-Bumped. BN Eds.
Well Gene Block apparently thinks so.
I say "apparently" because we don't have a direct quote from him on the topic (or on many other topics, for that matter). But we do have Doughnut's contract. The only objective standard in his contract for incentive payments is UCLA's position in the final Directors' Cup standings.
Here is how the Directors' Cup works. All NCAA sports are weighted equally. Finishing 5th in women's lacrosse is the same as finishing 5th in football (nothing against women's lacrosse but...really?). If a school wins a championship, that is worth 100 points. If a school finishes 2nd, that is worth 90 points. If a school finishes 3rd, that is worth 85 points. If a school finishes 4th, that is worth 80 points. For bracket sports like basketball with no 3rd place game, the 3rd and 4th place points would be split. And so on, all the way down to 5 points for competing in an NCAA championship event (even if you finish 73rd or lower).
For football, places 1-25 are determined by the final coaches' poll. Any team which wins a bowl game but does not finish in the top 25 gets 45 points for a 26th place finish. Any team which gets to a bowl game and loses, and does not finish in the top 25 (like UCLA) gets 25 points.
For each school, you look at the points for each men's team and the points for each women's team. Only the top 10 most points for men's sports and the top 10 most points for women's sports are included for each school.
The result is that breadth is rewarded, not depth. If you can get 80 points each by finishing 4th in women's lacrosse, rifle, skiing, and fencing, that is 360 points total. You would be ahead of a school which only won the BCS championship game and the NCAA men's basketball championship, which would be 200 points total.
Doughnut gets a bonus if UCLA finishes in the top 10% of the BCS standings. There are currently 286 teams in the standings, including such athletic powerhouses as Houston Baptist and St. Francis of Pennsylvania. So if UCLA can finish 28th in the standings, Doughnut gets a bonus. How many think that our Athletic Director should get a bonus if UCLA finishes 28th, on top of having the highest base salary in the conference? If you said zero people would think that, you would unfortunately be wrong. At least one person thinks this makes sense- Chancellor Block, since he signed Doughnut's contract with this provision.
Doughnut gets a higher bonus if UCLA finishes in the top 10. UCLA is currently in 4th, with baseball as the only sport still open in the calculations. The other teams in Omaha are far enough behind in the Directors' Cup standings, that even if they win the CWS, they will not catch UCLA. UCLA will definitely pass Michigan for 3rd place, even without winning a single game in Omaha. If UCLA can run the table in the CWS, UCLA will also pass Florida and finish 2nd.
Stanford has already clinched the Directors' Cup, even with no postseason in baseball. This will be the 19th consecutive year that Stanford has won. There is a glass enclosed basketball court in the fast food spot near the Stanford tennis courts, which can be used by any Stanford varsity athlete, and only by Stanford varsity athletes. The Directors' Cup pennants hang from the ceiling above the court. This is very cool, and obviously a great recruiting tool.
If Doughnut got a bonus whenever UCLA won the Directors' Cup, I would not have a problem. Winning the Directors' Cup should be a big deal.
Under Doughnut, we have breadth without depth, which is rewarded by the point structure of the Directors' Cup. The Bruins have had the following Directors' Cup finishes since he took over, in chronological order, starting with 2003- 6th, 3rd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, out of top 10 (2009), 4th, out of top 10 (2011), 3rd, 3rd or 2nd (this year). So we have 9 top 10 finishes in his 11 years, with 7 finishes in the top 3.
Before we start singing Doughnut's praises, however, here is how UCLA did in the 9 years before he took over (going back to the initial Directors' Cup)- 3rd, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 2nd, 2nd, 5th. We had a top 10 finish every year, with 6 finishes in the top 3.
Doughnut probably convinced Block that he deserved extra money for a top 10 finish, because we fell short in 2009 and 2011. Doughnut- "this would be a great accomplishment- I should get a reward." Block's ideal response- "we did this every year before you got here- this is what we are supposed to do. You are already paid for this with your base salary." Block's actual response- "okay- if that is what you need to keep doing your great job here".
Here are 5 schools this year, sorted alphabetically by their (disguised) actual names-
A- two national championships, loss in a BCS bowl game, elite 8 in men's basketball
B- two national championships, loss in a non-BCS bowl game, loss in men's basketball championship game
C- two national championships, BCS bowl win, sweet 16 in men's basketball
D- one national championship, BCS bowl win, loss in 2nd round in NIT in men's basketball
E- no national championships, loss in a non-BCS bowl game, loss in 1st round in men's basketball
Here is how I would rank each of these schools, in terms of how good the year was-
C, A, D, B, E
Here is how the schools rank in the Directors' Cup standings-
D (Stanford), A (Florida), E (UCLA), B (Michigan), C (Oregon)
Again, the Directors' Cup rewards breadth, not depth. Oregon's women's basketball team sucked. But they won two championships and the Fiesta Bowl, and went further than UCLA in men's basketball. We, meanwhile, have won no national championships and got blown out in the Holiday Bowl and in our only men's basketball tournament game.
And yet, the Directors' Cup results show that we had a better year.
I would take Oregon's year, and their AD, in a nanosecond over our year, and our AD. But Doughnut gets more money per his contract, over and above his base, thanks to how the Directors' Cup is computed.
Just another example of how Block is Doughnut's tool, when it comes to evaluating Morgan Center.