What made UND great and will make UND great again

[MafiaMan]

UND is not the Colorado of this scenario. UND would be the Oklahoma or Nebraska of your comparison, I would say any coach that came into those places and put up those numbers would have been fired before the "fire McCartney" chant could even begin.

Son, I've heard some whoppers in my day...

[Westside]

I'm not sure he's gone at 4-7. Faison just gave him an extension. It will reflect extraordinarily poorly on Faison if, one year removed from a lengthy extension he fires him? What does that say about his judgement? I think if there's ANY gray area, Muss will stay. Faison has already hitched his wagon to him.

On the other hand, do you think Faison wants to be known as the AD that oversaw a huge decline in the UND football program? Or does he clean house, bring in a new staff & hope they can lead the resurgence of the UND football program?

It reflects extremely poorly on Faison if he sticks w/ Muss as "his guy" & the continued mediocrity & losing don't change, as well. I'd say that would look far worse than removing him 1 yr after extension.

[Matt]

I would still like to see how the extension reads and if there is a buyout. In college sports, a coach almost has to have a contract that goes a couple years out just for recruiting purposes.

I didn't mean to imply Faison couldn't fire him due to the extension. I'm sure there's a buyout. I'm just saying, put yourself in President Kelly's shoes. Faison signs Muss to an extension, then one year later Faison thinks so little of Muss he would rather pay him not to coach the team? Just after you extended him?

For Faison to jettison Muss, this season will have to end in utter shambles, and it won't reflect well on anyone.

[jdub27]

I didn't mean to imply Faison couldn't fire him due to the extension. I'm sure there's a buyout. I'm just saying, put yourself in President Kelly's shoes. Faison signs Muss to an extension, then one year later Faison thinks so little of Muss he would rather pay him not to coach the team? Just after you extended him?

For Faison to jettison Muss, this season will have to end in utter shambles, and it won't reflect well on anyone.

Well the option was either let him go into his last year assuming he was gone or give him an extension. Recruiting in a contract year does not send a good message, giving a one year extension doesn't send a good one either. Coming off an 8-3 season, regardless of being a lightweight schedule, he was going to get that extension.

[choyt3]

How were UND coaches ever able to recruit when they were on a year-to-year contract? It wasn't that long ago.

[fightingsioux4life]

How were UND coaches ever able to recruit when they were on a year-to-year contract? It wasn't that long ago.

Maybe common practices for dealing with coach's contracts were different back then? Things change very quickly in our hyper-connected world.

[jdub27]

How were UND coaches ever able to recruit when they were on a year-to-year contract? It wasn't that long ago.

There was a lot more leeway and they were given a chance to right the ship.

[Matt]

Well the option was either let him go into his last year assuming he was gone or give him an extension. Recruiting in a contract year does not send a good message, giving a one year extension doesn't send a good one either. Coming off an 8-3 season, regardless of being a lightweight schedule, he was going to get that extension.

You'd be hard pressed to convince me that matters at the FCS level. In BCS conferences where top coaches are always jumping ship for a better deal? Sure. That gets used against you in recruiting. There just isn't the mobility among FCS coaches for that to matter. Now, trying to hire a coach on a year to year contract when the industry standard is a multi-year deal? Sure, that's a problem. But I don't buy that carries weight with FCS recruits-FCS coaches just don't move around much.

[jdub27]

You'd be hard pressed to convince me that matters at the FCS level. In BCS conferences where top coaches are always jumping ship for a better deal? Sure. That gets used against you in recruiting. There just isn't the mobility among FCS coaches for that to matter. Now, trying to hire a coach on a year to year contract when the industry standard is a multi-year deal? Sure, that's a problem. But I don't buy that carries weight with FCS recruits-FCS coaches just don't move around much.

Fair point, but if a coach is sitting in your living room saying that you're a good fit for our system, we like what we see in you, etc. are you really all that confident in what he says and want to commit to a program if he doesn't have a contract to even be on campus when you show up in the fall?

[jodcon]

I guess this will work itself out by the end of the season, if it goes like I'm afraid it will and the games against EWU, PSU, and NAU get out of hand and UND ends up 3-8 or 4-7 I can't imagine they won't let him go. If they don't release him under that scenario it sends a disturbing message that the leadership is just happy to be in the Big Sky and content to be competitive with the bottom 3 or 4 teams. If they're content to be "that team", I fully endorse getting out the torches and pitchforks and calling out the top brass because the days of 5000 attendance and losing recruiting battles are just around the corner.

As far as the buyout of his contract goes, I liken it to a doctor, you have to stop the bleeding before you can fix anything else, and the bleeding isn't necessarily money in this case.

[Matt]

Fair point, but if a coach is sitting in your living room saying that you're a good fit for our system, we like what we see in you, etc. are you really all that confident in what he says and want to commit to a program if he doesn't have a contract to even be on campus when you show up in the fall?

I guess that depends on the situation. In Muss' case, he'd been there for several years as an assistant and head coach, had some success and just jumping into a new conference? If he were paid on consecutive 1-year deals, I don't think I'd have any reason to think he'd be gone. If it was a struggling coach, program not doing well, then sure I have some reservations.

To go back to my original point though-I don't have a problem with extensions per se. I'm just speculating that since Faison just extended Muss, the threshold to fire him will be high.

[82SiouxGuy]

Fair point, but if a coach is sitting in your living room saying that you're a good fit for our system, we like what we see in you, etc. are you really all that confident in what he says and want to commit to a program if he doesn't have a contract to even be on campus when you show up in the fall?

A recruit has narrowed his choices to 2 schools. The 2 schools are basically even in his mind. One coach has a contract for 5 years, which means he should be around for the whole time the recruit is in school. The other coach has a contract that ends at the end of the year. Which school is the recruit going to choose?

[Matt]

A recruit has narrowed his choices to 2 schools. The 2 schools are basically even in his mind. One coach has a contract for 5 years, which means he should be around for the whole time the recruit is in school. The other coach has a contract that ends at the end of the year. Which school is the recruit going to choose?

If this is turning into a "here's why we needed to extend Muss in the first place" discussion, let's consider this: is a recruit more/less likely to believe Muss would have been back on a 1 year deal, or Bohl on a 5-year deal?

[82SiouxGuy]

If this is turning into a "here's why we needed to extend Muss in the first place" discussion, let's consider this: is a recruit more/less likely to believe Muss would have been back on a 1 year deal, or Bohl on a 5-year deal?

You keep saying that you don't think there was a reason to extend. Almost every college coach now gets an extension when they are down to 1 or 2 years left on their contract, unless the school plans to get rid of the coach. I don't think there are any year to year contracts in college sports, at least not in Division I major sports. Very few coaches work the final year of a contract in college sports. My post explained why they extend contracts. I wasn't comparing anything to NDSUAAS. I was talking about college coaching contracts in general. Remember, Mussman was and is recruiting against a lot of schools, not just NDSUAAS. But if you want to keep comparing the situation only against things in Fargo, just go ahead.

[Matt]

You keep saying that you don't think there was a reason to extend. Almost every college coach now gets an extension when they are down to 1 or 2 years left on their contract, unless the school plans to get rid of the coach. I don't think there are any year to year contracts in college sports, at least not in Division I major sports. Very few coaches work the final year of a contract in college sports. My post explained why they extend contracts. I wasn't comparing anything to NDSUAAS. I was talking about college coaching contracts in general. Remember, Mussman was and is recruiting against a lot of schools, not just NDSUAAS. But if you want to keep comparing the situation only against things in Fargo, just go ahead.

I used Bohl's contract to illustrate if a coach is going, it doesn't matter what the contract is. Whether that's Bohl-leave due to success-or Muss-leave due to failure.

I'm not even necessarily arguing Muss shouldn't have received the extension. What I am saying is that since Faison extended him, it won't reflect well on him to fire him the following year, so I am speculating that Faison's threshold for dismissal is likely to be higher than what many would like.

[82SiouxGuy]

I used Bohl's contract to illustrate if a coach is going, it doesn't matter what the contract is. Whether that's Bohl-leave due to success-or Muss-leave due to failure.

I'm not even necessarily arguing Muss shouldn't have received the extension. What I am saying is that since Faison extended him, it won't reflect well on him to fire him the following year, so I am speculating that Faison's threshold for dismissal is likely to be higher than what many would like.

There is no guarantee of a successful coach staying any more than there is of a losing coach getting fired. Coaches move on all of the time for a variety of reasons. But a contract in place for more than a year gives the image that the coach will be in place past the end of the year. That is why multiple years left on a contract is important to recruits.

Faison's been in the business for years. He has done a lot of good work at UND. I'm pretty sure that he'll make whatever decision he thinks will be best in the long run. Some people will probably disagree with him no matter what he chooses.

[zonadub]

If I recall correctly, doesn't SDSU have 1 year contracts? And USD also?

[Hayduke]

If I recall correctly, doesn't SDSU have 1 year contracts? And USD also?

I know that some states only allow state employees, football coaches at public universities for example, to have one year contracts. Colorado had that law in effect, then they made exceptions. I can't remember if they did it through a foundation or not..

Here's more general information

http://www.sportsmanagementresources.com/library/coach-contract-elements

[UND Fan]

I used Bohl's contract to illustrate if a coach is going, it doesn't matter what the contract is. Whether that's Bohl-leave due to success-or Muss-leave due to failure.

I'm not even necessarily arguing Muss shouldn't have received the extension. What I am saying is that since Faison extended him, it won't reflect well on him to fire him the following year, so I am speculating that Faison's threshold for dismissal is likely to be higher than what many would like.

I don't see that as an issue. The continuance of a losing FB program is what would reflect on Faison much worse than buying out Muss' contract. As many have noted, contracts are bought out all the time. That isn't a big deal any more.

[82SiouxGuy]

I know that some states only allow state employees, football coaches at public universities for example, to have one year contracts. Colorado had that law in effect, then they made exceptions. I can't remember if they did it through a foundation or not..

Here's more general information

http://www.sportsman...ntract-elements

You are correct. South Dakota has policies against giving more than 1 year contracts to coaches at public schools. They are the exception that proves the rule.

[Matt]

You are correct. South Dakota has policies against giving more than 1 year contracts to coaches at public schools. They are the exception that proves the rule.

And they haven't been nationally relevant in football since '87.

[The Sicatoka]

... If they don't release him under that scenario it sends a disturbing message that the leadership is just happy to be in the Big Sky and content to be competitive with the bottom 3 or 4 teams.

What you're describing is Iowa State in the Big Twelve. And where is Mussman from? Iowa State.

"Iowa State" of the BSC is not good enough.

[Cratter]

Serious answer...what made UND good over the years. It was trying to keep pace with NDSU. They were winning championships in the 80s and UND had to keep up. Luckily for UND, NDSU was on the top of the division for most of the decade. If UNDs main rivalry was St Cloud or Augustana....well you know the rest.

Why does western ND high school suck at hockey? Or should we ask why is the east so good? The east competes and tries to keep up with Minnesota. While the west tries to keep up with the east.

What makes the SEC great at football?

Finally got to watch the documentary on espnu about the Alabama and auburn rivalry. Lots of the same theories apply. Those programs seem to push each other. Funny enough those two teams quit playing for a period of time....40 years if I recall correctly...and there even showed the talk of their legislature pushing for the teams to play....auburn and Alabaman both have championships within the last ten years.....and Auburn despite being the underdog just beat Johnny football on Saturday.