So today I am introducing to all of you a system I created called the college coach grading system, CCGS for short. It is essentially a grading system using an algebraic formula I devised to a grade a college coaches performance (final rankings, total wins, bowl bids, bowl wins, prestigious bowl wins, etc.) versus the talent he has (acquired talent from previous coaching regime, talent he himself has recruited).

The most important thing to remember is that it is a final grade of that season. It is a grading system not a prognostication system. However you can use the numbers to make some educated guesses on your team’s future.
The formula is called TIRTCO (Talent Input Relative To Coaching Output). The talent portion of the equation is the last 4 recruiting class’s average vs the final rankings and bonus points for achievements. Not going to give the exact formula because I am actually going to start my own website. You never know ESPN, Rivals, and 247 might be lurking this post right now.

The theory is that if you get the #1 recruiting classes consistently than you should be winning NC’s if you are even an average to above average coach. A coach getting consistently classes in the 50’s and finishing in the top 25 is doubling his output. There is another grade called ORCA (Overall Recruiting & Coaching Ability). The ORCA grade takes the TIRTCO score and also puts more emphasis on the recruiting prowess of the coach. Think of the ORCA grade as a CEO type of grade.

I recognize there are flaws and outliers to this system (injuries, transfers, sanctions, etc.) but I still think it paints a solid picture.

The TIRTCO score gives you a number grade that gives you a conclusion statement.

The TIRTCO score scale.
0.249 - 0.001 = Terrible
0.499 - 0.250 = Bad
0.999 - 0.500 = Below Average
1 = “The Standard”
1.001 – 1.499 = Average
1.500 – 1.999 = Above Average
2.000 – 2.499 = Good
2.500 – 2.999 = Great
3.000+ = Elite

The ORCA (Overall Recruiting & Coaching Ability) rankings aka the “CEO” grade which favors recruiting 60% to 40% coaching using the TIRTCO score and recruit rankings.

01 – UA, Saban 145.14
02 – LSU, Orgeron 139.24
03 - UF, Mullen 132.85
04 – A&M, Fisher 131.37
05 – MSU, Moorhead 121.75
06 – UK, Stoops 113.58
07 – UGA, Smart 111.96
08 – MIZ, Odom 107.73
09 – AU, Malzahn 105.94
10 – UT, Pruitt 101.28
11 – USC, Muschamp 094.63
12 – OM, Luke 094.06
13 - VAN, Mason 093.54
14 – ARK, Morris 085.29

It's interesting because Stoops had an Elite year but I wonder how often he can replicate the success?

Other interesting pieces: Mullen finishes top three in both.

Kirby is pretty much a middle of the pack HC, but again: It will be very interesting to see how he does next year.

Surprised no one has come for Stoops, a bigger program. Miami could have had a steal.

It will just turn into a troll thread.

Especially if you don’t tease at how the calcs work.

Currently working on ACC grades.

Thanks bro

The ORCA (Overall Recruiting & Coaching Ability) rankings aka the “CEO” grade which favors recruiting 60% to 40% coaching using the TIRTCO score and recruit rankings.

2018 ACC ORCA Grade Rankings

01 – CLEM, Swinney 149.19
02 – FSU, Taggart 109.25
03 – PITT, Narduzzi 105.25
04 – NC ST, Doeren 105.00
05 – MIA, Richt 097.75
06 – DUKE, Cutcliffe 096.25
07 – GT, Johnson 093.50
08 - SYR, Babers 089.25
09 – UNC, Fedora 087.75
10 – UVA, Mendenhall 087.50
11 – WF, Clawson 085.00
12 – VT, Fuente 084.75
13 – LSVL, Petrino 081.25
14 – BC, Addazio 076.00

quote:

---

14 – FSU, Taggart 0.142 Terrible

---

Basically confirms everything we’ve said about Taggert.

Great recruiter, terrible coach. Unless he hires some really good assistants, he’s going to flame out in another year or 2.

2018 BIG 12 CCGS TIRTCO Grade Rankings

01 – OU, Riley 4.188 Elite
02 – WV, Holgorsen 2.210 Good
03 – UT, Herman 1.785 Above Average
04 – ISU, Campbell 1.592 Above Average
05 – OK. ST, Gundy 0.946 Below Average
06 – BU, Rhule 0.859 Below Average
07 – KSU, Snyder 0.812 Below Average
08 – TCU, Patterson 0.734 Below Average
09 – KU, Beaty 0.706 Below Average
10 – TT, Kingsbury 0.636 Below Average