| The big business of college athletics has been well documented by scholars (e.g., Greene, 2008; Karcher, 2009) and journalists (e.g., Alesia, 2009; Rhoden, 2008). The landscape of athletics competition has evolved from being merely an extracurricular recreational activity involving on-campus students to a multi-billion dollar industry (Crowley, 2006). Moreover, the NCAA and the manner in which it manages and regulates its student-athletes and corporate relationships have been frequently researched (Mitten, Musselman, & Burton, 2009; Sack, 2009). Since the inception of the NCAA, the overall financial benefit to scholarship student-athletes has remained relatively constant, while the dollars paid and benefits devoted to the head coaches in football and men's and women's basketball have skyrocketed to levels that have ignited spirited debate by internal and external athletic and academic stakeholders (Kahn, 2007; Sander, 2009). While a great deal has been written regarding salaries of head coaches and the business of intercollegiate athletics, few studies have looked at the contractual arrangements or components of the legal instrument (i.e., employment contract) that bind coaches and schools together.;For the purpose of this research inquiry, contract law served as the basis as its principles and concepts provide a foundation to the formation of employment contracts of head football coaches on the intercollegiate level. In reviewing the literature in relation to coaches' employment contracts, there are only a few known studies in this area (e.g., Greene, 2008; Greenberg, 2006; Greenberg & Smith, 2007; Karcher, 2009; Lopiano, 2008). While a great deal of literature has been published on a variety of sport law areas and topics, only a handful of scholars have contributed to the research and body of knowledge on issues related to college coaches' contracts. The current study fills a void in the literature as it analyzed the components of employment contracts for head football coaches of Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) schools.;Therefore, the purpose of this study was to use the quantitative content analytic method (Riffe, Lacy, & Fico, 2005) to examine the components of all current (i.e., 2011) and available employment contracts (N=91) of head football coaches at FBS schools. By obtaining and analyzing employment contracts from FBS universities, a determination was made regarding the critical components of these agreements. In an effort to discover the essential, consistent, and unique components of head football coaches' contracts at FBS schools, 45 measures for each contract were identified and coded. Of the 45 variables included in the study, 31 were dependent variables (e.g., duties and responsibilities, terms of employment, rollover provisions) and 14 were independent variables (e.g., conference affiliation, ethnicity of coach, undergraduate school enrollment). The data collected through this content analysis were analyzed through descriptive statistics and linear and logistical regression methods. The overall results and various statistical analyses of the contracts allowed for numerous comparisons (e.g., schools and their affiliated conferences). Also, this investigation provided an opportunity to explore the differences between Automatic Qualifying (AQ) schools and non-AQ schools.;The study found that 12 of the 31 provisions used in the study were primary. The primary contractual components of both the AQ and non-AQ conferences included duties and responsibilities; fringe benefits; base salary; radio, television, and internet; governing law and jurisdiction; outside income; summer camps; term; termination; buyout; and competitive bonus. The academic bonus component was primary only with non-AQ schools. Of the 31 components examined, only the scheduling of contest variable had a significant and positive relationship with conference affiliation (beta = .195, P < .05). The results also revealed that athletic department revenues by conference impacted the frequency in which components, such as contest scheduling (beta = -.190, P < .05), were used in the contracts. Moreover, the study found that differences in which components were used by conference were influenced by not only financial considerations, but also by legal reasons, type of services performed, and length of the contract. Finally, it was found that several independent variables (i.e., undergraduate enrollment; television market data; stadium size; overall team winning percentage; and athletic department revenues) significantly (P < .05) influenced the schedule of contest, income tax ramifications, notifying the athletic director of other opportunities, relocation expenses and outside income, radio television and internet, endorsements, and shoe, apparel, and equipment components. Based upon these results, it was concluded that financial considerations often determine the frequency in which components are included in football coaches' contracts and have enabled athletic directors to maximize the potential that exists to increase revenue based upon the success of their respective football programs. |
