Blog Article
Why ‘Fire the Coach!’ Feels Like a Solution, But Multi-Million Dollar Buyouts Say Otherwise
We’ve all been there. Your team is on a losing streak, the season’s slipping away, and that “Fire the coach!” chant starts echoing in your head. It’s cathartic. It feels like someone is taking action, like something is being done to right the ship.
Lately, however, athletic directors seem to be hitting the “snooze” button on those hot seat alarms. Coaches who, in years past, would be packing their bags are somehow clinging to their jobs. Why?
Let’s talk about the elephant in the room: the financial cost.
Firing a coach isn’t just about the head coach’s buyout (though those numbers are eye-popping enough on their own, as you can see in the chart below featuring buyouts for the top 20 on our Coaches Hot Seat Rankings). There’s a ripple effect that impacts the entire athletic department and can hamstring a program for years.
Take a look at that list. Those buyout numbers are staggering. Schools are paying tens of millions of dollars to coaches not to coach. That money could be used to improve facilities, hire top-tier assistants, and support other athletic programs.
And it’s not just the head coach’s salary. Assistant coaches have buyouts, too, which can add millions more to the tab. Suddenly, that “quick fix” looks like a costly gamble.
But wait, there’s more!
As if those costs weren’t enough, the recent House v. NCAA settlement has created a new financial landscape in college athletics. Schools can now directly pay their athletes a share of the revenue they generate. This is a game-changer, but it also means athletic departments have even less financial wiggle room. Those House settlement expenses are estimated to be around $20 million per school in 2025.
Think about it: a massive buyout combined with the new athlete compensation rules can seriously strain a school’s budget. And it’s not like the spending stops there. You’re still paying the fired coach and his staff NOT to coach while simultaneously shelling out money for the new coaching staff’s salaries. It’s like trying to buy a new car while paying off your student loans and a hefty credit card bill and still making payments on the old car you just traded in. Something’s gotta give.
So, what’s the takeaway?
It seems athletic directors are thinking twice before hitting that panic button. They’re facing a financial landscape that demands a more strategic approach. They’re weighing the long-term costs and benefits instead of bowing to pressure and making a rash decision. Maybe those hot seat coaches are getting a longer leash because school administrators are playing the long game, prioritizing financial stability and sustainable success over quick fixes.
Sometimes, patience and a long-term strategy are the more intelligent plays, even if they don’t provide the instant gratification of a coaching change.
What do you think? Is the cost of firing a coach worth it? Let me know here.
