I wonder about this too - at 57 does he want to "start over" again for a few more bucks? "I believe that we can win here, and win big". That's what he said when he was hired. Well, we are on the brink of that - in a rebuilding year, no less. CML is the 4th highest paid coach in the Pac-12. Not really all that far behind Petersen, who is #1 at 4.3 million.
The other possibility is an SEC program (Auburn) coming calling with $7 million. But that comes with a lot of scrutiny and the potential to be fired after a bad year. Ask Les Miles. Or Sumlin.
And what about his kids? How old are they now?
As far as Claeys goes, I don't see him wanting to try being a head Coach again. CML gave him a job when he had none, so I hope there is a bit of loyalty there. Agree on doing the best you can for all the assistants, including him.
I'd rather pay Leach $5m or 6m a year than just about any other coach we reasonably could get for $3.5 or 4m a year. Barring a complete disaster the rest of this year, he has shown definitively that he can win a lot of games in Pullman, which very few coaches could do. Overpaying by a couple million bucks to have a very high likelihood of success is a no-brainer compared to rolling the dice with just about anyone else. Guys like Todd Graham, RichRod, Mora, and various others couldn't even win in much better situations. There's something special here.
Some felt that the past few years were primarily a result of Falk (I disagree) and Grinch. This year has made apparent that Leach can reload from available outlets, and it's only going to get easier for him to do so as he continues to succeed.
This is just a feeling, but I think this year may show a lot of other programs that Leach really has what it takes. When it looked like he was going to get hired at Tennessee, a lot of people attacked that putative move by Tennessee on the grounds that, e.g., he hasn't won a conference championship. I think big programs are going to realize that his quirks are overblown and that winning 8 or 9 games (or more, if he can do it this year) with a bunch of 3-star players in poorly situated programs, as he has done at Texas Tech and here, is worth a lot, and that he would have more upside in a better situation. I also believe Leach, at some level, has to wonder what he could do in a better situation for recruiting and retaining his staff. I don't know if he cares about criticism, but it has to be weird to read critiques for, e.g., not winning a conference title when the degree of success he's had with lesser talent has been flat-out amazing. He has to think he could win conference titles, maybe even a natty, with 4- and 5-star players.
That said, I don't think giving him any more money beyond last year's raise and extension is critical right now. Schulz, widely (and perhaps even appropriately) criticized for negotiating against himself to give Leach big money after it became apparent other programs weren't coming last fall, wound up making a very good move.
I think it could make sense to give more money to the assistant coaching pool to try to keep guys like Spurrier and Claeys around. In any case, we still have half the season to go here, guys. Odds are that it's going to be a merely good or very good season instead of a ridiculously good one, which, despite being amazing in view of the circumstances and predictions for this year's squad, will probably quell some of the concern about him getting poached.