College football's ego issue is set to be resolved by the NIL era.

this year, 2025, has seen an extraordinary number of sought-after head coaching positions become available. Last week, one of the twelve open roles was claimed when James Franklin was hired was hired by Virginia Tech.

The volume of open jobs and the names being floated for those jobs have revealed an arrogance around many of those programs. The ever-changing landscape of college football will adjust that thinking. It just won’t be immediate.

There has always been an egocentric attachment to programs and the people that run them or root for them. College football is unlike every pro league this country has. The structure is different, leagues, conferences and divisions are different and most importantly, how these programs view themselves is different.

College football's unique nature, unlike most other American sports, fosters a tendency to overvalue one's own program. While it's common for fans of any team, regardless of their standing, to view their team subjectively, this isn't a new phenomenon. Nevertheless, the current availability of coaching positions highlights that this home team bias has escalated significantly.

College football's structure includes different tiers.

The open positions, listed without a specific order, include LSU, Penn State, Florida, Auburn, Stanford, UCLA, Arkansas, Oregon State, UAB, and Colorado State. Despite these eleven openings, discussions have primarily centered on the same three to four coaches. Lane Kiffin appears to be the most sought-after "free agent" should he decide to depart Ole Miss. Other coaches frequently mentioned are Eli Drinkwitz of Missouri, Jon Sumrall from Tulane, and, inexplicably, Marcus Freeman of Notre Dame, who has indicated he is not looking to move.

Although other names are being discussed, none are as steady as the prior four. Still, that's only four names for eleven positions. Eventually, the situation will resolve itself, and each of those programs will recruit someone to fill their open spot. However, this problem existed before the NIL era, the transfer portal, or the college football playoff.

This mindset probably originated before the BCS era but solidified into its current form during that period. It fosters pride and a sense of value that inherently introduces substantial subjective bias. In a truly objective assessment, LSU, Florida, and Auburn would likely be considered the top contenders. However, even that conclusion is influenced by this very BCS bias.

For over 25 years, each year has featured a "Davids vs. Goliaths" dynamic. It's widely understood that Colorado State isn't anticipated to defeat Georgia. Similarly, the UAB position isn't considered superior to the Florida position. This perception often stems from a history of success, a substantial donor and alumni network, and consistent placement in national or recruiting rankings. Consequently, programs have sought coaches who acknowledge this inherent bias.

A prime illustration of this bias emerges when we try to categorize these programs. For instance, LSU and Notre Dame are placed in a separate category from Penn State and Auburn, which itself is distinct from UAB and Oregon State. However, when discussing potential coaching hires, the local media and university staff involved all appear to consider them to be in the highest tier.

College football's new financial standard is NIL revenue.

The problem lies in comprehending the tiers. Based on some officials' remarks about their searches, it appears many consider the top tier to encompass the top 'half' of all Power 4 institutions. This implies that LSU, Stanford, and Oregon State are viewed as equivalent in terms of competitive standing, appeal of location, and available resources. 

As time progresses, the college football scene will naturally adjust some of these perspectives. A winning past and established reputation no longer hold the same value in college football today. Instead, financial resources are the new key determinant. Programs capable of increasing and expanding their operational budgets will emerge victorious. Funding influences recruiting success, as we're about to discover, it also impacts coaching appointments, and ultimately, substantial budgets will position teams for playoff contention.

NIL has fundamentally altered the landscape. Athletes and coaches are now less inclined to choose a university based on childhood allegiances or the presence of NFL legends. The deciding factors will be financial capacity and the ability to secure top-tier talent, with NIL budgets playing a crucial role. Tradition will no longer be the primary consideration.

Institutions such as Ohio State, Alabama, and Georgia will probably remain at the forefront. This isn't due to historical prestige, but rather their capacity to generate substantial revenue, a situation unlikely to shift with the advent of NIL.

Consider Matt Rhule and Nebraska as a prime illustration. For several days, three levels were debated as if they held identical weight. The question arose: would Matt Rhule depart Nebraska for Penn State? What unfolded was a storyline implying Penn State doesn't represent a significant improvement over Nebraska and is a coaching position as appealing as Florida or LSU.

The system, in its current form, will adapt its thinking as time progresses.

The coming years look set to bring disappointment for multiple programs, particularly if their desired coaching prospects opt to remain in their current positions. Should Kiffin, Drinkwitz, and Sumrall all decide to stay put, the coaching carousel will descend into utter pandemonium. Several institutions targeting a premier coaching hire, believing it to be a clear improvement over their recently dismissed coach, will discover that not all prominent Power 4 programs offer the same advantages.

The era where every top recruit exclusively considered Ohio State, Alabama, and Georgia is fading. While these programs will remain strong contenders, they'll face increased competition from others operating at a similar caliber. NIL is poised to foster greater parity, contingent on programs developing innovative strategies for revenue generation. Universities with rich traditions and numerous championships that neglect NIL revenue will fall behind those with less historical success but a strong focus on NIL.

College football has seen a shift for a while. Nevertheless, the inherent favoritism toward home teams in most programs will inevitably be addressed by their recruiting and winning strategies. Institutions relying on tradition and failing to adapt to the NIL environment are bound to falter. One can only wish this realization comes about swiftly. 

More college football news: 

• Deion Sanders buyout, contract details as Colorado Buffaloes coach
• Ole Miss reportedly gives Lane Kiffin an ultimatum as family visits Florida and LSU
• Virginia Tech reportedly funding roster near top of ACC for James Franklin
• Bill Belichick goes viral for awkward handshake after Wake Forest loss
• Texas state trooper reportedly relieved of duties after player exchange at Texas A&M