Retaining Assistant Coaches

In recent days there has been a lot of discussio surrounding Greg Scruggs' decision to leave Wisconsin for Michigan and its potential ramifications for the program. Taking a deeper dive into this move has made me consider broader reasonining for Scruggs' decision, and it's impact on the further retention of assistant coaches in the future. Is the solution really that simple? Pay them more and they will stay? Money certainly helps but it is never fully the solution.

It's clear that I find myself in the minority as the prevailing sentiment of the fandom is that to become a blueblood you must spend like a blueblood. While many clamin that simply raising the assistant coaches' pay pool would be enough to retain talent, I believe the path to achieving blueblood status requires a more comprehensive overhaul. Wisconsin must elevate every aspect of its program to match the standards set by the elite programs. Merely offering coaches like Greg Scruggs a salary comparable to what he'd receive at Michigan wouldn't guarantee his retention.

The coaching environment at Michigan offers distinct advantages. Not to say coaching at a big time program is without it's stresses and expectation but what it gains in expecations it lose in practical frustrations. Big time programs achieve their status from more than just a bigger coach pay pool. History aside these programs also tend to have higher budgets in areas such as recruiting, facilities, and overall infrastructure. Therefore for Wisconsin to compete at the same level it must invest comprehensively across all facets of its program rather than focusing solely on salaries. You can raise a coach's pay all you want but if you offer that same coach an extra evening at home every week with their kids because you have a better travel budget for recruiting that is a mighty powerful incentive.

It might seem like the Badgers are cheap when it comes to paying coaches, and when you compare it to big programs that might be the case. However when you look into the past of Wisconsin's budget you'll see a sharp increase in the past several years. Barry Alvarez built Wisconsin Athletics into a money making powerhouse, but like most high level CEOs he didn't make the program rich by writing a lot of checks. The Badgers were famously behind the times in both facilities and in budget to the point that toward end of the Bielema era they were losing multiple coaches a year to lateral moves. The weight training facilty was little more than a damp basement tucked under Camp Randall. So when Gary Andersen came in (to his credit) he insisted on an increased budget for assistant coaches and updates to the facilities and player services.

These were much needed improvements to modernize the program but they were still behind the times. When Paul Chryst took over he was able to retain rising star DC Dave Aranda but by year two there was no competition to LSU's ability to quadruple his salary. Next we would see assistants like Inoke Breckterfield and Chris Beatty leave for lateral (or slightly lesser) jobs at programs that in comparison to Wisconsin invested more in the football program overall. Now that Chris McIntosh is that Athletic Director it's important to pay coaches in commiserate with their abilities without losing sight of the tiebreaking factors outside of the checkbook.

Investing in upgrading facilities goes beyond mere aesthetics; it's about providing athletes and coaches with the tools they need to succeed. State-of-the-art training facilities, modern locker rooms, and top-notch equipment not only attract recruits but also create an environment conducive to player development and performance optimization. Expanding the recruiting budget allows Wisconsin to cast a wider net, reaching out to promising prospects and offering them compelling opportunities to join the program while easing the burden on the boots on the ground in recruiting wars. By committing to these investments, Wisconsin demonstrates its dedication to excellence, fostering a culture that attracts and retains high-caliber talent. As a result, the program is better positioned to compete at the highest levels of collegiate athletics, achieving sustained success and cementing its status among the elite programs in the nation. If we are taking about keeping up with the Joneses when it comes to coaching salaries we also need to keep up with lesser programs who are investing heavily into the infrastructure of their program, like for example Northwestern is currently doing. You can't expect results when you go big in one area but cheap out in another. The math doesn't add up.

So lets say at this time there is only enough money to take the next step in one area of the program. If that's the case then that area should be infrastructure because while our pay pool is not at the level of programs above us it is competitive with the programs our level. Coach's pay has increased in recent years but where we need to separate ourselves from our contemporaries is beyond the checkbook. By raising the floor you automatically raise the ceiling. By only investing in more pay you raise the ceiling while the short comings of the program overall are still there...and the tiebreaker is always the path of least resistance.