Home

coach prestige ratings system...

This is a discussion on coach prestige ratings system... within the EA Sports College Football and NCAA Football forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > EA Sports College Football and NCAA Football
MLB The Show 24 Review: Another Solid Hit for the Series
New Star GP Review: Old-School Arcade Fun
Where Are Our College Basketball Video Game Rumors?
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-27-2011, 04:41 PM   #41
MVP
 
OVR: 36
Join Date: Jun 2009
Blog Entries: 19
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

For OCs and DCs hopefully people can just comment with their opinions on their grades for the coordinators they know and provide evidence and facts to back it up.
__________________
I will always, always be a Jets fan. But trust me it hurts.
RayAllen20 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 05-27-2011, 04:42 PM   #42
MVP
 
volstopfan14's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: Jul 2010
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

Quote:
Originally Posted by theharbinater
yep, which is why i said base it on the hc ratings.

if a guy is the oc for a smaller school, it more likely he's not as good as the bigger school oc/dc. otherwise, the big schools would fire their guy and hire the smaller guys.

with the few exceptions likely being for boise, utah and tcu and the like. and those all have hc's that are fairly highly regarded as well, which show up in the rating system with boise and utah hc's being A- and tcu being B+. (if i were doing that by my opinion of them, it's probably be the exact opposite, with tcu as the A- and the other 2 as B+, but that's why i let the #'s do the talking, because i'm biased.) which means that their oc/dc are going to be rated fairly highly as well.
Well if you are going to do it with a statistical forumula, I think it would likely be best to do it by getting the stats from teams the coach has been a coordinator for. Stuff like where there offense/defense finished in total yards gained or given up. It just seems that the way you are talkking about with a conectiction to the HC has some problems. Like for instance, how will you rate Chrlie Weis? You can't really conect him to Will Muschamp since the two have never worked together before. I just kind of have a feeling that if you try to pair coordinators with head coaches it will get messed up. The time span spent at 1 school by assistants is pretty short. Most assistants have not worked under that HC their entire career. There are some situations like that such as Virginia Tech, but those are the exception, not the rule.
__________________
Tennessee Volunteers
Charlotte Hornets
volstopfan14 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 04:57 PM   #43
MVP
 
Spanky's Arena
 
OVR: 22
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: I'm with Leather, at Plato's Retreat
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

Excellent work.

I would make only one change, and it's something that's obvious and imperative: Ron English of Eastern Michigan is an F- (can we go lower than that?). He's a miserable failure and a disgrace to the profession.
__________________
It's on me. I shook his hand too hard. It was a hard ... kind of a slap-shake.

"What? You can't challenge a scoring play?''
Spanky is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 05:01 PM   #44
Rookie
 
OVR: 2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

Quote:
Originally Posted by volstopfan14
Well if you are going to do it with a statistical forumula, I think it would likely be best to do it by getting the stats from teams the coach has been a coordinator for. Stuff like where there offense/defense finished in total yards gained or given up. It just seems that the way you are talkking about with a conectiction to the HC has some problems. Like for instance, how will you rate Chrlie Weis? You can't really conect him to Will Muschamp since the two have never worked together before. I just kind of have a feeling that if you try to pair coordinators with head coaches it will get messed up. The time span spent at 1 school by assistants is pretty short. Most assistants have not worked under that HC their entire career. There are some situations like that such as Virginia Tech, but those are the exception, not the rule.
i think you are misunderstanding me.

i agree, a formula is way too complicated, for all the reasons you stated.

i'm saying that we rate them based on the prestige of the hc. and the better hc's more often than not have better coords. that's why they were so successful.

for the most part, an oc/dc's prestige will be in line with the hc's prestige. just a couple points lower.

with a few exceptions, of course. i mentioned malzahn, you brought up weiss. both good examples of coords that are close to the same prestige as the hc.

also, for muschamp, since there is no data for the formula, we have to kinda estimate (cause he's not a D- hc). likewise with all new hc's.

he might be the perfect example for what i'm talking about.

last year, if we'd had this system in place, mack brown (who would have been his hc) would have been rated an A (just like this year).

likewise, by what i'm suggesting we do, will muschamp would have been rated a B dc.

so, he gets hired by uf as hc, and his rating as a hc would still be a B.

now, for this year, since we didn't have this last year, we have to estimate what we think his prestige should be. and about a B seems correct to me.

make sense?

if you don't like my idea, that's fine. if you have a suggestion, i'm open.
theharbinater is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 05:33 PM   #45
MVP
 
volstopfan14's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: Jul 2010
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

Quote:
Originally Posted by theharbinater
i think you are misunderstanding me.

i agree, a formula is way too complicated, for all the reasons you stated.

i'm saying that we rate them based on the prestige of the hc. and the better hc's more often than not have better coords. that's why they were so successful.

for the most part, an oc/dc's prestige will be in line with the hc's prestige. just a couple points lower.

with a few exceptions, of course. i mentioned malzahn, you brought up weiss. both good examples of coords that are close to the same prestige as the hc.

also, for muschamp, since there is no data for the formula, we have to kinda estimate (cause he's not a D- hc). likewise with all new hc's.

he might be the perfect example for what i'm talking about.

last year, if we'd had this system in place, mack brown (who would have been his hc) would have been rated an A (just like this year).

likewise, by what i'm suggesting we do, will muschamp would have been rated a B dc.

so, he gets hired by uf as hc, and his rating as a hc would still be a B.

now, for this year, since we didn't have this last year, we have to estimate what we think his prestige should be. and about a B seems correct to me.

make sense?

if you don't like my idea, that's fine. if you have a suggestion, i'm open.
Ok I think I understand better what you mean. This seems like it is the best way to do it for the coordinators without having any bias.
__________________
Tennessee Volunteers
Charlotte Hornets
volstopfan14 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 05-27-2011, 05:53 PM   #46
Rookie
 
OVR: 4
Join Date: Jul 2006
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

Quote:
Originally Posted by theharbinater
i think you are misunderstanding me.

i agree, a formula is way too complicated, for all the reasons you stated.

i'm saying that we rate them based on the prestige of the hc. and the better hc's more often than not have better coords. that's why they were so successful.

for the most part, an oc/dc's prestige will be in line with the hc's prestige. just a couple points lower.

with a few exceptions, of course. i mentioned malzahn, you brought up weiss. both good examples of coords that are close to the same prestige as the hc.

also, for muschamp, since there is no data for the formula, we have to kinda estimate (cause he's not a D- hc). likewise with all new hc's.

he might be the perfect example for what i'm talking about.

last year, if we'd had this system in place, mack brown (who would have been his hc) would have been rated an A (just like this year).

likewise, by what i'm suggesting we do, will muschamp would have been rated a B dc.

so, he gets hired by uf as hc, and his rating as a hc would still be a B.

now, for this year, since we didn't have this last year, we have to estimate what we think his prestige should be. and about a B seems correct to me.

make sense?

if you don't like my idea, that's fine. if you have a suggestion, i'm open.
I agree 100%. No Coordinator should be better than the HC (which is a problem in the base rosters from the CC videos). The absolute ONLY exception to this would be Monte Kiffin (DC of USC). But with Monte being as old as he is, he shouldn't get any job offers for HC (developers said age is a factor in job offers). We'll see what happens though.

Your method makes sense. Drop them at least 1 or 1.5 letter grade at first, then look at the stats and how team's O and D ranked nationally and based on that decide whether the coordinator is worthy of his rating or not.

Last edited by PikeJR23; 05-27-2011 at 06:00 PM.
PikeJR23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 11:21 PM   #47
Pro
 
OVR: 7
Join Date: Apr 2008
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

Rankings seem really off for the PAC-12. Arizona State and UCLA have pretty below average staffs. ASU gets hype every couple of years and then folds. Oregon State may have the best coaches in the conference, with USC high with NFL experience. Statistically, it doesn't get better than Monte Kiffin. But that's probably where the flaw lies in such a model. He and Joe Paterno should probably be retired, yet JoePa is No. 1 on the list. Don't wanna flame PSU fans, but ... ummm , no.
Rivals is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2011, 12:06 AM   #48
Rookie
 
OVR: 2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Re: coach prestige ratings system...

first off, this ranting system is for head coaches only. it takes nothing for coord into account. i only listed them there for info purposes if someone wants to edit them.

the pac12, overall, lacks a very good coach, aside from kelly. they are getting some good new blood from utah, but other than those it's kinda shaky on who is any good.

erickson gets a lot of credit from his miami days, which is why the system ranks him so high. if you take away his national titles (2), he is barely a B+, i think.

ucla's neuheisel is ranked just above average. and when compared to the other pac 12 coaches (particularly riley and kiffin who you stated, but also tedford who is also ranked right around them) he is simply better.

he has a higher overall win% than all but tedford, higher in conf win% (except tedford), more major bowl appearances and wins than all, more top 10 finishes (this plus major bowl app/wins are what separate him and tedford), and more conf champs (tied with tedford).

only thing holding him back with the others is his last 3 years record, which is lower than the other 3.

this isn't to say he's head and shoulders better. but his #'s on the field have shown he's been a little better. at least over the long haul. if he keeps up like his last 3 years, he won't be for much longer.

as for monte, statistically, he'd be a D- as a head coach, because he's never been a college head coach. he'd be one of those that we'd have to estimate, like muschamp.

and as for his coord rating, he'd be like malzahn and weis in that they'd be some of the few that should be ranked very close in prestige to their hc. he might be the only one i'd rank at least even with his hc (and honestly, i'd probably put him above him).

and, again, this is a prestige rating. you can't get much more prestigious than joepa.

if they had other ratings in, like teaching, recruiting, offense and defense, then yeah, he'd be down the list on those ratings. but in prestige, he's up near the top, if not on the peak. same with spurrier and erickson.

if you have anything you'd like to change, and think it might make the results a little better, then please make a suggestion on how/what to change.
theharbinater is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > EA Sports College Football and NCAA Football »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:28 AM.
Top -