‘The money does not exist’: Why the buyouts for college football coaches are setting off alarm bells

Donate To GopherHole
matt

matt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
5,358
Reaction score
4,508
Points
113
At the start of the season, nine head coaches were making more than $10 million annually, according to the USA Today head coaches database, and 12 had buyouts totaling more than $40 million, topped by Kirby Smart’s $105 million owed should Georgia decide to can him.

Except now, as some of those bills come due at the same time revenue sharing comes into existence, the very real question is no longer an existential crisis. Just where is the money coming from?

“I have no idea,’’ said another board member at an affected school. “The money does not exist.’’

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/31/sport/college-football-coach-buyouts
 


matt said:
At the start of the season, nine head coaches were making more than $10 million annually, according to the USA Today head coaches database, and 12 had buyouts totaling more than $40 million, topped by Kirby Smart’s $105 million owed should Georgia decide to can him.

Except now, as some of those bills come due at the same time revenue sharing comes into existence, the very real question is no longer an existential crisis. Just where is the money coming from?

“I have no idea,’’ said another board member at an affected school. “The money does not exist.’’

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/31/sport/college-football-coach-buyouts
Click to expand...
Pretty sure in the case of Texas A&M, it came from wealthy boosters who will pay whatever it takes for a winning team. Of course A&M never actually wins anything, so the ROI might not be there.
 


Joe Hardy said:
Paying $ for coaches not to coach is stupid. Invest the $ in the kids. How many 4/5 start athletes does $49 million buy?

You win with athletes.
Click to expand...
I have a hard time believing any head coach doesn’t know a little ball
There are high school assistants with enough knowledge to win 7-9 games with Ohio states roster.
So the roster matters
 


I would agree that talent is by far the most important thing in college football. I bet you take the top 100 coaches and give them the top roster and every one of them is gonna win at least 10 games. There’s probably a difference between a guy like Saban winning multiple national titles and a coach like Franklin who just can’t seem to get over the hump. But I don’t think there’s that big of a difference between a guy like Franklin and a coach like Ferentz, Rhule, or PJ.
 

What is the actual threat of other schools poaching your coach? At the end of the day, if a coach wants to leave, they're going to leave.

The real killer is the yearly extension business. The contract reads that the buyout decreases every year over the life of the contract, but when you get a 1-year extension every year, the buyout never decreases.

Most people get a yearly raise/cost of living adjustment. So the yearly adjustment to a coaches salary doesn't bother me nearly as much. It's the fact that you have a 7-year contract, but 6 of those years are essentially a sham as you never work down your contract to ever have anything less than a perpetual 7-year contract.
 





gopherbadgerman said:
I would agree that talent is by far the most important thing in college football. I bet you take the top 100 coaches and give them the top roster and every one of them is gonna win at least 10 games. There’s probably a difference between a guy like Saban winning multiple national titles and a coach like Franklin who just can’t seem to get over the hump. But I don’t think there’s that big of a difference between a guy like Franklin and a coach like Ferentz, Rhule, or PJ.
Click to expand...
Sure if you could identify that talent, make the gameplan that accentuates that talent, and keep them all happy yes. Fisher had numerous bought and paid for teams. Florida has a huge pay roll. So did FSU the year they sucked.

You win with jimmies and joes I agree but you also need a coach who can identify those jimmies and joes and put them in the right places.
 


It’ll be interesting to see how universities adjust.

Agee, investing in players seems like a better idea. Why lock yourself to a coach? I can see a school like Minnesota (maybe not with Coyle) deciding to flip the script - heavy incentive based contacts.

Give an opportunity to a young coach willing to bet on himself and don’t commit too much money. invest in players and pay the coach based on success and bowl payments. With buyouts being dependent on winning.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom