Interesting facts about winning percentages

[MJMGator]

That is not accurate. He posted a set of facts -- winning percentages, arguably the most important facts -- for several coaches and stated that those facts "speak for themselves." Other posters then presented additional facts that deuce didn't like to which he responded by calling their facts “excuses,” “assumptions” and “claims” based on their “feelings.” He then reasserted that he had presented the only facts that mattered and that they “speak for themselves.” It’s as if he was comparing two rookie racecar drivers that had just run a qualifying lap on a racetrack in the same exact time and concluded the two drivers were equal. Then another person stated that one driver was in a Ferrari and the other was in a Miata. Deuce’s response was basically, “they ran it in the same exact time, the facts speak for themselves.” So I decided to look up some additional facts on coaches’ records their first three seasons as a head coach and the records of the teams they inherited in the three seasons before they took over. I looked at the longest tenured coaches in the SEC, some former members of our coaching staff, and one knucklehead that we all love to make fun of. Here is what I found: % Improvement (coaches first 3 compared to 3 years prior), Coach, School, % 3 years prior, % first 3 years 46% Bob Stoops, Oklahoma, 35%, 82% 32% Urban Meyer, Bowling Green/Utah, 45%, 77% 29% Steve Spurrier, Duke, 30%, 59% 20% Nick Saban, Michigan State, 32%, 53% 17% Les Miles, Oklahoma State, 39%, 57% 15% Dan Mullen, Mississippi State, 41%, 55% 11% Mark Richt, Georgia, 69%, 80% 3% Charlie Weis, Notre Dame, 57%, 59% -9% Ron Zook, Florida, 67%, 59% -9% Lame Kitten, Tennessee/Southern Cal, 75%, 66% -12% Gary Pinkel, Toledo, 64%, 52% -25% Will Muschamp, Florida, 83%, 58% (Note that for Kitten and Meyer, who were at multiple places during their first 3 years, I took weighted averages of the previous 3 years at both schools. Also the percent improvement might look a point off because of rounding) So looking at this list, the first 5 guys won national championships and most of the guys at the bottom of the list have been fired and taken lesser positions. The exception is Pinkel who has one conference title in 23 years as a head coach (Toledo in ’95) and whose most impressive post-season win is the cotton bowl. Based on these facts I think it is useful to look at the program a coach has taken over and the level of success in the years preceding his tenure. I do not think it is “balanced” to refer to this as “excuses,” “assumptions” or “claims” based on “feelings.”

Ain't no sunshine in those facts. ;)

 

[deuce]

That is not accurate. He posted a set of facts -- winning percentages, arguably the most important facts -- for several coaches and stated that those facts "speak for themselves." Other posters then presented additional facts that deuce didn't like to which he responded by calling their facts “excuses,” “assumptions” and “claims” based on their “feelings.” He then reasserted that he had presented the only facts that mattered and that they “speak for themselves.”

It’s as if he was comparing two rookie racecar drivers that had just run a qualifying lap on a racetrack in the same exact time and concluded the two drivers were equal. Then another person stated that one driver was in a Ferrari and the other was in a Miata. Deuce’s response was basically, “they ran it in the same exact time, the facts speak for themselves.”

So I decided to look up some additional facts on coaches’ records their first three seasons as a head coach and the records of the teams they inherited in the three seasons before they took over. I looked at the longest tenured coaches in the SEC, some former members of our coaching staff, and one knucklehead that we all love to make fun of.

Here is what I found:
% Improvement (coaches first 3 compared to 3 years prior), Coach, School, % 3 years prior, % first 3 years
46% Bob Stoops, Oklahoma, 35%, 82%
32% Urban Meyer, Bowling Green/Utah, 45%, 77%
29% Steve Spurrier, Duke, 30%, 59%
20% Nick Saban, Michigan State, 32%, 53%
17% Les Miles, Oklahoma State, 39%, 57%
15% Dan Mullen, Mississippi State, 41%, 55%
11% Mark Richt, Georgia, 69%, 80%
3% Charlie Weis, Notre Dame, 57%, 59%
-9% Ron Zook, Florida, 67%, 59%
-9% Lame Kitten, Tennessee/Southern Cal, 75%, 66%
-12% Gary Pinkel, Toledo, 64%, 52%
-25% Will Muschamp, Florida, 83%, 58%

(Note that for Kitten and Meyer, who were at multiple places during their first 3 years, I took weighted averages of the previous 3 years at both schools. Also the percent improvement might look a point off because of rounding)

So looking at this list, the first 5 guys won national championships and most of the guys at the bottom of the list have been fired and taken lesser positions. The exception is Pinkel who has one conference title in 23 years as a head coach (Toledo in ’95) and whose most impressive post-season win is the cotton bowl.

Based on these facts I think it is useful to look at the program a coach has taken over and the level of success in the years preceding his tenure. I do not think it is “balanced” to refer to this as “excuses,” “assumptions” or “claims” based on “feelings.”

You sound Butt Hurt!

tada

 

[Bernardo de la Paz]

You sound Butt Hurt! tada

I am definitely not happy with the way last season went. Here I'm just trying to help some people see what may be obvious to some others. Does this help you understand why it matters what program a coach took over when evaluating his record?

 

[GatorJ]

No it doesn't. These blind supporters are like broken records.

 

[deuce]

I am definitely not happy with the way last season went. Here I'm just trying to help some people see what may be obvious to some others. Does this help you understand why it matters what program a coach took over when evaluating his record?

You tried to change the scope of the topic. I don't care what program, on what planet or what day of the week. It's simple, 4 well know coaches during the first three years at their first major job. No and's, no but's and certainly no if's.
Just because the hard facts don't fit your agenda doesn't give you the right to change the base line.
I never drew a conclusion, you did. That's obvious from reading the thread. You can't refute the well know facts so you just try to change the parameters of the topic.

Here's some more interesting facts to consider:

In 199 games as a College Head Coach, Bob Stoops has won 80%
In 228 games, Nick Saban has won 75%
In 171 games, Richt has won 74%
In 300 games, SOS has won 73%
In 278 games, Pinkle has won 64%
In 89 games, Butch Jones has won 62%
In 38 games, Muschamp has won 58%

That looks like Bob Stoops is the best coach based on winning percentage but I wouldn't take him over SOS or Saban. And Richt has a better percentage than SOS, how can that be.

 

[deuce]

No it doesn't. These blind supporters are like broken records.

I never drew a conclusion, you did.

The Blind supporters or no worse than the Blind Haters who call themselves Gator Fans.

At least the Supporters want the team to win unlike the haters who are consumed with proving themselves right by the team failing.

If you want to hear a broken record, I would suggest you read some of law98's post.

 

[GatorJ]

In 199 games as a College Head Coach, Bob Stoops has won 80%
In 228 games, Nick Saban has won 75%
In 171 games, Richt has won 74%
In 300 games, SOS has won 73%
In 278 games, Pinkle has won 64%
In 89 games, Butch Jones has won 62%
In 38 games, Muschamp has won 58%

That looks like Bob Stoops is the best coach based on winning percentage but I wouldn't take him over SOS or Saban. And Richt has a better percentage than SOS, how can that be.

Because SOS had his first couple years at Duke which had no history of winning and made them winners. Then he went to South Carolina which had no history as winners either and made them winners. So the first couple years at each team was spent creating the programs and bringing them up to par before he made them elite. Richt dropped into an established winning program. Similiar to Muschamp. Except our Gators were much more relevant and elite than the dwags. And he still shows a 74% winning percentage and Muschamp is at 58%.

 

[GatorJ]

And btw, South Carolina was on probation for Spurrier's first 3 years.

 

[Bernardo de la Paz]

You tried to change the scope of the topic. I don't care what program, on what planet or what day of the week. It's simple, 4 well know coaches during the first three years at their first major job. No and's, no but's and certainly no if's. Just because the hard facts don't fit your agenda doesn't give you the right to change the base line. I never drew a conclusion, you did. That's obvious from reading the thread. You can't refute the well know facts so you just try to change the parameters of the topic. Here's some more interesting facts to consider: In 199 games as a College Head Coach, Bob Stoops has won 80% In 228 games, Nick Saban has won 75% In 171 games, Richt has won 74% In 300 games, SOS has won 73% In 278 games, Pinkle has won 64% In 89 games, Butch Jones has won 62% In 38 games, Muschamp has won 58% That looks like Bob Stoops is the best coach based on winning percentage but I wouldn't take him over SOS or Saban. And Richt has a better percentage than SOS, how can that be.

So apparently the answer is no. It didn't help you see.

 

[MJMGator]

You tried to change the scope of the topic. I don't care what program, on what planet or what day of the week. It's simple, 4 well know coaches during the first three years at their first major job. No and's, no but's and certainly no if's. Just because the hard facts don't fit your agenda doesn't give you the right to change the base line. I never drew a conclusion, you did. That's obvious from reading the thread. You can't refute the well know facts so you just try to change the parameters of the topic. Here's some more interesting facts to consider: In 199 games as a College Head Coach, Bob Stoops has won 80% In 228 games, Nick Saban has won 75% In 171 games, Richt has won 74% In 300 games, SOS has won 73% In 278 games, Pinkle has won 64% In 89 games, Butch Jones has won 62% In 38 games, Muschamp has won 58% That looks like Bob Stoops is the best coach based on winning percentage but I wouldn't take him over SOS or Saban. And Richt has a better percentage than SOS, how can that be.

Maybe because Stoops' only gig has been at a top program? Sorta like Mushchamp, huh? Saban and SOS had to rebuild at least one lower tier program each. Maybe we should expect more Stoops-like results from WM since he started out with a top program, as well? Nah, that wouldn't fit your "facts" would it?

 

[Gator Fever]

You can't compare coach's overall winning % when one was in a lower tier program and one wasn't or one coach was in that lower tier program for more years.

 

[GatorJ]

No it doesn't. These blind supporters are like broken records.

 

[deuce]

You tried to change the scope of the topic. I don't care what program, on what planet or what day of the week. It's simple, 4 well know coaches during the first three years at their first major job. No and's, no but's and certainly no if's. Just because the hard facts don't fit your agenda doesn't give you the right to change the base line. I never drew a conclusion, you did. That's obvious from reading the thread. You can't refute the well know facts so you just try to change the parameters of the topic. Here's some more interesting facts to consider: In 199 games as a College Head Coach, Bob Stoops has won 80% In 228 games, Nick Saban has won 75% In 171 games, Richt has won 74% In 300 games, SOS has won 73% In 278 games, Pinkle has won 64% In 89 games, Butch Jones has won 62% In 38 games, Muschamp has won 58% That looks like Bob Stoops is the best coach based on winning percentage but I wouldn't take him over SOS or Saban. And Richt has a better percentage than SOS, how can that be.

Maybe because Stoops' only gig has been at a top program? Sorta like Mushchamp, huh? Saban and SOS had to rebuild at least one lower tier program each. Maybe we should expect more Stoops-like results from WM since he started out with a top program, as well? Nah, that wouldn't fit your "facts" would it?

Sorry but I didn't make up the facts. If you don't believe the facts, look them up yourself. Naw, you're too lazy to do that, just keep popping off like you know something.

 

[deuce]

You tried to change the scope of the topic. I don't care what program, on what planet or what day of the week. It's simple, 4 well know coaches during the first three years at their first major job. No and's, no but's and certainly no if's. Just because the hard facts don't fit your agenda doesn't give you the right to change the base line. I never drew a conclusion, you did. That's obvious from reading the thread. You can't refute the well know facts so you just try to change the parameters of the topic. Here's some more interesting facts to consider: In 199 games as a College Head Coach, Bob Stoops has won 80% In 228 games, Nick Saban has won 75% In 171 games, Richt has won 74% In 300 games, SOS has won 73% In 278 games, Pinkle has won 64% In 89 games, Butch Jones has won 62% In 38 games, Muschamp has won 58% That looks like Bob Stoops is the best coach based on winning percentage but I wouldn't take him over SOS or Saban. And Richt has a better percentage than SOS, how can that be.

So apparently the answer is no. It didn't help you see.

That's correct, people who are blind can't help others to see.

 

[deuce]

You can't compare coach's overall winning % when one was in a lower tier program and one wasn't or one coach was in that lower tier program for more years.

I'm sorry, why not?

If you want to "weigh" the percentages, what formula would you recommend to make the equation more balanced?

Almost every successful coach worked his way up from a "lower tier" program and their records there got them the "higher tier" job.

Almost is the key word here.

 

[MJMGator]

You tried to change the scope of the topic. I don't care what program, on what planet or what day of the week. It's simple, 4 well know coaches during the first three years at their first major job. No and's, no but's and certainly no if's. Just because the hard facts don't fit your agenda doesn't give you the right to change the base line. I never drew a conclusion, you did. That's obvious from reading the thread. You can't refute the well know facts so you just try to change the parameters of the topic. Here's some more interesting facts to consider: In 199 games as a College Head Coach, Bob Stoops has won 80% In 228 games, Nick Saban has won 75% In 171 games, Richt has won 74% In 300 games, SOS has won 73% In 278 games, Pinkle has won 64% In 89 games, Butch Jones has won 62% In 38 games, Muschamp has won 58% That looks like Bob Stoops is the best coach based on winning percentage but I wouldn't take him over SOS or Saban. And Richt has a better percentage than SOS, how can that be.

Maybe because Stoops' only gig has been at a top program? Sorta like Mushchamp, huh? Saban and SOS had to rebuild at least one lower tier program each. Maybe we should expect more Stoops-like results from WM since he started out with a top program, as well? Nah, that wouldn't fit your "facts" would it?

Here's a fact i know...WM has led our team to depths we haven't seen since 1979. Come up with something to dispute that fact and maybe everyone will quit "popping off" to your silly thread. :rolleyes:

 

[MJMGator]

You can't compare coach's overall winning % when one was in a lower tier program and one wasn't or one coach was in that lower tier program for more years.

Deuce can and thats a fact. ;)

 

[Bernardo de la Paz]

You can't compare coach's overall winning % when one was in a lower tier program and one wasn't or one coach was in that lower tier program for more years.

Don't you know that only deuces' facts count?

 

[EuroGator]

Thanks for your thoughtful post Bernie. I was having trouble posting (the cookies thing from the note at the top of the page) so I couldn't reply yesterday. I am seeing things a little clearer now - in part because of your post.

That is not accurate. He posted a set of facts -- winning percentages, arguably the most important facts -- for several coaches and stated that those facts "speak for themselves." Other posters then presented additional facts that deuce didn't like to which he responded by calling their facts “excuses,” “assumptions” and “claims” based on their “feelings.” He then reasserted that he had presented the only facts that mattered and that they “speak for themselves.”

I think what I said was accurate:

I'll be his Huckleberry. Above is his first post in it's entirety. Many of you seem outraged that he posted this, perhaps because you're assuming that he's trying to say that Muschamp's quality as a coach are on par with Saban, Spurrier and Donovan. I read back through the thread and I can't find where he implied this or made that assertion.

I believe people were assuming that Deuce saw WM on par with those proven coaches ...and he didn't make that assertion - especially in his first post. However, what I saw in your post, and since then in reading the preceding and subsequent posts, causes me to see how Deuce is refusing to accept a context for the statistics he furnished. When others point out the differences in situations, he said things like, "No and's, no but's and certainly no if's." I disagree with that stance as I think the circumstances are really important. I didn't see this angle when I replied, though it was there - and it's even stronger / more clear now. My error was in my assumption that all of the "outrage" was in response to his initial post and an assumption of implication that WM IS a coach on similar level with Saban, Spurrier, and Donovan. I think much of the blowback in this thread came as he refused acknowledge the context those stats were in. That's what I get for assuming. ;-)

Enough analyzing what happened in previous posts...

In fact, I would say to everyone (Deuce included) - context and understanding the circumstances is exactly what many point to in hopes that WM can recover from last year and go on to be a successful head coach at UF. I want to make one thing perfectly clear - I am not satisfied with 4-8. In fact, I'm not satisfied with 8-4. I was thinking about starting a poll post to ask what people's losing threshold is - the record that is the least winning that is acceptable, understanding the reality of ebbs and flows in a program. 8-4 might be my threshold. I think that we should be one of the best 2 or 3 teams in the SEC each year, we should be always in the mix for the SEC Championship, and in the hunt for the National Title multiple times a decade.

However, considering that Foley retained WM, believing that Foley is one of the (if not THE) best AD's in the country, seeing the perfect 2013 storm of injuries, coaching instability, etc., and seeing that WM cited the need for offensive improvement and made moves to address them, I look and hope for success. I look at the context of the situation and let that be the lens through which I see the facts. The facts don't change, but I understand them better by seeing them in their context.

Deuce, I think you need to do the same with your record comparison. What you put together is informative and we can hope that WM shows marked improvement and joins the ranks of proven, winning coaches. We can keep high expectations while understanding the reality that could cause them to be unmet.

I hope this helps all of us, er... um... you blind folks.

 

[GatorJ]

That's a great post Euro.