by Fegger

Created on: February 27, 2009   Last Updated: March 01, 2009

I don't believe that it's especially responsible to try to make a correlation between two sports coaches, their respective salaries, and the plight of state or federal economic or financial issues. This is clearly an impertinent argument as well as a personal attack that is founded on poorly contrived emotional rhetoric. If a constructive, plausible discussion is to be created on this matter, then let's explore it under an appropriate heading; and once this is established, then perhaps we will embrace enlightenment.

Sports, not unlike Hollywood, falls under a category of the entertainment business. It is vital to understand that it is, in fact, entertainment and more-so, a business. Is it prudent of us to attack a Hollywood Director, Writer, or Producer for claiming a prize of tens of millions of dollars for their cinematic efforts because the economy is tanked? No, absolutely not-the gesture in doing so would be a sad commentary on our own personal desperation and would have no reflection whatsoever on the true subject at hand. In this economy, all businesses are not doing poorly. Some businesses are doing rather well; and are actually enjoying extremely prosperous quarters/years. It's obscene to think of punishing these businesses just because they are profiting while others are suffering; and we are not, collectively, fair critics as to whether or not they are undeserving.

It is important to view the two UCONN coaches under fire as two businessmen with unique and valuable skills in a business model that they have shown exceptional aptitude. They have goals, markets, a budget to adhere to and certainly they have the responsibility of creating a ROI (Return On Investment) to their "Employer", State of Connecticut University System and their somewhat removed "stockholders", the residents of Connecticut. Both men have achieved or surpassed the expectations of their Employer and their stockholders and have done so with great frequency and integrity. As long as they continue to create a profitable business enterprise and produce a viable return or margin from their efforts then it is inappropriate to attempt to devalue their accomplishments with erroneous open-forum discussions of their salaries.

They have complied within their respective job descriptions and they have produce in accordance with their contract. The state has benefited from their labors and they have been compensated satisfactorily in a manner that both sides agreed upon. Should either man have the savvy to capitalize the franchise of his resume in the private advertising sector, then all the power to him. Upon doing so, he joins other businessmen, sports and entertainment celebrities, politicians, and the like. There is no sound reason to begrudge these men a pay scale that is certainly commensurate with their hard work and credentials; and as stated prior, the argument is rather petty and impertinent.

Learn more about this author, Fegger.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.