Bob Nielson to USD

[Bison"FANatic"]

It will be interesting to see what Western Illinois does. I wonder if they come after Entz to return as he was associate head coach there for the year he was there?

[bri-dog]

Yes, you can. It shows a backwards thinking mentality in the state and a lack of leadership at USD and SDSU in getting it changed. This is not normal in D1 and how you got Nielson to agree to come is absolutely beyond me.

Maybe he's confident enough in his abilities that he won't worry about getting renewed every year for as long as he wants.

Not saying most would feel the same...

[DIBISON]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports...214-story.html

[THEsocalledfan]

So you think the powers that be at USD and SDSU haven't been trying to get the one year contract deal changed?

It should have changed when they went D1, so yes.

[ByeSonBusiness]

Yes, you can. It shows a backwards thinking mentality in the state and a lack of leadership at USD and SDSU in getting it changed. This is not normal in D1 and how you got Nielson to agree to come is absolutely beyond me.

It should have changed when they went D1, so yes.

Has USD or SDSU ever been bad to a coach before? Are they just canning people after a year or two? If they have a history of being good to coaches I wouldn't sweat the one-year deals.

I also don't think states should change laws to make coaches happy. Now that would be backwards.

[1998braves64]

the one year deal although not going to scare all away could scare some away. Being in a high profile position would seem to warrant some sort of "stability". Seems they've worked around it so far but if SDSU/NDSU (USD??) end up in 2nd level of college football after the dust settles in the next 5 or so years on the landscape it could become a bigger factor?

[wow]

Yes, you can. It shows a backwards thinking mentality in the state and a lack of leadership at USD and SDSU in getting it changed. This is not normal in D1 and how you got Nielson to agree to come is absolutely beyond me.

In theory, its backwards thinking. In practice, the SD schools seem to be doing something that seems impossible for so many DI schools (and fan forum posters).

The shortest tenured head basketball or head football coach at SDSU is 15 years - despite no multi-year contracts!

USD basketball hired the top assistant away from the 2014 Big 10 coach of the year!

USD football hired the MVFC coach of the year!

The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that SD needs to change their multi-year contract law asap. Okaaaaay.

Maybe our athletic directors should be working on multi-year consulting deals on how to negotiate. The rest of DI would be lined up with their checkbooks ready.

[jack power]

In theory, its backwards thinking. In practice, the SD schools seem to be doing something that seems impossible for so many DI schools (and fan forum posters).

The shortest tenured head basketball or head football coach at SDSU is 15 years - despite no multi-year contracts!

USD basketball hired the top assistant away from the 2014 Big 10 coach of the year!

USD football hired the MVFC coach of the year!

The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that SD needs to change their multi-year contract law asap. Okaaaaay.

Maybe our athletic directors should be working on multi-year consulting deals on how to negotiate. The rest of DI would be lined up with their checkbooks ready.

But,but,but, we should have changed a state law when we went D1!!

[BisonJD]

It should have changed when they went D1, so yes.

Agree 100% that the law needs to change...I just don't think its been a priority for the schools since the move. Look at SDSU...they've had the same three coaches at the helm of their major sports forever (AJ, Stig, Nagy), so it has largely been a USD problem. Secondly, both SD schools have been to the legislature asking for facility upgrades almost yearly since the transition, which has taken precedent over the yearly contract piece. Until both USD and SDSU go to the legislature as a united front and tell them this is a big issue, the law won't change. To this point, neither school has been willing to expend political capital to make it happen. However, when they get their sh#t together, Montana recently passed a nice example to follow: their law exempts all D-1 schools from the year-to-year contracts (everything else stays the same). It's a nice compromise for the D1s, because our legislature is never excited about ceding authority to anyone.

[THEsocalledfan]

In theory, its backwards thinking. In practice, the SD schools seem to be doing something that seems impossible for so many DI schools (and fan forum posters).

The shortest tenured head basketball or head football coach at SDSU is 15 years - despite no multi-year contracts!

USD basketball hired the top assistant away from the 2014 Big 10 coach of the year!

USD football hired the MVFC coach of the year!

The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that SD needs to change their multi-year contract law asap. Okaaaaay.

Maybe our athletic directors should be working on multi-year consulting deals on how to negotiate. The rest of DI would be lined up with their checkbooks ready.

Yep, you guys are crushing it compared to NDSU. My hats off to you!

Don't make me go down the checklist of how much better NDSU is in the D1 era, and good coaches are part of the reason. Even with Stig, it is hard to know if he is what is holding you back, or you are darn lucky to have him. I vote the later, but who knows. Sit and think about this; you can fire any coach you want with absolutely no cause at all. Has it been needed? No, but the time will come.