Just going to have to hope you’re right and that I am not, and me being wrong here is a positive for the football team. I don’t think Beamer can make this work but if there is a chance it obviously has to be with different coaches on the offensive side of the ball.
Extend Beamer, increase buyout
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
This is a maturing point for Beamer. He has done a mostly fair job up to this season in terms of on-field results. He just needs to be more by the book when it comes to coaching hires. I think he's been trying to prove a point with hiring under the radar types. Starting with OC for next season, he needs to hire coaches that everyone says "that makes sense" and not "who?".
I hate to keep bringing it up, but when Satterfield left and Shula was named OC, a lot of people where excited about the move. They were convinced Shula would bring his NFL knowledge and turn Sellers into an elite qb while making the offense a scoring machine.
Maybe a "who?" hire might be the best thing. Someone with no expectations and a clean slate might be the best option.
I guess I should have said "who?" and/or "why?"
We all knew who Shula was, but I think there was a collective "why?" when that hire was announced.
He just needs to hire someone, even if know well known, that people look at and say "that makes sense." So far, he hasn't made one OC hire that anyone thought made sense. Compounding, for each OC hire he said the guy he picked was his very first choice. Really? Satterfield was the guy at the top of his list? Loggains? Shula?
When Beamer first arrived and he said all of his asst. hires were his first choices I had the feeling there was some overcompensating going on. If it were true, I had to wonder what sort of coaches had thought being hired by a former position coach in his first head coach job was a great opportunity.
I think he's little overly emphatic at times in defending his decisions. And, yes, it comes across as overcompensating.
SOS would just tell you straight up if he made a dumb decision.
Knowing what we know now, it isn't surprising that someone as thin skinned and emotional as Beamer would be that way about defending his decisions.
I'm not sure he has the emotional maturity/stability to be a head coach at a major college.
I need @KingWard and his argument for a lifetime contract for Beamer to back me up here!
There is a great deal of angst that Beamer will be handicapped in the OC search, among other reasons, by being on the hotseat next year. IF the AD is going to retain Beamer AND expects him to hire a good/competent OC, he needs to do something to reassure OCs that they aren't bringing them on board for a 1 year experiment.
They could extend Beamer, reduce his annual salary and increase his buyout. Buyouts are not prohibitive for schools like LSU, PSU, Auburn, but we aren't in that galaxy of programs. PSU will pay Franklin $50 million (to be reduced by earnings). We already can't afford Beamer's which is shy of $30 million. If we had any semi-serious boosters, they'd have raised the money long ago. They could cut his salary $1 million/year for the remainder of his contract (through 2030, so 5 more seasons) and add that $5 million to his buyout. Something like that.
There is a great deal of angst that Beamer will be handicapped in the OC search, among other reasons, by being on the hotseat next year. IF the AD is going to retain Beamer AND expects him to hire a good/competent OC, he needs to do something to reassure OCs that they aren't bringing them on board for a 1 year experiment.
They could extend Beamer, reduce his annual salary and increase his buyout. Buyouts are not prohibitive for schools like LSU, PSU, Auburn, but we aren't in that galaxy of programs. PSU will pay Franklin $50 million (to be reduced by earnings). We already can't afford Beamer's which is shy of $30 million. If we had any semi-serious boosters, they'd have raised the money long ago. They could cut his salary $1 million/year for the remainder of his contract (through 2030, so 5 more seasons) and add that $5 million to his buyout. Something like that.
Last edited:
I think the AD sees what we all see, and am inclined to say don’t throw good
money after bad so firing him would be the only logical way to NOT go about
this halfassed!
Best way to beat mediocrity is to extend a mediocre coach for the “hope” of a good OC to come in?
The post to which you replied clearly stated "IF we are bringing Beamer back..."
It's a waste of everyone's time...the coaches, the players, the fans...to bring Beamer back under his current deal, knowing he won't able to attract a competent OC and then just fire him next year. If that's the plan, just fire him this year.
However, IF he is being retained AND being tasked with hiring a new OC, it only make sense to at least increase his buyout (extension not absolutely necessary) to offer some assurances to potential OCs that it isn't a one-year trial. That could easily be achieved by reducing his annual salary. If you're going to retain him, at least create a situation where he can attract a competent OC. Otherwise, don't bother.
Is that what he's saying?
Maybe we're arguing over word choice, but i see it differently.
If you leave Beamer as is, and tell him to go hire an OC, he will be greatly hampered by the perception that he's on his last year. OC's may avoid the position simply because they dont want to join a sinking ship.
If you want OC's to think they are coming into a stable job, we have to do something public to make Beamer's status more stable.
I see the logic behind it, I just disagree. Shane did this with his previous hires. He has the job to figure out how to bring someone in to what could be a 1 year gig.
He made his bed, its not up to us to fork over more millions so that he can lay in it.
As far as this is concerned, I'm looking at it more from the fan's perspective.
The worst thing for US is for the AD to set up a situation where it's basically pre-determined that Beamer will be fired next year. It just wastes another whole season.
Restructuring his deal in some way that gives potential OCs peace of mind about coming here enhances his ability to get a higher quality OC and have a decent season next year.
Otherwise we're looking at next year sucking. Breaking in a new staff in 2027 and going through the rebuilding process and maybe being decent by 2028 or 2029.
I see that, I just dont want to reward Shane by putting more money on the table for him, just to appease an OC candidate.
I mean, these guys aren't idiots, right? They can plainly see the shaky ground Shane is on.
Maybe the answer is in the OC contract? Guarantee them a 2 year payout, even if the staff is canned after one year?
I think a fully guaranteed contract for an OC would be a good incentive as well. For instance, Sammis at UConn currently makes about $400,000. Pay him $1,5 million/yr. Fully guaranteed for 3 years. Maybe 4. I dunno. These guys have families and hate having to uproot their families and move, so I think there needs to be enough incentive there. Maybe that would be enough for an OC in the lower ranks looking to take the step up.
I don't really think an increased buyout for Beamer is a huge reward. An extension probably isn't necessary, since his contract already goes through 2030, so that's fine. As I mentioned above, they could adjust his salary to account for the buyout increase.
It just seems to me that maintaining the status quo across the board and expecting him to hire a competent OC is futile and waste of time.
I am completely with you in that line of thinking. You send Shane out to search for an OC now, and every single candidate is going to weigh the possibility of going into a single year situation. That is going to limit us badly.
To your point about guaranteed years? If an OC is currently making 500k, I would think a two year, 1.5 million contract guaranteed should assuage doubt.
You'd be talking about 3 times the current salary and for two years.
Imo, the coaching career for coordinators is fluid enough that those terms would be enticing.
Yeah, I think it should be. Just whatever, they do, as I said in a post a little bit above, Donati should make it clear to an OC candidate they aren't bringing him for a one-year trial period.
I know the standard protocol is to bring back a struggling coach, knowing he's most likely getting canned the next year, and then canning him the next year (See Billy Napier at Florida). I just don't care to go through that whole process.
It's a multi-pronged approach for sure. In addition to the ideas here, I think they need to give White a raise and try to lock him up. That gives potential OCs some assurance that they'll be operating with a competent D and won't have to score 40 ppg.
if we are committed to keeping Beamer, it seems to me the smartest move would be to extend him and increase his buyout
No I would not double-down and reward failure.
I would not extend his contract or increase his buyout. If you don't believe he can turn it around, then just fire him. If you do believe in Beamer- then give him a second chance based on his current contract.
The pros generally don't consider revising a head coach contract before the end of the current contract, even if the coach is producing acceptable results; so why would you reward a coach for failure and risk building up a large buyout down the road. I like Beamer- I am on record saying I want him back. But his hiring and lack of firing decisions last year -raise serious questions about his ability to raise the program to a more sustainable higher level. Give him another shot, but roll the dice with his current contract.
Right. Settle on Beamer for life and tie all of his regular remuneration strictly to outcomes. Do what must be done at the staff level to make and keep us competitive. Maybe something that novel would work while all other approaches haven't proven very durable.
If we want to get crazy, could we just buy better players? Fire the coaches?
Fire all the coaches except for strength, nutrition, and some practice technicians. Hire some football loving nerds and run the offense and defense by AI. Artificial Intelligence would easily do better calling plays and defenses than the natural intelligence we've suffered through.
Take all the millions saved from the coaches and buy better players across the board.
Fire all the coaches except for strength, nutrition, and some practice technicians. Hire some football loving nerds and run the offense and defense by AI. Artificial Intelligence would easily do better calling plays and defenses than the natural intelligence we've suffered through.
Take all the millions saved from the coaches and buy better players across the board.