The Great Badger Coaching Search of '23: Start Drinking Heavily

[WiscTJK]

Potential for director of hockey operations would be Mankato's director Luke Regner. This is from his bio: "Prior to his time at Robert Morris, Regner served as a student assistant for four seasons with the men's hockey program at the University of Wisconsin. A 2017 Wisconsin graduate (business administration), Regner also worked in the athletics department as a video assistant with both football and hockey programs in his time with the Badgers."

I knew that name rang a bell.

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Is there really a discussion? 22/23 attendance Women's 52,321 vs Men's 157,321 for a difference of 104,787. Multiply the difference of 104787 by $24 per ticket and you get a difference of 2.5 million (before you get into concessions, parking, advertising). I also assume tickets for Women's are less than $24 (and the $24 for Men's may be exposing that I have not been to a Men's game in several years primarily due to product quality) and there is a significant financial difference even in the first 52K of attendance for both. I would also guess it is harder/less lucrative to attach Badger Fund donation requirements to Women's season ticket purchases. Add the fact that investing in a Men's coach has the potential payoff to bump Men's attendance by more than the women draw. Rebuild the Men's brand back to the levels of averaging 10K per game, and the "extra" money invested in a coach is well worth the payoff.

You've made some good points but being a Big Ten school with much better financial resources than smaller colleges, with his track record and just winning the Badgers 7th National Championship shouldn't Bob Johnson make as much as a brand new unproven men's coach?

 

[markwojo]

You've made some good points but being a Big Ten school with much better financial resources than smaller colleges, with his track record and just winning the Badgers 7th National Championship shouldn't Bob Johnson make as much as a brand new unproven men's coach?

Hasting is hardly "unproven" with 11 years of D1 head coaching experience where his WORST season would have been Granato's best. I assume Mark Johnson is among the best paid Women's hockey coaches in the country (or he has a terrible agent that has not leveraged interest elsewhere to get the proper raises at UW). The Big 10 finances come with Big Ten bills for salaries, facilities, amenties and the rest that comes with (and I don't mean just hockey (or football/basketball), but the vast majority of sports that LOSE money). Notre Dame fencing team has won 3 straight national titles. I would guess the actually "unproven" ND football coach makes 40 or 50 times more per year not because life is fair, but beacaue more people are interested in and spend money on football. If you want to compare an apple to a watermellon, you might as well complain Fickell makes more than "7 time National Champ" coach Mark Johnson too. Comparing a program that averages a couple thousand fans per game (at a fraction of the ticket prices) to one that average nearly 8 (and when right, history shows should be more like 10) at probably twice the ticket price and using coaches salaries in some equity arguement is just a wee bit disengenuous. Again, if Mark Johnson is not among the highest paid Woman's coaches in the country, there is definately an issue. But comparing his salary to that of a coach in a sport that can generate significant revenue is not one I would be complaining about equity on.

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Hasting is hardly "unproven" with 11 years of D1 head coaching experience where his WORST season would have been Granato's best.

I should clarify my unproven comment. I meat he's unproven at Wisconsin, I was not considering his previous coaching record. Previous success will of course bring high expectations but it will take several seasons to see if things have been turned around. Expectations were high for Granato and Oz too but didn't pan out.
My question is since he hasn't coached a single game yet at Wisconsin is he really worth more Johnson?

 

[markwojo]

Fickell is unproven at Wisconsin. Do you think you are hiring Fickell for what Mark Johnson makes until he proves it? Mens hockey generated 2.5 million more in just ticket sales (I did the math for you above) than Women's hockey. Bring the program back to the more historic norms of 10-11K average attendance and you are talking about 4 million more in again JUST TICKET REVENUE for Men's verses Women's hockey before you get into concessions, parking, badger fund required donations and all the other revenue that means. The CEO of Walmart makes more than a store manager just like the CEO of Wisconsin football makes more than the Men's hockey coach. Women's hockey revenue are a fraction of (even a historically down) Men's and the Men's coach is going to be paid more because he is managing a bigger enterprise. It has nothing to do with equity, fairness, or anything else other than basic economics.

It is stunning that this is even a discussion and I was honestly confused when someone earlier indicateed it even could be....but apparently it actually is.

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Fickell is unproven at Wisconsin. Do you think you are hiring Fickell for what Mark Johnson makes until he proves it?

I'm leaning more towards Johnson has proven his worth to Wisconsin ten times over and in my option deserves to have a salary equal to the men's coach. The ticket sale difference between the men and women's games is irrelevant, that's not what really funds the coaches pay. Do you have any idea how much money comes in from the conference sharing? Trust me, the money to pay Johnson equally is there and he deserves it!

 

[WiscTJK]

It is stunning that this is even a discussion and I was honestly confused when someone earlier indicateed it even could be....but apparently it actually is.

You are 100% right of course. Mark is fighting with 5 or 6 teams for his recruits. It's like the 70's and 80's for men's hockey. Men's team has to fight 5 or 6 teams just in the big7. It's a totally different ballgame. You revenue is really low by the way for the men's. It was $5.3M in 2019, the last year I can find stats for it. 53,000 attendance at women's games is roughly $530K at $10/ticket. Use $1M (generously) with concessions. That's a delta of $4M. Plus with better men's attendance, you are talking about $1M in the black that can be used towards the rest of the AD, which is where they were in the late 2,000's. Women's is in the red every year. If you can be a revenue producer, the coaches are naturally going to earn more.

 

[markwojo]

I'm leaning more towards Johnson has proven his worth to Wisconsin ten times over and in my option deserves to have a salary equal to the men's coach. The ticket sale difference between the men and women's games is irrelevant, that's not what really funds the coaches pay. Do you have any idea how much money comes in from the conference sharing? Trust me, the money to pay Johnson equally is there and he deserves it!

Last number I can find for Johnson is him making just shy of 400K a year which isn't bad for coaching kids playing a kids game. If you put him at 700K for the sake of equity or because he is such a great coach with 7 titles or whatever reasoning devoid of any economic reality, Women's hockey loses 500K instead of losing 200K and the athletic dept loses money instead of barely making a couple of bucks overall. This concept that Big Ten schools just print money without acknowledging that they burn through just about as much as they bring in is tiring. The only sports making money at UW are football, men's basketball, and barely men's hockey. Newsflash....the Big Ten TV money rolling in is not because of Women's hockey. I find it odd that instead of being happy that UW invests as well as any school in the country in Women's hockey for not only Johnson's salary but the facilities for the ladies, we want to argue some equity false equivalence comparing two drastically different things. If you want to see Johnson paid 700K, you'll probably need to figure out how to get twice as many people out to the Women's games and having them willing to pay double for tickets.

 

[WiscTJK]

Last number I can find for Johnson is him making just shy of 400K a year which isn't bad for coaching kids playing a kids game. If you put him at 700K for the sake of equity or because he is such a great coach with 7 titles or whatever reasoning devoid of any economic reality, Women's hockey loses 500K instead of losing 200K and the athletic dept loses money instead of barely making a couple of bucks overall. This concept that Big Ten schools just print money without acknowledging that they burn through just about as much as they bring in is tiring. The only sports making money at UW are football, men's basketball, and barely men's hockey. Newsflash....the Big Ten TV money rolling in is not because of Women's hockey. I find it odd that instead of being happy that UW invests as well as any school in the country in Women's hockey for not only Johnson's salary but the facilities for the ladies, we want to argue some equity false equivalence comparing two drastically different things. If you want to see Johnson paid 700K, you'll probably need to figure out how to get twice as many people out to the Women's games and having them willing to pay double for tickets.

And build a new / add on to LaBahn Arena that holds a max of 2,273 people.

 

[purpleinnebraska]

You'd think Michigan and Michigan State could add women's hockey, if the Big Ten has so much money that they can just double the salary of a women's hockey coach and not even miss it financially.

 

[markwojo]

You'd think Michigan and Michigan State could add women's hockey, if the Big Ten has so much money that they can just double the salary of a women's hockey coach and not even miss it financially.

Maybe there is still some Covid relief money floating around that could be earmarked for starting women's hockey in Michigan and doubling Mark Johnson's salary at UW.


In seriousness....I am very fond of Mark Johnson. He was a big part of my taking to hockey as a young kid watching the late 70's Badgers (often through the snow on tv as we lived far enough away that the picture on channel 3 was not all that great) and then the miracle on ice Olympic thing that he was pretty front and center in. Doubling his salary to match the men's head coach makes about as much sense as a 65 year old that has been out of men's hockey for 2 decades (and when he was last involved in the men's game he was the lead assistant/recruiter as the program had steadily declined and the head guy ultimately got a bit of a nudge out the door) being an actual viable candidate for the men's job.

 

[Timothy A]

You'd think Michigan and Michigan State could add women's hockey, if the Big Ten has so much money.

They do have the money, as does UND, but they are wasting it in a nuclear football facility arms race. In a perfect world a men's and women's hockey coach should get paid the same or close to it depending their experience and success, it's the exact same job for both. I'd hope the men's and women's soccer coaches get paid that way.

 

[J.D.]

They do have the money, as does UND, but they are wasting it in a nuclear football facility arms race. In a perfect world a men's and women's hockey coach should get paid the same or close to it depending their experience and success, it's the exact same job for both. I'd hope the men's and women's soccer coaches get paid that way.

Why would they automatically make the same if one brings the university a lot more money than the other? Not citing a specific example but I am sure in general men's hockey programs bring in more money than women's.

 

[markwojo]

They do have the money, as does UND, but they are wasting it in a nuclear football facility arms race. In a perfect world a men's and women's hockey coach should get paid the same or close to it depending their experience and success, it's the exact same job for both. I'd hope the men's and women's soccer coaches get paid that way.

The difference between hockey and soccer is that both men's and women's soccer is that neither soccer program generates revenue and both lose money....so yes both the men's and women's soccer coaches should be making roughly the same and less than the women's hockey coach who should make less than the men's hockey coach who should make less than the men's basketball coach who should make less then the football coach....because that is the economc reality/pecking order.

I don't disagree that the monies spent on football are obscene. But at the same time, football/basketball generate 95% of the athletic departments budget for all the other couple dozen teams that all lose money. Most businesses invest resources in the product line/departments that make money. Hard to argue pampering the golden goose when that goose(s) pays all of the bills.

Back to Mark Johnson....he makes more coaching women's hockey than all but about about a DOZEN men's coaches nationally. It just so happens one of those dozen are on the same campus. I probably should not tap on the glass (cause the sign says not to), but the men's hockey lead assistant will likely be in a similar zip code to what Johnson makes. Hastings was making 350K @ Mankato. Knott turned down the Mankato job (which I doubt they lowballed him for less than Hastings was making) with all signs point to Knott accepting an assisant gig at UW where I would guess he is making at the least 350K. Now I would guess Johnson gets an inflation kick (cause it is rough living on only 400K in Madison) and as a reward for winning another title, so he'll probably be making a little more than the men's lead assistant.

 

[John J. MacInnes]

You'd think Michigan and Michigan State could add women's hockey, if the Big Ten has so much money that they can just double the salary of a women's hockey coach and not even miss it financially.

There is zero interest at either school to add women's hockey.

The Big Ten schools that have women's hockey also all have a second building for them. That's not happening at any of the conference schools that only have a men's team right now.

 

[Sean Pickett]

Here is what Wisconsin reported for total salaries, benefits and bonuses for head coaches for 2021-22:

[TABLE="width: 211"]
[TR]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]Head Coaches[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD]Men[/TD]
[TD]Women[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: xl64"] [/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"] [/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Basketball[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2,941,390[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]706,358[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Football[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]5,258,176[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Golf[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]163,097[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]150,697[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Ice Hockey[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]596,594[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]444,231[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Soccer[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]269,985[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]272,992[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S&D[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]104,309[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]104,308[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Tennis[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]176,661[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]144,717[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]T&F, XC[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]298,757[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2,167[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


I believe that there is one Swimming & Diving head coach for both teams, likewise for Track & Field, X-County.

Sean

 

[Sean Pickett]

The Big Ten schools that have women's hockey also all have a second building for them. That's not happening at any of the conference schools that only have a men's team right now.

Penn State may have two ice surfaces, but the men and women both play on the main one.

Sean

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

There is zero interest at either school to add women's hockey.

Actually not quite true. Michigan hired a new President last October and he is looking into the feasibility of starting a women's hockey program. They've had an established club team for some time that could upgrade into the formal team to get things rolling.
There's a thread about this on the women's forum.

 

[aktick]

If we want to complain about any salary at UW, it should be that the women’s BBall coaches make more than the women’s hockey coaches. Sad.

 

[giwan]

There is zero interest at either school to add women's hockey.

The Big Ten schools that have women's hockey also all have a second building for them. That's not happening at any of the conference schools that only have a men's team right now.

You do not need two rinks to add womens hockey. Plenty of schools with only one.

The UM womens club team is well not that talented as I know U18 women teams easily beating them