Would Yaklich come? Could we afford him?
- Thread starter TheTruth
- Start date
jamminjamarsmiley
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2019
- Messages
- 2,520
I agree a change should be made... Yaklich is not the answer.
Trey_Guidry4three
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2018
- Messages
- 1,929
You would think we are playing in Louisville tonight. I'm happy I did not make the trip due to flight difficulties out of Fargo this morning. A change needs to be made no doubt but we all know ISU is financially tied to the hip with Daniel.
B
BirdGrad2011
Guest
Yaklich would likely have to take an ISU type job or lesser to get to where he wants to be as a head coach. Kind of over the alumni thing right now. Always want the best available though.
I really really have been trying to give Dan the benefit of the doubt the past several years. I really wanted him to succeed as our head coach, it would have been a great story.... star redbird player transitions into a star redbird coach. But unfortunately there is one common denominator in the very average to below average basketball product we have been struggling to watch over the past 8 years. It's not the players or the assistant coaches, we all know there have been more than enough turn over in those two departments. Its not the fans, its not the competition or the arena. IT'S DAN MULLER. His job is to put a product on the court that can win games and championships and he just IS NOT getting it done. I would rather take a chance on another coach instead of getting my hopes up year after year just to get the same result. Its sad that the best hope we have is to win a couple games to make it to the championship game in St Louis just to get BLOWN OUT every single time. We have a beautiful new lower bowl and its going to continue to be empty unless there is a product on the court worth watching. Dan if you love ISU as much as you say go recruit us a coach that win a tournament...… ANY TOURNAMENT!
TBS_20
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2019
- Messages
- 1,572
Longtime viewer. First time poster. I made an account to post this. Basically, ISU can play with the big boys (see below) they just choose not to.
1. Yaklich is far and away the best option but the following could be for any coach they choose.
2. If a P5+1 team comes calling Yaklich will obviously go there but if not ISU could easily afford him.
3. Worst case scenario ISU has to pay out the remainder of Muller's contract, which I believe is $2.4-million. ISU would have to pay more to get Yaklich. Let's say $1.25-million (which is probably a high estimate). 5 years, $6.25-million. $6.25+$2.4=$8.65-million. $8.65-million÷20,000 students=$432.5÷3 years=an increase in tuition of just $144.17 per year.
4. Of course, increasing tuition is never an ideal option but it's only for 3 years AND it would be worth it in the long run because Yaklich is definitely the guy to get ISU back to the NCAA tournament which would bring in revenue in many forms.
5. Also, after 3 years if any coach proves themselves worthy ISU could scrap the rest of the 5 year contract and restructure the contract for 3 years $9-million ($3-million per year) and just keep the $144.17 increase in tuition and pay like the big boys without donors or an even more increase in tuition. That initial increase would cover it once they cover paying off Muller.
Don't say ISU is little sisters of the poor and can't do this and can't do that because an increase in tuition of just $144.17 per year means paying coaches, whoever it may be, like a top 20 coach EVERY YEAR from here on out and it would end up paying for itself. ISU can play with the big boys they just choose not to.
1. Yaklich is far and away the best option but the following could be for any coach they choose.
2. If a P5+1 team comes calling Yaklich will obviously go there but if not ISU could easily afford him.
3. Worst case scenario ISU has to pay out the remainder of Muller's contract, which I believe is $2.4-million. ISU would have to pay more to get Yaklich. Let's say $1.25-million (which is probably a high estimate). 5 years, $6.25-million. $6.25+$2.4=$8.65-million. $8.65-million÷20,000 students=$432.5÷3 years=an increase in tuition of just $144.17 per year.
4. Of course, increasing tuition is never an ideal option but it's only for 3 years AND it would be worth it in the long run because Yaklich is definitely the guy to get ISU back to the NCAA tournament which would bring in revenue in many forms.
5. Also, after 3 years if any coach proves themselves worthy ISU could scrap the rest of the 5 year contract and restructure the contract for 3 years $9-million ($3-million per year) and just keep the $144.17 increase in tuition and pay like the big boys without donors or an even more increase in tuition. That initial increase would cover it once they cover paying off Muller.
Don't say ISU is little sisters of the poor and can't do this and can't do that because an increase in tuition of just $144.17 per year means paying coaches, whoever it may be, like a top 20 coach EVERY YEAR from here on out and it would end up paying for itself. ISU can play with the big boys they just choose not to.
TIMMY
Well-known member
A tuition increase to pay for a new basketball coach????? I'm taking a pass on that one.
TBS_20
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2019
- Messages
- 1,572
TIMMY said:
And, that is exactly why they will never go anywhere. And increase of $72 dollar a semester could change this program drastically. Sometime you have to make tough, unfavorable decisions for the good of the future. Some just cant see the future.
BUT, I do agree it will never happen.
Yak is one of Miller’s best friends. I know it’s business, but I have a tough time believing that if Muller gets canned Yak is going to want to take a job his buddy was just fired from. Yak will have plenty of opportunities at a HC job at this level. Keep in mind, he has no HC experience. Often, new coaches will get their legs wet at this level. Now, Yak may have leaped over that step being an really well respected coach at Michigan and Texas.
Also, just another coaching note that I don’t know where to put within the 100 threads that discuss this topic...
I think we are starting to see why Chris Collins didn’t want the job. It’s tough with legacy hires.
Also, just another coaching note that I don’t know where to put within the 100 threads that discuss this topic...
I think we are starting to see why Chris Collins didn’t want the job. It’s tough with legacy hires.
Adunk33 said:
I would agree with you on Yak not wanting to take his buddy's job, but I also have a feeling that if Muller got canned and Yak got offered the job Muller would tell him to take it.
That being said, we'd likely have to do it this year if we are going to go after Yak, i get the sense that he will likely be a HC somewhere next year.
ricohill
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2017
- Messages
- 7,302
Is Yak really the guy for this job? Texas is 82 in NET, might not make the tournament, and Shaka could be fired. I get they had one good team while he was the assistant here, but anyone could have won and had a great defense with that group of players.
I'm sure he's going to be a candidate at some low/mid-major schools, but I am in no way sold he has what it takes to be the head coach at ISU and be successful. There is so much more that goes into being a head coach than coaching defense. Look at the players he recruited while he was here...
I'm sure he's going to be a candidate at some low/mid-major schools, but I am in no way sold he has what it takes to be the head coach at ISU and be successful. There is so much more that goes into being a head coach than coaching defense. Look at the players he recruited while he was here...
TIMMY
Well-known member
I think to increase tuition, even a small amount, for something that specific you need students to buy into it. I don't think you'd ever get that. In fact I'd be afraid of opening the student fees for athletics can of worms. We might not like the outcome.TBS_20 said:
SoCalRedbird
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2017
- Messages
- 1,120
Oh, I think so.ricohill said:
The defensive efficiency on Yak's teams would have us compete for a Valley championship every single year. ISU in 2016 to Michigan in the FF to Shaka's Texas team, where we can assume Yak isn't allowed complete control of the defensive schematics. Hard to believe Shaka would compromise his HAVOC methodology just because he picked up a mildly successful, defensive-minded assistant. Given free reign w the UT defense, Yak would have them rated higher.
My only question is who he knows in the recruiting world. He's from high school, not AAU.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
DaveBird10
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 1,396
Gonna piggyback on this, there is zero chance Yak would replace Dan if Dan is released. They were roommates in college and Dan called Michigan to get Yak the job their.DWRedbird said:
Only way Yak comes here is if we some how make the NCAA tournament and leaves for a better job and the chances of that happening are...
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
TBS_20
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2019
- Messages
- 1,572
cubird said:
At this point I don't really care who the coach is next year as long as it isn't Muller. My choice is Yaklich but the whole point of my original post wasn't about getting Yaklich specifically it was more about ISU can afford $3-million per year (some of that will go to paying Dan off but $3-million once he's paid off) on a coach without donor support or increasing revenue by just raising tuition by $72 per semester. That's it. Eventually it will pay for itself with other revenue streams when they get good for awhile because they can retain a high calibur coach and they will be able to reduce tuition. It's a somewhat temporary increase. That's all it takes and a lot of problems get fixed. Well, they have to oust Lyons, too but that's another thread , lol.
I get many of you disagree with this but it's just so simple. You can throw at me what about this and that....AND? Not only will being good help the program it will help the school. it's the classic case of spend money to make money.