ADVERTISEMENT

Kyle Flood Was An Overachiever

Knight Shift

Legend
May 19, 2011
77,602
73,446
113
Jersey Shore
Can some of the stats jocks check the work here? #14, above Urban Meyer. Boy, Bob made a big mistake!

Floodies unite!!!!!

http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...30/ncaa-football-coaches-overrated-underrated.

Usually, when we talk about a head coach who overachieves or underachieves, we basically mean a coach whose AP poll rankings don't match his program's recruiting rankings.

This is understandable, but unsatisfactory. Part of a coach's job is to recruit. If a program has a lot of talent, that coach succeeded at that part of his job. Losing a game because of a lack of talent is just as bad as losing one for any other reason, unless we're talking about a true underdog that will never be able to land top talent, no matter the coach.


For example, Urban Meyer doesn't get named 2014 Big Ten Coach of the Year for going undefeated in conference play despite QB injuries; the honor goes to Jerry Kill, whose Minnesota finished the regular season 8-4, but 0-3 against ranked teams. OSU's supposed to win, because it has all those recruits. Never mind that Meyer's staff recruited many of those recruits and had been coaching them for three years at that point.

Let's look at another way of judging which coaches overperform or underperform. Bill Connelly used math (explained here, with full rankings for every FBS head coach over the last decade) to figure out which coaches are able to squeeze the most wins (or losses) out of games, based on what actually happened on the field, not on high school scouting or preseason polls or fan emotions.

I think it's a lot more interesting. Here are the top 25 overperformers:


Coach Years Wins difference per year
1 Ken Niumatalolo 8 1.08
2 Bill Snyder 8 0.94
3 Gus Malzahn 4 0.94
4 Dave Christensen 5 0.91
5 Mark Hudspeth 5 0.89
6 Matt Campbell 4 0.81
7 Pat Fitzgerald 10 0.8
8 David Bailiff 9 0.79
9 Rich Brooks 5 0.71
10 DeWayne Walker 4 0.68
11 Tom O'Brien 8 0.66
12 Mack Brown 9 0.66
13 Les Miles 11 0.63
14 Kyle Flood 4 0.58
15 Urban Meyer 10 0.58
16 Gary Pinkel 11 0.57
17 Paul Johnson 11 0.56
18 Frank Solich 11 0.56
19 Rickey Bustle 6 0.54
20 Mark Dantonio 11 0.52
21 Jim McElwain 4 0.51
22 Bo Pelini 7 0.51
23 Turner Gill 6 0.5
24 Gene Chizik 6 0.48
25 Steve Sarkisian 7 0.46
And here's the list you don't want to be on:



Coach Years Wins difference per year
25 Derek Dooley 6 -0.45
24 Bobby Hauck 5 -0.47
23 Greg McMackin 4 -0.47
22 Mario Cristobal 6 -0.48
21 Randy Shannon 4 -0.48
20 Pat Hill 7 -0.5
19 Ron Zook 7 -0.5
18 Curtis Johnson 4 -0.51
17 Mike MacIntyre 6 -0.51
16 Paul Chryst 4 -0.52
15 Norm Chow 4 -0.52
14 Gary Andersen 7 -0.53
13 Bob Toledo 5 -0.53
12 Rich Ellerson 5 -0.54
11 Mark Snyder 5 -0.55
10 Houston Nutt 7 -0.56
9 Dave Wannstedt 6 -0.57
8 Hal Mumme 4 -0.59
7 Doug Martin 9 -0.6
6 Joe Glenn 4 -0.62
5 Phillip Fulmer 4 -0.62
4 Tyrone Willingham 4 -0.86
3 Steve Addazio 5 -0.87
2 Kevin Wilson 5 -0.96
1 Todd Dodge 4 -1.28
 
  • Like
Reactions: jor22
4 x 0.58 wins is a negligible amount in the grand scheme of things.
 
4 x 0.58 wins is a negligible amount in the grand scheme of things.

There were some bigger losers at the top of that list.
#4 Dave Christensen at Wyoming-- 27–35 (.435)
#10 DeWayne Walker at New Mexico State---10–40


The ranking is based on what the author calls " a measure called second-order wins. It is basically my version of the Pythagorean Wins concept, where you look at a certain component (usually points or runs scored and allowed) and determine what a team's record probably should be as opposed to what it actually is. If you're losing a ton of close games but winning a bunch of blowouts, that's probably a sign that, on average, you would be faring better than you are."

Just goes to show that statistics can be tweaked and twisted in a number of ways to make the case you want to make, and that never happens on Scarlet Nation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeR0102
You posted this so we can insult Flood some more. Flood will never have another HC or offensive coordinator position at D 1 football.

The calculation probably didn't take into account the lag in recruiting. If it did, Ash if he wins 3 games in the next 2 years will be the greatest coach ever in college football due to Flood terrible recruiting.
 
You posted this so we can insult Flood some more. Flood will never have another HC or offensive coordinator position at D 1 football.

The calculation probably didn't take into account the lag in recruiting. If it did, Ash if he wins 3 games in the next 2 years will be the greatest coach ever in college football due to Flood terrible recruiting.
No, I posted the article because it was a strange take on what the author of the bog considered coaching success. The breakdown in the methodology is reflected in Flood at #14, #4 Dave Christensen at Wyoming-- 27–35 (.435) and #10 DeWayne Walker at New Mexico State---10–40. And the methodology appeared to take recruiting into account.

Apologies for putting up a football topic. Let's discuss pork roll some more.
 
If you are talking about a major league baseball schedule, yes. For a 12-game college football schedule, no not negligible.

Fair enough, but I think the stats are misleading. I will have to do some more research, but for example, in 2012 Rutgers was out gained by Syracuse 418 to 237. In my opinion we were a more talented team then them, but this formula would give him credit for a gained win.
 
Funny Kevin Wilson is on the list you don't want to be on and gets an massive extension.....shows you what you know! :P
 
208vhb6.jpg
 
Fair enough, but I think the stats are misleading. I will have to do some more research, but for example, in 2012 Rutgers was out gained by Syracuse 418 to 237. In my opinion we were a more talented team then them, but this formula would give him credit for a gained win.
He must be a Syracuse graduate since the Cuse fans were claiming they won the game base on offensive yardage.
 
Fair enough, but I think the stats are misleading. I will have to do some more research, but for example, in 2012 Rutgers was out gained by Syracuse 418 to 237. In my opinion we were a more talented team then them, but this formula would give him credit for a gained win.
I know nothing about the validity of the analysis. You make a valid point. Just commented on whether a 1/2 game was significant or not.
 
I know nothing about the validity of the analysis. You make a valid point. Just commented on whether a 1/2 game was significant or not.

Yeah, you are probably right. I just figured 2 wins over the course of Flood's time took him from a 27-24 record to a 25-26 record.

If the stats that they actually used were points scored, as you would do with a baseball pythagorean formula, Flood would actually be helped by the fact that he had so many blow out losses, compared to close wins.
 
Flood benefitted from the final few recruiting classes of Schiano. As those classes graduated, Floods teams got worse. Now Ash has to work with Floods below average recruiting classes.
 
No, I posted the article because it was a strange take on what the author of the bog considered coaching success. The breakdown in the methodology is reflected in Flood at #14, #4 Dave Christensen at Wyoming-- 27–35 (.435) and #10 DeWayne Walker at New Mexico State---10–40. And the methodology appeared to take recruiting into account.

I think posting this is interesting, Knight Shift. But as best I can tell the methodology is flawed to say the least. The author looks at the "expected wins" at the beginning of the season and then compares them with the outcome? So if I understand correctly, if the consensus of Athlon, Phil Steele, et al. is that 'Bama will go undefeated and they lose one game then Nick Saban is -1.0 for that season and the second to worst coach on this list? Given that preseason expectations are based on reputation, all that tells me is that RU's reputation is so horrible that even Flood was able to marginally exceed those awful expectations.

Any analysis that has Harbaugh, Dan Mullen and Kirk Ferentz as "bad" coaches who under-achieve is pure garbage.
 
I think posting this is interesting, Knight Shift. But as best I can tell the methodology is flawed to say the least. The author looks at the "expected wins" at the beginning of the season and then compares them with the outcome? So if I understand correctly, if the consensus of Athlon, Phil Steele, et al. is that 'Bama will go undefeated and they lose one game then Nick Saban is -1.0 for that season and the second to worst coach on this list? Given that preseason expectations are based on reputation, all that tells me is that RU's reputation is so horrible that even Flood was able to marginally exceed those awful expectations.

Any analysis that has Harbaugh, Dan Mullen and Kirk Ferentz as "bad" coaches who under-achieve is pure garbage.
Agreed. I was scratching my head at seeing those coaches ranked so lowly and KF and the other two I mentioned being ranked highly.
 
Statistics are irrelevant: Kyle Flood couldn't hold Chris Ash's jock strap.
Wow! A surprising statement from someone who is usually more measured in their tone! Kyle Flood was a nice guy who was in way over his head. I give him credit for taking a shot, there are many out there who do not have the cajones to even take the shot. He was in over his head and he knew it and many on this board knew it. With that said, it is time to let kyle Flood go with dignity. We are into a new and exciting chapter in Rutgers Football history under coach Chris Ash. The Future looks bright for RU Football, I look forward to the ride with all the fine people on this forum!
 
This will probably be the only list where we will find Kyle Flood ranked ahead of Urban Meyer. I always knew Kyle was a way better coach than Urban and now I have the proof. Thank you for the post.
 
Wow! A surprising statement from someone who is usually more measured in their tone! Kyle Flood was a nice guy who was in way over his head. I give him credit for taking a shot, there are many out there who do not have the cajones to even take the shot. He was in over his head and he knew it and many on this board knew it. With that said, it is time to let kyle Flood go with dignity. We are into a new and exciting chapter in Rutgers Football history under coach Chris Ash. The Future looks bright for RU Football, I look forward to the ride with all the fine people on this forum!

Ummmmm.......I think you need to invest in one of these........

83fd02da_smeter3ob_zpsh6wmzka9.jpeg
 
Flood was. He got a job he wasn't qualified for . Many places would have canned him after the end of year 1 debacle , basically every place else except Rutgers would have fired him after year 2 .
But he managed to stay 4 years, losing games , recruits and self -respect in the process . But he got paid . One of the final hires /stains from the pernetti era.
 
Flood was. He got a job he wasn't qualified for . Many places would have canned him after the end of year 1 debacle , basically every place else except Rutgers would have fired him after year 2 .
But he managed to stay 4 years, losing games , recruits and self -respect in the process . But he got paid . One of the final hires /stains from the pernetti era.
Hmmm. Year 1 debacle? Kent State was a terrible game. Played Louisville to the wire, and RU was robbed because of an ineligible receiver downfield call. 9-4 and tied for a conference championship is not exactly a debacle for most first year coaches. Agreed that year 2 was not good and exposed many weaknesses in coaching, but then he somewhat redeemed himself in year 3, first year in the B1G, but the blowouts were alarming. And RU was supposedly hamstrung by budget/money issues. Hindsight is 20/20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 17Q66
Unfortunately for you, recruiting is part of being a head coach in college, as is player development. These types of arguments are why advanced analytics and sites like pro football focus are garbage.
 
Well, from the link (actually the link within the link OP posted), recruiting rankings don't factor into these numbers. Here's where the "win expectancy" comes from:
The idea behind win expectancy is simple: It takes the key stats from a given game (success rates, explosiveness, field position factors, and other factors that end up going into the S&P+ ratings), mashes them together, and says, "With these stats, you probably could have expected to win this game X percent of the time." Add those figures up over the course of a season, and you get a glimpse of what a given team probably could have expected its record to be.

Given that, if you were expected to win 2 games in a season and you actually won 3, you are ahead of the curve. If you were expected to win 11 games, and you won 10, you're behind the curve. That doesn't mean the 10 win coach is worse than the 3 win coach, though.

If anything, it seems to speak to the fact that wins and losses come down to more than the key stats identified in the formula.

Even so, here's a breakdown of the coaches we faced during Flood's tenure:
- There were 51 games during the 4 years he was a head coach.
- Of those, 4 were against FCS teams, leaving 47.
- Of the 47, 9 were against coaches not in the data set (meaning they have not been a HC for at least 4 years between 2005-2015).
- Of the remaining 38 games, the head coaches averaged a score of -0.015.
- Against the 19 coaches faced with positive scores, Flood went 5-14 (wins against Niumatalolo, Butch Jones, Mike Leach, Randy Edsall, and Willie Taggart).
- Against the 19 coaches faced with negative scores, Flood went 12-7 (losses against Franklin x2, Chryst x2, Harbaugh, Darrell Hazell, and Gary Anderson).
 
Hmmm. Year 1 debacle? Kent State was a terrible game. Played Louisville to the wire, and RU was robbed because of an ineligible receiver downfield call. 9-4 and tied for a conference championship is not exactly a debacle for most first year coaches. Agreed that year 2 was not good and exposed many weaknesses in coaching, but then he somewhat redeemed himself in year 3, first year in the B1G, but the blowouts were alarming. And RU was supposedly hamstrung by budget/money issues. Hindsight is 20/20.

He had an NFL talent laden defense in 2012 and had us in close games against army and Tulane ! And the Kent state , va tech , Pittsburgh games were complete disasters. Ok, let's assume there was still hope that he was a good coach , year 2 made it clear he was bad .
Glad we are done with him and hope ash is a coach we are happy with .
 
  • Like
Reactions: BROTHERSKINNY
No, I posted the article because it was a strange take on what the author of the bog considered coaching success. The breakdown in the methodology is reflected in Flood at #14, #4 Dave Christensen at Wyoming-- 27–35 (.435) and #10 DeWayne Walker at New Mexico State---10–40. And the methodology appeared to take recruiting into account.

Apologies for putting up a football topic. Let's discuss pork roll some more.
Knight Shift, I know you are from the Sarasota area, so...Did you know that Publix sells Pork Roll(Taylor Ham)? FYI
 
He had an NFL talent laden defense in 2012 and had us in close games against army and Tulane ! And the Kent state , va tech , Pittsburgh games were complete disasters. Ok, let's assume there was still hope that he was a good coach , year 2 made it clear he was bad .
Glad we are done with him and hope ash is a coach we are happy with .

25547439.jpg
 
Flood benefitted from the final few recruiting classes of Schiano. As those classes graduated, Floods teams got worse. Now Ash has to work with Floods below average recruiting classes.
And we got Nova because Wannestedt got fired, not because Gary won his recruitment. And on and on and on ...
 
I think Flood is a better example of the Peter Principle than an over achiever. To me, anyway, he advanced to a level beyond his ability but was apparently very good at the level below. Anthony Davis has had wonderful things to say about Flood when Flood was an assistant and Davis was playIng at RU.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT