Big picture & neutral Jimmy Lake evaluation thread.
I have a formula (#CoachEvaluation) that grades FBS head coaches.
I've yet to deep test for predictive value. Anecdotally it works, but I have a lot of work to do before I'd feel really good using it in front of an AD.
Conceptually, it compares the performance of a team in a HC's tenure w/ the that of the team in the years prior to the HC's hire. Using advanced metrics, with the goal being to be fair to both coaches taking over strong
2/25
programs (to avoid the "nowhere to go but down" dynamic) and coaches taking over bad programs. It knows that reasonable expectations are drastically different, both across teams in any given moment, and within the same program over different eras.
Are there potential
3/25
underlying factors beyond the on-field product (even the metrics on-field)? Absolutely. I think of the SB Nation article "The mess that Jimbo left".
But my position is that those issues are very difficult to measure and tend to be formulated in support of an
It should be noted that it is a purely ratio calculation, there is no counting element. So Joe Paterno sticking around for 127 years, that does nothing.
It goes w/out saying that responsible interpretation of these numbers needs to consider the length of the tenure.
Year 8 at Toledo is when UW could've hired him instead of Neuheisel. We know Gary Pinkel was great at Missouri, but he was also very solid at Toledo.
13/25
This is highly anecdotal, being limited to 1 out of 130 programs, but I am proud of how it's handled UW.
Petersen: stud before, stud during, no further analysis needed
Sarkisian: loved him at UW (the formula's most polarizing opinion), USC obvious an asterisk
14/25
Willingham: average (overhyped) coach at Stanford that was never deserving of the opp at ND, an opp he didn't earn...the firing at ND was a tad aggressive, but wholly vindicated by his job at UW
15/25
Neuheisel: charmed existence (got 3 good jobs, left all 3 in worse shape) never should've been hired b/c CU regressed under his watch ... @cougsgo was right, he was hired b/c Barbara Hedges had a crush on him
Lambright: after 6 years, it was time to move on
16/25
James: obviously a stud, but it also liked him after Y1 & Y2 as well, would've been in support of him even before he won the 1977 Rose Bowl....he had things moving in the right direction from the jump
Owens: looks average b/c he stayed too long, was at 28.2% after year 11
17/25
If the 2021 season ended today, Jimmy Lake's #CoachEvaluation score would be -45%.
Historically, that score would put him in the 18th percentile of all measured HC tenures after year 2.
18/25
What does that mean? What's the historical context for HCs who score in a similar range through their 2nd year? Are there any success stories?
19/25
Since WWII, there are 202 FBS HCs to #CoachEvaluation score between -30% and -60% after their 2nd year (heading into 2020).
As of today, Coach Lake would sit squarely in the middle of this group. This is his peer group as of right now.
20/25
Of these 202
- 24 were gone after year 2 (almost all presumably fired)
- 41 were gone after year 3 (w/ no promotions that I could detect)
- 39 were gone after year 4 (no promotions)
- 38 were gone after year 5 (w/ 2 promotions, Bobby Ross at GT & Ken Hatfield at AF)
21/25
- 36 clawed their way back to finish the stint w/ a positive score (regardless of departure terms)
- 166 finished w/ a negative score
- of those given at least 3 years, average finishing score was -25%
- of those given 4+ years, average finishing score was -18%
22/25
- of those given 4+ years, the average performance in years 3-4 was at 92% the level of inheritance
^ in years 1-2, the performance of this group averaged 57.4% the level of the inheritance
In other words, things got better, but not to the point where they were before
We can poke fun at Texas for a bad stretch from 2013-2017.
In the CFP era, TCU & Oklahoma State posted higher avg SRS ratings, and UT's hypothetical inclusion in the SEC would've actually * lowered * the SEC's avg SRS. LOL.