Football Coach Pay: 2023

I recently got a free trial to USA Today's football coaching salary database, and I thought I'd share some insights on where VT stands.

Where VT stands relative to other schools (for which we have data):

FBS Rank ACC Rank
Head Coach Pay 42th 7th
Total Assistant Pay 28th 5th
Total Staff Pay 30th 5th

What if VT was in a different conference?
I thought it would be interesting to see how VT's payroll would stack up against teams in other conferences. You can interpret this table to say 'If VT was in conference X, where would their coaching payroll rank in that conference?'

Conference Total Staff Pay Head Coach Pay Total Assistant Pay
AAC 4th 3rd 4th
ACC 5th 7th 5th
Big 12 4th 6th 4th
Pac-12 4th 7th 4th
SEC 12th 12th 11th
Big Ten 8th 12th 7th

Quick Callouts:

  • 'Total Assistant Pay' refers to just the 10 on-field assistants
  • Total Staff Pay includes Head Coach Salary, Total Assistant Pay, and Strength Coach Salary
  • There are 11 schools that USA Today has no data for (SMU, Temple, Miami, Duke, Texas Christian, Notre Dame, Army, Brigham Young, Air Force, Southern California, Vanderbilt)
  • There are an additional 14 schools that USA Today has head coaching data for, but no salary info for assistants (Hawaii, Rice, Tulsa, Liberty, Tulane, Navy, Boston College, Wake Forest, Baylor, Syracuse, Northwestern, Pittsburgh, Stanford, Penn State)
  • Conference affiliation matches the 2023 season (eg; Texas is in the B12, not SEC)
  • There are some coaching changes that are not up to date (Shane Beamer's extension, Miss. St HC/DC, Garret Riley to Clemson OC, Kendall Briles to TCU, etc)

Takeaways:

  • The SEC/B10 have clearly separated themselves
  • The arms race moves quick. In about 15 months we went from having the 3rd highest paid staff in the ACC to the at best 6th (Miami is definitely paying more than us. Pitt likely is too, but not much).
  • There is more stratification at the top than the bottm:
    • Of the schools spending more than us on Total Coach Pay, there are three (Illinois, UCLA, Minnesota) spending within a million of us.
    • Of the schools spending less than us on Total Coach Pay, there are 8 (Nebraska, Iowa State, Indiana, Washington, Missouri, Virginia, Cincinnati, Purdue) spending within a million of us.
    • For context, the difference in staff total staff spending for schools 1 and 8 (Alabama and Michigan, respectively) is roughly $5m.

Some things that surprised me or stood out or otherwise interested me:

  • We're outspending Nebraska (on staff) - that was surprising
  • The two AAC schools outspending us (again, on staff) are Cincinnati and Houston - both going to the B12 next year
  • It's interesting to see how coach pay compares to total assistant pay at different schools.
    • Dabo was once known for taking a 'lower' salary to get good assistants. Now he's making ~$4m more than all of his assistants combined (this does not account for Garret Riley, who will probably get ~$2m, but still, Clemson is spending nearly 60% of their total coaching staff spend on Dabo).
    • Pry is paid 41.25% of our total coaching staff budget. This percentage ranks 75th among schools we have data on. To be expected for a first time head coach.
    • If you want to look at the delta between head coaching salaries and assistant salary pools, you'll see that VT has the 6th highest negative differential between head coach pay and assistant pay (Pry makes $4m, Assistants make $5.3m total, thus a -$1.3m difference). The other schools with a larger negative differential (meaning that HC salary - assistant salary pool < 0) are Florida State, Tennessee, Oregon, Texas, South Carolina (this one is out of date), and Washington. All of these programs are on the. rise. 5 of those schools are rebuilding (Oregon isn't) and every school except FSU had a first or second year coach. VT is a rebuild with a (now) second year coach, so maybe this is a sign of good things to come? Sure, why not.

EDIT - A note about coordinator pay:
I don't want to go through USA Today's list of nearly 1300 assistants from 130 FBS and figure out which ones are coordinators vs position coaches. However, if we assume that the two highest paid assistants on a roster are coordinators, then we can determine coordinator pay pretty accurately:

  • By this method, VT is paying $1.715m for our two coordinators
  • Of the 106 schools we have assistant salary data for, VT ranks 50th for coordinator pay
  • Of the 8 ACC schools we have assistant salary data for, VT ranks 6th, BUT the 3 schools right above us in coordinator pay (Louisville, FSU, Clemson) are basically paying their coordinators the same as us ($1.725m, $1.75m, and 1.775m, respectively)
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.

Comments

Dabo was once known to take pay cuts? I dont remember this at all.

Pay cut was the wrong term. Edited to be more accurate. What I was trying to say was that Clemson/Dabo was (one of) the first school(s) to pay coordinators 7-figure salaries. At the time, they did this by paying Dabo under market rate (for lack of a better term). This was pretty unusual for the time (early 2010s), but is not uncommon anymore.

Twitter me

Yeah, that's what I assumed you meant I just don't remember than as Dabo has Ben one of the highest paid for a while.

If VT is 50th in coordinator pay, And that doesn't include USC, PSU, Miami, Baylor, ND or Stanford that have historically paid better than VT ... means we are 50th out of 58 P5 programs. Record wise we were 52nd out of those 58 P5 programs. So we slightly under achieved. Now this assumes Wake, Cuse, or Northwestern doesn't pay more.

So we are close to getting what we pay for.

Well, you're comparing against other schools whose coordinators aren't first year also. Along those lines, I'd be interested to see if the coaching staff will get raises across the board if we get a certain amount of wins in year 3 or 4.

Interesting analysis.

VT hired some fairly inexperienced coaches, position-wise. We're still trying to do more with less, overall.

Staying solvent, 2023, in a "pay to play" sport.

Another interesting tidbit: Former VT Receivers Coach Holmon Wiggins (currently at Alabama) is the 74th highest paid assistant in the country, making $850k/year. In 10 years, Wiggins has 4x'd his salary (good for him)!

Year School Position Total Pay
2022 Alabama Wide Receiver Coach $850,000
2021 Alabama Wide Receiver Coach $575,000
2020 Alabama Wide Receiver Coach $475,000
2019 Alabama Wide Receiver Coach $450,000
2018 Virginia Tech Wide Receiver Coach $280,000
2017 Virginia Tech Wide Receiver Coach $260,000
2016 Virginia Tech Wide Receiver Coach $260,000
2015 Memphis Wide Receiver Coach $212,237
2014 Memphis Wide Receiver Coach $208,075
2013 Memphis Wide Receiver Coach $208,075
2012 Memphis Wide Receiver Coach $200,000

Comparing this to some VT assistants...

  • OC Tyler Bowen makes $870k/year, making him the 70th highest paid assistant in the country.
  • DC Chris Marve is the 83rd highest paid assistant in the country, taking home $845k/year.
  • Wide Receiver's coach (Fontel Mines, who has 2 years of experience at the FBS level, but none at the P5 level prior to VT) is making $295k/year.

Twitter me

good lord... with that type of rise AND being under Saban he's gotta be looking at an OC position in the immediate future.

He might not want to be an OC. He's making good money as a position coach and putting guys in the NFL. Definitely curious what wants to do next (if anything else)

Twitter me

I think he does want to be an OC, but 850k to be a WR coach means you can take your sweet time looking for the right opportunity.

It means Saban knows he'll wind up being an OC but really values his work as WR coach and recruiter and wants to keep him around as long as possible. Just look at the success they've had putting WRs in the NFL, I'd wanna keep him around too

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

That's all well and good, but what is Homer Wiggans making?

21st century QBs Undefeated vs UVA:
MV7, MV5, LT3, Braxton Burmeister, Ryan Willis, Josh Jackson, Jerod Evans, Michael Brewer, Tyrod Taylor, Sean Glennon, and Grant Noel. That's right, UVA. You couldn't beat Grant Noel.

Yea the drumbeating about what Tech was going to pay "our next coach" was always a pipe dream.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

I mean, Tech made a significantly larger investment in Pry's administration than we did in Fuente's (part of that is because Whit didn't throw good money after bad coaches, but I digress). Support staff is not including in these numbers. Also, inflation moves quickly in the coaching marketing. Like I said above, in 15 months we went from having the 3rd highest paid staff in the ACC to the 6th/7th.

But - to your point - VT isn't able to go out and pick up an 'established' coach. We had to pick between first time HC with P5 experience, or sitting head coach with only G5 experience.

Could we have gotten assistants with better resumes for the same price? Probably, (1) Pry has to bring in guys he's comfortable with, and (2) I think it's wiser for VT to take some risks on some guys with a high ceiling/low floor. If we hit big, we can parlay that into future hires.

Twitter me

Some of the talking heads on social media. were trying to say Tech was going to be able to dump 4/5 million on just the HC 3 years ago and millions more for coordinators and assistants. That Tech had the resources to be too 3 in conference in pay. It was clear that Tech never has had the pockets to do that. Then the derision even in TKP when talking about the need to join the Hokie Club just shows how out of touch with reality of Tech's bank account many are.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

I don't think people are necessarily out of touch with the 'reality of Tech's bank account' as much as they fail to understand how fast 'inflation' hits in college football.

The 'top 3 in ACC pay' headline was outdated in a matter of weeks. That's just wild.

Twitter me

But it's something we A) should have seen coming B) realized that Tech wasn't going to drop 4/5 million on our new hire because we really can't. Despite massive increases in number of total donors and respectable increases in total donations we still don't match what we demand our peers are in football. Miami, UNC, PSU, SCe are paying its staff's. The fastest way to change that is by people having to pay more to join the Hokie Club, more small total donors and more long term donors total. But mention Hokie Club or donations and many fans say the team gets enough, won't give more until we sit atop ACC or why join at all.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

But it's something we A) should have seen coming

I mean, I think the administration did to a degree. But I don't think anyone thought Miami - who had been underfunding their football program for 1.5 decades - would take hundreds of millions of COVID dollars made by their hospital and funnel it into the football team.

Tech wasn't going to drop 4/5 million on our new hire because we really can't

For what it's worth, Pry's salary is $4m

Miami, UNC, PSU, SCe are paying its staff's. The fastest way to change that is by people having to pay more to join the Hokie Club, more small total donors and more long term donors total. But mention Hokie Club or donations and many fans say the team gets enough, won't give more until we sit atop ACC or why join at all.

It's interesting to see that of the 4 examples you listed, each one generates their revenue differently:

  • Don't have clear data on PSU, but I imagine there's a lot of old money funding that program
  • Miami was about to subsidize their program heavily after COVID
  • SCar's donation numbers are ~$2m/year less than VT's, but they have that SEC TV money
  • UNC's donation numbers are about twice that of VT. But, for what it's worth, UNC's total staff salary is only about $1m more than VT (not much split 11 ways)

I am curious if/why the VT fanbase isn't as financially engaged as other fanbases. Is it just the size of the fanbase, or something more cultural?

Twitter me

I would expect UNC, PSU, and Miami to have wealthier donors than VT. USCe probably is similar to VT.

Also it's cheaper at Miami, the talent is closers, the history is there.

Wealthier donors or more donors?

Twitter me

Both? VT puts out a lot of engineers which are good jobs but not really "I will buy the coaches contract out" money. (which is why VT has to get the more people to donate angle).

I've wondered about this a lot, and have considered the same hypothesis, but I haven't seen any evidence that suggests this is true. You mean to tell me of the 500-1000 engineers VT has graduated in each of the last 30 years, none of them have gone into consulting, or tech, or entrepreneurship? I also don't know what careers/education donors at other schools are.

I've also theorized that having a (relatively young) fanbase concentrated in the DC area means that there's not a lot of extra cash laying around.

I have another hypothesis that donations just aren't a part of VT's fan culture. Beamer instilled the idea of doing more with less, the fanbase internalized this, and now the fanbase doesn't understand why we need 50 assistants to be successful.

Likely a combination of the three. Would be cool to see actual data on how donor profiles vary from school to school though.

Twitter me

He didn't say "none".

He's speaking in general terms, and of the engineers I know (and I know a lot), most are what you'd consider frugal. Perhaps moreso than physicians or lawyers.

Have to be in many instances. I figure once I finally pay off my student loans I can begin to donate. Prior to that, it stinks, but I'd rather save money for things with my wife than a program there isn't much control over besides providing money and hoping it is spent how I'd like.

That and I've tried to donate smaller amounts before and it was a pain in the ass for me to figure it out.

He's speaking in general terms, and of the engineers I know (and I know a lot), most are what you'd consider frugal. Perhaps moreso than physicians or lawyers.

Do engineers from Clemson or Penn State or Iowa or Florida or Auburn also not donate and/or donate at lower rates? Do our alumni from other majors donate at the same rate as those with similar academic backgrounds from other universities?

Google says that roughly 20% of Clemson grads are engineers. Virginia Tech graduates a similar % of engineers. Clemson's graduating classes are also smaller than those of Virginia Tech. However, Clemson fundraises much better than VT (at least has as of 2016).

Honestly, I just think VT fans don't see the value of donating (at least relative to fans of peer universities). Maybe we don't internalize how our money benefits the athletic department or people are resistant to participating in the arms race. Probably a mix of cultural things, quality/cost of life after graduating, and operations at the athletic department/university.

I did recently (3-6 months ago?) had a conversation on TKP where someone (Maybe VTJ12?) where they showed that the academic side of the university is making huge strides in donations, while athletics is just slowly chugging along. That, if true, could indicate that there is an issue in our fundraising strategy (be it something wrong with the athletic department, or university leadership is somehow blocking the athletic department).

Twitter me

You ask a lot of questions without answering them. If you want to give this topic a fair treatment, I think you need to get some resources and find the answers. It's far too complicated a topic just to bring in partial data. You asked one question, and I threw out a possible explanation, but a lot more research would have to be done to verify it or to rule it out. I was suggesting that law schools and med schools generate bigger donors than engineering schools, but that is some serious shooting from the hip.

I seem to remember the drive for 25 being an attempt at bringing more donors into play, and I thought it had. This was certainly Whit's strategy. But the terrible football performance over the past 5 years is probably a pretty big setback.

Clemson isn't a particularly fair comparison, as they've won the national championship a few times recently.

I'm just throwing out some randomly related facts as food for thought. A real discussion of this is worthy of better research and analysis.

I was suggesting that law schools and med schools generate bigger donors than engineering schools, but that is some serious shooting from the hip.

Yes - I agree, and that was my point. It's a likely a cumulation/complex mix of things. Not just 'we're an engineering school, not a pre-law/pre-med school'

I seem to remember the drive for 25 being an attempt at bringing more donors into play, and I thought it had. This was certainly Whit's strategy. But the terrible football performance over the past 5 years is probably a pretty big setback.

Also agree

Clemson isn't a particularly fair comparison, as they've won the national championship a few times recently.

Clemson is a really interesting case. Their football spending doubled in 3 years (from $20m in 2013 to $40m in 2016), and then grew by another $20m in the next 3 years (source). They also doubled their donations from 2015 to 2016 (source). Clemson made the jump with VT-level donations, and then was able to take another big leap right after. I've never seen another school doing this without switching conferences.

For a while, I thought they were a roadmap that we could follow. Now I'm starting to think that they're an outlier in the sport (in a variety of ways), and we shouldn't try to emulate them.

Twitter me

In my experience, the ultra-boosters aren't normally from the professional class (Lawyers, Engineers, Doctors, etc.). Obviously, all great jobs to have that make great money, some make exceptional money, and you want to have a LOT of those donors if you can, but the big time boosters are usually oil tycoons (for our lucky friends in and around Texas, other select locales) and business owners.

A very specific example to address Clemson from my lived experience: SC is a relatively affordable place to live. Outside of some parts of Charleston, Greenville, Columbia, and some coastal towns, cost of living is pretty low, and since Greenville is more recently a surging market, it's mostly high cost of living for younger people or recent entrants. Plenty of people in Greenville are living in 7 figure/upper 6 figure valued houses on mortgages for way less than I pay for rent here because they bought those houses 10, 15, 20 years ago. I digress, most places in South Carolina are relatively affordable compared to many parts of the country (DMV, for example, where many VT alumni go after college).

The strength of IPTAY lies in business owners across the state, and surrounding states, who, because of the cost of living situation, have a lot more money to push into Clemson football. You own a successful insurance firm? You might be pushing 30-50k a year into IPTAY. You own several Car Dealerships? Same thing. You are a local developer? Push it into IPTAY. Owner of a company that makes some obscure part for dishwashers you've never thought about who makes well over 7 figures a year? Big time Clemson fan. I've met tons of these people over the years. Clemson/South Carolina football games are major social engagements for half the year, and tons of social cred comes from being boosters. It's a function of not having as many other things draining their money, which means more money can be shoveled into IPTAY/Gamecock Club.

I'd wager that if we were in the SEC, like we should have been 13 years ago, our salaries would be much higher (because the SEC pie slices are much bigger than those of the acc)

So comparing where we would rank relative to other conferences doesn't seem that useful to me. We'd probably be somewhere in the middle in the SEC if we were getting SEC TV money (our Nike deal would probably be better too)

Onward and upward

I'd wager that if we were in the SEC, like we should have been 13 years ago, our salaries would be much higher (because the SEC pie slices are much bigger than those of the acc)

Agree.

So comparing where we would rank relative to other conferences doesn't seem that useful to me.

Disagree. We compete against SEC teams for coaches, recruits, and transfers. How can you look at my comment above about Holeman Wiggins and not think that it's relevant to compare our coach salaries with that of the SEC?

Twitter me

I read it as: if we were in the SEC we'd have the 12th highest salary. But if we were in the SEC I don't think we'd be paying what we are now. We'd be paying more which would probably put us closer to 7th or 8th.

I guess the original point is that the SEC pays more. But that's nothing new. Everyone knows that already which is why I don't see the comparison as particularly useful.

Onward and upward

We are barely 6/7 in the ACC how would we jump up to that high in the SEC? I think more likely it would be 9/10 at best maybe even 11/12.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

You're missing the point. If we were in the SEC we would be getting a lot more money and we could spend that on coaching. I think if we had moved to the SEC back when we were good we'd be pretty solidly in the middle.

Onward and upward

But everyone in the SEC gets more money. I'm looking at it like this. We can't beat dollar wise for salaries with peers getting same TV revenue we are why would beat dollar wise other teams in another different conference getting same TV money?

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

I think the reasoning is "we aren't the highest paying among our peers and we aren't the lowest paying among our peers."

If our peers were different, and we had more money in general, we'd probably perform about the same.

We'd probably have more financial engagement from the fanbase if we had home games against UGA, Tennessee, Scar, etc, every year than Duke, Syracuse, BC, blah blah blah.

They're just saying we'd have the money to be middle of the SEC pack.

You're so freaking close it's painful.

But everyone in the SEC gets more money.

Bingo.

We can't beat dollar wise for salaries with peers getting same TV revenue we are why would beat dollar wise other teams in another different conference getting same TV money?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. I'm not saying that we would beat all the SEC teams in spending. But being that we're middle of the pack in the ACC it stands to reason that we'd be middle of the pack in the SEC if we were getting SEC benefits.

VT has a real football culture. If we had annual games vs quality SEC teams rather than Duke, bc, Ecu, etc. We would have way more fan engagement (which pushes revenues up in terms of tickets and merchandise) and there'd be more incentive for nil deals and we'd probably have a better apparel deal all on top of definitely having more TV money. Football has been and will continue to be king at VT. You best believe that with more money we'd be investing heavily in football. I don't think we'd ever get to Alabama or Georgia levels but I think we'd fairly comfortably park ourselves right in the middle.

Onward and upward

I tend to agree - the SEC carries cache with recruits; being the northern-most SEC team would be a huge recruiting advantage. Not to mention the upgrades to staff and facilities that SEC TV money would grant us, it's not unreasonable to believe that we jump from being a top 40/50 program in the ACC to being a top 25 program being in the SEC.

Twitter me

If we want to be relevant in football at the highest collegiate level, jumping to the SEC at some point in the near future is the only positive outcome. The ACC is going to be relegated to a second-tier conference and is trying to hold members hostage with the GoR. A lot of people beating the B1G drum but I frankly hate that conference and don't think we have nearly as much in common with those midwestern schools as some. I also think that league is very overrated, mostly plays boring three yards and a cloud of dust football, and I'm thinking isn't going to function as well as they hope with teams stretching both coasts. We are in the southern footprint, and games against Tennessee, Kentucky, South Carolina, Georgia etc would really ramp up interest in our program as the DMV football program in the SEC. We may never win the natty but we would be a whole hell of a lot better off than we are now slowly sinking and falling further behind in the ACC.

Could not agree more with this. And I think the numbers I shared in the OP illustrate that the 'power 2' is a real thing. The fact that most ACC teams are closer to the AAC than the SEC is... concerning.

Also, the idea of being in the B10 and playing USC/UCLA every other year just doesn't make sense to me. But I guess geography doesn't really matter now.

Twitter me

Those AAC teams are missing leading, Houston has money and poached a P5 coach, Cincy just hired a new coach and are moving to P5. I assume SMU is another one up there and they have north Dallas money. The other one, UCF, is massive in size. They just have to get everyone to donate a little.

Also comparing us to Houston isn't fair, we just don't have that Kenny Rogers, Randy/Dennis Quaid, Jim Parsons, Master P, Fuzzy Zoeller, Ron Canion, Marvin Odum, Ken Lay type money ... okay maybe scratch that last one.

Not sure it misleading; it's an accurate indicator of where VT (and other ACC schools) stand in the sport. The thought of a coach choosing Cincy over VT would be unimaginable 10 years ago. Now, not so much.

Twitter me

But 10years ago Cincy wasn't in the Big 12

If we want to be relevant in football at the highest collegiate level, jumping to the SEC at some point in the near future is the only positive outcome.

100%

We may never win the natty

We're never going to win one in the ACC. Moving to the SEC (or the B1G, though I prefer the SEC for many reasons) would be the only way to increase our odds. But even then, the odds would be long. I don't think VT will ever play for a natty again. But I think we're less likely to get there playing in the ACC than if we jump to one of the big 2.

Onward and upward

Agree on your second point, we're definitely not winning one in the ACC. It's the first argument anyone always brings up against an SEC move - "but we will finish last every year!" When we are already struggling in a horrible ACC and can't win there in the current landscape.

I guess the original point is that the SEC pays more. But that's nothing new. Everyone knows that already

I didn't realize that 12 of the current 14 SEC schools are paying more than us. I would've guessed 8ish.

Twitter me

Honestly, I'm kind of surprised that it's not all 14. I guess vandy. Who else? Missouri?

Onward and upward

So if VT jumped to SEC (if I'm fact there was a real chance to in the coming years), wouldn't the financial risk of owing money to the acc be worth getting to the table? IF that were to happen I can't imagine the ACC would continue to stay connected and it would domino into the other major players leaving which would result in a void contract and no longer owing money anyways, right?

I'll keep saying it because I keep hearing it from sources inside of "NIL departments (or whatever the heck they are actually called from school to school)" that the ACC is dead. It cannot exist long term in the current climate unless something substantial changes. Sure it can exist, but it will continue its decline into obscurity.

Is coronavirus over yet?

Do these sources say the same thing about the B12 and P12? Just curious.

Twitter me

I haven't spoken with any of these guys about those conferences. Maybe because they don't impact the ACC as much in recruiting... IDK, but the individual I spoke with last week was speaking directly, just like a number of other conversations I've had, about the SEC and BIG10 in relation to the ACC.

EDIT: Two of these people are UNC folks one is not.

Is coronavirus over yet?

If UNC is thinking about options, then the ACC is definitely done.

So true. The ACC just feels like a lame duck conference.

Twitter me

I know Godfrey and some other national writers have alluded to it, but if the SEC were smart, VT and UNC would be the jackpot. If UNC is looking for a way out that is the linchpin to undo the entire ACC with their strong influence. Plus that fills out the southern footprint giving the SEC VA and NC. You get a historically good and known football brand/fan base in VT with a sizable student body and alumni base firmly positioned in the DMV area. With UNC, you get that Carolina brand which everyone grows up knowing in NC and is a national brand. Some people may argue why not UVA then over VT, but even though they have a great basketball team and non-rev sports, they have a very small enrollment and alumni base which is mostly not from VA. You're basically adding another Vandy with them which I don't think the SEC wants.

Yea, I've heard that take as well. I have to imagine that the SEC is smart, so if they're not chasing at least one of the VA schools + UNC, then there's a reason why.

If UNC is looking for a way out that is the linchpin to undo the entire ACC with their strong influence.

I do think the only way that the ACC gets out of the GoR early is if schools start announcing that they're leaving at the end of the GoR. If two school announce that they're leaving when the GoR expires (2036?), then a year goes by, then 2 more announce they're leaving in 2036, then the remaining schools start to really freak out, and all of a sudden 4 more schools say they're leaving... well at that point you have 8 schools that want to leave, and the GoR falls apart, and those 8 schools can leave in the short term.

If UNC wants to start that movement, I'm here for it 仄儭

Twitter me

Yep. The ACC is their playpen and it's over as soon as they want new toys

21st century QBs Undefeated vs UVA:
MV7, MV5, LT3, Braxton Burmeister, Ryan Willis, Josh Jackson, Jerod Evans, Michael Brewer, Tyrod Taylor, Sean Glennon, and Grant Noel. That's right, UVA. You couldn't beat Grant Noel.

Can you (or someone else) explain the relationship between conference and NIL?

I would think NIl deals are largely funded by local businesses (so do larger city based schools have an advantage there) and alumni donations (does conference change this? I know at least one person on here said they didn't want to donate to pay players. Is another factor performance for donations, so would donations for NIL increase if we are mediocre in the SEC?)

Thanks for any explanations you guys have!

If a conference makes more in TV revenue, it means they can pay for operating expenses (salaries, travel), facilities, etc with TV money, and booster money can be funneled toward NIL.

VT makes $35m from TV money and $20m from donations (from memory). Suppose that U of Florida makes about $75M from TV revenue and $50m from donations. UF could operate at the same level as VT (and presumably offer athletes a similar experience) with TV money alone, and encourage donors to invest $50m/year in NIL. This puts VT at a disadvantage.

Twitter me

Makes sense. I don't think my brain has been operating well recently - haven't been sleeping well for awhile.

Thanks for the explanation!

A person inside UNC said that he knows that most SEC and BIG schools are telling donors to now give much more heavily to NIL organizations because they have everything they need from TV contracts.

There's no path forward for the ACC here.

Is coronavirus over yet?

It's also worth noting that there is nothing preventing a conference from establishing their own NIL deals. Conferences are nonprofit businesses and essentially unmentioned in the NCAA NIL rules. NCAA does prohibit NIL deals based on athletic ability or participation, or attendance at a school, but that is an easy hurdle for a conference to surmount. For instance, the SEC could announce tomorrow, for every football player in the SEC, they will get $100K in NIL deals in their representation of the conference as long as they participate in some sort of conference event. This would be the next step to further establishing SEC and B1G as the elite conferences and I don't see why that wouldn't happen.

I miss the days when football websites had threads about where the football team is ranked instead of threads about where the wide receiver coaches salary ranks. I assume when/if this staff wins some games they will get new more lucrative contracts.

We're going to have to open the purse for Fontel sooner rather than later if I'm guessing. He starts hauling in Richmond 4*s and the SEC is going to be beating his door down

I've got to believe we're a more attractive coaching destination than UVA right now, alma mater be damned you gotta do what's best for your coaching career

Look at JHam getting an upgrade to DCoordinator at his alma mater, but jobless shortly thereafter because of the HC. I would think that factors in to a new hire's decision, although Eliot has been there only a year, but the consideration is trajectory of Eliot/UVA vs any other job offer they would get.

Anyone still think Elliott is an N/A?

Why would Mines go to UVa? I'd think VT would be a better place to be right now.

Why would Mines go to UVa? I'd think VT would be a better place to be right now.

Hagans was making $400k/year at UVA. Mines is making $295k/year at VT. 25% raise and the opportunity to coach at your alma mater might sound nice to him.

One could argue that VT puts him in a better position from a career standpoint, but I say that as a VT fan who is somewhat optimistic about the future of the program, and has no idea what the situation is like at UVA.

Twitter me

Non-paywall post from Mehul over at 247 indicates PSU actually came after Mines first, as did another P5 job, but we stepped up to the plate ($). Don't think UVA is looking at Mines now. Also sort of reaffirmed what I had seen that Mines and his family really enjoy Blacksburg.

https://247sports.com/college/virginia-tech/board/59428/Contents/mines-2...

I think our inroads instate are getting some attention.

I would much rather live in BBurg than Charlottesville.

Less pompous assy in Blacksburg?

Huge win if true. Dude is earning his money this offseason. Looking forward to seeing a more complete product on the field to match.

Twitter me

I think we're going to see donor $$ diverting to NIL and the growth in these salary numbers leveling off appreciably.

Don't think so. Most donations don't pay for salaries. Unless it's an endowed position. Especially at Tech.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

Agree with Fireman. I think the NIL money will be 'diverted' from facilities, not salaries. There's a reason why NFL weight rooms and locker rooms are a huge downgrade from college - it's because college programs (a) have to find ways to spend their money and (b) have to find ways to impress recruits.

From a somewhat dated article in the Chicago Tribune (emphasis mine):

In the past 20 years, dozens of schools across the Southeast and Southwest have built indoor football facilities. Leider also finds himself facing more competition. At least 20 other companies have entered the college sports design sector since the 1990s, he said.

Some collegiate players now enjoy facilities superior to those offered by some professional teams. Florida State and the University of Florida have indoor football practice facilities. The NFL's Jacksonville Jaguars do not. Asked about this, Leider noted a significant difference between professional and college sports.

"When you can pay a player, that changes the equation," Leider said. "Just look at (Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher) Zack Greinke: He just signed for $200 million. I'll bet the quality of the locker room isn't that big a deal for him."

Twitter me

I assume this data is based on current year salary and doesn't take into account total contract values, which may incorporate escalations that are higher for some coaches than others, certain incentives that are separate from salary, etc.

I just looked at Pry's salary from his contract. The non-paywalled stuff shows that he gets $4M this year, a fairly large jump to $4.75 in year 2, then a smaller jump to $5M in year 3. So don't know if other coaches are getting similar bumps from year to year, and what bumps there might be for the coordinators.