Don’t ask, we already did: SC lawmakers won’t help pay Muschamp’s $19 million buyout
South Carolina lawmakers have $1.8 billion in extra money to spend next year, but they won’t use any of it to help the University of South Carolina fire football coach Will Muschamp.
“No, that belongs in the athletic department,” said S.C. House budget committee chairman Murrell Smith, a Gamecocks football fan and USC School of Law graduate.
Fans’ calls for Muschamp’s departure have re-emerged after the Gamecocks fell to a 4-6 record Saturday with a home loss to Appalachian State of the Sun Belt Conference. The Gamecocks are double-digit underdogs in each of their final two games and are in danger of finishing with their worst record of Muschamp’s four-year stretch in Columbia.
If USC opted to fire Muschamp after the season — and school leaders have not hinted at such plans — the school would owe him 75 percent of his remaining contract, or about $19 million.
Smith joked earlier this year about allocating state disaster relief money to USC’s football program, but he told The State Monday that spending taxpayer dollars to fire a football coach is terrible public policy.
“That’s not state business,” he said. “We’re not getting into the business of hiring and firing football coaches. That’s not the function of state government to get involved in athletics.”
Republican Gov. Henry McMaster, a USC and USC School of Law graduate, agrees.
“It wouldn’t be an appropriate use of state funds,” McMaster spokesman Brian Symmes told The State Monday.
Muschamp on Sunday said he still had the support of the USC administration.
“Everybody’s been very positive, supportive,” Muschamp said. “What we need to do moving forward, and that’s what you know, we’re excited about, not where we are but where we’re moving. And we’ve made a lot of strides. A lot of progress, being a program that in the first three years of the staff won more games than anyone else has. And we’ve had some inconsistencies this year that have been frustrating. We’re looking forward to battling out of it.”
The sheer size of Muschamp’s buyout makes letting him go a tough sell. The coach would be owed $19 million if he is canned right after the Clemson game. It would be paid out over the life of his contract, which lasts until 2025.
The ultimate buyout amount can be negotiated down, if Muschamp is OK accepting less money. Athletics Director Ray Tanner has said the payouts for any coach would be less if they get another coaching job.
Of course, the S.C. Legislature could cover that with just 1% of next year’s budget surplus.
In September, Smith jokingly tweeted, “It appears that it will be necessary to sponsor an amendment to next year’s budget to appropriate 21 million to the @UofSC to rebuild @GamecockFB. #disasterrelief.”
Lawmakers are well aware that spending millions of taxpayer dollars on a football coach’s buyout instead of, say, raises for S.C. teachers would look awful politically.
USC also could face tough questions from lawmakers if it ponies up for Muschamp’s buyout. Skeptical lawmakers might wonder why USC needs to request more money for other projects if the school’s athletics department found the money to get rid of a football coach.
Buyouts are generally paid by college athletics departments, sometimes by raising money from boosters who are willing to pay for the change. It doesn’t always work out as planned.
Two Texas universities — Texas State and Houston — dipped into the red last year to fund buyouts for struggling football coaches, requiring other university funds to cover the difference, the Texas Tribune reported.
Other schools have fired struggling coaches with enormous buyouts already this season.
Florida State jettisoned head coach Willie Taggart despite his $17 million buyout. And Arkansas will owe Chad Morris $10 million after firing him Sunday.
This story was originally published November 11, 2019 at 3:35 PM.
