Texas A&M head coach Mike Elko's recent contract extension has stirred up quite the conversation, especially when you consider the hefty numbers involved. With an average annual base salary of $11.5 million, Elko's deal would have ranked him fourth among college head football coaches last year.
It's not just about the money, though. The contract includes automatic one-year extensions when the Aggies win nine or more regular-season games or make it to the College Football Playoff.
This development has fans buzzing, particularly given Texas A&M's history with coaching extensions. The debate often boils down to whether the financial commitment is justified. But perhaps the real question is why these extensions often don't pan out as expected.
Let's take a look at the history. RC Slocum inked a seven-year extension in 1999 after a Big 12 title in 1998.
Dennis Franchione secured one post-Cotton Bowl in 2004. Mike Sherman was extended after a 9-4 season in 2011.
Kevin Sumlin got his after a 20-6 start over two seasons, and Jimbo Fisher negotiated his during the 2021 season following a fourth-place finish in the final CFP rankings in 2020.
In many cases, these extensions were influenced by potential openings at other high-profile programs. Franchione had LSU and Notre Dame in the mix, Sumlin had USC, and Fisher had LSU.
Despite these strategic moves, the post-extension performance often didn't match the pre-extension success. Only Sumlin managed to avoid finishing with a .500 record or worse in the regular season.
Interestingly, all these coaches were no longer with the program by the fourth year of their extension. This raises a critical question: Why do contract extensions at Texas A&M frequently fall short of expectations? It's a pattern worth examining as the Aggies move forward with Elko at the helm.