With the impact of NIL, I think the vast majority of us would agree that the contenders for a natty will only increase in the coming years, right?  I suppose the dramatic rise of Indiana is Exhibit A in support of this contention.

And I suppose that also means there will continue to be a real rise in the number of coaching changes too, right?

But I just want to offer a look at the coach’s perspective in this—and, contrary to what some might think, I don’t believe it’s primarily about salary & bonuses in all cases (or perhaps even in the majority of cases).  

I believe decisions will primarily be made in the majority of cases on where a coach thinks he has the best shot of winning a national championship.

I base this in part on what I witnessed years ago when someone from my high school soccer program made the decision to leave his longtime head coaching position at an Ivy League school, where he had a lot of success and job security, to move to a major conference where he thought he would have a legitimate chance to win a national championship.

Yes, the pay was higher but, as I said, he had job security and it’s not as if the increase in pay at the new school was going to materially change his lifestyle.

But it was the competitive streak in him—and he did play professionally for a while—that was the driving force.  He wanted that shot at a natty.

It worked out for him as he has won two national championships.  There obviously isn’t the level of media attention attached to college soccer that there is to college football so being in the limelight was not part of the equation here.

It was, plain and simple, wanting an opportunity win the ultimate prize at the collegiate level that was the main motivation for why he gave up a job he was otherwise happy with; and I think this is what will be the driving force for a lot of football coaches going forward.