Study on coaching changes

B

BirdsOfPrey

Well-Known Member
There have been several recent in-depth studies done on coaching changes in college football. These studies covered a twenty-five
year timeframe. The performance of football programs that replaced their head coach was compared to those where the coach
was retained. Several factors examined included records of teams that made changes, whether successful conditions existed for a
new coaching staff and performance after the hiring of a new coach was observed for three to five years.

The results of these studies showed that poor teams with few wins who changed coaches often experienced a brief enthusiasm within
their programs but there was little to no effect on overall winning and those teams soon returned to their previous level of winning. The
surprising result of the study involved teams with middling records of .500 or above where there seemed to be favorable conditions for a
new coaching staff. With these teams, replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than
comparable teams who retained their coach. Based on these facts "buying out" existing coaches is akin to economic stupidity.

The study reached no conclusions as to why performance declined nor did it examine results after the 3-4 year period. For what it's worth,
this study suggests Iowa is in a tough spot & is unlikely to see performance improvement when they hire a new coach. Iowa needs to be careful & dilligient when the time comes to hire a new coach - not sure I want Barta making that selection.
 
I would say it depends. If they can hire a known coach that still maintains the fire (Bielema) then it should be ok. Let's be honest though, it's all about the assistants that the coach brings in. They have to recruit, that is #1, and then be good at the coaching part as well obviously. Iowa has not done that IMO, and obviously Bielema knows how valuable a good assistant can be, that's one of the reasons he left, so his assistants could get paid. Also, one other reason to be all over Bielema is he knows how to recruit in the B1G, has had success there, and though Wisconsin might have a little easier recruiting path, it's not much more than Iowa has (Minus all the winning they have done in the past 5 years).

Also, the landscape of CFG has changed dramatically in 25 years so looking over a 25 year span tells us very little about right now. It can give us a trend, but that's about it.
 
hawkfarmer said:
I would say it depends. If they can hire a known coach that still maintains the fire (Bielema) then it should be ok. Let's be honest though, it's all about the assistants that the coach brings in. They have to recruit, that is #1, and then be good at the coaching part as well obviously. Iowa has not done that IMO, and obviously Bielema knows how valuable a good assistant can be, that's one of the reasons he left, so his assistants could get paid. Also, one other reason to be all over Bielema is he knows how to recruit in the B1G, has had success there, and though Wisconsin might have a little easier recruiting path, it's not much more than Iowa has (Minus all the winning they have done in the past 5 years).

Also, the landscape of CFG has changed dramatically in 25 years so looking over a 25 year span tells us very little about right now. It can give us a trend, but that's about it.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Look at the start of the decline of Iowa football. First, Norm's health went south, then KOK left. For all of the grief KOK took at Iowa, he was still much better than what we have now and KF seemed to trust him. We have not done a good job replacing assistants and the program has been mediocre at best. I'm not sure if it's because KF doesn't trust them and does too much by himself, or if the philosophies of the staffs don't mesh well, or if they just aren't very good coaches. It could be a combination of all 3. I don't see it changing now, so it's time to move.
If we could get Bielema, we should do it tomorrow for the reasons hawkfarmer mentions above.
 
I dont think a coach would get 5 years of declining football at any school. A coach at a program for 16 years should not have to "rebuild" ever as long as he out recruiting like he is supposed to be. We can keep the next coach for 16 years for all I care as long as he is competitive, makes style changes as the game changes, can develop players and coaches. Lastly one who doesnt settle for poaching recruits from DMACC.
 
taffaej said:
I dont think a coach would get 5 years of declining football at any school. A coach at a program for 16 years should not have to "rebuild" ever as long as he out recruiting like he is supposed to be. We can keep the next coach for 16 years for all I care as long as he is competitive, makes style changes as the game changes, can develop players and coaches. Lastly one who doesnt settle for poaching recruits from DMACC.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There's a difference between "peaks and valleys" and program that is simply in decline. 16 years in, not having been ranked for even a single since 2010, I feel comfortable in believing it's the latter, in Iowa's case.

I also agree completely on the above sentiments regarding assistants.. I'm believing more and more that the quality of assistants (coaching and/or recruiting) or lack thereof, is the #1 problem plaguing the program right now, in addition to KF's seeming inability to adapt to the current CFB landscape.

Just ask Hayden Fry what kind of effect it had on the program when Barry Alvarez, Snyder, Stoops, etc. all left the program. Iowa football with that great coaching staff was terrific.. Without doing more fact finding, the 1980's was maybe the best decade Iowa Football has ever had, unless maybe the 2000's. The 1990's, not so much.

I also feel that KF had a terrific staff in the early 2000's. Now, not so much.
 
I read a study that said if your coach doesnt know what a fake punt is that you have a 300% chance of finding a better coach.
 
Check out what Todd Graham is doing at ASU....he eats, sleeps, talks, breathes nothing but a National Championship....preaches it non-stop to his team and coaches....coaches who for the most part are all young and super ambitious. Recruits his a** off. Said last year that winning the PAC -12 South was nice, but we have much bigger goals here at ASU than that. That is a coach that ins't retired on the job...that is how to win folks!
 
thetrza said:
We need to model ourselves on what Colorado has done the past few years.
Click to expand...

You mean just sit here on HN and beeotch and moan about the boring stale excuse of a football program that is on the brink of falling out of complete relevance for another 5-8 years? :D
 
DJL said:
Bingo. Look at the start of the decline of Iowa football. First, Norm's health went south, then KOK left. For all of the grief KOK took at Iowa, he was still much better than what we have now and KF seemed to trust him. We have not done a good job replacing assistants and the program has been mediocre at best. I'm not sure if it's because KF doesn't trust them and does too much by himself, or if the philosophies of the staffs don't mesh well, or if they just aren't very good coaches. It could be a combination of all 3. I don't see it changing now, so it's time to move.
If we could get Bielema, we should do it tomorrow for the reasons hawkfarmer mentions above.
Click to expand...

I'm curious as to why you say this. I'm not tryin to be a smarta$$, but I had always heard KirFer lets his assistants do their thang without meddling too much; and that's why they like working for him. Do you (or others who have said this) have contradictory information?
 
Eda said:
I'm curious as to why you say this. I'm not tryin to be a smarta$$, but I had always heard KirFer lets his assistants do their thang without meddling too much; and that's why they like working for him. Do you (or others who have said this) have contradictory information?
Click to expand...

Maybe that's what kirk told them to say.
 
Eda said:
I'm curious as to why you say this. I'm not tryin to be a smarta$$, but I had always heard KirFer lets his assistants do their thang without meddling too much; and that's why they like working for him. Do you (or others who have said this) have contradictory information?
Click to expand...

Eda, KF is a good delegator, To a fault. Now that does not include who is QB I think he has done a poor job hiring ast. starting with Soup. Word is there has been a lot of egos and personal agendas involved. My info is not from current but rather former players so take it for what its worth
 
thetrza said:
We need to model ourselves on what Colorado has done the past few years.
Click to expand...

What, make the 420 legit so no one is worried about football and are instead obsessed with finding Cheetos?

At least I HOPE you're not talking about football. I was at the CU vs. UCLA game and CU was not a talented team, probably not even .500 in the B1G West. The only thing keeping the game close was the fact that UCLA was affected by the altitude late in the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top