore.
Please hire Odom or Purnell who are currently on the NIT selection cmt and do a horrible job! In fact, may have been a hachet job on Martin
Just what he needed... ex Gamecock coach still sore and ex CU coach...
Just what he needed... ex Gamecock coach still sore and ex CU coach...
We can't get much further back. Throw out the Final Four and Frank did nothing here.
A. Edjones doesn’t hide its fees. I work for them and I tell my clients every year down to the dollar what they pay me and the firm. And
b. Some folks don’t have the knowledge or the time to DIY.
C. An actively managed portfolio will always out perform an indexed portfolio over time.
You’re spreading false truths. None of our A share mutual funds charge 6%. The highest is 5 and that is if you have less than $250k. There is a cost of doing business even at Vanguard where you think it’s free. There are other ways to do business other than A share mutual funds.
And I have the same free app that a vanguard client can plug their indexed funds into and it will demonstrate how much they’ve missed out on by not being in actively managed funds. You see what you want to see when it comes to things like this.
I answered the question above. You disagree.
The comparisons you make are your opinion. Clearly many people do use those firms because they aren't interested in keeping up with it themselves- or don't have time to keep up it themselves- or prefer to not handle it themselves.
Clearly many universities and athletic departments disagree with you. Probably not new.
My dad uses Edward Jones. He doesn't have time or the interest in messing with it himself. He has many hobbies and is active and it's just not something he's interested in doing.
HIs trusts his advisor, is willing to pay for the service she provides because he feels she does a good job and has assisted him through some rather complicated estate issues because of her particular background.
He's asked me to look over this portfolio a few times just for the heck of it (I'm not an expert by any means) but I've found that the approach she's taken with him has been very solid given his situation and his goals. He lives a comfortable retirement, and still works part time 10-15 hours a week because he enjoys it.
Some folks on here have a hard time understand that people are different, and value different things.
Last edited:
In fairness, you nor I (or anyone on this site )have any idea how they do their jobs because we haven't done it and all we can do is read some stories about them from people that haven't done it either.
Clearly a lot of schools use search firms so - just using some logic- their services are probably more than just talking to an agent.
Odom got what he wanted from USC, which was one last big pay day before retirement because USC wanted to hire someone with name recognition, and he was about a year away from being fired at Wake. Doubt he has anything against Frank. Purnell either. Bottom line is that the NIT picks matchups that draw the biggest crowds possible. USC struggles to draw decent crowds during the season. And nobody could have been placed in the NIT where USC would have been a natural foe that would have drawn any interest on the road. And let's be honest, nobody in Columbia could have cared less if USC went to the NIT. All that would have done is put fodder on the talk shows that it was just another reason to fire Frank because USC couldn't get in the big show. And it was a break they didn't go. It just delayed the inevitable of letting Frank go and starting over.
Similar threads
