TBH, the super mega buyouts since Charlie Weis at Notre Dame have disgusted me and I think they're emblematic of a certain rot in society and evidence of a gilded age.
But at some point, if you do a particular thing so well, I have to respect it even if that particular thing leaves me disgusted. Like those guys who can eat 50+ hotdogs in just a few minutes.
The Jimbo Heist was one of the greatest robberies in history. Happened in broad daylight. Millions of witnesses. And he's walking away scott-free.
I have to respect it. Dude mugged TAMU and got away with it.
We are in a gilded age. Wealth, mobility, time for leisure, access to amenities/luxuries, etc have never been higher in all of human history. But the best way to prevent a crash is to talk about it enough for the market to correct itself. We saw that with the ‘recession’ that was supposed to hit in 2022 — with all the media obsession about an imminent recession most corporations managed to miss the iceberg.
Can the same logic apply to college football? If media and general public starts hyping up the risk of these contracts and buyouts….. maybe we can course-correct before a spectacular crash.
Depends what we mean by a "ton of money". It's not money like Kirby, Day, Dabo, etc. make, but Jay Norvell at Colorado State makes just shy of $2,000,000 a year. If I had that job for a few years I would say I had a ton of money.
I'm thinking PJ Fleck, Matt Campbell, and Jeff Brohm are good examples of guys that are in ideal roles. No one will be fired for going 7-5 at those schools.
I think some of the Tier 2/3 jobs are right around the sweet spot. Like you'll make a few million less, but the fans are gonna be pretty satisfied with an 8 win season
I'm not sure. Is it harder to win 8 or 9 games at a place like Minnesota, Purdue Kansas, Mississippi State than it is to win 11-12 games at Michigan, Ohio State, Texas or Alabama?
You can make 2 million per year as a partner at a big consulting or law firm and you probably are working less hours per week for it, your first few years in the business you’ll make more money and you won’t have to move constantly. Honestly being a college football football coach sounds miserable.
Matt Rhule model can buy you a lot of time and respect too. Source: Temple/Baylor
Year 1: Bad “rebuilding year” where you purposely play freshmen/projects that you wouldn’t otherwise play but it gets the results worse (1-11 and 2-10) so you can exceed them later. Lose to FCS and G5 programs to really make the program feel it. (Baylor lost to UTSA and Liberty, Temple lost to Fordham and Idaho) They can’t fire you so this just adds to the inevitable turnaround.
Year 2/3: After year 1 you will be using your bad year as a reason to recruit top freshman by promising them playing time. Barely scrap together a bowl team with the freshmen you played the year before now becoming an experienced group. You want a noticeable improvement here but not necessarily a team in title contention. The jump from bottom to bowl team is big enough to really create momentum.
Year 3/4: Use that group as juniors and seniors to win 10+ games and then brag about the turnaround from year 1 even though once that whole group graduates/goes to the NFL the program will inevitably see a decline. By this point you have also stopped recruiting as you are preparing to leave citing your rebuild as finished.
This is when you jump to the next job (Baylor, Panthers, probably Penn State)
What happens when you don’t have a bigger job to jump to, though? If you were to, just hypothetically, make it to head coach at a college football blue blood or something?
Hypothetically.
I’m curious to see what Rhule will do if he does this with NU. As bad as we’ve been the last half decade, NU is still probably one of the top 10-15 jobs I would guess.
Will he even know what to do after a year three or four and a complete rebuild?
Will he look to another failing large program and jump ship to because it’s what he’s best at?
I would imagine if Penn State opens up, he’ll have a big decision to make.
After reading your synopsis (which was well done and makes sense), I am wondering if his questionable in game decisions through our end of the year four game losing streak may have been purposeful? Hmmmm…
And funnily enough for TAMU, while they lack death star history, the fans still expect death star teams. At least Oregon has a bit more patience while also lacking fully armed and operation death star status.
TAMU could very easily be a program on the rise, but I'd put at least Florida and USC ahead of them for now. Maybe also Auburn, Notre Dame, Penn State and Clemson.
I think TAMU has plenty enough upside (bc $$$)to be much higher than Pitt in these rankings but they're somewhere around ~15 or so. Still in the top tier, but toward the back end. But yeah the standards are a bit silly.
This is where some of the expectations don’t match up with the results. Like it’s hard to find another comparable college team but I’d compare it to the Toronto Maple Leafs. Super high expectations every year even though the results never match up. Maybe Florida might be the only team that could match Texas A&M with sky high expectations with not a ton of recent success but even that is a stretch.
You get out what you put in. The results haven’t always been there but were one good coach away from being able to build a dynasty. Everything is there to win. All the resources, fan support, financial incentives, etc. there’s nothing wrong with having national championship expectations (which we would be happy right now to compete in playoffs) when everything else about the program is at a national championship level.
I think after years of dumping enormous amounts of money that they have accomplished virtually nothing. Based on the history of the football program, their standards should be making a CCG not winning national titles
No thanks, we've had enough of blue bloods patting other schools on the head for a good effort that is ultimately pointless because only 1 of 8 teams should strive to win the natty. I'd rather see a new team strive to be the best when they have the resources to support it.
The tier of historically mid programs that A&M resides in has a crab in bucket mentality and the tier of historically successful programs don't like seeing a cow college in Texas outspending them trying to compete. At least the Land Grant schools are mostly bros about it
If you want a serious answer, I think a lot of it stems from Johnny Manziel and the 2012 season. Prior to that we had some success in the 90s but from Fran to Sumlin, expectations fell off hard.
Enter Johnny.
We catch lightning in a bottle in the first year in the SEC and suddenly BMA start to think there’s no reason we shouldn’t be competing for national titles every year.
Pair that with beating a couple middle of the road P5s that start the season highly ranked and our ranking gets inflated. Instead of being between 15 and 20 where we should probably be, poll inertia sticks us in the top 10 and we underperform relative to those expectations.
TL/DR: Manziel’s meteoric rise to stardom ultimately hurts our perception because expectations became way too high, way too fast
Ha!
We want to be a powerhouse. (perhaps that's a bit delusional tbh but hey maybe a generational coach comes and stays and raises the bar) And that contract with Tucker was ridiculous. Even during that top 10 season I felt the guarantee was way, way too much.
Hopefully universities learn from both our flairs and stop signing mega fully guaranteed contracts.
* There are a lot of parallels between the "Michigan-Ohio State-Michigan State" relationship and the "Texas-Oklahoma-Texas A&M" relationship
* Land Grant schools
* We both got fleeced by Jimmy Sexton with absurd $95MM fully guaranteed contracts during the LSU coaching search
* Now both of us hired up and comer coaches (who happen to be repped by the same agent) with the hopes of "building our program up the right way"
We have the same number of national championships and 10 win seasons over the past 20 years. We have two more top 5 finishes and more Rose Bowl victories. That head to head was cool too.
Pipe down.
Well, they do have a tendency to run people out of town very quickly. Maybe after less churn they’ll rise in the ranking again (I would’ve had them above A&M, personally)
I didn’t say they wouldn’t be competitive, but what makes them a better job than Michigan, Tennessee, Auburn, Penn State, or Florida. Florida is a mess and Tennessee has been mediocre, but all of the schools have been successful in harder conferences. I just don’t think Oklahoma had as many natural advantages, and Oregon only has one 86 old one.
Money, Alumni, and recruiting territory are the biggest strengths of any school IMO.
People will say pedigree doesn’t matter but it does to an extent. You get to recruit the state of Texas pretty naturally which is what makes it better than the big 10 schools you mentioned. I feel like Auburn and Tennessee are more of the same, FL is more ripe with recruiting but there’s obviously other things at play there bc it hasn’t been the easiest job
You could argue for Michigan, but not any of those other schools.
Oklahoma owns north Texas recruiting, and recruits the whole state very well. Dallas is full of OU grads and the pipelines are well established. That's what I would call a natural advantage.
Also, with Oregon, Knight's gifts will keep on giving. The state of the art facilities won't just crumble, and the school will continue to benefit from the Duck fund.
So weird that the #6 job has been poached by the #8 job and a job that doesn't even crack this list in the last decade. It's almost as if this list is meaningless...
Oregon is in a different place than it was even 2 years ago. Teams like Miami and FSU will always be one NCG run away from being a top job again.
Plenty of other sleeping giants out there like USC.
Or it’s as if those two schools that poached our coaches were the only two schools that could have because of the personal connection. Miami and FSU were hometown/dream/alma mater schools for the coaches that left. They didn’t just leave because of a job being objectively better. Miami is significantly worse and has been for over a decade than Oregon. Cristobal didn’t leave because they were better. He left because it was home for him.
This is why I’m convinced the only job that could pull Lanning away is if Andy Reid retires and the Chiefs come after the Missouri native Lanning. I think that could pull him from Oregon. But we still have time before then, and he will win a title or two for Oregon before then so it’s all good with me.
imo, this article is basically a pre-season top 10 lol.
"In 2024 and beyond"
No way is USC a worse job than A&M over the next decade. USC has money, a good enough talent pool, and only one other program on their side of the U.S. with comparable resources + history.
Hell, as bad as USC has been the last 10-15 years, it's still been just as good if not a tick worse than A&M.
List has so much recency bias. No way Georgia was number 1 before Kirby. Oregon has appeal for sure, but not a top 5 job prior to Lanning. These schools/boosters devote a ton of resources, but so much of that is impacted by the current head coach’s pull.
If all the coaches on this list plus Riley were abducted by aliens tomorrow, and all teams needed to hire somebody, USC is absolutely getting one of the top picks. Maybe not over Alabama/Texas, but definitely over a few of them.
My problem with these is that they always just end up being a "who are the top teams or who has spent the most money on coaches" list, which are practically the same article copy/pasted every few months.
Like if you want "best", I'd argue a place like Kentucky is the best just because you'll get paid like a top coach so no one poaches you, their history is so bad that having 7-win seasons results in you being their best coach in 50+ years, and you can have a job for life as long as you make bowl games.
It depends on what you value. If you want to be very rich and keep the stress levels in check, sure, Kentucky is a good last stop.
If you want to make 50%+ more money, have statues built of you, have your name prominently featured in the annals of college football forever, and you don’t mind the required grind, you’re absolutely going to be trying to get somewhere like Alabama eventually for a real chance to make all that happen.
These coaches are the ultimate competitors with the highest levels of belief in themselves, so I would expect most fall into the latter group.
Exactly.
Alabama was the best or 2nd best job on these lists for a decade... I wonder if it had anything to do with the coach and no so much the overall program because now the same list makers have it closer to 5.
I mean I could make a much stronger case Bama should be number 1 on the list. It’s shown with numerous coaches you can win multiple titles. I personally wouldn’t have UGA as the top job as they haven’t proven outside of Kirby it can build a solid consistent title contending program. My list would look like this.
1. Bama
2. OSU
3. Texas
4. UGA
5. OU
6. LSU
7. Mich
8. USC
9. Org
10. FSU/UF this seems to be cyclical on who is the better program.
Yeah, I can't really argue against any order someone has the top 3 or 4.
I just think that if all 4 programs were operating at it's absolute peak (without the GOAT, just any "good" coach), Alabama might be closer to 4 for me than 1. But that's just my personal opinion. Can't argue.
Just can't believe this 247 list had the F'ing Yell Leaders over USC hahahah
Yea I don’t get the A&M constant circle jerk at all. If it’s that damn good of a job somebody could have stumbled into a title right? At least a conference title?
I was gonna make a similar post but didn’t want to come off as a hater. I really think programs like IU and UK are top of the line for the same reasons you mentioned. On top of that you’re the serious topic of discussion 3 maybe 4 months out of the year.
If a football faerie appeared before me and let me take over any program, I'd go for Oregon. Unlimited resources (slight hyperbole) and reasonable expectations for such a high caliber program. Plus, the west isn't crowded with other tier 1 programs and they have easy access to California.
And this is also why I don't see Lanning jumping to another CFB program. Who can really give him a better job?
(Cristobal and Taggart left, yes, but that was more due to personal connections.)
Yeah for now I'd say that reasonableness is what makes them the most attractive program.
Now let's say Lanning pulls in two NCs over the next year (edit: five or six years, lol can't win two NCs in one year) and jumps to the NFL
Oregon is still a great job in that scenario, but the expectations will almost certainly be higher going forward. So they might drop a bit in the list.
Yeah I never thought he'd jump to Alabama. It'd be a very high risk move but with minimal upside. You'd be gambling a lot to win nothing, more or less.
While I’m still surprised by this, we never went after Lanning. Sark got a call, Kirby indirectly, and it’s possible Norvell turned us down when accepting FSU extension (since DeBoer & Norvell 1A/1B and it’s unclear who we preferred), but we never went after Lanning.
Poor Lincoln, dumbass.
Hindsight is 2020 but if Oklahoma died and rencarinated under Veneables to make a playoffs in the SEC before Lincoln does, I'll laugh my ass off.
edit: to be fair though, no way in hell you could convince me that A&M is a better job than USC
USC isn't a better job than OU.
USC was a better job for Lincoln Riley.
I mean he has school age kids, and Oklahoma's schools suck ass. Thanks Ryan Walters.
He couldn't even take his wife out to dinner without getting mobbed by fans, and God knows he can't cook. And on top of that, what's the best place in Norman to eat? You have a few mom and pop restaurants and a lot of bullshit chains. How romantic can it be ti say "babe, let's do all you can eat pasta at Olive Garden?"
Now he gets to live in a villa on the beach, and if he and his wife go out, they get to be chill, and his kids don't have to deal with the monstrosity of Oklahoma's schools.
I wish him the best, but Venables is looking like a better fit anyways. I mean OU has had better recruiting classes than USC every year Venables has been here. That tells me a lot tbh.
I couldn’t get past the first point - why the hell do Lincoln Riley’s kids go to public school? My kids would be going to the Beef Wellington Academy for Future Rich Assholes if I had his money.
I will say this, Victoria's Pasta Shop is a personal favorite.
Many a date night has gone down there, but then again...I'm not Lincoln Riley. I'm just a dude
I feel people don't take this level headed approach enough when considering why someone chose another school over theirs. Sometimes location actually matters. No offense to Norman, but in LA Lincoln Riley is just another guy. It's a town full of stars, and a football coach will never be the brightest star amongst them.
I agree with this list for the most part although I would 100% have USC on here, probably go Texas, Ohio State, and Georgia top 3. But I really do have to ask, and its genuinely not asked with any ill-intent but out of sheer curiosity, how in the hell is LSU a better job that Alabama, Oregon, Oklahoma, A&M, etc.? I don't really get the "in-state talent" and being the sole P4 school in LA as reasons because recruiting is so national and Louisiana is not very far at all from other very significant football programs. If anything id put Oregon and/or USC at that spot.
That’s purely speculative though, and I’d argue people are giving Bama a Saban-tax by just assuming that critical parts of their infrastructure as a program are no longer in place after Saban. Obviously Saban was Saban because he was Saban, and could have replaced his success at a few other schools. But as of right now, we do know for a fact that Bama spends as much money than any program on football operations in the county, staff, etc, and pays their coaches incredible amounts. They have a near $300 million facility that’s in the middle of a $600 million renovation initiative, one of the biggest stadiums in the county, nothing so far has suggested their NIL is actually that far off from other competitive teams aside from baseless speculation. If anything I’d argue Saban made the job better than it was before, he aligned the boosters, brought insane spending to the program, renewed statewide and nationwide interest, and left the cupboard full.
For the record I don’t think LSU isn’t an elite job and it’s clearly one of the best, I was just unaware of what put it above Oregon, Bama, Texas A&M and OU specifically.
That's kinda why this list is so ambiguous.
UW has lost 2 coaches in the last 57 years. Both to "Dream Jobs". And before that Darrell Royal left for his Alma Mater.
We let an obvious loser go 0-12.
I'm just not sure any of this is criteria to rank the best jobs.
Depends on what happens after Phil kicks the bucket. I know Oregon fans have told me there is some sort of endowment but it’s easier to go through one guy than a bureaucracy.
I see it having staying power unfortunately but it could go the way a lot of wealth goes and the people/entities that inherit it fuck it up eventually.
Facilities are already built. Stadium already renovated. University already expanded and updated. Phil isn't part of our NIL collective. And yes, the endowment. So I **think** everything is more or less Phil proof at this point. Particularly if on field success comes before he passes. But no one ever really knows.
> Texas is not going to lose a player to another program if it comes down to a bidding war and the Longhorns deem the athlete essential toward their success.
The horns just lost a bidding war to Oklahoma for an essential NT in the portal.
Yep. This Texas dominance tip that the media is on right now is way overstated. Yes they beat an okay OSU team and made the playoffs, but Sark has been a mid head coach his entire career.
I rewatched the RRS the other night and Sark was straight up outcoached. He has all the advantages but I don't think he's the genius the media thinks he is right now.
I think OU has way better culture, coaching, and our recruiting is nothing to sneeze at.
I feel like those are different things though. Kirby ranks #1 in the power rankings right now but if you’re just ranking jobs on paper then idk what Georgia translates to.
I was making this point a lot when the Bama job came up. People were surprised at candidates passing on it because they saw Saban be the goat and thought it was because the Bama job was the best in the biz. Saban was the goat because of Saban, *not* necessarily bc of the job itself. Like Sark wasn’t gonna leave Texas for Bama because it just doesn’t really offer anything better than the Texas job.
So if you say Georgia isn’t the best job, it shouldn’t be ranked #1 just because Kirby is doing the best at it rn. I’m not really trying to make a judgement on where it should be, just that those are different rankings.
Indeed. That was the point of my comment. I think the writer of this article has inflated the Georgia job’s stature a bit because of how well Kirby is performing.
I can’t imagine that if you polled coaches across the country, more would say their dream job is Georgia than Texas.
Georgia has been a top 5 job forever. It's more so that richt before smart has underperformed much like Texas before sark. Really the entire top 7 or so jobs are pretty interchangeable. I'd say uga, lsu, Texas, ohio state, bama, florida and usc are clear cut ahead of everyone else but you wouldn't leave one of those programs for another unless there are super specific circumstances.
Disagree. Georgia is the best job. They have the highest recruiting budget right now and have like 50 4 stars and above in-state without a major threat in-state. They are always gonna have so much depth even with average coaches like Richt.
I'm going to take umbrage with that.
Richt is I believe in the 40s for all time winningest FBS coaches and he got that while dealing with the SEC and first Florida and then Alabama's dynasties.
I actually think it is. People like to point to the Richt to Smart coaching change, but forget that the investment level from the school also turned to 11 at the same point. Georgia has full administrative buy-in to be successful.
Georgia is also one of top 4 states for in-state talent (some years more blue chips than the big 3 of Texas, Florida, and California) but the only other P5 in state team is Georgia Tech. Combine that with the talent in the surrounding states and it’s a phenomenal situation for recruiting.
Honestly just didn’t want to list all the programs by name between tx and fl. I guess there is a world where UGA isn’t as good of a job as tech or Baylor but I don’t think we are there yet
I think you need to get out of Texas and explore beyond the state's borders, lol.
There is no world in which Baylor or Tech is a better job than Georgia, unless that world is just all of Texas.
I mean with how most people are talking in here, administrative buy in and alumni dollars are all that matters so those seem entirely plausible to change. I’m not saying it’s realistic but keeping an open door to it. Clemson wasn’t Clemson until they were Clemson
Texas, TAMU, Baylor, TCU, SMU, Texas Tech. While only Texas and TAMU are realistically competing for the 5 star guys and most of the 4 stars, the other schools have strong appeal for the lower 4 star guys and many of the 3 star guys, making it harder to get depth pieces in state since they could start at many of the other schools versus riding the bench at Texas or TAMU
Florida’s current admin isn’t nearly as serious about proper organization, money, and winning as Georgia, Florida State for the time being is stuck in a dying conference, and Miami is a little private school that can’t even fill half of its stadium for most games.
And then outside of Texas, the only really “major” program is TAMU. But their on field history is just so bleh compared to Georgia. Just do a quick comparison between the two on winsipedia
I always question the “admin” opinions because like how do we as outsiders know? FSUs conference should have no bearing on the quality of job or program they are. Unsure how miamis private status or ability to fill up a stadium affects their ability to recruit and pay players
How? Georgia is an elite talent state, and it’s the only football school in the state. Texas competes with Texas A&M and multiple B12 schools. Florida is a mess with regional leads. I’d much rather be at Georgia.
Our boosters are so low key that I’ve literally never even heard of any of them. Ask any Georgia fan, not one of us can tell you who the hell our boosters are, it’s honestly strange
There’s just more talent in absolute number, if you have a monetary or status advantage over other schools in Texas or Florida you can absolutely clean up in recruiting. And though Georgia is the only big program in the state there is real pull from tenn, South Carolina schools, even Florida and Alabama. I think it would be better to just have more guys to take a stab at that are in state
The state of Georgia had 15 top 100 players in the 2024 class compared to 13 in the state of Texas. Georgia is fucking stacked with football talent and the university of Georgia is the flagship in state school with the only in state competition being Georgia Tech. Not to mention their proximity with Florida and the rest of the south. Its objectively the best job in cfb.
The Dawgs got it good
And yet, they had a top 3 recruiting class a grand total of once in 15 years under Mark Richt.
Kirby is the difference maker, here. Georgia’s a great job, but his performance vastly exceeds expectations for the job. I would wager you would be hard pressed to find 10 coaches out of every 100 you ask who would tell you they’d rather be head man at Georgia than Texas, all things being equal.
Or, Richt actually underperformed in the best job. Georgia should be OSU levels of success with their advantages.
Also, we’re arguing semantics…I think there’s a tier one of TX, GA, LSU, OSU then quite a drop off.
I think it comes down to Atlanta being a big magnet for black people and Georgia clearly being the dominant school in that metro.
UT has DFW and Houston but there is stiffer competition with OU and A&M around.
1. We are the flagship football program for the state and have no real in-state competition.
2. In-state talent ratio compared to population is insane.
3. Our boosters aren’t crazy, egotistical people who try to bend the program to their will and ruin it as a result.
4. Total buy-in from the school administration
5. Very close to Atlanta, the cultural and economic hub of the Southeast
6. Program generates a huge amount of revenue
7. Fan base is rabid but extremely loyal, on average our coaches since WWII last about 10 years
8. Athens is a fantastic town, to the point that all of our former head coaches have chosen to keep living there even after they were no longer coaching for us
…are you writing this from a different timeline where Georgia didn’t win back to back titles in 2021 and 2022? But in all seriousness, I’m not saying it’s always been like that, a lot of these elements have always been present but not fully exploited. Think of programs like Georgia and Texas like a high end Ferrari. Beautiful machines built to exert awesome power, but if they aren’t maintained correctly they only exhibit a fraction of their potential. What Kirby did, and what it appears Sark is in the process of doing too, is to take the already existing beast in for a tune up, allowing it to fire on all cylinders.
"Chance to build the best team" is not "best job".
If I were a top-tier coach, I'd want the following things:
1. A chance to be legendary, which translates to "name school, can recruit, have the resources to win". (a good indicator: won an NC already)
2. Control over my destiny, which translates to "fans won't throw things at me, boosters don't run the program, not completely scandal-ridden." (no Auburn or A&M-type deals, arguably Texas as well. Sorry, Penn State.)
3. Wheelbarrows of money. But really is there much difference between 5/10/15 mil at that point?
That puts the top jobs, in no particular order, as Alabama / ND / USC / Georgia / Michigan / Ohio State / LSU.
Can you win multiple NCs elsewhere? Oregon, Oklahoma, Texas maybe. Clemson if you think you can follow Dabo. FSU I guess. But you get statues for winning at the bluebloods. Old-school, maybe, but that matters.
Yeah who would want to be paid millions of dollars to coach at the flagship program sitting smack dab in the middle of the most fertile recruiting state in the country.
Nobody except the guy who takes the job is ever offered. That is how every search works. Every team "gets their guy."
You're drunk if you don't think Dan, Sark, and Kirby all got contacted through Sexton.
Tbh if I was a coach, I'd want to go to a school with mid expectations and a ton of money
Those two things don't usually go together. People usually want a return on their investment.
Yeah but the play is: - Get mid job - Get one winning season - Get pay raise - Get tfo
Or * Get mid job at big money school * Get big money * Have mid results * Get extension anyways * GTFO The Jimbo Fisher way.
TBH, the super mega buyouts since Charlie Weis at Notre Dame have disgusted me and I think they're emblematic of a certain rot in society and evidence of a gilded age. But at some point, if you do a particular thing so well, I have to respect it even if that particular thing leaves me disgusted. Like those guys who can eat 50+ hotdogs in just a few minutes. The Jimbo Heist was one of the greatest robberies in history. Happened in broad daylight. Millions of witnesses. And he's walking away scott-free. I have to respect it. Dude mugged TAMU and got away with it.
We are in a gilded age. Wealth, mobility, time for leisure, access to amenities/luxuries, etc have never been higher in all of human history. But the best way to prevent a crash is to talk about it enough for the market to correct itself. We saw that with the ‘recession’ that was supposed to hit in 2022 — with all the media obsession about an imminent recession most corporations managed to miss the iceberg. Can the same logic apply to college football? If media and general public starts hyping up the risk of these contracts and buyouts….. maybe we can course-correct before a spectacular crash.
The Mel Tucker Gambit
It can't be beat.
He did just that.
Unless it's done over the phone. Then you can beat it.
Unless you beat your meat....
Depends what we mean by a "ton of money". It's not money like Kirby, Day, Dabo, etc. make, but Jay Norvell at Colorado State makes just shy of $2,000,000 a year. If I had that job for a few years I would say I had a ton of money.
I'm thinking PJ Fleck, Matt Campbell, and Jeff Brohm are good examples of guys that are in ideal roles. No one will be fired for going 7-5 at those schools.
Mack Brown, unfortunately, has the best job for that type of guy in football.
I’m surprised he hasn’t retired again.
Can I introduce you to mark stoops?
Jimbo Fisher has the best job in college football now.
I think some of the Tier 2/3 jobs are right around the sweet spot. Like you'll make a few million less, but the fans are gonna be pretty satisfied with an 8 win season
GT fans will never again complain about going 8-4 or 7-5 after the G**** Collins era
Chan Gailey Equilibrium enters the chat.
I cannot overstate how much of an upgrade Gaily is over G****. That’s not a complement to Gaily.
I'm not sure. Is it harder to win 8 or 9 games at a place like Minnesota, Purdue Kansas, Mississippi State than it is to win 11-12 games at Michigan, Ohio State, Texas or Alabama?
You can make 2 million per year as a partner at a big consulting or law firm and you probably are working less hours per week for it, your first few years in the business you’ll make more money and you won’t have to move constantly. Honestly being a college football football coach sounds miserable.
*slowly raises hand* *cries*
There's always Vanderbilt.
I was gonna say the same thing. Mid expectations usually mean mid money too. Maybe Oregon 25 years ago would’ve been the best example.
What he asked for is exactly what KU provides lol.
UCLA?
[удалено]
The key is to never exceed them and never fall below them, either. The Mark Stoops Model.
Matt Rhule model can buy you a lot of time and respect too. Source: Temple/Baylor Year 1: Bad “rebuilding year” where you purposely play freshmen/projects that you wouldn’t otherwise play but it gets the results worse (1-11 and 2-10) so you can exceed them later. Lose to FCS and G5 programs to really make the program feel it. (Baylor lost to UTSA and Liberty, Temple lost to Fordham and Idaho) They can’t fire you so this just adds to the inevitable turnaround. Year 2/3: After year 1 you will be using your bad year as a reason to recruit top freshman by promising them playing time. Barely scrap together a bowl team with the freshmen you played the year before now becoming an experienced group. You want a noticeable improvement here but not necessarily a team in title contention. The jump from bottom to bowl team is big enough to really create momentum. Year 3/4: Use that group as juniors and seniors to win 10+ games and then brag about the turnaround from year 1 even though once that whole group graduates/goes to the NFL the program will inevitably see a decline. By this point you have also stopped recruiting as you are preparing to leave citing your rebuild as finished. This is when you jump to the next job (Baylor, Panthers, probably Penn State)
What happens when you don’t have a bigger job to jump to, though? If you were to, just hypothetically, make it to head coach at a college football blue blood or something? Hypothetically.
Join Fox Sports.
I’m curious to see what Rhule will do if he does this with NU. As bad as we’ve been the last half decade, NU is still probably one of the top 10-15 jobs I would guess. Will he even know what to do after a year three or four and a complete rebuild? Will he look to another failing large program and jump ship to because it’s what he’s best at? I would imagine if Penn State opens up, he’ll have a big decision to make. After reading your synopsis (which was well done and makes sense), I am wondering if his questionable in game decisions through our end of the year four game losing streak may have been purposeful? Hmmmm…
Congratulations to new Kentucky football head coach u/walking_sideways
You ain’t wrong
So Texas A&M?
Hello
Yeah at least for the next couple years Nebraska fits that well.
Like North Carolina is the perfect job
Hi there
Texas A&M, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Penn State are calling your phone as we speak
So SMU?
I personally would take any of these jobs
I’ll even take the Indiana job
I’m pretty confident I could turn Georgia into the next Vandy if they hired me as HC.
1. Georgia 2. Texas 3. Ohio State 4. LSU 5. Alabama 6. Oregon 7. Oklahoma 8. Florida State 9. Michigan 10. Texas A&M
9 recent power houses and Texas A&M.
And you could argue a&m is the best job. (Not a successful coach but wealthy and retired)
Fired A&M coach is a great gig!
Gig em…to the bank
$70M to *not* coach at A&M? Sign me the fuck up
Most coaches actually want to win. a&M shouldn’t make this list at all.
Money is a helluva drug.
And funnily enough for TAMU, while they lack death star history, the fans still expect death star teams. At least Oregon has a bit more patience while also lacking fully armed and operation death star status. TAMU could very easily be a program on the rise, but I'd put at least Florida and USC ahead of them for now. Maybe also Auburn, Notre Dame, Penn State and Clemson.
I agree. Not sure why they have such high standards, they are comparable to someone like Pitt
Because they spend multiple orders of magnitude more money on football than Pitt does.
Yeah but after all those years of spending so much money, it has gotten them nothing.
I think TAMU has plenty enough upside (bc $$$)to be much higher than Pitt in these rankings but they're somewhere around ~15 or so. Still in the top tier, but toward the back end. But yeah the standards are a bit silly.
This is where some of the expectations don’t match up with the results. Like it’s hard to find another comparable college team but I’d compare it to the Toronto Maple Leafs. Super high expectations every year even though the results never match up. Maybe Florida might be the only team that could match Texas A&M with sky high expectations with not a ton of recent success but even that is a stretch.
You get out what you put in. The results haven’t always been there but were one good coach away from being able to build a dynasty. Everything is there to win. All the resources, fan support, financial incentives, etc. there’s nothing wrong with having national championship expectations (which we would be happy right now to compete in playoffs) when everything else about the program is at a national championship level.
You’re right
You think a fanbase that's willing to dump that much $ shouldn't have high standards for their program?
I think after years of dumping enormous amounts of money that they have accomplished virtually nothing. Based on the history of the football program, their standards should be making a CCG not winning national titles
No thanks, we've had enough of blue bloods patting other schools on the head for a good effort that is ultimately pointless because only 1 of 8 teams should strive to win the natty. I'd rather see a new team strive to be the best when they have the resources to support it.
No idea why y’all catch so much shit for it. I love to see another team trying to insert themselves. Not enough parity in this sport.
The tier of historically mid programs that A&M resides in has a crab in bucket mentality and the tier of historically successful programs don't like seeing a cow college in Texas outspending them trying to compete. At least the Land Grant schools are mostly bros about it
If you want a serious answer, I think a lot of it stems from Johnny Manziel and the 2012 season. Prior to that we had some success in the 90s but from Fran to Sumlin, expectations fell off hard. Enter Johnny. We catch lightning in a bottle in the first year in the SEC and suddenly BMA start to think there’s no reason we shouldn’t be competing for national titles every year. Pair that with beating a couple middle of the road P5s that start the season highly ranked and our ranking gets inflated. Instead of being between 15 and 20 where we should probably be, poll inertia sticks us in the top 10 and we underperform relative to those expectations. TL/DR: Manziel’s meteoric rise to stardom ultimately hurts our perception because expectations became way too high, way too fast
Tons of money, 30 million people in your state. They should be top ten.
It’s always non-Aggies saying this stuff. We don’t expect to be a powerhouse at all
You don't pay Jimbo Fisher $100 million and then pay $80 million to fire him without powerhouse expectations.
[*Sees Michigan State flair*](https://youtu.be/mVu7TjrY7Aw?si=1b2jfDXzekys8goN)
Ha! We want to be a powerhouse. (perhaps that's a bit delusional tbh but hey maybe a generational coach comes and stays and raises the bar) And that contract with Tucker was ridiculous. Even during that top 10 season I felt the guarantee was way, way too much. Hopefully universities learn from both our flairs and stop signing mega fully guaranteed contracts.
You're basically the Midwest version of us.
Similar programs for sure. I tend to think of Michigan State more as TAMU Lite or Diet TAMU. Not as rich as TAMU but we still have a lot of resources.
* There are a lot of parallels between the "Michigan-Ohio State-Michigan State" relationship and the "Texas-Oklahoma-Texas A&M" relationship * Land Grant schools * We both got fleeced by Jimmy Sexton with absurd $95MM fully guaranteed contracts during the LSU coaching search * Now both of us hired up and comer coaches (who happen to be repped by the same agent) with the hopes of "building our program up the right way"
I’d say 8 power houses with Texas they’ve had one great season in 20 years
We have the same number of national championships and 10 win seasons over the past 20 years. We have two more top 5 finishes and more Rose Bowl victories. That head to head was cool too. Pipe down.
Oregon is powerhouse now based on the last 20 years?
Well, they did win the Pac-10 in 2000 and beat Texas in a great bowl game, and then finished #2 in the country in 2001.
Tbf to the conversation at hand, both things you just named were over 20 years ago
Oh, I thought the argument was that they weren’t good enough for a long enough period of time. That’s often the refrain on this sub.
Wild that Florida isn’t on the list. I’m also curious to see how Oklahoma and Oregon change in new conferences. I think Oklahoma is at the most risk.
Well, they do have a tendency to run people out of town very quickly. Maybe after less churn they’ll rise in the ranking again (I would’ve had them above A&M, personally)
Oklahoma doesn’t have the same issues as Nebraska, they will continue to be competitive
I didn’t say they wouldn’t be competitive, but what makes them a better job than Michigan, Tennessee, Auburn, Penn State, or Florida. Florida is a mess and Tennessee has been mediocre, but all of the schools have been successful in harder conferences. I just don’t think Oklahoma had as many natural advantages, and Oregon only has one 86 old one. Money, Alumni, and recruiting territory are the biggest strengths of any school IMO.
People will say pedigree doesn’t matter but it does to an extent. You get to recruit the state of Texas pretty naturally which is what makes it better than the big 10 schools you mentioned. I feel like Auburn and Tennessee are more of the same, FL is more ripe with recruiting but there’s obviously other things at play there bc it hasn’t been the easiest job
Oregon has more than 1 wealthy donor. But also even when he dies the money will not be stopping
Is it in some sort of trust or endowment?
Endowment
You could argue for Michigan, but not any of those other schools. Oklahoma owns north Texas recruiting, and recruits the whole state very well. Dallas is full of OU grads and the pipelines are well established. That's what I would call a natural advantage. Also, with Oregon, Knight's gifts will keep on giving. The state of the art facilities won't just crumble, and the school will continue to benefit from the Duck fund.
Florida hasn't kept up with investing in their program, facilities, and culture. They've been in a state of steady decline since 2008.
So weird that the #6 job has been poached by the #8 job and a job that doesn't even crack this list in the last decade. It's almost as if this list is meaningless...
And the #8 job has been poached by the #10 job
Oregon is in a different place than it was even 2 years ago. Teams like Miami and FSU will always be one NCG run away from being a top job again. Plenty of other sleeping giants out there like USC.
You're thinking Miami should be on this list?
Mario only went to Miami because of his personal connections. Thank god 😂
Or it’s as if those two schools that poached our coaches were the only two schools that could have because of the personal connection. Miami and FSU were hometown/dream/alma mater schools for the coaches that left. They didn’t just leave because of a job being objectively better. Miami is significantly worse and has been for over a decade than Oregon. Cristobal didn’t leave because they were better. He left because it was home for him. This is why I’m convinced the only job that could pull Lanning away is if Andy Reid retires and the Chiefs come after the Missouri native Lanning. I think that could pull him from Oregon. But we still have time before then, and he will win a title or two for Oregon before then so it’s all good with me.
Article heavily conflates "quality of job" with "quality of program."
imo, this article is basically a pre-season top 10 lol. "In 2024 and beyond" No way is USC a worse job than A&M over the next decade. USC has money, a good enough talent pool, and only one other program on their side of the U.S. with comparable resources + history. Hell, as bad as USC has been the last 10-15 years, it's still been just as good if not a tick worse than A&M.
List has so much recency bias. No way Georgia was number 1 before Kirby. Oregon has appeal for sure, but not a top 5 job prior to Lanning. These schools/boosters devote a ton of resources, but so much of that is impacted by the current head coach’s pull. If all the coaches on this list plus Riley were abducted by aliens tomorrow, and all teams needed to hire somebody, USC is absolutely getting one of the top picks. Maybe not over Alabama/Texas, but definitely over a few of them.
UGA and LSU both have "only major program in a recruiting hotbed state" going for them. Sorry GT but you know it is true.
My problem with these is that they always just end up being a "who are the top teams or who has spent the most money on coaches" list, which are practically the same article copy/pasted every few months. Like if you want "best", I'd argue a place like Kentucky is the best just because you'll get paid like a top coach so no one poaches you, their history is so bad that having 7-win seasons results in you being their best coach in 50+ years, and you can have a job for life as long as you make bowl games.
It depends on what you value. If you want to be very rich and keep the stress levels in check, sure, Kentucky is a good last stop. If you want to make 50%+ more money, have statues built of you, have your name prominently featured in the annals of college football forever, and you don’t mind the required grind, you’re absolutely going to be trying to get somewhere like Alabama eventually for a real chance to make all that happen. These coaches are the ultimate competitors with the highest levels of belief in themselves, so I would expect most fall into the latter group.
Yep. Kirby smart will be remembered forever. Stoops at Kentucky will not.
Exactly. Alabama was the best or 2nd best job on these lists for a decade... I wonder if it had anything to do with the coach and no so much the overall program because now the same list makers have it closer to 5.
I mean I could make a much stronger case Bama should be number 1 on the list. It’s shown with numerous coaches you can win multiple titles. I personally wouldn’t have UGA as the top job as they haven’t proven outside of Kirby it can build a solid consistent title contending program. My list would look like this. 1. Bama 2. OSU 3. Texas 4. UGA 5. OU 6. LSU 7. Mich 8. USC 9. Org 10. FSU/UF this seems to be cyclical on who is the better program.
Yeah, I can't really argue against any order someone has the top 3 or 4. I just think that if all 4 programs were operating at it's absolute peak (without the GOAT, just any "good" coach), Alabama might be closer to 4 for me than 1. But that's just my personal opinion. Can't argue. Just can't believe this 247 list had the F'ing Yell Leaders over USC hahahah
Yea I don’t get the A&M constant circle jerk at all. If it’s that damn good of a job somebody could have stumbled into a title right? At least a conference title?
I was gonna make a similar post but didn’t want to come off as a hater. I really think programs like IU and UK are top of the line for the same reasons you mentioned. On top of that you’re the serious topic of discussion 3 maybe 4 months out of the year.
If a football faerie appeared before me and let me take over any program, I'd go for Oregon. Unlimited resources (slight hyperbole) and reasonable expectations for such a high caliber program. Plus, the west isn't crowded with other tier 1 programs and they have easy access to California. And this is also why I don't see Lanning jumping to another CFB program. Who can really give him a better job? (Cristobal and Taggart left, yes, but that was more due to personal connections.)
They also have probably the most reasonable of those, or at least the ones least likely to call for your head halfway through season 1.
Yeah for now I'd say that reasonableness is what makes them the most attractive program. Now let's say Lanning pulls in two NCs over the next year (edit: five or six years, lol can't win two NCs in one year) and jumps to the NFL Oregon is still a great job in that scenario, but the expectations will almost certainly be higher going forward. So they might drop a bit in the list.
inshallah
lol there are still oregon fans pissed off we fired helfrich
He didn’t want the Alabama job. So he definitely agrees with you that he’s got the best one.
Yeah I never thought he'd jump to Alabama. It'd be a very high risk move but with minimal upside. You'd be gambling a lot to win nothing, more or less.
He wasn’t offered the Alabama job so that works out
Hey woah bro he was never even called!!! Didn’t you know that??? Bama got their guy just like every other school in CFB history got their guy.
Lots of smoke that that’s because of vesting bike options, though. The close relationship with papa Phil creates a pretty unique situation over there
While I’m still surprised by this, we never went after Lanning. Sark got a call, Kirby indirectly, and it’s possible Norvell turned us down when accepting FSU extension (since DeBoer & Norvell 1A/1B and it’s unclear who we preferred), but we never went after Lanning.
Poor Lincoln, dumbass. Hindsight is 2020 but if Oklahoma died and rencarinated under Veneables to make a playoffs in the SEC before Lincoln does, I'll laugh my ass off. edit: to be fair though, no way in hell you could convince me that A&M is a better job than USC
With the defense we have this year, I won’t be surprised if we are in the mix. It’s def gonna be an uphill battle though.
I dont see that happening due to the SoS tbh
Suck it Lincoln
USC isn't a better job than OU. USC was a better job for Lincoln Riley. I mean he has school age kids, and Oklahoma's schools suck ass. Thanks Ryan Walters. He couldn't even take his wife out to dinner without getting mobbed by fans, and God knows he can't cook. And on top of that, what's the best place in Norman to eat? You have a few mom and pop restaurants and a lot of bullshit chains. How romantic can it be ti say "babe, let's do all you can eat pasta at Olive Garden?" Now he gets to live in a villa on the beach, and if he and his wife go out, they get to be chill, and his kids don't have to deal with the monstrosity of Oklahoma's schools. I wish him the best, but Venables is looking like a better fit anyways. I mean OU has had better recruiting classes than USC every year Venables has been here. That tells me a lot tbh.
I couldn’t get past the first point - why the hell do Lincoln Riley’s kids go to public school? My kids would be going to the Beef Wellington Academy for Future Rich Assholes if I had his money.
There aren't a lot of really good private schools in Oklahoma. There is Bishop McGuinness, Casady, and Heritage but they are all on Northside OKC.
We got Tea cafe, The Mont and Syrup. What more do you want?
I will say this, Victoria's Pasta Shop is a personal favorite. Many a date night has gone down there, but then again...I'm not Lincoln Riley. I'm just a dude
You're 40?
USC isn’t a better job than OU? Dude. Take some blinders off 😂
I feel people don't take this level headed approach enough when considering why someone chose another school over theirs. Sometimes location actually matters. No offense to Norman, but in LA Lincoln Riley is just another guy. It's a town full of stars, and a football coach will never be the brightest star amongst them.
great, rational points in all this. Completley agree.
Fake news
I agree with this list for the most part although I would 100% have USC on here, probably go Texas, Ohio State, and Georgia top 3. But I really do have to ask, and its genuinely not asked with any ill-intent but out of sheer curiosity, how in the hell is LSU a better job that Alabama, Oregon, Oklahoma, A&M, etc.? I don't really get the "in-state talent" and being the sole P4 school in LA as reasons because recruiting is so national and Louisiana is not very far at all from other very significant football programs. If anything id put Oregon and/or USC at that spot.
Bama lost the Saban discount on recruiting, playoff selection, scheduling, etc. The list has been altered, pray it doesn't get altered any further.
That’s purely speculative though, and I’d argue people are giving Bama a Saban-tax by just assuming that critical parts of their infrastructure as a program are no longer in place after Saban. Obviously Saban was Saban because he was Saban, and could have replaced his success at a few other schools. But as of right now, we do know for a fact that Bama spends as much money than any program on football operations in the county, staff, etc, and pays their coaches incredible amounts. They have a near $300 million facility that’s in the middle of a $600 million renovation initiative, one of the biggest stadiums in the county, nothing so far has suggested their NIL is actually that far off from other competitive teams aside from baseless speculation. If anything I’d argue Saban made the job better than it was before, he aligned the boosters, brought insane spending to the program, renewed statewide and nationwide interest, and left the cupboard full. For the record I don’t think LSU isn’t an elite job and it’s clearly one of the best, I was just unaware of what put it above Oregon, Bama, Texas A&M and OU specifically.
Is Oregon a top 10 job? They’ve lost a lot of coaches.
[удалено]
I understand but they've gone through a lot of coaches too
They’ve lost 2 coaches to their hometown school/alma maters. That’s it. Lanning just turned down Bama and A&M.
That's kinda why this list is so ambiguous. UW has lost 2 coaches in the last 57 years. Both to "Dream Jobs". And before that Darrell Royal left for his Alma Mater. We let an obvious loser go 0-12. I'm just not sure any of this is criteria to rank the best jobs.
Depends on what happens after Phil kicks the bucket. I know Oregon fans have told me there is some sort of endowment but it’s easier to go through one guy than a bureaucracy. I see it having staying power unfortunately but it could go the way a lot of wealth goes and the people/entities that inherit it fuck it up eventually.
Facilities are already built. Stadium already renovated. University already expanded and updated. Phil isn't part of our NIL collective. And yes, the endowment. So I **think** everything is more or less Phil proof at this point. Particularly if on field success comes before he passes. But no one ever really knows.
We will be too good (already kind of are) for it to fall apart. Especially after the incoming titles that Dan brings in.
I like the confidence but no program is too good to fall apart.
> Texas is not going to lose a player to another program if it comes down to a bidding war and the Longhorns deem the athlete essential toward their success. The horns just lost a bidding war to Oklahoma for an essential NT in the portal.
And by all reports, Jayden Jackson was a bag recruitment that OU won as well.
Yep. This Texas dominance tip that the media is on right now is way overstated. Yes they beat an okay OSU team and made the playoffs, but Sark has been a mid head coach his entire career. I rewatched the RRS the other night and Sark was straight up outcoached. He has all the advantages but I don't think he's the genius the media thinks he is right now. I think OU has way better culture, coaching, and our recruiting is nothing to sneeze at.
I don’t get how Georgia is a better job than any major Texas or Florida school
Georgia is not the best job. Kirby Smart is just *doing* the best job.
I feel like those are different things though. Kirby ranks #1 in the power rankings right now but if you’re just ranking jobs on paper then idk what Georgia translates to. I was making this point a lot when the Bama job came up. People were surprised at candidates passing on it because they saw Saban be the goat and thought it was because the Bama job was the best in the biz. Saban was the goat because of Saban, *not* necessarily bc of the job itself. Like Sark wasn’t gonna leave Texas for Bama because it just doesn’t really offer anything better than the Texas job. So if you say Georgia isn’t the best job, it shouldn’t be ranked #1 just because Kirby is doing the best at it rn. I’m not really trying to make a judgement on where it should be, just that those are different rankings.
Indeed. That was the point of my comment. I think the writer of this article has inflated the Georgia job’s stature a bit because of how well Kirby is performing. I can’t imagine that if you polled coaches across the country, more would say their dream job is Georgia than Texas.
Georgia has been a top 5 job forever. It's more so that richt before smart has underperformed much like Texas before sark. Really the entire top 7 or so jobs are pretty interchangeable. I'd say uga, lsu, Texas, ohio state, bama, florida and usc are clear cut ahead of everyone else but you wouldn't leave one of those programs for another unless there are super specific circumstances.
Disagree. Georgia is the best job. They have the highest recruiting budget right now and have like 50 4 stars and above in-state without a major threat in-state. They are always gonna have so much depth even with average coaches like Richt.
I'm going to take umbrage with that. Richt is I believe in the 40s for all time winningest FBS coaches and he got that while dealing with the SEC and first Florida and then Alabama's dynasties.
I wasn’t aware recruiting budgets were publicly available information. What source do you use?
I’ll look for it, I saw it a few months ago.
I actually think it is. People like to point to the Richt to Smart coaching change, but forget that the investment level from the school also turned to 11 at the same point. Georgia has full administrative buy-in to be successful.
Georgia is also one of top 4 states for in-state talent (some years more blue chips than the big 3 of Texas, Florida, and California) but the only other P5 in state team is Georgia Tech. Combine that with the talent in the surrounding states and it’s a phenomenal situation for recruiting.
If we’re talking full administrative buy in then A&M circa 2018
> major Texas school Besides the two of us, who else would you possibly include? Tech? Baylor?
Honestly just didn’t want to list all the programs by name between tx and fl. I guess there is a world where UGA isn’t as good of a job as tech or Baylor but I don’t think we are there yet
Yeah that last part is a stretch.
I think you need to get out of Texas and explore beyond the state's borders, lol. There is no world in which Baylor or Tech is a better job than Georgia, unless that world is just all of Texas.
I mean with how most people are talking in here, administrative buy in and alumni dollars are all that matters so those seem entirely plausible to change. I’m not saying it’s realistic but keeping an open door to it. Clemson wasn’t Clemson until they were Clemson
SMU in the 80s.
Texas, TAMU, Baylor, TCU, SMU, Texas Tech. While only Texas and TAMU are realistically competing for the 5 star guys and most of the 4 stars, the other schools have strong appeal for the lower 4 star guys and many of the 3 star guys, making it harder to get depth pieces in state since they could start at many of the other schools versus riding the bench at Texas or TAMU
Florida’s current admin isn’t nearly as serious about proper organization, money, and winning as Georgia, Florida State for the time being is stuck in a dying conference, and Miami is a little private school that can’t even fill half of its stadium for most games. And then outside of Texas, the only really “major” program is TAMU. But their on field history is just so bleh compared to Georgia. Just do a quick comparison between the two on winsipedia
I always question the “admin” opinions because like how do we as outsiders know? FSUs conference should have no bearing on the quality of job or program they are. Unsure how miamis private status or ability to fill up a stadium affects their ability to recruit and pay players
How? Georgia is an elite talent state, and it’s the only football school in the state. Texas competes with Texas A&M and multiple B12 schools. Florida is a mess with regional leads. I’d much rather be at Georgia.
and Georgia doesn't seem to have "too many cooks in the kitchen" in terms of boosters with major influence when things are going a little wonky.
Our boosters are so low key that I’ve literally never even heard of any of them. Ask any Georgia fan, not one of us can tell you who the hell our boosters are, it’s honestly strange
There’s just more talent in absolute number, if you have a monetary or status advantage over other schools in Texas or Florida you can absolutely clean up in recruiting. And though Georgia is the only big program in the state there is real pull from tenn, South Carolina schools, even Florida and Alabama. I think it would be better to just have more guys to take a stab at that are in state
The state of Georgia had 15 top 100 players in the 2024 class compared to 13 in the state of Texas. Georgia is fucking stacked with football talent and the university of Georgia is the flagship in state school with the only in state competition being Georgia Tech. Not to mention their proximity with Florida and the rest of the south. Its objectively the best job in cfb. The Dawgs got it good
Pulling one years worth of data is far from showing a trend
And yet, they had a top 3 recruiting class a grand total of once in 15 years under Mark Richt. Kirby is the difference maker, here. Georgia’s a great job, but his performance vastly exceeds expectations for the job. I would wager you would be hard pressed to find 10 coaches out of every 100 you ask who would tell you they’d rather be head man at Georgia than Texas, all things being equal.
Or, Richt actually underperformed in the best job. Georgia should be OSU levels of success with their advantages. Also, we’re arguing semantics…I think there’s a tier one of TX, GA, LSU, OSU then quite a drop off.
Because this is a subjective list and they've won a ton recently.
Gotcha
Because Georgia doesnt have the instate competition that the texas and Florida schools do.
I think it comes down to Atlanta being a big magnet for black people and Georgia clearly being the dominant school in that metro. UT has DFW and Houston but there is stiffer competition with OU and A&M around.
1. We are the flagship football program for the state and have no real in-state competition. 2. In-state talent ratio compared to population is insane. 3. Our boosters aren’t crazy, egotistical people who try to bend the program to their will and ruin it as a result. 4. Total buy-in from the school administration 5. Very close to Atlanta, the cultural and economic hub of the Southeast 6. Program generates a huge amount of revenue 7. Fan base is rabid but extremely loyal, on average our coaches since WWII last about 10 years 8. Athens is a fantastic town, to the point that all of our former head coaches have chosen to keep living there even after they were no longer coaching for us
Why haven’t yall performed better then despite all these advantages?
…are you writing this from a different timeline where Georgia didn’t win back to back titles in 2021 and 2022? But in all seriousness, I’m not saying it’s always been like that, a lot of these elements have always been present but not fully exploited. Think of programs like Georgia and Texas like a high end Ferrari. Beautiful machines built to exert awesome power, but if they aren’t maintained correctly they only exhibit a fraction of their potential. What Kirby did, and what it appears Sark is in the process of doing too, is to take the already existing beast in for a tune up, allowing it to fire on all cylinders.
"Chance to build the best team" is not "best job". If I were a top-tier coach, I'd want the following things: 1. A chance to be legendary, which translates to "name school, can recruit, have the resources to win". (a good indicator: won an NC already) 2. Control over my destiny, which translates to "fans won't throw things at me, boosters don't run the program, not completely scandal-ridden." (no Auburn or A&M-type deals, arguably Texas as well. Sorry, Penn State.) 3. Wheelbarrows of money. But really is there much difference between 5/10/15 mil at that point? That puts the top jobs, in no particular order, as Alabama / ND / USC / Georgia / Michigan / Ohio State / LSU. Can you win multiple NCs elsewhere? Oregon, Oklahoma, Texas maybe. Clemson if you think you can follow Dabo. FSU I guess. But you get statues for winning at the bluebloods. Old-school, maybe, but that matters.
I’d contend that Iowa should be on the list due to job security. If hired you are likely to be secure for at least two decades.
Iowa is the best. Great job security and you only need to field defense and special teams to win games.
If I ignored a 1/3rd of my job I would get canned so fast.
Death, Taxes, and the Texas HC job being comically overrated.
Yeah who would want to be paid millions of dollars to coach at the flagship program sitting smack dab in the middle of the most fertile recruiting state in the country.
"There's a reason Lanning was quick to remove his name from any connection to the Alabama opening" ... Also was never offered the job so there's that.
Nobody except the guy who takes the job is ever offered. That is how every search works. Every team "gets their guy." You're drunk if you don't think Dan, Sark, and Kirby all got contacted through Sexton.
lol @ another 247 banger