It can be, but it could also be written differently. I'll leave that to the lawyers.
Beamer
- Thread starter ElectricalCock89
- Start date
It can be, but it could also be written differently. I'll leave that to the lawyers.
I think Coach Beamer earned it over the Vandy coach- yes. I don't think that is that close really.
So it would then come down to Beamer and Smart - or the Texas coach. Both UGA and Texas have much more talent than South Carolina.
Smart didn't have the year they've had the last few years. So then it would be Beamer or the Texas coach. So it boils down to who did a better job with the talent they had.
Beamer- redshirt freshman starting for first time. Texas with a very experienced former 5 star QB leading an absolutely loaded team.
I think Beamer gets the nod there. yes.
and generally, I'm going to side and pull for the coach of my school over the coach at other places.
and I'd have a real problem giving such an award to a coach whose team lost 4 of the last 5 games no matter who the coach was or where he coached. When you lose 4 of the last 5, you are having some significant issues that you can't overcome.
Buyouts are just like salary. They are going to be negotiated based on leverage. Howling monkey fans calling for coaches to be fired at the first signs of adversity doesn't help.
I dont think posts on a message board make any difference whatsoever. Especially compared to putting out seasons like this one, or last years losing season.
But you made it almost 2 days this time before crawling back begging for more attention. Congratulations.
Last edited:
Yep. The AD exercised its leverage during the initial hire.
Now the tables have turned because of the success.
Beamer's agent now be dictating those terms which likely will be framed around the SEC industry average.
Yeah, I don't know how his job is safe, but it seems like it is. Talk about doing less with more.
Well beating Alabama helped him a bunch, but next year may be a 3 or 4 win season. Have you seen what portal did to their WR group? They nearly all left.
Schools are going to have to take a hard look at their finances soon and realize they can't actually afford to pay these coaches $10 million a year now with revenue sharing. You've seen Brian Kelly give back $1 million in salary. Now Norvell is giving back $4.5 million.
Schools are going to be decimated if they have to fire a coach being paid $10 million a year now. Before they could absorb it but not with revenue sharing.
If your program is not loaded with money, it makes more sense to risk letting a coach go elsewhere instead of risking painting yourself into a corner with a huge buyout. That causes all kinds of problems when it goes bad. Look at FSU. They gave Norvell a big contract. Now even though they are suddenly the worst team in the ACC they can't afford to fire him. A&M went crazy and gave Fisher a huge salary. They have to pay him $70,000,000 to never come back. Thats insane but I'm glad it happened to them.
There will always be capable low-cost coaches itching for an opportunity to prove they can do it. That was Beamer when he arrived. It's up to the AD to make a wise choice. Tanner got burned big time by Muschump. He made up for it with the Beamer hire. Just remember before you lock a coach in with a sky-high buyout. The portal can significantly raise your ceiling, and it can immediately lower your floor.
There will always be capable low-cost coaches itching for an opportunity to prove they can do it. That was Beamer when he arrived. It's up to the AD to make a wise choice. Tanner got burned big time by Muschump. He made up for it with the Beamer hire. Just remember before you lock a coach in with a sky-high buyout. The portal can significantly raise your ceiling, and it can immediately lower your floor.
Last edited:
Hopefully some of these schools are figuring out that there are a lot of good coaches out there than can win and you don't have to pay people over the top crazy.
The portal - with even really good teams losing good players might show some of these ADs that even the best coaches aren't always seen as that great by some of the players who have options.
The portal - with even really good teams losing good players might show some of these ADs that even the best coaches aren't always seen as that great by some of the players who have options.
Great observation.
Seems we can we add that a new benchmark for marketable coaches is their ability to harvest talent from the portal.
We can put that myth to bed.
The season before McGee hired Fat Brad, Scott won a NC at FSU as their OC. Muschamp was DC/HCIW at UTex before bombing at UF.
It's ironic that some of the big "home run hire" names floating around in the past are now guys we wouldn't even think about trading Beamer for.
This may not be just a new benchmark, but THE benchmark for coaches going forward. At least coaches who aren't sitting a filthy rich school already.
No consideration that if Beamer was an offensive guy, maybe we end up 10-2 or 11-1 and in the playoff instead of 9-3?
We were in the Top 5 in offense the 2nd half of the season after a new QB/Offense reached a comfort level.
That's an offensive guy if you pay an attention to reality.
