Coach A in small conference
Prestige when taking over: D-
Prestige when applying for BCS jobs: B
Seasons coached: 13
Record: 243-138 (.638)
NT appearances: 7 (including four in a row at the time of application)
NT record: 0-7 (.000)
PIT appearances: 2
PIT record: 4-2 (.667)
No postseason: 4 (seasons 1, 2, 4, and 6 on the job)
Top 25 finishes: 1
Top 10 finishes: 0
Best NT result: first round
Most recent season: NT, first round
Players drafted: 0

Coach B in a small conference
Prestige when taking over: D-
Prestige when applying for BCS jobs: B
Seasons coached: 9
NT appearances: 3 (including two in a row at the time of application)
NT record: 3-3 (.500)
PIT appearances: 1
PIT record: 0-1 (.000)
No postseason: 5 (seasons 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 on the job)
Top 25 finishes: 1
Top 10 finishes: 1
Best NT result: Sweet Sixteen
Most recent season: NT, Sweet Sixteen
Players drafted: 1

Both of these resumes belong, in my opinion, to good coaches, so I'm not trying to bash one or the other. Just trying to get/give an idea of what it takes to get a BCS job in this game. 

In your opinion, should either or both of these coaches qualify for the following jobs: 

BCS conference, B prestige
BCS conference, B- prestige
BCS conference, C+ prestige

If one or both shouldn't qualify for some or all of those jobs, what work needs to be done to get their resume up to these levels? 

coach B IMO definitly a B school
coach A IMO definitly a B- school

I know NT wins a re huge but coach A has consistency going to keep them close

Prestige when taking over is irrelevant. You didn't post the career record of Coach B. All-in-all this is a weird of way trying to figure out who should be more qualified for a job, you need to list the last 10 seasons of their resumes instead of what you posted above.

Posted by stinenavy on 1/23/2015 8:07:00 PM (view original):
Prestige when taking over is irrelevant. You didn't post the career record of Coach B. All-in-all this is a weird of way trying to figure out who should be more qualified for a job, you need to list the last 10 seasons of their resumes instead of what you posted above.

Are you sure current prestige is irrelevant? I'm fairly new to D1, but I don't ever remember being qualified for a job (regardless of baseline) that had a higher prestige than the school I'm currently at.

Oh crap, I calculated the career record and didn't post it. I don't remember the W/L, but the win percentage was between .640 and .650 over nine seasons. Slightly above Coach A

Posted by darnoc29099 on 1/23/2015 9:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by stinenavy on 1/23/2015 8:07:00 PM (view original):
Prestige when taking over is irrelevant. You didn't post the career record of Coach B. All-in-all this is a weird of way trying to figure out who should be more qualified for a job, you need to list the last 10 seasons of their resumes instead of what you posted above.

Are you sure current prestige is irrelevant? I'm fairly new to D1, but I don't ever remember being qualified for a job (regardless of baseline) that had a higher prestige than the school I'm currently at.

Re-read what I posted.

Stine: I posted in the format I did partially because I wanted to disseminate some of the information into what I would've thought are important categories (although I know prestige when taking over isn't important, just giving a sense of where the careers started), and partially because I want to ask questions both of what kind of job these resumes will get AND what sort of jobs these resumes should get.

I'm on my phone right now, but if you are curious, there are ETSU and Elon in the Southern Conference in Knight.

Posted by waykbordr on 1/23/2015 5:34:00 PM (view original):
coach B IMO definitly a B school
coach A IMO definitly a B- school

I know NT wins a re huge but coach A has consistency going to keep them close

It's interesting that you would say that. What actually happened is that Coach A was qualified for a B prestige job and Coach B is not qualified for any A/B range prestige jobs and is not qualified for all C+ jobs either. Reputation and loyalty are both A+

I was looking for a B- prestige job. I wasn't qualified. The job ultimately went to a coach with 4 NTs and 6 PITs in 16 seasons. They had no NT wins and no players drafted. They finished with B- prestige.

I am coach B.

Am I missing something here, or is this yet another example of the job logic being dumb as crap. I mean, I get me not having a lot of longevity. But I think I've shown that I can coach at D1. I'd rather have someone showing they can win NT games than someone who has just won a few more CTs in a row in a bad conference.

This is my season-by-season resume. I got rejected from a B- job and was "keep looking" for a C+ job. 

79	tarvolon	30-2	12-0	13-1	5-1	16-0	8	7	45	B	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Sweet 16)
78	tarvolon	25-5	8-3	14-1	3-1	15-1		26	50	C+	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
77	tarvolon	17-12	7-4	8-7	2-1	9-7		101	98	C+
76	tarvolon	21-7	8-4	13-2	0-1	12-4		64	118	C+	PI (1st Round)
75	tarvolon	23-7	6-3	15-2	2-2	13-3		50	83	C+	NT At-large Bid NT (2nd Round)
74	tarvolon	12-16	4-7	7-8	1-1	6-10		147	98	D+
73	tarvolon	16-12	6-2	9-9	1-1	9-7		72	85	D+
72	tarvolon	14-13	3-6	11-6	0-1	5-11		211	315	D-
71	tarvolon	10-18	4-9	5-8	1-1	4-12		267	285	D-

Here is Coach A, who got a B-prestige job (and I'm not bashing on garman--he's a great coach and was ahead of me during the time that we were both in the conference. I just thought my NT wins would've put me at or close to his level). 

garmansouth	19-11	10-1	6-9	3-1	12-4		46	55	B	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
76	garmansouth	25-5	11-1	11-3	3-1	14-2	23	34	108	B	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
75	garmansouth	19-9	8-1	11-6	0-2	14-2		41	67	B-	Conf Champion NT At-large Bid NT (1st Round)
74	garmansouth	20-10	9-2	8-7	3-1	12-4		60	78	B-	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
73	garmansouth	20-10	10-3	10-6	0-1	13-3		55	69	B-	Conf Champion PI (3rd Round)
72	garmansouth	21-9	8-5	13-3	0-1	15-1		53	72	B-	Conf Champion PI (3rd Round)
71	garmansouth	25-5	12-0	10-4	3-1	15-1		40	117	C+	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
70	garmansouth	14-14	5-7	8-6	1-1	8-8		106	75	C
69	garmansouth	18-13	5-7	9-5	4-1	12-4		95	89	C+	CT Champion NT (1st Round)
68	garmansouth	16-13	7-8	7-4	2-1	12-4		94	70	C
67	garmansouth	19-11	8-6	8-4	3-1	14-2		91	101	C-	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
66	garmansouth	13-15	4-6	8-8	1-1	9-7		189	211	D
65	garmansouth	14-13	7-6	7-6	0-1	10-6		237	312	D-

Here is the resume that got the job that I was rejected for: 

79	treyman	27-3	13-0	12-1	2-2	15-1		54	228	B-	Conf Champion NT At-large Bid NT (1st Round)
78	treyman	23-6	13-1	9-3	1-2	14-2		48	109	B-	NT At-large Bid NT (1st Round)
77	treyman	26-4	10-1	14-1	2-2	16-0		33	102	B-	Conf Champion NT At-large Bid NT (1st Round)
76	treyman	23-7	13-1	8-5	2-1	13-3		70	158	C+	Conf Champion PI (1st Round)
75	treyman	24-6	12-1	10-3	2-2	15-1		59	138	B-	Conf Champion NT At-large Bid NT (1st Round)
74	treyman	27-5	15-1	10-3	2-1	13-3		57	148	C+	PI (3rd Round)
73	treyman	23-6	10-1	12-4	1-1	15-1		75	216	C	Conf Champion PI (1st Round)
72	treyman	22-7	11-1	10-5	1-1	14-2		97	249	C	Conf Champion PI (1st Round)
71	treyman	23-5	11-2	12-2	0-1	13-3		94	284	C	PI (1st Round)
70	treyman	19-10	9-4	8-5	2-1	9-7		140	259	C
69	treyman	24-6	14-0	9-5	1-1	13-3		60	150	C	PI (2nd Round)
68	treyman	20-8	12-1	7-6	1-1	10-6		110	249	C-
67	treyman	16-11	11-2	5-8	0-1	10-6		116	159	D+
66	treyman	20-8	9-4	10-3	1-1	10-6		137	275	D
65	treyman	15-13	6-7	8-5	1-1	9-7		180	237	D-
64	treyman	9-19	7-6	1-12	1-1	4-12		287	289	D-

Basically, it looks to me like longevity is valued way, way more than I would've expected (and more than it is in real life). I'm certainly not trying to say I have an amazing resume, but I feel like I have proven myself. In the last five seasons (basically, once the team was all my recruits), I have four postseason appearances, three of them NT, three top 50 RPIs, three NT wins, and a top ten ranking. I knew my resume was lacking last season, but this season, I thought I was ready to move to at least B-level jobs. 

When moving from Div-2 to Div-1, longevity is very important.  As is consistency.  This is especially true for the higher baseline prestige schools.  If a team has a B baseline prestige and is C now (so they have likely sucked for a while) ..  then they are still harder to get than a D baseline prestige school with the same current C prestige.

At least that is my experience.

So, a Big6 opening is harder to get than a Horizon League opening if the teams have the same Current Prestige.

This is moving from low D1 to high D1, not D2 to D1. 

I am qualified for some smaller conference B- jobs, but I'm not qualified for a B prestige job in the Big Sky or B- jobs in the ACC, MWC, or CUSA. I was also not qualified for C+ Missouri. 

I think you're absolutely right that lack of longevity is the problem. I just can't see why longevity should be so important that it outranks quality. How many real life coaches have made multiple runs past the first round in low-major conferences and can't get mediocre Big Six jobs?