Started By
Message
re: Most overrated football coach in the SEC
Posted on 4/23/24 at 9:39 am to SidewalkTiger
Posted on 4/23/24 at 9:39 am to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Meanwhile, in the real world, Notre Dame has only had one coach for 3 years or less since the 1960's.
Why do you keep lying?
The only one being dishonest is you trying to bring up the 1960's as if it's relevant and as if the "one" coach wasn't among the group leading up to BK.
4 coaches in the time period of 2001-2010, so 3 coaching changes in a 10 year period, and that's not even counting the Leary scandal.
But sure, the coach in 1960 is really relevant to things leading up to BK, not the 10 years prior to his arrival. Sleazy as always.
quote:
Winning percentage is a "filtered stat?"
He has the second highest winning percentage in the conference, not sure how that "removes" losses.
Fitlers:
Conference only
Active Coaches only
How dumb is it?
If Texas, Alabama and Oklahoma all win their first conference game next year, or win a decent amount early in the season, BK would immediately drop to #5 on the list.
Because it's a stupid stat that doesn't say much of anything about how good a coach is.
You're just looking for ways to gloss over the fact he has 7 losses in 2 years, and the only thing you can do at this point is spam that stupid stat.
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 9:48 am
2
Posted on 4/23/24 at 9:49 am to 3down10
So you're counting an interim bowl game coach and a guy who never coached a game as actual Notre Dame head coaches?
Both Venables and Sarkisian would still fall below Kelly.
But I wouldn't apply the stat to only one game, at minimum a coach needs a year to have a sample size large enough.
Not really, 7 losses in 2 seasons isn't that bad considering they'd went .500 the two seasons prior.
quote:
Fitlers:
Conference only
Active Coaches only
How dumb is it?
If Texas, Alabama and Oklahoma all win their first conference game next year, or win a decent amount early in the season, BK would immediately drop to #5 on the list.
Because it's a stupid stat that doesn't say much of anything about how good a coach is.
Both Venables and Sarkisian would still fall below Kelly.
But I wouldn't apply the stat to only one game, at minimum a coach needs a year to have a sample size large enough.
quote:
You're just looking for ways to gloss over the fact he has 7 losses in 2 years, and the only thing you can do at this point is spam that stupid stat.
Not really, 7 losses in 2 seasons isn't that bad considering they'd went .500 the two seasons prior.
Posted on 4/23/24 at 9:52 am to 3down10
quote:
The only one being dishonest is you trying to bring up the 1960's as if it's relevant and as if the "one" coach wasn't among the group leading up to BK.
4 coaches in the time period of 2001-2010, so 3 coaching changes in a 10 year period, and that's not even counting the Leary scandal.
But sure, the coach in 1960 is really relevant to things leading up to BK, not the 10 years prior to his arrival. Sleazy as always
Okay, let's try this another way as you're still getting confused.
Notre Dame has not stacked elite classes in a LONG TIME!
When was the last time they had 3 consecutive elite recruiting classes?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News