Started By
Message
re: Jon Hoke ...
Posted on 2/9/15 at 2:12 pm to TiptonInSC
Posted on 2/9/15 at 2:12 pm to TiptonInSC
quote:
Eta: they should give him $100k if he doubles the defensive totals from last year (sacks, tfl's, interceptions....not yards and points given up of course)
That's what I'm a big proponent for. When I draw up contracts for people that have worked for me in some type function that requires a contract, I like to heavily incentive performance.
Hoke has a contract right now that's worth $750K annually and he doesn't have to improve anything technically to get that $750K. There's another $125K in possible Incentives (that's the cap they put in, so even if he wins a SEC, Natty and has a Top3 Defense in the SEC, he can still only get $125K more (also since it would technically be a bonus, it gets taxed close to 40%.) Therefore, he could really only make about $75K in Incentive Bonuses.
If I would've not capped the incentives, and added more like you suggested for ranking in TFL's, Sacks, Turnover's Gained, 3rd Down Conversion Defense and Scoring Defense etc....
Also, you could never convince me that a DC who could win us a SEC and Natty should only get $125K in Incentive Bonuses. I don't believe it. I would absolutely have a 6 figure incentive bonus for winning a natty and quite possibly a SECCG as well.
1
Posted on 2/9/15 at 2:54 pm to CockInYourEar
quote:
heavily incentive performance.
The only problem is when you start putting more on the back end like that, you limit your options of who you can hire. Every man has his price, and if you can't meet the baseline, no one comes knocking. Unfortunate, since I agree the meat of contracts should be put in the incentive pile, just not the way the market has worked out. It's a symptom of ever increasing salaries.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News