Arkansas HC Search

[AppSt94]

Will need some deep pockets for the buy-out.
I think Florida would have terminated Billy. However, I do not believe the buy-out money is free flowing. As such, it may take some time for some of these schools given how much they (donors) are paying in NIL.

No question that is why he is still there. I also think schools are going to have to set winning standards in deals to make losing a cause that voids the buyout. I just don't think a coach who is winning 30-40% of games should get paid 20M to go away.

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

[AppStFan1]

Will need some deep pockets for the buy-out.
I think Florida would have terminated Billy. However, I do not believe the buy-out money is free flowing. As such, it may take some time for some of these schools given how much they (donors) are paying in NIL.

No question that is why he is still there. I also think schools are going to have to set winning standards in deals to make losing a cause that voids the buyout. I just don't think a coach who is winning 30-40% of games should get paid 20M to go away.

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

I think most would not but if you are taking a chance on someone who wants the job badly they might. Big name coaches won't do it for sure.

[BambooRdApp]

Will need some deep pockets for the buy-out.
I think Florida would have terminated Billy. However, I do not believe the buy-out money is free flowing. As such, it may take some time for some of these schools given how much they (donors) are paying in NIL.

No question that is why he is still there. I also think schools are going to have to set winning standards in deals to make losing a cause that voids the buyout. I just don't think a coach who is winning 30-40% of games should get paid 20M to go away.

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

Why would they .. another school will not require it...so, other schools will not put in contracts...the old story..FOMO..

[t4pizza]

Will need some deep pockets for the buy-out.
I think Florida would have terminated Billy. However, I do not believe the buy-out money is free flowing. As such, it may take some time for some of these schools given how much they (donors) are paying in NIL.

No question that is why he is still there. I also think schools are going to have to set winning standards in deals to make losing a cause that voids the buyout. I just don't think a coach who is winning 30-40% of games should get paid 20M to go away.

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

More importantly their agents won't let them agree to it. That being said, all it takes is a couple smaller schools doing this and it would start to spread, again the rarity of the job drives the desire. Most coaches believe in themselves and think they will be successful so I do think you could find some to agree to it. Until Napier, UF hadn't had a full-time coach with a less than .500 record since the 1040s so i doubt language like that would scare anyone off. Again, I don't see most agents ever going for it but I do think schools looking at first time head coaches or coaches moving up a division could get away with it on some level.

[CharlotteApp05]

These leaders are forgetting common facts. At the end of every season, there is only one champion and the average record is .500.

And no matter how much in NIL or coaches salaries are paid, those are still the numbers.

And then when P5 conferences decide to reduce FCS and G5 games, they lower their coaches win % even more. It’s a zero sum game. And I totally agree it’s gotten out of control and feels like it’s going to be forced to evolve.

[AppSt94]

Will need some deep pockets for the buy-out.
I think Florida would have terminated Billy. However, I do not believe the buy-out money is free flowing. As such, it may take some time for some of these schools given how much they (donors) are paying in NIL.

No question that is why he is still there. I also think schools are going to have to set winning standards in deals to make losing a cause that voids the buyout. I just don't think a coach who is winning 30-40% of games should get paid 20M to go away.

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

More importantly their agents won't let them agree to it. That being said, all it takes is a couple smaller schools doing this and it would start to spread, again the rarity of the job drives the desire. Most coaches believe in themselves and think they will be successful so I do think you could find some to agree to it. Until Napier, UF hadn't had a full-time coach with a less than .500 record since the 1040s so i doubt language like that would scare anyone off. Again, I don't see most agents ever going for it but I do think schools looking at first time head coaches or coaches moving up a division could get away with it on some level.

I just don’t see this happening. These guys being interviewed for a job are also interviewing the schools to see if it’s a situation that will allow them to get to their next job. Guaranteed contracts are necessary to provide much needed stability for a coach to recruit players and staff.

[t4pizza]

Will need some deep pockets for the buy-out.
I think Florida would have terminated Billy. However, I do not believe the buy-out money is free flowing. As such, it may take some time for some of these schools given how much they (donors) are paying in NIL.

No question that is why he is still there. I also think schools are going to have to set winning standards in deals to make losing a cause that voids the buyout. I just don't think a coach who is winning 30-40% of games should get paid 20M to go away.

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

More importantly their agents won't let them agree to it. That being said, all it takes is a couple smaller schools doing this and it would start to spread, again the rarity of the job drives the desire. Most coaches believe in themselves and think they will be successful so I do think you could find some to agree to it. Until Napier, UF hadn't had a full-time coach with a less than .500 record since the 1040s so i doubt language like that would scare anyone off. Again, I don't see most agents ever going for it but I do think schools looking at first time head coaches or coaches moving up a division could get away with it on some level.

I just don’t see this happening. These guys being interviewed for a job are also interviewing the schools to see if it’s a situation that will allow them to get to their next job. Guaranteed contracts are necessary to provide much needed stability for a coach to recruit players and staff.

Nobody will ever know until someone gives it a try. Professional athletes sign non-guaranteed contracts all the time (except MLB), why should coaches be any different? I don't see this coming anytime soon, but I think schools may start thinking in this direction at some point.

[AppSt94]

No question that is why he is still there. I also think schools are going to have to set winning standards in deals to make losing a cause that voids the buyout. I just don't think a coach who is winning 30-40% of games should get paid 20M to go away.

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

More importantly their agents won't let them agree to it. That being said, all it takes is a couple smaller schools doing this and it would start to spread, again the rarity of the job drives the desire. Most coaches believe in themselves and think they will be successful so I do think you could find some to agree to it. Until Napier, UF hadn't had a full-time coach with a less than .500 record since the 1040s so i doubt language like that would scare anyone off. Again, I don't see most agents ever going for it but I do think schools looking at first time head coaches or coaches moving up a division could get away with it on some level.

I just don’t see this happening. These guys being interviewed for a job are also interviewing the schools to see if it’s a situation that will allow them to get to their next job. Guaranteed contracts are necessary to provide much needed stability for a coach to recruit players and staff.

Nobody will ever know until someone gives it a try. Professional athletes sign non-guaranteed contracts all the time (except MLB), why should coaches be any different? I don't see this coming anytime soon, but I think schools may start thinking in this direction at some point.

This isn’t the pros.

[t4pizza]

I can’t see a coach agreeing to that type of contract parameters.

More importantly their agents won't let them agree to it. That being said, all it takes is a couple smaller schools doing this and it would start to spread, again the rarity of the job drives the desire. Most coaches believe in themselves and think they will be successful so I do think you could find some to agree to it. Until Napier, UF hadn't had a full-time coach with a less than .500 record since the 1040s so i doubt language like that would scare anyone off. Again, I don't see most agents ever going for it but I do think schools looking at first time head coaches or coaches moving up a division could get away with it on some level.

I just don’t see this happening. These guys being interviewed for a job are also interviewing the schools to see if it’s a situation that will allow them to get to their next job. Guaranteed contracts are necessary to provide much needed stability for a coach to recruit players and staff.

Nobody will ever know until someone gives it a try. Professional athletes sign non-guaranteed contracts all the time (except MLB), why should coaches be any different? I don't see this coming anytime soon, but I think schools may start thinking in this direction at some point.

This isn’t the pros.

Haha, not yet but it sure feels like it more and more with each passing season.

[Bootsy]

There’s one thing we can all agree on: it’s just a matter of time before this model falls apart. But no one is willing to fix it because the powers-that-be are greedy, selfish people who fear losing money and/or being sued.

The only way change ever happens is if the revenue trend declines because fans get fed up, generational interests shift, etc.

For example, player strikes in the NBA and MLB have had a disastrous impact on both leagues, and very nearly tanked the NFL in the 1980s. Younger generations don’t care as much about sports; they have a ton of other entertainment options today.

Are we going to see strikes in college sports or young people become completely disinterested? Probably not. But I pose these as an example of what can start the revenue decline…and it’s already happening.