Top coaches at the University of California lead programs that attract tens of thousands of spectators, generate millions in revenue and instill pride in their schools.

The UC system’s Nobel laureates promote a university’s academic mission, generate millions in research grants and create prestige that draws students and other top researchers.

Gauging the comparable worth of coaches and laureates to the nation’s most highly-regarded public university system can be complex, but measuring their financial worth, at least in terms of how much each gets paid, is not.

The top UC coaches earn, on average, three times more than the system’s full-time Nobel laureates.

The top eight coaches earned an average of $1.2 million in 2010, while UC’s eight full-time laureates earned an average of $403,000.

Click here to review our searchable database of UC pay from 2006 through 2010.

“People generally agree that top academic programs are the most important part of a UC school,” said Karen Anderson, a college researcher. “But just walk around Berkeley and ask students who the football coach is, and who was the school’s last Nobel Prize winner and you’ll quickly see that we, as a society, often place a much higher value on sports.”

Pay breakdown

The UC system paid 545 coaches a combined $35.5 million in total compensation in 2010. Pay ranged from millions for top coaches to less than $2,500 for some part-time assistant coaches.

The system paid its 16 working Nobel laureates a combined $3.8 million in 2010. Only eight laureates worked full time; the rest worked as adjunct professors, or in other part-time roles. The UC system boasts more than 100 Nobel laureates with affiliations to various campuses. But most graduated from a UC campus, conducted research or taught prior to 2010.

UC Berkeley head football coach Jeff Tedford ranked as the highest paid UC employee, earning $2.3 million in 2010.

In comparison, Dr. Stanley Prusiner, director of the Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases at UC San Francisco, was the highest paid Nobel laureate, earning $819,167. Prusiner’s compensation ranked No. 32 of all UC system employees.

Both Tedford and Prusiner earned less than $240,000 in base salary. Their compensation figures were significantly inflated by money coming from grants, private gifts and endowments, a common practice among top earners at the UC system.

Tedford‘s pay includes a $1.6 million “talent fee” for appearing on television, radio or other media shows; making speeches or other public appearances; running youth camps, and similar duties. Tedford also has incentives built into his contract of up to $1 million tied to his Golden Bears performance on the gridiron. Tedford missed out on all incentives in the 2010 year when his team finished with a mediocre 5-7 record.

Pay for other top earning coaches, including UCLA basketball coach Ben Howland, who earned $2.1 million, Berkeley’s basketball coach Mike Montgomery, who earned $1.9 million, and UCLA football coach Rick Neuheisel, who earned $1.2 million, followed similar compensation formulas.

UC officials say people don’t always understand that the highest paid coaches draw their salaries almost entirely from athletic department revenue, private gifts, sponsorships and donations.

“The very top coaches usually don’t get any money from universities’ general fund,” said Steve Montiel, spokesman at the UC Office of the President.

Prusiner, winner of the 1997 Nobel Prize in medicine for his work analyzing bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease, received an additional $581,997 in pay mostly from research grants he helped secure for the institute he leads. He ranked No. 32 overall highest in pay at the UC system.

UC Santa Barbara economics professor Finn Kydland, winner of the 2004 Nobel Prize for economics, was the second highest paid Nobel laureate in 2010, earning $411,333 in total compensation. He ranked No. 428 overall systemwide. The other Nobel laureates also received much of their total pay from research grants.

Measuring worth

Top coaches and Nobel laureates alike are often credited with helping generating revenue for their schools that support scholarships and other campus-wide services.

At UCLA, the athletic department generated $61.9 million last year from television deals, ticket sales and corporate sponsorships, said Marc Dellins, director of executive relations at UCLA’s athletic department. The football and basketball programs, led by the two high-profile coaches, accounted for most of that revenue, which helped support nearly all other sports and coaching salaries at the university, Dellins said.

UC Santa Barbara had four full-time Nobel laureates in 2010, the most of any UC campus. Michael Witherell, vice chancellor of research at the university, said the true value of the school’s laureates comes from the other top-level educators and researchers they help recruit.

“Our laureates not only help us secure research grants that contribute financially to the university, they also attract other highly-renowned educators,” he said. “That means our students are getting an education from people who are recognized as tops in their fields. There is no way to put a monetary value on that.”

Some economists said it’s also difficult to quantify how much a coach or Nobel laureate is worth to a university – financially or in terms of the prestige they create.

Andrew Zimbalist, an economist at Smith College in Massachusetts who has also written extensively about coaching pay at Division I schools, said coaches are often given too much credit for the success or revenue generated by school’s sports programs.

“These compensation packages make no economic sense. There is no evidence that higher salaries correlate with higher performance or revenue in athletics,” he said. “Coaches are not bringing in all that money. It’s the players. It’s the history of the program. That’s what is selling the game to sponsors, to donors and to ticket buyers.”

Zimbalist said universities send the wrong message when they pay coaches so much more than top professors and Nobel laureates.

Who deserves more?

Among some students and alumni, there is little consensus over who should be paid the most.

“The core mission of a university is academics, first and foremost,” said Mindy Schmidt, who graduated this spring from UC Irvine. “The main reason the UC system has the most applicants each year is because of value of the education the schools provide. Nobel laureates contribute to that value. Coaches don’t.”

Alberto Campos, a junior at UCLA, disagrees.

“No one is paying $50 to go sit in a stadium to watch someone conduct research,” Campos said.

“Scientific research might be more important in the long run,” he said. “But for the average student, sports have a greater influence in their college experience. That’s why you get 100,000 people at the Rose Bowl for the UCLA-USC game.”

Contact the writer: 714-704-3773 or fleal@ocregister.com