Guz Malzahn received a $20 million buy out from Auburn. Texas bought out Tom Herman's contract for $15.4 million. Texas is also paying the buyout at Alabama for the new coach the Horns hired. South Carolina boought out Muschamp for $15 million. What is the lesson learned? Actually, there are two lessons learned.
One, Tulsa is never going to have a sufficient buyout in its head coaching contracts to deter a P5 school from hiring a Tulsa head coach. It appears to me that Tulsa might be putting a high buyout in the coach's contract to deter a P5 school....but that is just not going to be a deterrent with the P5 schools with all their millions of dollars.
Two, and this is the most important lesson, Tulsa should never put a buyout in a coaches contract so large that it would deter Tulsa from firing the coach when it is obvious the coach has/is failing.
A sort of example of this is Guz Malzahn's UCF contract for $2.3 million annually for five years.
UCF can buy out Malzahn each of the five years as follows:
2021: $7M
2022: $5M
2023: $3M
2024: $2M
2025: $500,000
None of us know what the buyout amount is in Haith's contract. It might be high enough to deter firing Haith this year. Who knows?
It takes a while to build a football team. But not so much in basketball. Based on an assumed $1.3M salary paid to Heath, perhaps the buyout could have been structured this way:
FIrst Year: $2.6M
Second Year: $1.3M
Third Year: Nothing
But include a buyout the coach has to pay if they take a position with another school maybe like this:
First Year $7M
Second Year: $7M
Third Year: $5M
Fourth Year: $4M
Tulsa and most all other G5 schools do not have the financial capability to compete with the P5 schools and will continually be losing coaches. So there is no reason to put a high buyout for a G5 school to fire their unsuccessful coach. Guarantee a new coach a few years to build the team, and put incentives in the new contract for the new coach to make more money. It appears to me that hiring a new coach that will be successful has a 50/50 success rate in the long run. So don't put large buyouts into coaches' contracts starting the 3rd year.
One, Tulsa is never going to have a sufficient buyout in its head coaching contracts to deter a P5 school from hiring a Tulsa head coach. It appears to me that Tulsa might be putting a high buyout in the coach's contract to deter a P5 school....but that is just not going to be a deterrent with the P5 schools with all their millions of dollars.
Two, and this is the most important lesson, Tulsa should never put a buyout in a coaches contract so large that it would deter Tulsa from firing the coach when it is obvious the coach has/is failing.
A sort of example of this is Guz Malzahn's UCF contract for $2.3 million annually for five years.
UCF can buy out Malzahn each of the five years as follows:
2021: $7M
2022: $5M
2023: $3M
2024: $2M
2025: $500,000
None of us know what the buyout amount is in Haith's contract. It might be high enough to deter firing Haith this year. Who knows?
It takes a while to build a football team. But not so much in basketball. Based on an assumed $1.3M salary paid to Heath, perhaps the buyout could have been structured this way:
FIrst Year: $2.6M
Second Year: $1.3M
Third Year: Nothing
But include a buyout the coach has to pay if they take a position with another school maybe like this:
First Year $7M
Second Year: $7M
Third Year: $5M
Fourth Year: $4M
Tulsa and most all other G5 schools do not have the financial capability to compete with the P5 schools and will continually be losing coaches. So there is no reason to put a high buyout for a G5 school to fire their unsuccessful coach. Guarantee a new coach a few years to build the team, and put incentives in the new contract for the new coach to make more money. It appears to me that hiring a new coach that will be successful has a 50/50 success rate in the long run. So don't put large buyouts into coaches' contracts starting the 3rd year.
