Skip to main content
Join Now
Get a profile. Be recruited.
Default AvatarAlabama - BOL Round Table
New
Avatar
GumpingAintEasyOct 27, 3:38 PM

In this era, why would you *ever* buy a coach out?

I was watching a video talking about Kelly’s buyout, and it made me realize how preposterous the ego trip is for these boosters and ADs who fire coaches. College football is NFL Lite now. Players are paid. Players are essentially waived and traded in the portal, though unofficially. LSU’s deal to fire Kelly is going to cost them more than $100 million over the next 5 years. Maybe closer to $115 million. ($54 million to fire him, $15 million to buy out the staff, and probably at least $50 million to hire a good coach and staff to replace him.) So…in this era - why in the blue hell would you spend $110-$120 million just to employ coaches when you could spend all of that money on players and facility upgrades? With revenue sharing, athletic departments keep moaning and groaning about how they’re on the knife’s edge financially. Yet a handful of programs are going to spend upwards of a billion dollars this year just to make their coaches go away. Wouldn’t it be better to say “this season was a wash. We are going to keep our coach and just buy him better talent next year?” Try, try again. I couldn’t name half the head coaches in the NFL. If that’s where college is heading, why not just walk into Kelly’s office and say “we aren’t firing you but we are forcing you to do X/Y/Z and spend XX on your roster”? If you have $100 million just lying around in boosters’ couch cushions, why not just buy a roster that doesn’t get its a** kicked by Texas A&M at home?
89 Replies
Avatar

Coachbrew

Oct 27, 3:46 PM

Or better yet, in this era why give a guy this type of buyout? Especially if you think you have a destination job
Avatar

Leejr

Oct 27, 3:46 PM

1. You can’t spend that $ on players anymore. 2. BK will not get near that $54 million because LSU was surprisingly smart in structuring that contract. however, I think you’re right that these massive 10-year contracts are stupid and wasting money. Someone will make an incentive based contract soon and that will become the norm. Tho buyouts probably won’t fully go away because their main function is to prevent the coach from being hired away
Avatar

12times

Oct 27, 3:48 PM

Coachbrew said:
Or better yet, in this era why give a guy this type of buyout? Especially if you think you have a destination job
You can’t sign the top 20 without the guaranteed money. It’s what the market will allow that dictates the value.
Avatar

Larson McCord

Oct 27, 3:53 PM

Coachbrew said:
Or better yet, in this era why give a guy this type of buyout? Especially if you think you have a destination job
because other programs will pay it if you don't. So you can either hire someone no one else wants or set it up with the large buyout. The main issue is that when a coach loses the fanbase it just gets toxic and it's nearly impossible to turn things around. Donations decrease, players are more hesitant to sign with the uncertainty etc
Avatar

GumpingAintEasy

Oct 27, 3:55 PM

Coachbrew said:
Or better yet, in this era why give a guy this type of buyout? Especially if you think you have a destination job
I get the silly contracts. They have to provide security to get good coaches. The lunacy comes from giving this kind of contract and then buying it out three years later. Over and over and over again.
Avatar

GumpingAintEasy

Oct 27, 3:56 PM

Leejr said:
1. You can’t spend that $ on players anymore. 2. BK will not get near that $54 million because LSU was surprisingly smart in structuring that contract. however, I think you’re right that these massive 10-year contracts are stupid and wasting money. Someone will make an incentive based contract soon and that will become the norm. Tho buyouts probably won’t fully go away because their main function is to prevent the coach from being hired away
If you think NIL as we knew it is gone, then I have some ocean front property in northport id love to offer you. I can assure you the players being recruited right now are being offered money beyond the revenue share, and schools will gladly and easily find ways around the clearinghouse. The best players will still get NIL deals above and beyond the regular rev share. If Bubba from Bubba’s Toyota down the street is involved in this buyout, he could just as easily be involved in putting a qb on a billboard.
Avatar

Leejr

Oct 27, 3:58 PM

GumpingAintEasy said:
If you think NIL as we knew it is gone, then I have some ocean front property in northport id love to offer you. I can assure you the players being recruited right now are being offered money beyond the revenue share, and schools will gladly and easily find ways around the clearinghouse.
Almost all of the major recruiting guys covering it disagree with you.
Avatar

capstonebill

Oct 27, 3:59 PM

It is true college football is now NFL lite more than ever. I wonder if we see Coach swapping like in the NFL. There's just not enough elite coaches out there unless you want to take a flyer on an up and coming assistant or lower division coach.
Avatar

GumpingAintEasy

Oct 27, 4:00 PM

Leejr said:
Almost all of the major recruiting guys covering it disagree with you.
Please show me where in any of the recent legislation NIL deals will be eliminated? I have no idea what you’re talking about when it comes to “recruiting guys”. Every one of them still references NIL and “if money is involved” in major recruitment stories.
Avatar

Larson McCord

Oct 27, 4:00 PM

Leejr said:
Almost all of the major recruiting guys covering it disagree with you.
you have a link to something saying the money is going to be reduced?
Avatar

Jim Norman

Oct 27, 4:01 PM

Texas A&M
Avatar

GumpingAintEasy

Oct 27, 4:02 PM

Larson McCord said:
because other programs will pay it if you don't. So you can either hire someone no one else wants or set it up with the large buyout. The main issue is that when a coach loses the fanbase it just gets toxic and it's nearly impossible to turn things around. Donations decrease, players are more hesitant to sign with the uncertainty etc
And this may be the calculus moving forward Hire a bargain basement coach that will take a deal structured in the school’s advantage/benefit and then pay out the a** for your roster. It doesn’t take a genius tactician to manage a roster full of five stars. Find a great general manager and pay *that* guy top dollar. Chill on the insane coaching contracts. Acquire talent. Rinse and repeat.
Avatar

Larson McCord

Oct 27, 4:04 PM

GumpingAintEasy said:
And this may be the calculus moving forward Hire a bargain basement coach that will take a deal structured in the school’s advantage/benefit and then pay out the a** for your roster. It doesn’t take a genius tactician to manage a roster full of five stars. Find a great general manager and pay *that* guy top dollar. Chill on the insane coaching contracts. Acquire talent. Rinse and repeat.
I disagree strongly. A lot of coaches have struggled to manage talented rosters.
Avatar

BamaNavyCPO

Oct 27, 4:04 PM

Coachbrew said:
Or better yet, in this era why give a guy this type of buyout? Especially if you think you have a destination job
This ^^^ 100%
Avatar

Leejr

Oct 27, 4:05 PM

GumpingAintEasy said:
Please show me where in any of the recent legislation NIL deals will be eliminated? I have no idea what you’re talking about when it comes to “recruiting guys”. Every one of them still references NIL and “if money is involved” in major recruitment stories.
NIL is still a thing and schools still pay players. You can pay a single player whatever you want, but there’s a cap now. the 3rd party review of NIL deals is legit. Why do you think so many schools front loaded this past class? Because they know they can’t do the same next year. you know exactly who I’m talking about, your just being obtuse. Almost all of the recruits analysts and reporters seem to think this new system has real teeth and most schools won’t test it. Will it get challenged in court almost certainly. Will it lose in court? No idea. But no one seems to think that everyone is going to be tossing around fake deals to every single player like we have been for the last few years. Except you I guess.
Avatar

GumpingAintEasy

Oct 27, 4:06 PM

Larson McCord said:
I disagree strongly. A lot of coaches have struggled to manage talented rosters.
Ed Orgeron, Gene Chizik and Mack Brown have also won national titles in our lifetime. They didn’t sustain it, but those guys are one step above a trained circus monkey when it comes to managing a program. They didn’t win it being great coaches. They won it having Joe Burrow, Cam Newton and Vince Young on their team.
Avatar

Leejr

Oct 27, 4:08 PM

Larson McCord said:
you have a link to something saying the money is going to be reduced?
Not to any specific article off the top of my head. Just an amalgamation of what’s been put out since the Rev share model was adopted. I listen to as many CRB shows on the side as I have free time to. From actual reporters to talking heads, I don’t remember anyone saying that they think schools are going to ignore the new model and do whatever they want
Avatar

GumpingAintEasy

Oct 27, 4:09 PM

Leejr said:
NIL is still a thing and schools still pay players. You can pay a single player whatever you want, but there’s a cap now. the 3rd party review of NIL deals is legit. Why do you think so many schools front loaded this past class? Because they know they can’t do the same next year. you know exactly who I’m talking about, your just being obtuse. Almost all of the recruits analysts and reporters seem to think this new system has real teeth and most schools won’t test it. Will it get challenged in court almost certainly. Will it lose in court? No idea. But no one seems to think that everyone is going to be tossing around fake deals to every single player like we have been for the last few years. Except you I guess.
The best players will still be paid market value. This entire settlement will continue to be challenged over and over again. This is a band aid on a gaping wound. Imagine the first time this clearinghouse denies a borderline deal? It goes to court in some favorable district and an injunction will be granted. There will be some type of review and appeal process. There’s nothing that says a five star player can’t get paid a legitimate sum of money for NIL. We just can’t funnel pay for play through collectives anymore and call it NIL. If a group of boosters can afford to pay a coach to go away, they can afford to compensate players through actual NIL deals through legitimate businesses. That’s the point. The only way around NIL as we know it is an actual collective bargaining agreement the players agree to. Otherwise they’re all free agents who will try to get every dime they can get by hook or by crook.
Avatar

Larson McCord

Oct 27, 4:09 PM

Leejr said:
Not to any specific article off the top of my head. Just an amalgamation of what’s been put out since the Rev share model was adopted. I listen to as many CRB shows on the side as I have free time to. From actual reporters to talking heads, I don’t remember anyone saying that they think schools are going to ignore the new model and do whatever they want
the new model just means that there is a cap on specific rev share payments and additional deals must be approved by the clearinghouse. That doesn't mean it will cost less for players
Avatar

Larson McCord

Oct 27, 4:10 PM

GumpingAintEasy said:
Ed Orgeron, Gene Chizik and Mack Brown have also won national titles in our lifetime. They didn’t sustain it, but those guys are one step above a trained circus monkey when it comes to managing a program. They didn’t win it being great coaches. They won it having Joe Burrow, Cam Newton and Vince Young on their team.
all got fired with buyouts too. So this doesn't change my point.
Avatar

Leejr

Oct 27, 4:12 PM

GumpingAintEasy said:
The best players will still be paid market value. This entire settlement will continue to be challenged over and over again. This is a band aid on a gaping wound. Imagine the first time this clearinghouse denies a borderline deal? It goes to court in some favorable district and injunction will be granted. There will be some type of review and appeal process. There’s nothing that says a five star player can’t get paid a legitimate sum of money for NIL. We just can’t funnel pay for play through collectives anymore and call it NIL.
Right… so the deals can’t come from the schools. Let’s say that every single NIL deal that gets denied is over turned in court. Okay. Schools still can’t pay players beyond the rev share cap. Back door deals will never go away because they never have. But they’ll certainly shrink considerably.
Avatar

Jimmy Johns

Oct 27, 4:12 PM

Leejr said:
NIL is still a thing and schools still pay players. You can pay a single player whatever you want, but there’s a cap now. the 3rd party review of NIL deals is legit. Why do you think so many schools front loaded this past class? Because they know they can’t do the same next year. you know exactly who I’m talking about, your just being obtuse. Almost all of the recruits analysts and reporters seem to think this new system has real teeth and most schools won’t test it. Will it get challenged in court almost certainly. Will it lose in court? No idea. But no one seems to think that everyone is going to be tossing around fake deals to every single player like we have been for the last few years. Except you I guess.
There isn’t a cap on private NIL deals, which can and are still being made. Many guys on here stated that they thought that the addition of rev share + NILGO was going to massively curtail the edge that the big NIL spenders had (Texas, tOSU, Oregon, aTm, etc). To some extent, they are right in that it does level the playing field SOME with the top 15 or so programs that can max out their rev share funds. Yet we see with our own eyes that this is not true to the fullest extent and plenty of big money NIL deals are being made/promised. And we will see it even more plainly in the next transfer portal window.
Avatar

Larson McCord

Oct 27, 4:13 PM

Leejr said:
Right… so the deals can’t come from the schools. Let’s say that every single NIL deal that gets denied is over turned in court. Okay. Schools still can’t pay players beyond the rev share cap. Back door deals will never go away because they never have. But they’ll certainly shrink considerably.
no, they won't
Avatar

Leejr

Oct 27, 4:14 PM

Larson McCord said:
the new model just means that there is a cap on specific rev share payments and additional deals must be approved by the clearinghouse. That doesn't mean it will cost less for players
Right, but the op was about saving money from buyouts to spend on a roster. A school can now only pay X on a roster per the rev share cap. Players can still go get as many NIL deals as they want, but it can’t come from or through the university. So saving all that money is great, but it can’t be put towards a roster.

Thanks for checking out this free message board preview.

Join the full discussion at BOL Round Table