Yep. Just because a school might have more money, better facilities, better weather, better recruiting opportunities, etc. than a helmet, does not necessarily make that school a helmet.
Some schools dwarf Alabama in terms of recruiting access, fan base, or money (Florida, aTm, UGA etc), but it doesn't make them better jobs by any stretch. Decades and decades of consistent success defines a helmet school.
True.... but that wasn't the question. The question was... what does being a helmet school benefit a coach or a potential coach? This question came about because of Mdot's original assertion that FSU is a better job than the A&M job.
In terms of which is the better job for a potential coach... A&M has a bigger more impressive stadium (recruiting), has better facilities (recruiting), is situated in at least as fertile a recruiting ground, and is apparently willing to pay more to both head coaches and assistant coaches. There are other potential advantages as well, but I'll stick to the big obvious ones.
Florida State offers "helmet status" (arguable, but I'll concede the point here).
If I'm a coach considering the two... the choices are very comparable at least, if not heavily in A&M's favor when looking at what I would care about and what would help me succeed from a coaching perspective.
Now.... obviously helmet status means something when it comes to schools like Ohio State... or Alabama... or Texas. Because those schools offer everything that A&M does PLUS helmet status. FSU doesn't (this of course then begs the question... is FSU really a helmet school, but that's a discussion for a different thread).
There is a reason Jimbo Fisher is considering leaving the job for A&M. If it was a simple as y'all make it seem, he would've squashed rumors about A&M days ago.
