Six college football buyouts that will decide the coaching carousel

For at least a decade, we've been in an era of relentless spending in college football, where buyout money from coaching contracts has been considered merely a speedbump. When Texas A&M fired Jimbo Fisher for a $77 million tab in 2023, it signaled to the industry that no buyout was too big. The school will be paying him more than $7 million annually through 2031 to not coach the team. But after the busiest three-year stretch of turnover that the coaching industry has ever seen, there might be signs of buy-out based pragmatism. More than 30 jobs turned over in each of the past three years -- 32 in 2024, 30 in 2025 and a record 33 in 2026. (That's 95 coaches being replaced -- 14 more than the next busiest three-year stretch from 2011 to 2013.) The combination of simple cyclical trends and the financial crunch from programs having to pay players portend a slowdown for 2026. Consider that by this time last year, there were five power-conference openings: Stanford (from the spring), Arkansas, UCLA, Oklahoma State and Virginia Tech. (Penn State fired James Franklin on Oct. 12). So far, there have been no firings. "There's monster buyout dollars, the need to fund rosters and uncertainty from the Protect College Sports Act and what revenue share will look like," a power-conference athletic director said. "Does changing the head coach just solve everything? Or do some places stay the course here?" Coaches are projecting top-end rosters above $60 million in the SEC for 2027 and the top players in the sport at more than $8 million next year. With the Protect College Sports act facing long odds in the House of Representatives, rosters project to remain on a rising trajectory. It's amplified now as debt grows, roster costs skyrocket and the cost of a full staff changeout and roster upgrade can cost well over $100 million. Not surprisingly, many of the schools with coaches in peril rank low in spending compared to their league peers, so they face a quintessentially modern college football choice of where to allocate the money. There's an age-old conundrum being weighed by athletic directors: Can they afford to fire the coach and pay the giant buyout? Or can they afford to keep the coach and let the program, donations and fan interest atrophy? So how busy will the hiring and firing industry around college sports be this fall? The answer revolves around six power-conference schools and their ability to navigate daunting buyouts. Jump to a coach: Lincoln Riley | Dabo Swinney Mike Norvell | Deion Sanders Shane Beamer | Greg Schiano 1. USC's Lincoln Riley Buyout: $70 million USC has given Riley vast resources for his roster, a glistening new facility and one of the country's highest paid general managers. There's been changes in virtually every facet of the program -- coordinators, strength staff and off-field personnel. If USC continues to be the same version of this movie under Riley -- glitzy enough on offense to beat overmatched teams but lacking the collective grit and discipline to win big games -- there's only one decision left for USC leaders. USC is 5-1 and faces the exact type of two-game stretch -- at Penn State and at Wisconsin following a bye -- that USC has struggled with under Riley. He's 11-10 on the road overall at USC and 4-6 in Big Ten road games. Patterns have formed that need to be broken. Perhaps worse than falling to 0-3 against Oregon two weeks ago in a 41-27 loss, the Trojans proved a national embarrassment with the sideline behavior of Desman Stephens after his "disgusting" hit on Oregon quarterback Dante Moore. The lack of awareness and discipline on the sideline as Stephens giddily celebrated turned USC into a punchline. Riley's hand-picked defensive coordinator, Gary Patterson, has authored the country's No. 89 scoring defense. A hire that carried with it classic boom-or-bust potential is trending to bust. How will that look against USC's upcoming gauntlet: at Penn State, at Wisconsin, Ohio State and at Indiana over the next several weeks? There's little tangible signs USC's defense, which got gashed for 460 yards at Rutgers, can hold up on the road. And there's no empirical evidence Riley can beat good teams -- he's 5-14 against opponents ranked in the AP Poll, he's 0-5 against AP Top 10 teams. Riley has six years remaining on his deal at USC, which was given to him by former AD Mike Bohn. His initial 10-year deal got extended by a year after reaching the Pac-12 title game in his first year. He makes more than $11 million annually, and that number escalates through the final season in 2032. Riley's buyout would be the second biggest in the history of college football behind Fisher. There's mitigation on Riley's deal, which means the USC tab could become more manageable in the same way James Franklin's did at Penn State. (Franklin was initially set to be owed $49 million and the school ended up paying close to $9 million over three years.) USC is unlikely to get that drastic kind of a cut. But if USC fired Riley, he'd still be a commodity because he remains a top playcaller. Riley, a Texas native and Texas Tech graduate, was a dominant coach in the Big 12. (He held an 84.6% win percentage at OU, compared to 67.8% at USC.) If he landed a college head job or NFL coordinator gig, he could save USC a significant amount of money. (Franklin's Virginia Tech deal is for nearly $42 million.) The cautionary tale for USC will be on the opposite sideline on Saturday. Firing a coach for being very good but failing against great teams has appeared to backfire on Penn State in the very early days of the coach Matt Campbell era. He clearly needs more time, but there's no obvious championship-caliber replacement for Riley looming in the market. And there's a gaggle of young talent on the USC roster that could easily scatter if he's not there. 2. Clemson's Dabo Swinney Buyout: $57 million Clemson is not firing Dabo Swinney. Let's start there. The success has been too great. The roots are too deep. The buyout is too big. Clemson is also 3-2 and will likely be favored in the remainder of its games. Clemson has struggled to regain the heights that Swinney brought them to, one of the great runs at the top of the sport between 2015 and 2020 which included six-straight CFPs and two national titles. Clemson's dip has come with the seismic changes in the sport this current decade. And Swinney's skill set, which was elite for the prior era, hasn't translated at the same level in this new one. So the question moving forward is one Clemson has been juggling with for years -- how does Clemson evolve to align Dabo's strengths? Those are connection, culture building and development, but they come in an era where there's more focus on transaction. There has been some evolution. Clemson took 10 defensive transfers last year. It only took one on offense. Is it reasonable that there could be continued evolution there as the program slowly modernizes. Swinney's talking points about Clemson's ACC dominance remain, as the school has won eight ACC titles in the past 11 years. But there's a clear-cut new bell cow in the league in Miami, which beat Clemson by four touchdowns on Clemson's own field last week. So what's next here? Does Clemson ride with the same staff and hope for improvement? Do they stick with freshman quarterback Tait Reynolds or do what Clemson has yet to do in the portal era -- go spend top-of-market for a portal quarterback, which would be at least $5 million? Are there front office adjustments coming to continue to modernize personnel acquisition? Clemson could end up with another solid season in 2026, but there remains a vexing gap to close to catch up to the sport's elite. 3. Florida State's Mike Norvell Buyout: Nearly $51 million Norvell is fighting valiantly in what's the hottest seat in the sport. The tenor of Saturday's blowout win over Virginia provided much needed oxygen for Norvell's tenure. He's now gone 4-14 in his last 18 ACC games headed into a trip to Louisville on Friday. Norvell is 3-2 this season and 41-36 overall, which was highlighted by an undefeated regular season and ACC title in 2023. Not much has gone right since. To put it bluntly, FSU has significant financial issues in the athletic department. FSU's athletic department is more than $430 million in debt, most of which is facility debt and there's revenue bonds in place to account for it. Still, that makes it difficult for FSU to take on more debt. Especially difficult for an athletic department that faces paying out up to $68 million for both Norvell and his staff. (Norvell's shaky recent seasons make it unlikely his next job will be at a power conference school, so the payouts will be significant for FSU.) Around the ACC and college football, there's an expectation that the same leadership void and lack of alignment that dug FSU into a hole on and off the field could end up impacting the school's critical upcoming moves. When FSU fired athletic director Mike Alford on Sept. 14, the industry expectation was for a quick AD search and then a decision on Norvell by the end of the year. But as of now, Florida State hasn't been seriously engaged with any major search firms and there's an expectation that Board Chairman Peter Collins, whose tenure has coincided with FSU falling into a crater, will try to handle all the high-leverage decisions with President Richard McCullough. This has been concerning locally and amusing nationally, as everyone has already seen the pride come before the fall. Let's remember, Florida State is trying to position itself for an upgrade out of the ACC after clumsily suing the league, flopping on the field and behaving in a way that could turn off potential league suitors. Former FSU Trustee Drew Weatherford famously said in 2023: "It's not a matter of if we leave [the ACC], but how and when we leave." McCullough was equally vocal, referencing "an existential crisis" because of the revenue gap with the Big Ten and SEC. Institutional arrogance, an ugly financial sheet and a history of underwhelming athletic leadership handcuffed by alignment issues -- the forgettable David Coburn, Stan Wilcox and Randy Spetman preceded Alford -- have raised red flags around the industry about the Florida State athletic director job. With boosters always having a big voice and campus leadership hovering, the question at FSU has long been simple -- "How much power will the AD really have?" FSU would like Norvell to win big the rest of the year, as he's well-liked by the administration (and would cost the aforementioned $68 million to move on from him and his staff). If FSU wants to compete with Miami, which has soared past them in the realignment derby, they need to catch up financially. FSU is at least $15 million behind Miami's football roster spending. One final difficult financial signal flare -- public institutions in Florida have been greenlighted to receive more than $22 million in auxiliary funds from campus, which expires in 2028. That's another giant line item to figure out for FSU in the near future. Norvell will be paid out through 2031. 4. Colorado's Deion Sanders Buyout: $26.1 million The best part of Deion Sanders' time at Colorado is that he made the school's football program, which had been dormant for decades, interesting. But as Sanders muddles through Year 4 with no quarterback, no identity and little hope of competitiveness in the Big 12, it's clear the buzz is gone. The Colorado fan base ate up the early excitement, but interest is dwindling as Colorado is flailing and may not be favored for the rest of the season. There's little loyalty here. For Sanders, Colorado was just a vehicle for his reality show. For Colorado, they got a bump out of Travis Hunter's brilliance, but that's becoming a distant memory. They also got an enrollment bump from the buzz of Sanders' early tenure, which is hard to quantify. But for now, the reality show has gone cringe. Sanders was caught screaming "we got nine people out there after a timeout," and that came after they had called timeout because they had just eight players on the field. The viral clip from the FOX broadcast is a fitting symbol for where this program is. Colorado has just two wins over power conference programs -- Iowa State and Georgia Tech -- the last two years. Colorado is 2-13 in the last 15 games against power conference opponents. After a bye this week, Colorado faces No. 12 Utah and travels to No. 18 Oklahoma State in its next two games. New offensive coordinator Brennan Marion has Colorado's offense No. 125 in scoring. The 18.6 points per game are nearly a touchdown behind the second-worst team in the league, TCU's 25.4. And nearly two touchdowns behind the third-worst, UCF's 32.4. Sanders' big gamble at quarterback -- five-star Julian Lewis, who left high school early -- is now the third stringer. Colorado, like most mid-level Power 4 schools, is also steeped in fiscal issues. Colorado reportedly projects a $27 million fiscal deficit for this year. They're in the middle of the pack of Big 12 spending for football, and staying there while paying a huge buyout is tough math. Former athletic director Rick George gave Sanders a lucrative extension in March of 2025, which caps his pay at $12 million for 2029. With no serious suitors for Sanders, the length and guaranteed money now make it one of the worst contracts in the sport. The all-in cost with staff would not be significantly higher, but the $26.1 million for Sanders looms large. New athletic director Fernando Lovo inherits a flailing program, a bad contract and now a decision on one of the most noted figures in the sport. 5. South Carolina's Shane Beamer Buyout: $22.5 million It has been a perfect storm for South Carolina this year. They lost to Kentucky on a walk-off two-point conversion, have had high-profile discipline issues with star defensive end Dylan Stewart, and quarterback LaNorris Sellers hasn't regained his 2024 form. Beamer hasn't shied away from needing to be better, as he's 35-33 in Year 6 at the school. "I haven't been good enough as a head coach. I own it. We've got to get better as a football team." Beamer is two seasons away from being on the cusp of the College Football Playoff. But South Carolina is 0-3 in the SEC and in last place on the heels of a 4-8 season. And that's put him in the crosshairs. There's been no urgency at South Carolina to fire Beamer. He's well liked there, and South Carolina's relatively stable financial situation is mostly because of a more-than $42 million financial subsidy. The latest filings show that number growing, a $16 million increase from 2024. The finances that South Carolina is facing with Beamer are unique on this list. No matter where Beamer is employed next, the school would owe him the entire $22.5 million, as there's no off-set or mitigation in his deal. That'd be an extra line item of more than $7 million every year through the 2030 season. Throw in the cost of the staff, which could top out at up to $11.8 million, and they are looking at a potential tab of nearly more than $33 million. (The staff deals do have off-set and mitigation, which means some of that $11.8 million could be shaved off.) New athletic director Jeremiah Donati is expected to wait out the season here. The finances are tricky, as South Carolina's ultra successful women's basketball team lost more than $6 million last fiscal year and the men's team is 6-30 in SEC the last two years and could have to buy out coach LaMont Paris for more than $8 million. South Carolina has been spending near the middle of the SEC. Can they spend tens of millions in dead money and still keep up? The first question prospective coaches ask in this market is simple: How much will the school have for a roster? 6. Rutgers' Greg Schiano Buyout: $18.6 million Few athletic departments have been more consistently saddled in debt than Rutgers, which lost more than $75 million in the 2024-25 fiscal years. Between reported losses and money from state, school and student fees, Rutgers can claim more than a half-billion in losses since joining the Big Ten in 2014. Schiano is the program's only successful modern coach, as he's won 100 games over his two stints. He's the program's overall wins leader by 22 games. On-field performance the last two years has put Schiano under the microscope, though. Rutgers went 5-7 in 2025 and has started this year 1-4, including a home loss to UMass. A game next week at Maryland, another financially strapped athletic department with a coach in the crosshairs, will be a key bellwether for Schiano's future. Rutgers' financial pressure is real, as it would cost up to $28 million just to fire Schiano and the staff. The prospect of significant mitigation for Schiano is unlikely, which leaves Rutgers facing another pile of debt. Schiano is well liked in the athletic department and has a strong reputation with donors and in the state for his 18 years as head coach. There's examples this year at places like Wisconsin, Baylor and Mississippi State where patience has paid off. Schiano made clear earlier this year the lack of NIL infrastructure at Rutgers under former AD Pat Hobbs, saying bluntly: "We have not tried it ... not at the Division I level, forget the Big Ten level." Rutgers ranks near the bottom of the Big Ten in spending on its football roster, and it's tough math to take on a lot of dead money and pitch to prospective candidates that they can be competitive in the Big Ten, which projects to have a median football spending in 2027 of nearly $35 million. (Rutgers is below $25 million this year.) New athletic director Keli Zinn took over a financial trainwreck from Hobbs and has begun steering Rutgers back to better fiscal ground. The question looming is simple if Rutgers can't U-Turn on the field -- can Rutgers afford to take on more debt?