Best Coach in the ACC? Friedgen?

C

CitySting

Guest
Your thoughts?
CoachWinning
PercentageSchool's
Win pct.Difference
Coach Cch. Win% Schs. Winn% Difference
Ralph Friedgen 0.676 0.533 0.143

Jim Grobe 0.514 0.406 0.108

Bobby Bowden 0.780 .673 0.107

Frank Beamer 0.654 0.599 0.055

Al Groh 0.560 0.532 0.028

Tommy Bowden 0.612 0.590 0.022

Chan Gailey 0.578 0.594 -0.016

Ted Roof 0.102 0.510 -0.408
 
Coach School Diff
Ralph Friedgen 0.676 0.533 0.143
Jim Grobe 0.514 0.406 0.108
Bobby Bowden 0.78 0.673 0.107
Frank Beamer 0.654 0.599 0.055
Al Groh 0.56 0.532 0.028
Tommy Bowden 0.612 0.59 0.022
Chan Gailey 0.578 0.594 -0.016
Ted Roof 0.102 0.51 -0.408

This software must hate tabs.

I don't think that the schools historical, cummulative win percentage has bearing on the quality of your current coach.

But I would rank those coaches as follows:

Nat Titles
B. Bowden - has won it all, no contest

Conf Titles
F. Beamer - has built a consistent top 20 football power.
J. Grobe - won an ACC title with WAKE.
R. Friedgen - 3, ten win seasons. ACC Title at UMd.

Bridesmaids
C. Gailey - consistent winner. He could have jumped Ralph and Grobe with two more field goals last year. But he didn't, so here we are.
T. Bowden - he can win the big games, but has not put together a complete season.
A. Groh - great recruiter for players, but hasn't been able to bring in an retain the kind of coaching staff it takes to make a real conference run.

Other
T. Roof - I would cut him some slack for being at Duke, but hiring BO'B was a disaster.
 
Last edited:
I don't think you have a valid argument.

For example, without B. Bowden FSU's winning percentage is almost non-existant. Prior to his arrival they had very few, if any, winning seasons. In essence, his winning % IS FSU's winning %. Same with Frank Beamer at VT.

Also, these schools have not been playing for the same period of time. You need to establish a consistent time frame (20years, 40 years, in the ACC, etc.)

If you were going to use this type of analysis as the basis for an argument, you might have to limit it to the last 20 years. I still don't think it would be relevant, but maybe a little bit more than just a blanket school's winning %
 
If a school's legacy is the primary factor for future success than perhaps the best way to rank a coach is by how he performed in relation to his school's history.
Using historical percentages penalizes guys like Beamer and Bowden who've raised their school's profiles and have been the leading factor in the school's success. It also doesn't allow for the new coaches to be ranked. Its not the perfect method, but I think it is a better barometer than Dienhart's spit balling.
 
Well then, what is the point you are trying to get to with your analysis?

Your school's historical perspective doesn't indicate if today's football coach is better than another team's current football coach in and of itself. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt by suggesting that the past twenty years might be more indicative of a coach's success. I agree with what you are saying about Bowden and Beamer being penalized but I still don't think it creates a valid argument. If anything, it just enhances my point. B. Bowden's .780 winning % would vastly outstrip Fridgen's.

What do you want the numbers to say?
 
CitySting said:
Your thoughts?
CoachWinning
PercentageSchool's
Win pct.Difference
Coach Cch. Win% Schs. Winn% Difference
Ralph Friedgen 0.676 0.533 0.143

Jim Grobe 0.514 0.406 0.108

Bobby Bowden 0.780 .673 0.107

Frank Beamer 0.654 0.599 0.055

Al Groh 0.560 0.532 0.028

Tommy Bowden 0.612 0.590 0.022

Chan Gailey 0.578 0.594 -0.016

Ted Roof 0.102 0.510 -0.408
Click to expand...

My thoughts are, this is a meaningless comparison.
 
CitySting said:
Your thoughts?
CoachWinning
PercentageSchool's
Win pct.Difference
Coach Cch. Win% Schs. Winn% Difference
Ralph Friedgen 0.676 0.533 0.143

Jim Grobe 0.514 0.406 0.108

Bobby Bowden 0.780 .673 0.107

Frank Beamer 0.654 0.599 0.055

Al Groh 0.560 0.532 0.028

Tommy Bowden 0.612 0.590 0.022

Chan Gailey 0.578 0.594 -0.016

Ted Roof 0.102 0.510 -0.408
Click to expand...

It can't be a coincidence that your text appears in Red and Black.
 
The best coach is the one who is the best at everything. That leaves me no choice but to choose Beamer as the best coach in the conference. He's good on the recruiting trail, he's an excellent coach as consistently demonstrated by his special teams, he's a good game-day Xs and Os guy and his teams have a very good style of play. VT seldom beats itself.

With only one title to show for all the talent Bowden has had basically disqualifies him with extreme prejudice.

Fridge mopped up with the tremendous talent he inherited from the underachieving Ron Vanderlinden. He ain't doin' so hot with his own players. Buh bye.

Groh? No one in the ACC has done less with more. He had class after class of NFL-caliber offensive and defensive lineman but continues to fill the shoes of his predecessor quite nicely. And he does not run a tight ship inside his program.

Grobe? Who has done more with less? I'd pick him ahead of Beamer but don't want to overreact on their recent success. If he keeps it up, he gets my vote.

Gailey is the best at some things but as much as I like the guy he needs to overachieve at least once. I'll say this for Gailey, he's building a fortress one brick at a time and he's about 3/4 of the way through. Our football program is well on the way to being more solid than it has been in over 60 years. Gailey is probably more of a GM than a coach. Not that there's anything wrong with that provided you have the right assistants. And now that we've replaced Mr. Bean with Mr. Bond we are all set.
 
I agree with almost everything you wrote, 00Burdell. The only thing I might differ with you on is the success of B. Bowden. To me he was once a great coach, then became a great GM (with Richt, Amato, and Andrews) and only in recent years (when he put his faith in Jeff) did he lose some of his luster. I am very interested to see what happens with Jimbo Fisher in the fold in Tallahassee, because I think Bobby still can be a very good college head coach (even if I don't like him personally....dadgummit!)
 
With only one title to show for all the talent Bowden has had basically disqualifies him with extreme prejudice.
Click to expand...

Bowden has actually had two titles, plus he finished in the top 5 for about 10 years in a row. While the program's backslidden since 2000, it's hard to deny his success during the 80's and 90's.
 
I'd take Gailey over Groh in a second.

I'd take Beamer over Gailey. I'd take Bobby Bowden over Gailey. I would be happy with Fridge, but probably only because I have good memories of his time here. The rest can take a walk.

beej67,
thinks Gailey is clearly better than 9/14ths of the ACC
 
How can you leave off Beamer?

atlanta jacket said:
top three friedgen, grobe and bowden
Click to expand...

It's amazing that people aren't including Beamer. He's been to 14 straight bowls, including 3 Sugars and an Orange. VT had only been to 6 bowls in the preceeding 45 years. His teams have produced 28 All-Americans.

Wasn't VT something like the 3rd winningest team in the 90's?

Oh yeah, he has the third highest number of wins of all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top