So let me show some numbers, because no doubt some of you are business folks and understand ROI, as well as "resources are limited/finite". I will suggest as my going in hypothesis that NONE of the below have changed their actually work load or responsibilities over this time-frame, although their titles may have changed or adjusted on an organizational chart. No doubt, some are responsible for more than just support to coaches/athletes but some are not. Some "Support" is their paid job. Keep in mind, UNL and the whole system is running a deficit, there has been lots of salary freezes or small increases for professors in this same time. I would also suggest looking at Sam's article as a reminder of where ALL Husker Athletics stands, and has been over the last few years.
https://www.omaha.com/huskers/plus/...cle_39234085-fc9b-547a-80fa-7ffed58670c7.html
So by all ACCOUNTS I am aware of LEBLANC seems to a bang-up job in his role, 47.7% pay increase over 5 years I doubt it.
LOGSDON by all accounts I am aware of does not to a bang up job, but has garnered the most influence and power within the AD over the SE/BM years and gotten 80.0% raise. Wow.
VAUGHN is doing compliance, so we know that job hasn't changed or the responsibilities associated with it. 56.2%. Amazing.
ZIMMER by all accounts I am aware of does a bang up job, and did get thrown Golf and Tennis firing/hiring in the last minute, which is strange for the career "Life Skills" coordinator. But hell, maybe that is worth a 58.6% raise.
BOEHM, well his resume of leading our MBB program is pretty well established for what (20 years?) but his pay just races up as well. Will he go away with Miles? Should he? Probably if we are serious about having a good MBB program and hold people accountable for its lack of performance.
BURTON by all accounts I am aware of got screwed around by SE and his cronies, and got put back in a place that makes sense. As far as I know, he prolly deserves that 21.3% for putting up with that jack-ass SE.
Now before I go on the the paid/titled/trained/performance support in-house people in a whole separate category, I will just say. The President of the University System has gone from:
So in 4 years about 3% per year, which is pretty standard for any Federal or State employee. Very reasonable, and I know cause I was one for 20 years.
I don't know what we paid SE or what we are still paying him and BM for that matter. But it is reasonable to think with these increases in salaries far above the Head man of the University system, we can expect results. CORRECT? For you business guys, tell me you are getting your bang for buck out of that breakdown? Please tell me and show me, why that is justified?
Or just say...JACK you are on to something here and ain't good and smells like crap....
So let me show you the in-house performance diagram as it pertains to "Team Building/Leadership/Mental Skills Development and Mental Health".
PAT LOGSDON
HEAD of PERFORMANCE, started as FB Secretary under TO, made her way up the chain of command, has never lead anything and has ZERO performance background. 80.0% increase in pay tho.
Dr. TODD STULL
Started just like me as a Volunteer/Consultant and now is "in-house" even-though he has been removed from every support role he has attempted by the Coach, for not being effective but somehow leads our PERFORMANCE under PAT, because she isn't qualified and he is. So yes, of course if the AD says you are and you are paid you can be there in title, but effectiveness is what counts in creating winning cultural and Teams.
Dr. BRETT HASKELL.
Took over for me and some others with VB in 2015, and by all accounts does a good job. She focuses primarily on VB and VB only. However, she is starting to branch out to FB, as everyone wants on that train. Who wouldn't.
NEW GUY 1
50,000 + I am sure more, but will low-ball for the argument
NEW GUY 2
50,000 + I am sure more, but will low-ball for the argument
OK, so these FOUR cause PAT doesn't' do anything in this arena expect "oversee" it are primarily MH people. And I am the first to say that is a needed and awesome resource to have MH proffessionals for UNL student/athletes. Of note, it is not available for coaches...just kids. They also attempt to do Performance Team Building/Leadership etc....They are BM "in-house people" led by Pat Logsdon for this high performance machine we call Husker Athletics.
Now, you have to understand they have to see patients "Scheduled/Walk-in" like any clinic out in town and that eats up a majority of the day, So extra time devoted to TEAM/GROUP performance is secondary to their primary job of MH. Anyone who is involved in sports knows you don't force performance methods or ideas down a coaches or groups throat, you are invited in and you provide value and then you are invited back. If your value helps lead to victories or outputs the coaches like, you get to keep coming back. If you are there, because an AD tells the coach you need to be there or you force yourself into the circle of the Team you are probably just hurting the Team.
So our invested cost is 485K (low ball) on "in-house performance help", and the leader PAT has gotten 80% raise over the last 5 years all the while Husker Athletic performance across the board has decreased. (See Sam's Article) I absolutely for one think this is a GREAT investment/right people in charge and completely makes sense to me. No seriously it does. But yet, we want to ONLY point at coaches and kids, we think Moss crap don't stink and all is well at ONE MEMORIAL.
UNL athletic support is so damn good, that is rewarded both financially and with increased power, and doesn't need any help from the outside. People, Please.
It is really simple, if a coach ask for my help and or someones help in any area.....it means he isn't getting it from the in-house. Stop believing the hype, start asking the right questions and supporting the right avenues to championships.
I have focused on the $$ and performance people, but you and I know there are more cracks in this machine up there.