Serious question: what coach comes into program avg 9 wins/year and...

[WVUDisciples]

...goes .500 in his first four full years, keeps his job, and then turns the program back into a consistent 9-win program again?

I'm sure there is an example out there, but I cannot think of one.

I can think of a ton of examples of guys who never got it done and got fired (RR and Muschump for example) , but not one who was given 5 years to get it done and then maintained it.

Shed some light for me please.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

...goes .500 in his first four full years, keeps his job, and then turns the program back into a consistent 9-win program again?

I'm sure there is an example out there, but I cannot think of one.

I can think of a ton of examples of guys who never got it done and got fired (RR and Muschump for example) , but not one who was given 5 years to get it done and then maintained it.

Shed some light for me please.

Art Briles for one (at least the first 4 year comparison) and he wasn't even transitioning his school from a weak conference to a power conference.

Discombobulated & reeking from desperation for anything negative.

 

[FBG]

Frank Beamer had six poor to average seasons before VT started winning consistently.

David Cutcliffe at Duke had five sub -.500 seasons, and then they went 10-4 and 9-4.

 

[WVUDisciples]

Wrong answer. Please check your stats before giving erroneous answers.

1. Art Briles did not take over a program averaging 9 wins a year. Baylor was in much disrepair for a long time with a very poor recruiting record. Dana inherited a number of future top NFL draft picks too.

2. Art Briles went 10-3 in his fourth full year with the program. I've seen coaches do it in 3 years. Some have made a major difference in 2.

So let's try this again: The question is who has taken over a 9 win program at any ncaa school, gone .500 in their first full four years, and eventually got it turned around?

Art Briles for one (at least the first 4 year comparison) and he wasn't even transitioning his school from a weak conference to a power conference.

Discombobulated & reeking from desperation for anything negative.

 

[WVUDisciples]

Beamer and cutliffe did not take over 9-win programs with a number of future top nfl draft picks. Try again.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Wrong answer. Please check your stats before giving erroneous answers.

1. Art Briles did not take over a program averaging 9 wins a year. Baylor was in much disrepair for a long time with a very poor recruiting record. Dana inherited a number of future top NFL draft picks too.

2. Art Briles went 10-3 in his fourth full year with the program. I've seen coaches do it in 3 years. Some have made a major difference in 2.

So let's try this again: The question is who has taken over a 9 win program at any ncaa school, gone .500 in their first full four years, and eventually got it turned around?

Asking a question with so many caveats is just another sign of desperation. The four year comparison is a good one and the fact the WVU is transitioning from a weak conference to a power conference is more of a critical factor than what our record was in the Big Least.

You are discombobulated and reeking of desperation for anything negative.

 

[Samuel S]

Obviously, you already knew the answer before yo posed the question. Even a broader, "how many have coaches have failed to improve a program by their 5th season and then achieved a high level of success?" query and we all know that such results are extreme exceptions.

To be fair, a main reason it is extraordinarily unusual for it to happen is largely because it is extraordinarily unusual for a coach to be given the opportunity.

To get any meaningful historical information, we need to have a sample of a significant number of coaches who were allowed to continue coaching at the same school for well beyond 5 years despite the lack of improvement for the first 5, and then look at how many made a later improvement and how many didn't.

That would be a lot of work to try to gather such information when it seems highly probable that all it would lead to is the conclusion that the sample size is way too small to mean anything.

Of course, it also means that continuously throwing Beamer's name in to defend Holgorsen is equally worthless. One example from a quarter century ago is insignificant.

 

[Buckaineer]

What coach started their coaching career early in one conference and then moved into a completely different conference--one regarded by the professionals as much more difficult to succeed in--all the while fending off personal attack, numerous staff changes and having to significantly increase depth on the roster to be able to compete in an entirely new conference which plays a different style of ball than in the previous one?

If you leave out all the details then things look very different.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

What coach started their coaching career early in one conference and then moved into a completely different conference--one regarded by the professionals as much more difficult to succeed in--all the while fending off personal attack, numerous staff changes and having to significantly increase depth on the roster to be able to compete in an entirely new conference which plays a different style of ball than in the previous one?

If you leave out all the details then things look very different.

Exactly!!!

 

[WVUDisciples]

How about TCU, MWC weaker than BE?

What coach started their coaching career early in one conference and then moved into a completely different conference--one regarded by the professionals as much more difficult to succeed in--all the while fending off personal attack, numerous staff changes and having to significantly increase depth on the roster to be able to compete in an entirely new conference which plays a different style of ball than in the previous one?

If you leave out all the details then things look very different.

 

[WVUDisciples]

I think there may be an answer out there, I really don't know for sure. But I agree, there are very few programs that avg 9 wins a year that would give a coach five years to succeed, no matter the program. Heck, I can't think of a program that averaged 8 wins a year that gave a guy going .500 five years.

U say I'm giving too many caveats. There are only TWO caveats to my question . Just 2. 9 win program, 4 full years to get back to that level. Just two.

Obviously, you already knew the answer before yo posed the question. Even a broader, "how many have coaches have failed to improve a program by their 5th season and then achieved a high level of success?" query and we all know that such results are extreme exceptions.

To be fair, a main reason it is extraordinarily unusual for it to happen is largely because it is extraordinarily unusual for a coach to be given the opportunity.

To get any meaningful historical information, we need to have a sample of a significant number of coaches who were allowed to continue coaching at the same school for well beyond 5 years despite the lack of improvement for the first 5, and then look at how many made a later improvement and how many didn't.

That would be a lot of work to try to gather such information when it seems highly probable that all it would lead to is the conclusion that the sample size is way too small to mean anything.

Of course, it also means that continuously throwing Beamer's name in to defend Holgorsen is equally worthless. One example from a quarter century ago is insignificant.

 

[bamaEER]

...goes .500 in his first four full years, keeps his job, and then turns the program back into a consistent 9-win program again?

I'm sure there is an example out there, but I cannot think of one.

I can think of a ton of examples of guys who never got it done and got fired (RR and Muschump for example) , but not one who was given 5 years to get it done and then maintained it.

Shed some light for me please.

The transition into a much tougher conference has to be considered here. When you say 'going back to consistent 9 win seasons', we're talking about a whole different level of team than what we had winning 9 in the BE.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

If you leave out all the details then things look very different.

It's hard to make a 15-21 record in conference over a four year period look any different than what it does.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

I think there may be an answer out there, I really don't know for sure. But I agree, there are very few programs that avg 9 wins a year that would give a coach five years to succeed, no matter the program. Heck, I can't think of a program that averaged 8 wins a year that gave a guy going .500 five years.

U say I'm giving too many caveats. There are only TWO caveats to my question . Just 2. 9 win program, 4 full years to get back to that level. Just two.

Wrong - many more implied. College coaches; 12 game seasons; length of tenure; averages; etc., etc., and then you fail to mention factors such as only one losing season out of 5, an Orange bowl win, a Big East Championship, 3 or 4 wins over top 10 teams, and the transition to a new conference to balance out the question. Holgorsen's winning percentage isn't that much worse than Nehlen's winning percentage and Don was here for 20 years - although that doesn't fit the caveats in your troll question.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Holgorsen's winning percentage isn't that much worse than Nehlen's winning percentage

Things I learned on the internet today: a coaching record of 25-25 isn't that much worse than 149–93–4.

 

[WVUDisciples]

Ok, let's try it this way. Let's just look at programs who made a switch to tougher conferences and see what happened.

Maryland Pitt Syracuse - fail, new coaches

TCU Utah - coaches successful at making transition

You telling me our program cannot expect Utah level results? Seriously?

 

[wbgvwbgv]

It's hard to make a 15-21 record in conference over a four year period look any different than what it does.

Not really because you had one bad season with a depleted roster (not of his making) and key injuries. Dana would be 31-20 overall without that one season for a winning percentage over 60%. Higher than Don Nehlen 's winning percentage over 20 years, and some consider him the greatest WVU coach ever.

 

[WVUDisciples]

Navy Houston Memphis - all went to tougher conferences than where they were before, even. Marshall moved to a tougher conference - success

 

[dolemitebmf]

Wrong answer. Please check your stats before giving erroneous answers.

1. Art Briles did not take over a program averaging 9 wins a year. Baylor was in much disrepair for a long time with a very poor recruiting record. Dana inherited a number of future top NFL draft picks too.

2. Art Briles went 10-3 in his fourth full year with the program. I've seen coaches do it in 3 years. Some have made a major difference in 2.

So let's try this again: The question is who has taken over a 9 win program at any ncaa school, gone .500 in their first full four years, and eventually got it turned around?

Owned...

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Not really because you had one bad season with a depleted roster (not of his making) and key injuries. Dana would be 31-20 overall without that one season for a winning percentage over 60%. Higher than Don Nehlen 's winning percentage over 20 years, and some consider him the greatest WVU coach ever.

Which bad season do you want to throw out? [laughing]

31-20 ? Please explain how you get there.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Ok, let's try it this way. Let's just look at programs who made a switch to tougher conferences and see what happened.

Maryland Pitt Syracuse - fail, new coaches

TCU Utah - coaches successful at making transition

You telling me our program cannot expect Utah level results? Seriously?

Pitt's previous 2 head coaches didn't fail and got much better jobs at higher profile programs. Shafer & Edsall both had overall losing records and no major bowl wins. Reeking of desperation for something anything negative - becoming futile.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Which bad season do you want to throw out? [laughing]

31-20 ? Please explain how you get there.

Overall record minus his one and only losing season (2013).

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Navy Houston Memphis - all went to tougher conferences than where they were before, even. Marshall moved to a tougher conference - success

LMAO - Marshall.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Pitt's previous 2 head coaches didn't fail

It all makes sense now.
13-20 record isn't failing? Multiple losses to MAC teams and CUSA teams isn't failing? [laughing]

You are very entertaining.

 

[Samuel S]

He threw out the 3rd of 5 seasons because, of course, it makes sense to throw out the worst one, even when it fell exactly in the middle of his tenure.

Of course, if you throw out the worst, you should also throw out the best (which actually makes more sense because it was both an inherited roster and a schedule dissimilar to any we will play in the future-- and it is of course the future we want to be better since we are stuck with the past as is.)

Excluding high/low we are 21-17 overall. In conference, we are 13-14, with 6 of the wins against ISU and KU. If you aren't satisfied with a 33% wining percentage against the other 7 teams, you just have far too high standards.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Overall record minus his one and only losing season (2013).

First of all, I don't understand why we are throwing out random seasons. Secondly, that was his 3rd year as HC, so if you want to cry about a depleted roster, it doesn't make sense, he doesn't get a free pass. Thirdly, if you take his overall 25-25 record and throw out a 4-8 record, you get 21-17, not 31-20 like you stated.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

It all makes sense now.
13-20 record isn't failing? Multiple losses to MAC teams and CUSA teams isn't failing? [laughing]

You are very entertaining.

They would still be at Pitt if they didn't take higher profile jobs at Wisconsin & Arizona State - more money, better programs, etc. Big Promotions IMO.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

He threw out the 3rd of 5 seasons because, of course, it makes sense to throw out the worst one, even when it fell exactly in the middle of his tenure.

Of course, if you throw out the worst, you should also throw out the best (which actually makes more sense because it was both an inherited roster and a schedule dissimilar to any we will play in the future-- and it is of course the future we want to be better since we are stuck with the past as is.)

Excluding high/low we are 21-17 overall. In conference, we are 13-14, with 6 of the wins against ISU and KU. If you aren't satisfied with a 33% wining percentage against the other 7 teams, you just have far too high standards.

Didn't you get the memo from Lyons earlier this week? LOL.

 

[GoWVU]

Ok, let's try it this way. Let's just look at programs who made a switch to tougher conferences and see what happened.

Maryland Pitt Syracuse - fail, new coaches

TCU Utah - coaches successful at making transition

You telling me our program cannot expect Utah level results? Seriously?

Yet even from your first group labelled "fail", 2 of them have already matched or exceeded our results in their new leagues. Pitt had an 8-win season this season in year 3 since joining the ACC, while last year Maryland went 7-6 in their Big 10 debut. Even Rutgers, who you forgot, had an 8-5 season during their first in the Big 10. Are we now to the point where we're no better than Rutgers or Maryland? It's a fair question to ask based on the results.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Yet even from your first group labelled "fail", 2 of them have already matched or exceeded our results in their new leagues. Pitt had an 8-win season this season in year 3 since joining the ACC, while last year Maryland went 7-6 in their Big 10 debut. Even Rutgers, who you forgot, had an 8-5 season during their first in the Big 10. Are we now to the point where we're no better than Rutgers or Maryland? It's a fair question to ask based on the results.

This has now become just another troll and low information thread on our idiot board - same old same old.

 

[GoWVU]

Wins over top 10 opponents: Bill Stewart 2, Dana Holgorsen 1.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Things I learned on the internet today: a coaching record of 25-25 isn't that much worse than 149–93–4.

His overall record is 35-28 at WVU. Now do the math or maybe California go-go boy can do it for you - he is really good with statistics

 

[WVUDisciples]

O my goodness, don't confuse them with simple math.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Wins over top 10 opponents: Bill Stewart 2, Dana Holgorsen 1.

Wrong - Texas, Baylor, and OSU were all highly ranked when we played and beat them.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Read the memo boys and come back in two years!

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Wrong - Texas, Baylor, and OSU were all highly ranked when we played and beat them.

Texas was #11, Baylor was #4 (the only Top Ten like he cited) and OSU was #11.

 

[NC EnginEER]

Wrong - Texas, Baylor, and OSU were all highly ranked when we played and beat them.

Without looking it up, my memory is that Baylor was the only one of those three in the top 10.

 

[5150]

What coach started their coaching career early in one conference and then moved into a completely different conference--one regarded by the professionals as much more difficult to succeed in--all the while fending off personal attack, numerous staff changes and having to significantly increase depth on the roster to be able to compete in an entirely new conference which plays a different style of ball than in the previous one?

If you leave out all the details then things look very different.

TCU made the transition without a problem. Why does everyone want to make an excuse for Dana? I am not in favor of firing Dana at the moment but the staff changes were in large part his problem and now in year 5 can we stop with the depth issue.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Texas was #11, Baylor was #4 (the only Top Ten like he cited) and OSU was #11.

Since we are dealing with Mo, Larry, and Curly, we will change it from Top 10 to Top 11 - see what a drastic change that made from the original intent.

Read the memo and come back in two years.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Since we are dealing with Mo, Larry, and Curly, we will change it from Top 10 to Top 11 - see what a drastic change that made from the original intent.

I'll be damned. You're good at changing numbers and stats to make them fit your argument. If you're happy with a 15-21 conference record over 4 years, I'm happy for you. I'm starting to think Punisheer is Dana and your are Dana's brother.