Following the money harder to do
Schools such as UNC no longer collect data on coaches’ outside pay
North Carolina is happy to tout a laundry list of coach Roy Williams’ numbers. Victories and Atlantic Coast Conference titles, for example. Or Final Four appearances.
There’s one number, however, on which North Carolina is noticeably silent: Williams’ total compensation. Specifically, the money he gets from outside sources. That includes money from shoe contracts, basketball camps, speaking engagements and TV and radio shows, sums that surely dwarf his base salary.
Williams and North Carolina aren’t alone, either. An annual review of coaches’ pay by USA Today found more and more state schools have stopped collecting information about outside income and benefits paid to their coaches.
‘‘ Coaches are going to hit $ 10 million a year,’’ said Dan Rascher, a sports economist who is the academic director for the sport- management program at the University of San Francisco. ‘‘ That’s just crazy. Regular people are going to be like, ‘ What is happening?’ So I think part of this is trying to slow that train down or keep our eyes off of it.’’
The NCAA used to require schools to collect information about income and benefits that any athletic- department employees received from outside sources. Most schools would disclose that information, but some — including North Carolina — refused.
Tired of policing what could range from a single pair of shoes to a multimillion shoe contract, the schools’ representatives on Division I’s top governing bodies dropped the reporting requirement last spring. Lo and behold, with no obligation to track the extra income, many schools are deciding they can’t be bothered.
This isn’t pocket change, either. South Carolina’s Frank Martin gets a cool $ 1.9 million for endorsements and radio and TV appearances. That’s in addition to his base salary of $ 350,000 and a $ 200,000 supplement from the school.
Martin’s $ 1.9 million technically isn’t considered outside income because South Carolina negotiated the deals, then they were written into his contract. But that’s just legalese. He’s getting paid by outside entities, just as Williams is.
And considering Williams’ accomplishments — and the fact his base compensation of almost $ 2.1 million this year ranks 24th among coaches whose teams made the NCAA tournament and for whom financial information is available — it’s safe to say he’s getting what Martin is from outside sources and probably much more.
But we won’t know because North Carolina won’t make it public. It won’t configure Williams’ contract to ensure the outside income is transparent, either.
‘‘ It’s uncomfortable for them and creates lots of questions,’’ Rascher said. ‘‘ Why is the highest- paid employee in the state often a head football coach? So I understand why they want to keep this information hidden from the public. At the same time, they are government employees, and these payments pertain to jobs as government employees.’’
The money from the side gigs isn’t coming out of the pockets of taxpayers, but that’s beside the point. The money, as Rascher said, is a byproduct of being a state employee.
Sure, someone such as Williams could retire and still command a contract from Nike or have kids lining up to attend his camps. But he’s one of a small number of coaches who could do that. Most have drawing power because of the school they represent, a school that’s funded by taxpayers.
Think about it this way: If a governor or state legislator was getting money from outside sources, particularly companies or people who could influence their decisions, there would be a ferocious uproar if the details weren’t disclosed.
Why should the outside income and benefits these coaches get be considered any differently?
‘‘ It gets down to, to me, fundamental fairness,’’ said B. David Ridpath, an associate professor of sports administration at the Ohio College of Business. ‘‘ How much control does that outside entity have over that coach? Who’s having influence? That always worries me, and I think we need to be completely upfront from where these payments are coming in.
‘‘ We would worry about it if it was the mayor. We would worry about it if it was a congressman. I think we should ask the same questions of who’s really controlling college athletics.’’
But with nothing requiring schools to track outside income and benefits anymore, don’t count on many answers. Or anything close to transparency.
It’s all well and good to brag about wins and losses. But those aren’t the only numbers that matter.
Follow me on Twitter @ nrarmour.