This sounds like girl math...

Its actually all free since we are returning Jimbo, right?

Me reading TexAgs this morning, "I was told no math would be involved"

LincolnBorglum79 said:

---

Good analysis. We can cover that annual net cost by full attendance and an extra game or two at the end of the year.

---

And two more teas.

This is about as much of a positive budgeting spin as you can put on it!

GigEmLaw said:

---

Easiest way to look at this is to take the savings on the extra hotel night costs $3.2M over eight years and the staff cost savings of about $20M over the next 8 years for a savings of $23.2M (assuming no increases in the staff allocations.

So, basically, you can look at the 2024 up front payment is a wash with those savings. One of the responders was correct. Still paying $7M base plus Jimbo's annual over next 8 years. But, upfront was washed with those savings.

---

This

1872walker said:

---

That sounds exactly like my wife's shopping math.

You're not saving anything simply because you got a discount.

---

+ This

Gen1Ag96 said:

---

We're paying Jimbo and we're paying Elko. Two separate costs. You don't get to deduct Elko's salary from Jimbos for a net savings to Jimbo's buyout. The only way Jimbos payout goes down is if you pay Jimbo less. I may be missing something, that's totally possible. Still glad we made the change. I think Elko will do great!

---

Equals our reality with some positivity thrown in for good measure.

4 said:

---

If Elko hits his incentives, the additional revenue brought into the AD as a by product of the winning will offset all of it and take us into the black real quick.

---

Add up the reality, carry the positivity, and we get our new potential reality! LFG!!!!

No offense but your math isn't mathing. That fancy accounting would end you up in prison in business lol

We aren't saving the 2 million dollar difference in salary. Elko's 7 million is in addition to paying out Jimbo.

The assistant pool does save us 2.5 million per year and yes the travel situation saves another 4k...

So it would look more like this

Elko salary - net 7 mil more
Assistant pool - net 2.5 mil savings
Travel - net 400k savings

So no Fishers buyout is not down to a net ~2 million. It's actually a net 4.1 mil more we are having to spend just using your numbers.

But yes we can certainly find ways to cut 4.1 million from the budget I'm sure.

Logos Stick said:

---

Can someone explain why loser Jimbo chose to travel a day early?

---

He was collecting Motel 6 awards points. If he had lasted one more year he was going to redeem them for a Motel 6 franchise in Yazoon City Mississippi.

I doubt Stoops was going to take a pay cut to come to us, so had we hired him instead we would be paying him at least $2 million more per year than. Elko. That savings brings the buyout down to 300k a year!

He's getting paid $76 MILLION to NOT DO A JOB! It's pathetic that the contract was offered to him.

greg.w.h said:

---

RnK94 said:

---

Fisher's buyout is $7.2 million per year through 2031.

Fisher was paid $9 million per year under his prior contract and had a $13.5 million quota for staff salaries.

Elko is being paid $7 million base per year and has an $11 million quota for staff salaries.

Jimbo's insistence on Thursday travel cost A&M around $400k per year per Bjork so if Elko travels on Friday that money would be saved as well.

So, the net to A&M at this point has dropped to $2.3 million per year net unless Elko hits his incentives which I don't think anyone will be upset about!

---

Last time I checked the cost per year is still $7.2 + 7 plus 11. And if you want honest accounting amortize the $19.2 over 7 years which is an additional 2.74 per annum for fall of 24-30.

The notional savings in Jimbo's salary is utter fiction since it is fully guaranteed unless you're factoring in opportunity cost or present value v future value. The decrease in assistant cost is proposed not realized but given the budget pressures I'm sure it is necessarily true.

With Jimbo 9.5 plus 13. With Elko 14.2 + 11. So 22.5 v 25.2. Not including the 2.74 per annum upfront which comes from somewhere. So out the door is 27.94 annually in actual committed funds with 25.2 impacting athletic department budget.

Note: amortized payout means Jimbo is paid in in more or less similar dollars for the $7.2 so no additional present v future value and presumably tracks to planned revenue. So annual loaded additional cost is roughly 2.7 + 2.74 = 5.44 with 2.7 committed from department budget.

---

I was nodding along to OP, but you are saying lots of big phrases I don't understand and I am scared now. So I will believe you fully and follow after you as a nameless minion now.

That's just another way of saying.

Husband: "why did you buy a $10,000 rug?"
Wife: "well it's normally $20,000. I saved us $10,000 so really it's free."

We owe Fisher 79.6 Million

2thFixinAg said:

---

That's just another way of saying.

Husband: "why did you buy a $10,000 rug?"
Wife: "well it's normally $20,000. I saved us $10,000 so really it's free."

---

AND yet he was still fired. Something you insisted would never happen

Spotted Ag said:

---

He's getting paid $76 MILLION to NOT DO A JOB! It's pathetic that the contract was offered to him.

---

Now just think how many other things that Sharp has had his hand in financially for the university.

RnK94 said:

---

Fisher's buyout is $7.2 million per year through 2031.

Fisher was paid $9 million per year under his prior contract and had a $13.5 million quota for staff salaries.

Elko is being paid $7 million base per year and has an $11 million quota for staff salaries.

Jimbo's insistence on Thursday travel cost A&M around $400k per year per Bjork so if Elko travels on Friday that money would be saved as well.

So, the net to A&M at this point has dropped to $2.3 million per year net unless Elko hits his incentives which I don't think anyone will be upset about!

---

Is this supposed to make anyone feel better? The only reason Fisher's buyout is $7.2 million instead of $9 million is we are having to pay him a bunch of it up front. It would have been better to pay him $9 million per year than have to pay a bunch up front.

Also, are you certain none of the staff had guarantees in their contracts? Are you sure we didn't have to do a one-time buyout or even a yearly amount?

There is no sugar coating it. We paid $77 million plus likely some assistant buyouts to get rid of a coach.

Hopefully OP was a liberal arts major…

Logos Stick said:

---

Can someone explain why loser Jimbo chose to travel a day early?

---

Gives you more time to adjust for altitude changes.

Showstopper said:

---

Hopefully OP was a liberal arts major…

---

Nope! BIMS Major actually.

Perhaps I didn't explain things well, lemme try again.

A&M was contractually obligated to pay Fisher and his staff. It wasn't a piece of jewelry your wife bought on sale. That money was going to be spent next year as long as Jimbo was the coach.

So, for the 2024-25 season lets call the budget line item "football staff salaries".

As was said before, if A&M kept Jimbo that number would have been $9 million + $13.5 million = $22.5 million per year.

Under Elko the total number will be $7 million + $11 million = $18 million per year. If you add in the Fisher buyout to that number then is it $25.2 million per year. Yes, I am ignoring the lump sum buyout that was due this year. Again, as was said before, the savings over the life of the Elko contract basically offsets that lump sum buyout so either way you look at it, the net hit to the budget for the buyout was reduced by a large percentage.

The overall net hit to the budget is $2.7 million per year (25.2 - 22.5 for you non-liberal arts majors out there). If you then take out the $400k per year for the Thursday travel you get to a net budget hit of $2.3 million. If you don't like taking that out that's fine, it's savings to the program either way, assuming Elko travels on Friday like every other sane college coach. This also assumes that Elko doesn't hit his performance targets next year, if that happens then obviously his salary number goes up.

The bottom line is by getting a more reasonable contract signed with Elko and dropping the asst coach/support staff quota the overall deficit from the buyout was reduced significantly. Good news for those of us who are season ticket holders and hopefully won't see a big increase in ticket price or donation required for the seats.

If you want the source for the staff pool number and the $400k per year for Thursday travel go to about the 17:45 mark on this video: https://texags.com/s/55845/ross-bjork-recaps-search-that-resulted-in-texas-am-landing-mike-elko

Not Coach Jimbo said:

---

This sounds like girl math...

Its actually all free since we are returning Jimbo, right?

---

If only we had paid Jimbo with a Texas A&M AMEX card. Then we could have claimed fraud and disputed the transaction.

If you do it on a cash basis then OP is right and 2023 is a big hit. If you do it on accrual basis then Greg is mostly right and it's a bunch of small hits over time, though you could also take the current fair market value of the full contract (less than the $76M given interest rates) and amortize it.

I'm guessing the salaries will be done on a cash basis within the department which is fine given this should wind up being a strong year for the athletic department.

I think this type thinking is what got us in this mess to begin with.

you people calculating our savings under Elko remind me of my wife shopping.

Divining Rod said:

---

you people calculating our savings under Elko remind me of my wife shopping.

---

Winner