Just went through real life hires to see what the standards seem to be for various schools. 

Bluebloods (Kentucky, UNC, Duke, Kansas, UCLA)

*Gillespie. 3-3 NT record in the past four years. 2-1 PIT record. Total postseason games (6 NT, 3 PIT). Ten year resume no improvement. 
*Calipari: 13-4 NT record in past four years. 0-0 PIT record. Total postseason games (17 NT). Ten year resume, staggeringly good. 
*Self: 9-4 NT record in past four years. 0-0 PIT. Total postseason games (13 NT). Ten year resume, add two more NT games (1-1) and one PIT (0-1)
*Williams: 12-4 NT record in past four years. 0-0 PIT record. Total postseason games (16 NT). Ten year resume, staggeringly good. 
*Alford: 2-3 NT record in past four years. 1-1 PIT record. Total postseason games (5 NT, 2 PIT). Ten year resume, add two more NT games (0-2) and four PIT (1-3)
*Howland: 4-2 NT record in past four years. 1-1 PIT record. Total postseason games (6 NT, 2 PIT). Ten year resume, add one NT (0-1) and one PIT (0-1)

Alford looks like an anomaly here, especially because he had a couple teams that got high seeds and were upset early. So if we take him out for the minimums, we have

Minimum standards for blue-blood job: 6 NT games over the past four years, averaging at least one win per appearance
Average standard for blue-blood job: 10.5 NT games over the past four years, averaging a Sweet Sixteen or better. 


B+ to A-level programs

*Crean (Indiana): 1-3 NT record past four years, 0-1 PIT. Total postseason games (4 NT, 1 PIT). Ten year resume, add six NT games (4-2) and four PIT (2-2)
*Weber (Illinois): 2-2 NT record past four years, 1-1 PIT. Total postseason games (4 NT, 2 PIT). Ten year resume, no real improvement.  
*Miller (Arizona): 6-4 NT record past four years, 0-0 PIT. Total postseason games (10 NT). Ten year resume, no improvement. 
*White (Florida): 0-0 NT record past four years, 5-3 PIT. Total postseason games (0 NT, 8 PIT). Ten year resume, no real improvement. 
*Turgeon (Maryland): 3-4 NT record past four years, 0-0 PIT. Total postseason games: 7 NT. Ten year resume, add three NT games (2-1) and five PIT (2-3)
*Smart (Texas). 2-4 NT record past four years, 0-0 PIT. Total postseason games (6 NT, 0 PIT). Ten year resume, add five NT games (4-1)
*Self (Illinois): 4-2 NT record past four years, 0-1 PIT. Total postseason games (6 NT, 1 PIT). Ten year resume, no real improvement.
*Groce (Illinois): 3-2 NT record past four years, 0-0 PIT. Total postseason games (5 NT, 0 PIT). Ten year resume, no real improvement.

White looks like an anomaly, and definitely not the model for WIS standards. 

Minimum standards for a B+ to A level job: four NT games in the last four years, at least two wins (OR a big run in the ten-year window)
Average standards for a B+ to A level job: six NT games in the last four years, three wins. 

So basically, If you can get a pair of NT wins in your four season window (in at least two appearances), you seem to be qualified for high-level jobs in real life (the equivalent of the WIS B+/A-/A jobs). In WIS, this kind of resume qualifies you for C+/B- jobs (I had a resume very similar to Turgeon's in Knight a few years back and actually got rejected from B- jobs). 

This is just a starting point, so feel free to add more to this. I didn't go over jobs that are at B- or C level, because you see a lot more hiring of assistants and unproven mid-majors at that point, and just because there's too much data to go through. All these are basically the hirings I can think of off the top of my head, so I'm sure I missed more (although hiring of assistants were intentionally excluded). 

In short: WIS' hiring standards are too high. They should be brought down to keep good jobs from being run into the ground by a sim coach (and to allow good mid-major coaches to make a jump to somewhere that isn't a total train wreck). Of course, this doesn't even touch on firing logic, which needs to be amped up if hiring logic is eased up. But it's a start. 

There needs to be a sliding scale as the process goes.  Just like in RL if your top choice says no you move down the list.  I have applied for 2 jobs I was a longshot for and have been rejected.  Yet the job is still posted.  It seems like I should stay on the backburner until a better coach comes along.

Posted by cburton23 on 10/1/2015 4:17:00 PM (view original):
There needs to be a sliding scale as the process goes.  Just like in RL if your top choice says no you move down the list.  I have applied for 2 jobs I was a longshot for and have been rejected.  Yet the job is still posted.  It seems like I should stay on the backburner until a better coach comes along.

I tend to agree, which is a bit of what I had in mind when I posted the minimum and average. The idea that's in my head is something like this. 

*To get the job relatively soon after applying, you need (1) to exceed the average standard for a job of that caliber, and (2) to exceed the resumes of all other applicants. 
*If you fail (2), you are rejected. 
*If you fail (1), your application is kept on file until later in the job process. If, towards the end of the job process, you have accomplished (2), then you will be hired if (3) you exceed the minimum standard for a job of that caliber. 

I think that makes perfect sense.  The only remaining question is how is it determined what level each job is?  Is it current prestige, baseline pretige or some average of both?

This is just a totally top-of-my head proposal based entirely on the data I've looked up and personal experience playing WIS, not really factoring in hiring patterns at lower level jobs. 

Standards to get an A+ prestige BCS job at the beginning of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 10 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have averaged at least 2 NT wins per appearance in the last four seasons, AND (3) are better than all other applicants. 

Standards to get an A+ prestige BCS job at the end of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 6 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have averaged at least 1 NT win per appearance in the last four seasons, AND (3) are better than all other applicants. 

Standards to get a B+/A- prestige BCS job at the beginning of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 6 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have at least three NT wins in the last four seasons*, AND (3) are better than all other applicants

Standards to get a B+/A- prestige BCS job at the end of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 4 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have at least two NT wins in the last four seasons*, AND (3) are better than all other applicants. 

Standards to get a C+/B- prestige BCS job at the beginning of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 3 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have at least one NT win in the last four seasons*, AND (3) are better than all other applicants

Standards to get a C+/B- prestige BCS job at the end of the jobs process: Same as the beginning, except you only need (3) and EITHER (1) OR (2) instead of both. 

This is obviously not an exhaustive list, but it's a start, and I think it'd make things make more sense. 

*An NT run outside of your four-season window but inside your ten-season window does not count towards NT games played within the four season window. However, it can add to your "wins in the last four seasons" as follows: a Sweet Sixteen or better adds 1 NT win to your four season resume; a Final Four or better adds 2 NT wins to your four season resume; a national title adds 3 NT wins to your four season resume. 

I'd want to see some minimum requirements, some requirement for a certain number of games a coach has won (total and at the same level).  Also, there needs to be some consideration on how to discount lower level results. The way you have it written a new coach could theoretically pick up a stacked D3 team, go NT, FF, S16, FF and be the most qualified applicant to move to an A+ Michigan State.  I don't think anybody wants that.

In my opinion, coach hiring is one place you absolutely cannot look to real life as a model.  In real life there is so much involved in being a media presence (both your personality and the narrative surrounding your team), your career as an assistant, your relationship with the school/program, etc.  I mean, Kansas was coming off a national title and UNC was coming off a Final Four and filled vacancies with coaches that had no head coaching experience, but were Dean Smith's assistants.  Coach K would never have gotten the Duke job if Bobby Knight hadn't made a phone call.  If Coach K retired at the end of this season, barring any sort of major scandal this year, Steve Wojciechowski would absolutely be a finalist to replace him, despite only having 2 seasons as a head coach, one of which was not very good.

Job change reform in WIS needs to be based on WIS, not real life.

Posted by acn24 on 10/1/2015 6:29:00 PM (view original):
I'd want to see some minimum requirements, some requirement for a certain number of games a coach has won (total and at the same level).  Also, there needs to be some consideration on how to discount lower level results. The way you have it written a new coach could theoretically pick up a stacked D3 team, go NT, FF, S16, FF and be the most qualified applicant to move to an A+ Michigan State.  I don't think anybody wants that.

In my opinion, coach hiring is one place you absolutely cannot look to real life as a model.  In real life there is so much involved in being a media presence (both your personality and the narrative surrounding your team), your career as an assistant, your relationship with the school/program, etc.  I mean, Kansas was coming off a national title and UNC was coming off a Final Four and filled vacancies with coaches that had no head coaching experience, but were Dean Smith's assistants.  Coach K would never have gotten the Duke job if Bobby Knight hadn't made a phone call.  If Coach K retired at the end of this season, barring any sort of major scandal this year, Steve Wojciechowski would absolutely be a finalist to replace him, despite only having 2 seasons as a head coach, one of which was not very good.

Job change reform in WIS needs to be based on WIS, not real life.

Sorry if I was unclear. I was referring to D1 jobs and D1 resumes. There would have to be scaling done for D2 and D3 resumes. Does that sufficiently address your first concern? I've also, on this list, discounted people being hired from assistant positions, as well as people like White who were more known as assistants/recruiters and didn't really have the head coaching chops yet. but I feel like once you discount those things, the hiring decisions you have left give a somewhat realistic baseline for what WIS job logic can look like. Because current WIS job logic is not very good. 

I know the proposal I've given is a rough first draft and not exactly what I'd want coded into the firing logic. But it does take into account actual WIS experience and knowledge of how easy it is to accomplish the various tasks on that list. If it's bad from a WIS perspective, I'd be happy to hear criticisms. But while I am letting real life inform things, I don't think I've done so to such a degree that makes it a bad WIS idea. 

Strong work, Tarv.

Posted by tarvolon on 10/1/2015 4:38:00 PM (view original):
This is just a totally top-of-my head proposal based entirely on the data I've looked up and personal experience playing WIS, not really factoring in hiring patterns at lower level jobs. 

Standards to get an A+ prestige BCS job at the beginning of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 10 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have averaged at least 2 NT wins per appearance in the last four seasons, AND (3) are better than all other applicants. 

Standards to get an A+ prestige BCS job at the end of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 6 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have averaged at least 1 NT win per appearance in the last four seasons, AND (3) are better than all other applicants. 

Standards to get a B+/A- prestige BCS job at the beginning of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 6 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have at least three NT wins in the last four seasons*, AND (3) are better than all other applicants

Standards to get a B+/A- prestige BCS job at the end of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 4 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have at least two NT wins in the last four seasons*, AND (3) are better than all other applicants. 

Standards to get a C+/B- prestige BCS job at the beginning of the jobs process: (1) Have played at least 3 NT games in the last four seasons, (2) have at least one NT win in the last four seasons*, AND (3) are better than all other applicants

Standards to get a C+/B- prestige BCS job at the end of the jobs process: Same as the beginning, except you only need (3) and EITHER (1) OR (2) instead of both. 

This is obviously not an exhaustive list, but it's a start, and I think it'd make things make more sense. 

*An NT run outside of your four-season window but inside your ten-season window does not count towards NT games played within the four season window. However, it can add to your "wins in the last four seasons" as follows: a Sweet Sixteen or better adds 1 NT win to your four season resume; a Final Four or better adds 2 NT wins to your four season resume; a national title adds 3 NT wins to your four season resume. 

I like this much more realistic

This is infinitely more important than any recruiting or game playing developments. With most worlds now looking at 80% vacancies in D3, we'd best keep opportunity to advance in front of as many coaches as we can.