Coaching Buyouts and Contract Extensions Thread

[OrangeAfroMan]

All the while, Iowa is back in the 30s and 40s.  
No dice.

[Gigem]

From 1900 to 2002, LSU is 14th in win%.  A&M is 21st, behind Syracuse and in front of GT.
(removing all the Ivy League teams and shit)
.
1900-1989, it goes like this:
27 - Arizona
28 - A&M
29 - Clemson
30 - Florida
So if you remove Florida's best 2 decades, yes, A&M is slightly ahead.
3 NCs in that span.  3 Heisman winners.  Kind of changes things.
Oh, and LSU is still 14th.
.
1900-2021
A&M improves, up to 17th.
But LSU and Florida improve, too, at 12th and 13th.
.
And if anyone wants to know why the kings are the kings, in all 3 of those time spans above, the top 10 are the same 10 programs, in some order.

I’m even more impressed, because up until the 70’s A&M was an all male military college with no more than 6,000 students. Kinda like the Citadel. And we were super bad for most of the 60.s and 70’s. 

[Gigem]

And I think fundamentally there’s not much separating Florida from A&M. Or Clemson. All large state schools, in the south, who are not “blue bloods” but have arguably had as much success as most blue bloods in the last 20 or so years. With big fan bases, large amounts of resources, and able to attract big time talent. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

It doesn't matter. There has to be a number of schools, and therefore there has to be a cut line where the schools you keep or lose are all marginal and you can argue all day who should or should not be on either side.

It's only interesting if your school is near the cut line, in which case you have a personal stake in it. But since this is a fictional exercise, is it REALLY worth arguing? 

[Gigem]

It doesn't matter. There has to be a number of schools, and therefore there has to be a cut line where the schools you keep or lose are all marginal and you can argue all day who should or should not be on either side.

It's only interesting if your school is near the cut line, in which case you have a personal stake in it. But since this is a fictional exercise, is it REALLY worth arguing?

Not my list. 

[Cincydawg]

And I think fundamentally there’s not much separating Florida from A&M. Or Clemson. All large state schools, in the south, who are not “blue bloods” but have arguably had as much success as most blue bloods in the last 20 or so years. With big fan bases, large amounts of resources, and able to attract big time talent.

This works for me, pretty much.  All three seem to be able to reach the top, or near it, and also sneak in some bad years, especially Florida of late, which is a puzzlement to me.  I figured Clemson is able to recruit at times from neighboring states in a way USCe has not been able to do for whatever reason.  Florida should never be worse than 8-5.  A&M has to compete with UT/UO and that's a challenge, but as noted, they have the resources, the stadium, the tradition, etc.

I could see Clemson drifting into a down period, they have in the past, 7-6 kinds of seasons at times, maybe no bowl games, but Florida and A&M really should never drop further than 5 losses IMHO.  

[FearlessF]

It doesn't matter. There has to be a number of schools, and therefore there has to be a cut line where the schools you keep or lose are all marginal and you can argue all day who should or should not be on either side.

It's only interesting if your school is near the cut line, in which case you have a personal stake in it. But since this is a fictional exercise, is it REALLY worth arguing?

of course

in the off season, ABSOLUTELY!

[847badgerfan]

I'm not sure how a few programs snuck into that Barons list. 
Iowa and A&M haven't done much of anything in the past 30 years.  I know, I know, arbitrary cut-off, but okay, name your cut-off.  20 years?  50? 
What has Iowa done in any span?  A&M? 
They've ALMOST done stuff, but that's about it.  They don't belong with the others, at all.

Iowa has won the conference championship in the past 20 years, played in CCG's, and they sell out their large stadium. They are a baron.

Nebraska is living on past glory here - in grave danger of losing any status, unless Rhule can get it fixed. They sell out but have not won anything in a long time.

Who knows what happens to Iowa when Kirk hangs it up. It's a great job for the right person. Dan Mullen would be good there, IMO.

[Cincydawg]

I'd include programs that "haven't done much" in the second tier if they have tremendous fan enthusiasm.

I suppose one might argue that would include South Carolina and their ilk, so I'd temper that a bit with on field success to some level.

[FearlessF]

Iowa has won the conference championship in the past 20 years

meaning 2004 when they "shared" with Michigan but lost the head to head?

[Gigem]

Iowa has won the conference championship in the past 20 years

meaning 2004 when they "shared" with Michigan but lost the head to head?

We shared the Big 12 South in 2010 with Oklahoma, beat them head to head, but they went to the CCG because of BCS rankings.  

It happens.  If they won it, they won it.  

[FearlessF]

I know.
UNL claims conference championships shared back in the Big 6 and Big 8 daze

I don't count any of them from the 60's, 70's, and 80's that UNL shared with the cheatin Sooners that the Sooners won the head to head

it ain't right

it's called a tie-breaker and the head to head winner went to the Orange Bowl every time

[OrangeAfroMan]

It doesn't matter. There has to be a number of schools, 

There does?

[OrangeAfroMan]

And I think fundamentally there’s not much separating Florida from A&M. Or Clemson. All large state schools, in the south, who are not “blue bloods” but have arguably had as much success as most blue bloods in the last 20 or so years. With big fan bases, large amounts of resources, and able to attract big time talent.

I guess national championships aren't a big deal, especially 3 in 12 years.
Programs with 3 NCs in 12 years is a SHORT list:
recent Bama
90s Nebraska
80s Miami
Switzer OU
50s OU
WWII ND
30s Minny
and
turn-of-the-century Florida
.
That's it.