JacketFromUGA
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,897
Which college football coaches consistently produce overachievers or underachievers? [Bill Connelly]
- Thread starter JacketFromUGA
- Start date
Coloradojacket
Banned
- Messages
- 2,034
Well, just to roll with this, I think Bill Schneider at Kansas St.
MWBATL
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 6,589
Seriously? KS can recruit kids who can't graduate form HS and have criminal records (OK, maybe not criminal, but you get my point). With absolutely no recruiting restrictions why shouldn't you be able to produce some decent results?
a5ehren
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 484
You ever been to Manhattan, KS?
It's...not great, and I've had 3 cousins that played there.
- Messages
- 5,139
I have a little bit of an issue with the methodology here. Coaches are measured vs. the expectations of others, thus Saban is way down on the list. That's a bit like saying Tiger and Jack were merely OK golfers because they won the majors at a rate that was expected of them whereas Brooks Koepka is an exceptional overachiever because no one foresaw him winning 2 US Opens.
To me, the hallmark of a great coach is someone who "moves the needle" and changes the expectations and perceptions of a program. Examples - Saban took an already great FB program and is performing at a level perhaps unprecedented even for Bama. Snyder - no one had even heard of KS before he arrived. Swinney - took a good program and made it an annual NC contender. Using this methodology, if he has a "down" year (say 9 wins which used to be a very good Clemson season)vs. the norm that he has created, he will be dinged somewhat in this system if I understand it correctly. Cutcliffe is another guy (no matter how you feel about him or Duke) who has changed the culture and outside perceptions/expectations of a program. We now have GT fans who anticipate this game with apprehension. How often has that happened in our lifetime?
To me, the hallmark of a great coach is someone who "moves the needle" and changes the expectations and perceptions of a program. Examples - Saban took an already great FB program and is performing at a level perhaps unprecedented even for Bama. Snyder - no one had even heard of KS before he arrived. Swinney - took a good program and made it an annual NC contender. Using this methodology, if he has a "down" year (say 9 wins which used to be a very good Clemson season)vs. the norm that he has created, he will be dinged somewhat in this system if I understand it correctly. Cutcliffe is another guy (no matter how you feel about him or Duke) who has changed the culture and outside perceptions/expectations of a program. We now have GT fans who anticipate this game with apprehension. How often has that happened in our lifetime?
knoxjacket
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 855
It’s real strange how our fans think academics are the only impediment to recruiting.
Even with limited majors we should (and generally do) outrecruit places like Kansas State ever year.
JacketFromUGA
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,897
There’s a list of all the coaches and where they fall.
Bill Snyder is #1. You should click and read the article it’s a good one
Bill Snyder is #1. You should click and read the article it’s a good one
YJMD
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,628
From the article,
'It is intended to say "Given your success rates, big plays, field position components, turnovers, etc., you could have expected to win this game X% of the time." It has nothing to do with pre-game projections or opponent adjustments.'
It's hard to know exactly what that means. As I read it, it makes me think this is a purely calculated stat and really measures how good of a game day coach someone is. It doesn't refer to recruiting rankings, strength of schedule, etc. Its game win prediction is based on how you perform on average in the past from the same spot. Since it doesn't factor in strength of opponent, it would be less accurate over small data sets but a better measure with large amount of data. In a small set, it also seems quite susceptible to random variation.
So.... We need to look at it over a span of years. I'm not sure how much system matters here. It might be that the TO is better at fending off comebacks due to limited possessions so those coaches are more able to play keep away when they gain an unexpected advantage. And that would more than offset any disadvantage in trying to come from behind to win games you are unexpectedly in the hole in. Or it could be some guys are just better winners, e.g. through coaching adjustments or player motivation.
'It is intended to say "Given your success rates, big plays, field position components, turnovers, etc., you could have expected to win this game X% of the time." It has nothing to do with pre-game projections or opponent adjustments.'
It's hard to know exactly what that means. As I read it, it makes me think this is a purely calculated stat and really measures how good of a game day coach someone is. It doesn't refer to recruiting rankings, strength of schedule, etc. Its game win prediction is based on how you perform on average in the past from the same spot. Since it doesn't factor in strength of opponent, it would be less accurate over small data sets but a better measure with large amount of data. In a small set, it also seems quite susceptible to random variation.
So.... We need to look at it over a span of years. I'm not sure how much system matters here. It might be that the TO is better at fending off comebacks due to limited possessions so those coaches are more able to play keep away when they gain an unexpected advantage. And that would more than offset any disadvantage in trying to come from behind to win games you are unexpectedly in the hole in. Or it could be some guys are just better winners, e.g. through coaching adjustments or player motivation.
AE 87
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 13,030
This. IIuc, he uses his advanced stats to calculate likelihood of winning based how teams have done with comparable stats. These coaches are outperforming statistical expectations.
If Alabama dominates, then the bar would be set high for them not to be expected to win. IIuc.
DvilleJacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,685
They get a ton of Juco guys that flunked out of other p5 programs too.
Techster
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 18,393
This brings up and interesting question: Has Coach Ken surpassed his mentor CPJ? To go a little beyond that, has Jeff Monken surpassed them both? Army is now on a 2 game roll against Navy. After a 14 game win streak against Army (part of the streak can be attributed to CPJ), Coach Ken has lost the last 2 against Monken. Monken seems to have Army on a roll after taking 2 years to rebuild the Black Knights.
Obviously, all three coaches are VERY good coaches.
TheSilasSonRising
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 3,729
I fear we are approaching a program paradigm where beating a navy, wfu, uva, usf, gsu is going to be considered “overachieving”.
MikeJackets1967
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 14,844
- Location
- Lovely Ducktown,Tennessee
I think Navy is slipping back to the level they were 20 years ago. Army has zoomed past the Navy and Air Force football programs. I think Navy will go 6-6 this season and could have a losing season in 2019.
stech81
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 8,962
- Location
- Woodstock Georgia
First no they do not know CPJ offense better than he knows it. Are they more willing to change things in the offense, yes. But does anyone know who calls the offensive plays for Navy and Army ? Are they a head coach who let's the coordinators and assistant coaches run the game ?
Heisman's Ghost
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,945
- Location
- Albany Georgia
I don't think this means that much. To me, this should be about the universities and how easy or hard it is to get top talent. UNC is a classic underachiever. Tarheels get plenty of talent and much of it is squandered. UGA is an underachiever of a different sort they consistently haul in top 10 classes and have been doings so for as long as I can remember. But like the "Head Ball Coach" once said: "Georgia gets plenty of talent... (dramatic pause to insert the needle) I can't imagine what happens to them" Some teams have been underachieving for so long it is second nature such as Miami, FSU, Texas, Notre Dame and the like. Some teams could bring in the second coming of Knute Rockne and it would not matter such as Iowa State, Tulane, Rice.
I see Tech as an overachiever and has been for quite a while. One top 20 recruiting class since these things became a national obsession circa 2000. If UGA had our classes they would be looking up at Mississippi State and possibly Vanderbilt and Kentucky. Basically our coaches have been getting just about all that could be squeezed out of pretty limited talent in most years. The last time I can remember a Tech team that honestly underachieved relative to its talent level may have been one of Chan's teams. Others may differ on that. Other teams that I see overachieving relative to their talent are Duke (now that Coach Cut is there), Army, Navy, perhaps Pitt, Wisconsin gets more out of their players year after year than just about anyone, and to some degree (this is just my opinion so don't get upset) Virginia Tech has historically done well relative to talent at times.