Football Coaches, Institutions of Higher Learning, and Finance

[Rolltydr]

Based on the numbers below, I definitely know which schools should be avoided if one is seeking a degree in Finance!

Paid to coach football:
Kirby Smart, Georgia: ~$13,282,580 (2 national championships at Georgia, 4 as DC at Alabama)
Ryan Day, Ohio State: ~$12,575,000 (1 national championship as HC)
Dabo Swinney, Clemson: ~$11,447,025 (2 national championships)

Paid not to coach football:
Jimbo Fisher, Texas A&M: $77,000,000. (1 national championship at FSU in 2013, never got close at A&M)
James Fanklin, Penn State: $57,000,000. (1 Big10 championship in 2016. Only made playoffs once)
Gus Malzahn, auburn: $22,000,000. ( 0 championships as HC, 1 as OC in 2010, lost 2013 championship game as HC)

Oh, and those schools paying those huge numbers for someone not to coach, are still paying salaries (or soon will be) close to those at the top for someone to actually coach!

Edited to correct PSU championship.

 

[Rolltydr]

James Franklin's Penn State ousting proves schools fear losing games more than losing money

Penn State's willingness to pay the second-biggest buyout in college football history is an expensive reminder of the cost of doing business at this level.

www.nbcsports.com

 

[Patri]

I am shocked at those numbers. I had no idea.

 

[Rolltydr]

I am shocked at those numbers. I had no idea.

I love college football as much as anybody, and I understand paying coaches who are coaching and are successful. An economic impact study was conducted to determine if Nick Saban was worth what he was paid at Alabama. I believe he started at $4M/yr in 2007 and was paid $12M/yr when he retired in 2023. It found he had an overall impact of $180-$200M dollars to the university and the local economy. However, signing a contract that guarantees you must pay tens of millions of dollars to a person who fails in the job is the absolute height of stupidity.

 

[davidvel]

Based on the numbers below, I definitely know which schools should be avoided if one is seeking a degree in Finance!

Paid to coach football:
Kirby Smart, Georgia: ~$13,282,580 (2 national championships at Georgia, 4 as DC at Alabama)
Ryan Day, Ohio State: ~$12,575,000 (1 national championship as HC)
Dabo Swinney, Clemson: ~$11,447,025 (2 national championships)

Paid not to coach football:
Jimbo Fisher, Texas A&M: $77,000,000. (1 national championship at FSU in 2013, never got close at A&M)
James Fanklin, Penn State: $57,000,000. (1 Big10 championship in 2016. Only made playoffs once)
Gus Malzahn, auburn: $22,000,000. ( 0 championships as HC, 1 as OC in 2010, lost 2013 championship game as HC)

Oh, and those schools paying those huge numbers for someone not to coach, are still paying salaries (or soon will be) close to those at the top for someone to actually coach!

Edited to correct PSU championship.

Odd post.

But since you know, care to share with the rest of us? What does what they pay the football coach have to do with a student studying finance? Also, what do the number of championships have to do with a student studying finance? Is there any correlation or causation between the numbers you posted and a student studying finance?

Kirby's contract is for over $80 million, how much of the benefits of football is returned to finance (or other) students?

 

[Brett]

Based on the numbers below, I definitely know which schools should be avoided if one is seeking a degree in Finance!

Paid to coach football:
Kirby Smart, Georgia: ~$13,282,580 (2 national championships at Georgia, 4 as DC at Alabama)
Ryan Day, Ohio State: ~$12,575,000 (1 national championship as HC)
Dabo Swinney, Clemson: ~$11,447,025 (2 national championships)

Paid not to coach football:
Jimbo Fisher, Texas A&M: $77,000,000. (1 national championship at FSU in 2013, never got close at A&M)
James Fanklin, Penn State: $57,000,000. (1 Big10 championship in 2016. Only made playoffs once)
Gus Malzahn, auburn: $22,000,000. ( 0 championships as HC, 1 as OC in 2010, lost 2013 championship game as HC)

Oh, and those schools paying those huge numbers for someone not to coach, are still paying salaries (or soon will be) close to those at the top for someone to actually coach!

Edited to correct PSU championship.

It's going to cost UNC $30 million to pay Bellichick not to coach football

 

[Rolltydr]

Odd post.

But since you know, care to share with the rest of us? What does what they pay the football coach have to do with a student studying finance? Also, what do the number of championships have to do with a student studying finance? Is there any correlation or causation between the numbers you posted and a student studying finance?

Kirby's contract is for over $80 million, how much of the benefits of football is returned to finance (or other) students?

The point is that these universities which offer degrees in finance which, in part, profess to teach students about finance make some pretty questionable financial decisions. Unless you think it’s smart to pay millions of dollars to someone who you no longer want to work for you. And Alabama is certainly not immune. Current coach Kalen DeBoer who replaced Saban has a buyout of about $90 million. And, I believe I saw that Kirby’s is $110,000,000. They are both still working for their respective employers.

The schools are doing this while begging congress to pass laws which would prevent them from having to pay the athletes more money. You may agree. I think it’s asinine.

College football programs could spend $200 million in buyouts. Spare us the money moaning

Schools are clamoring for a way to control student athlete payments. We've yet to hear about coach contracts, of course.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Rolltydr]

It's going to cost UNC $30 million to pay Bellichick not to coach football

An NFL coach who had never coached in college, had no relationship with any high school coaches that could help him recruit the top high school players, and no concept of the transfer portal. Bill was a great NFL coach for many years and I enjoyed watching his team. However, once Brady left, he became merely mortal and the last couple years, they were a bad football team.

 

[Snazzylass]

I am shocked at those numbers. I had no idea.

Um, yep! The coaches are the highest paid state employees...

 

[Snazzylass]

I love college football as much as anybody, and I understand paying coaches who are coaching and are successful. An economic impact study was conducted to determine if Nick Saban was worth what he was paid at Alabama. I believe he started at $4M/yr in 2007 and was paid $12M/yr when he retired in 2023. It found he had an overall impact of $180-$200M dollars to the university and the local economy. However, signing a contract that guarantees you must pay tens of millions of dollars to a person who fails in the job is the absolute height of stupidity.

A winning sports team makes all the difference in the desirability of the university. The Jesuits learned this a long time ago. Kids want to go to AL and other schools with a tradition of winning. So, yes, the impact is huge.

The buyouts are the way the game is played and I've often heard the alums, the boosters help with that. It's always a concern when it's time to dump a coach.

The big change in college sports is NIL and the portal. It's going to hurt the mid majors in BB. Time will tell the overall effects.

In the meantime, how about those Hoosiers? And, is Penn State going to steal our coach?

 

[Rolltydr]

I don’t know if it’s true, but I heard yesterday that Adidas actually agreed to pay Franklin’s buyout. It also is to be paid out over the length of the contract, which runs through 2031, I believe, so it just becomes a line item in the budget. Very manageable for the university or whoever actually pays it.

It will be interesting to see the effect on BB. IMO, it has leveled the playing field in football as evidenced by Indiana, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and a few others in cfb. The coaches and AD’s, especially the ones from Georgia, Alabama, PSU, Ohio State, the “haves”, tried to tell us NIL would ruin the sport because they would get all the good players and the “haves nots” wouldn’t have a chance. Exactly the opposite has happened. It’s always been easier for the mid majors to compete in basketball because money hasn’t been as big a factor in where players went. There were more good players to go around and limited scholarships so the talent was more evenly distributed. It will be interesting to see if that does change.

 

[davidvel]

The point is that these universities which offer degrees in finance which, in part, profess to teach students about finance make some pretty questionable financial decisions. Unless you think it’s smart to pay millions of dollars to someone who you no longer want to work for you. And Alabama is certainly not immune. Current coach Kalen DeBoer who replaced Saban has a buyout of about $90 million. And, I believe I saw that Kirby’s is $110,000,000. They are both still working for their respective employers.

The schools are doing this while begging congress to pass laws which would prevent them from having to pay the athletes more money. You may agree. I think it’s asinine.

College football programs could spend $200 million in buyouts. Spare us the money moaning

Schools are clamoring for a way to control student athlete payments. We've yet to hear about coach contracts, of course.

www.nytimes.com

You said "Based on the numbers below, I definitely know which schools should be avoided if one is seeking a degree in Finance!" So you believe that the people making decisions to pay football coaches are the same people teaching finance in the classroom? My bet is the professors in many instances are hell bent again such expenditures. I still don't understand your logic here, or your "point." I see no relation between a student choosing a university for a finance degree, and what the football team's coach makes.

 

[pedro47]

Wow! All Those state employees football coaches all have a state retirement plans paid by the university and probably have used of a state vehicles .

 

[Rolltydr]

Deleted

 

[pedro47]

Odd post.

But since you know, care to share with the rest of us? What does what they pay the football coach have to do with a student studying finance? Also, what do the number of championships have to do with a student studying finance? Is there any correlation or causation between the numbers you posted and a student studying finance?

Kirby's contract is for over $80 million, how much of the benefits of football is returned to finance (or other) students?

Why is a football coach paid more than the university president?

 

[Rolltydr]

I still don't understand your logic here, or your "point."

It isn’t complicated.

 

[Brett]

Why is a football coach paid more than the university president?

Actually most colleges do not pay their coaches more than the 'presidents' --- most private and Ivy league colleges don't

But some college football coaches are highly paid

 

[davidvel]

It isn’t complicated.

Brilliant explanation.

 

[ScoopKona]

Why is a football coach paid more than the university president?

Because college sports is what brings the big donations. I was chummy with the university president when I was an undergraduate. He was nicknamed "Herb" because he looked like "Herb -- the man who has never tried a Whopper" from the Burger King advertising campaign.

I asked him this very question.

"Because that coach brings in more money than a dozen of me ever could."

He went on to explain that college athletics are first and foremost for the alumni. Then they're for the athletes and all the staff (this is how the US wins so many Olympic medals - the NCAA). And finally they're for their region and the undergraduates.

 

[davidvel]

Because college sports is what brings the big donations. I was chummy with the university president when I was an undergraduate. He was nicknamed "Herb" because he looked like "Herb -- the man who has never tried a Whopper" from the Burger King advertising campaign.

I asked him this very question.

"Because that coach brings in more money than a dozen of me ever could."

He went on to explain that college athletics are first and foremost for the alumni. Then they're for the athletes and all the staff (this is how the US wins so many Olympic medals - the NCAA). And finally they're for their region and the undergraduates.

Donations for what? Certainly not the Finance Department.

 

[ScoopKona]

A winning sports team makes all the difference in the desirability of the university.

The top 10 programs bring in $200-250 billion or so in revenue. (They have almost as much in expenses. But it's an economic juggernaut.) And even more in donations to the school's trust fund. And even more in bequests. And the rest of the top 50 are at the very least nine-figures in revenue.

Anyone who likes watching the Olympics should be glad college sports exists. And for all the whining and moaning from people who don't understand how universities work, sports generally pays for itself, and pays trust fund dividends. The Ivy League's massive trust funds exist because of their turn of the 20th century sports programs. Harvard's is sitting at $50 billion-ish.

The cutting edge teaching hospital was paid for with touchdowns and buzzer-beater three-pointers.

"Department reported $254,933,664 in revenue"

Ohio State reports more than $26 million in athletic student aid in FY 2024

The Ohio State University Department of Athletics remains one of the largest departments in the nation in both size and revenue, according to the new financial report filed to the NCAA. The report highlights a commitment of $26,084,724 in athletic student aid – an increase from $23.8 million...

news.osu.edu

 

[davidvel]

Blah, blah, blah, as usual.

 

[Snazzylass]

You said "Based on the numbers below, I definitely know which schools should be avoided if one is seeking a degree in Finance!" So you believe that the people making decisions to pay football coaches are the same people teaching finance in the classroom? My bet is the professors in many instances are hell bent again such expenditures. I still don't understand your logic here, or your "point." I see no relation between a student choosing a university for a finance degree, and what the football team's coach makes.

Uh, true. Many faculty resent the sports teams. No, finance majors don't choose their school based on the sports team, specifically.

However, while, @ScoopKona was talking about the general economic benefits, and there are many. I was talking about enrollment, not just finance majors, though Dan Dakick did call IU a business school yesterday. Sure, they are known for their B-school, and School of Music, and Dentistry, etc.

Kids, who can afford the traditional college experience and that's what they are looking for, do care about winning the football game on Saturday. Alums want to go to the Bowl games. It does add to the campus experience. AL has maybe the strongest Greek (women) system and thanks to the football team. Notre Dame doesn't have any financial aid to speak of. They don't need it. Like Duke, rich kids want to go there.

Believe me, geeky, nerdy finance majors, accountants and dentists are the biggest fans in the stands and supporting their schools. Winning programs promote the schools. March Madness promotes the schools.

John Mellencamp has given a bunch of money to IU and helped build some of the sports facilities. His only ties to the University are him playing at frat parties when he was a teenager and his butt in the seat at ball games.

Football pays for all the other sports in both high school and college. Universities depend on their alums to build the buildings, oh, and the proliferation of student loans, but that's another subject.

 

[TolmiePeak]

The top 10 programs bring in $200-250 billion or so in revenue. (They have almost as much in expenses. But it's an economic juggernaut.) And even more in donations to the school's trust fund. And even more in bequests. And the rest of the top 50 are at the very least nine-figures in revenue.

Anyone who likes watching the Olympics should be glad college sports exists. And for all the whining and moaning from people who don't understand how universities work, sports generally pays for itself, and pays trust fund dividends. The Ivy League's massive trust funds exist because of their turn of the 20th century sports programs. Harvard's is sitting at $50 billion-ish.

The cutting edge teaching hospital was paid for with touchdowns and buzzer-beater three-pointers.

"Department reported $254,933,664 in revenue"

Ohio State reports more than $26 million in athletic student aid in FY 2024

The Ohio State University Department of Athletics remains one of the largest departments in the nation in both size and revenue, according to the new financial report filed to the NCAA. The report highlights a commitment of $26,084,724 in athletic student aid – an increase from $23.8 million...

news.osu.edu

The University of Washington athletic department was $8m in the red for 2024. The department relied on and infusion of funding from student fees and transfers from the academic budgets.

 

[Rolltydr]

Yes, football at the top programs, is a huge revenue producer, for both schools and the local economy. But, it is also a very expensive. I've seen articles that show only a few schools end up making money off football because it is so expensive. But, it also brings in huge revenue for the other sports and the university. That's why they all want to have football programs. I get it. I'm as big a fan of college football as anybody.

My only point in the original post is that some schools enter into contracts that make no financial sense whatsoever. Texas A&M, knowingly and willfully, entered into a contract with Jimbo Fisher that bound them to pay him almost $80,000,000 if he failed. He failed, if you can call getting paid $80,000,000 not to work failure. Penn State did the same thing with James Franklin for $49,000,000. I understand football brings in huge dollars. It would bring in even more if they didn't give tens of millions of dollars to people who failed at the job.

Edited to add: The same President, Provost, and Board of Trustees (Regents) reign over both the Athletic Department and the Academic Departments and are ultimately responsible for the decisions and priorities of both.