EDIT: Actually found a great example of why this idea would have no chance of working, Auburn in Tark is 10-0 with 9 games on the road playing mostly sims and has a 54 RPI, do you think if they went 6-10 in conference they'd have any chance of increasing their RPI?

---------------------------------------
--------------------------------------

if it is a tough conference... yes.

and the other thing to consider is the opponents and whether they are likely to win more in conf than they did in noncon (which is quite likely if these opponents were smallconference teams who may have performed poorly in noncon, but will have a chance to win some games in their weak conf.

coaches by world with 10 nba picks and .700 win pct, active and retired

naismith	wooden	rupp	smith	iba	allen	Crum	tark	knight	phelan
bkdries	playmaker	jakemarley	goose goslin	lostmyth2	cal_bears	kelby03	oldresorter	lostmyth2	lostmyth2
daveymac	oldresorter	gordonbops	jsreilly	pottle	viperhoops	lwbraun	grecianfox	tbrown24	tannermcc
nellie	bluespruce	ttnorm	marmup	combalt	kyle_lee7	taz21	oldave	rossett2	jskenner
oldresorter		combalt	petec	lwbraun	tdiddy3	leustachy	sacfflgod	ledfoot	brocktune310
combalt		oldman_sons	oldresorter	porkpower	marmup	rds_lsu	porkpower	srunstro	pakeli
lostmyth		delynn10	jimmybosox	oldresorter	girt25	oldman	daveymac	jbohrman	daveymac
airjare			jleo	jdberry40	airjare	jason5	bdub13	azamat	glen87
			mullycj	kckgt72		bluespruce	jjmurphy1127	weirdrash
				bejeebers		urdanick	acn24	tannermcc
						steelman97		oldresorter

Quote: Originally Posted By daveymac on 3/01/2010
coaches by world with 10 nba picks and .700 win pct, active and retired

naismith	wooden	rupp	smith	iba	allen	Crum	tark	knight	phelan
bkdries	playmaker	jakemarley	goose goslin	lostmyth2	cal_bears	kelby03	oldresorter	lostmyth2	lostmyth2
daveymac	oldresorter	gordonbops	jsreilly	pottle	viperhoops	lwbraun	grecianfox	tbrown24	tannermcc
nellie	bluespruce	ttnorm	marmup	combalt	kyle_lee7	taz21	oldave	rossett2	jskenner
oldresorter		combalt	petec	lwbraun	tdiddy3	leustachy	sacfflgod	ledfoot	brocktune310
combalt		oldman_sons	oldresorter	porkpower	marmup	rds_lsu	porkpower	srunstro	pakeli
lostmyth		delynn10	jimmybosox	oldresorter	girt25	oldman	daveymac	jbohrman	daveymac
airjare			jleo	jdberry40	airjare	jason5	bdub13	azamat	glen87
			mullycj	kckgt72		bluespruce	jjmurphy1127	weirdrash
				bejeebers		urdanick	acn24	tannermcc
						steelman97		oldresorter

Just curious as to why the number of players drafted would have any relevance to this discussion. A coach's ability to get a player drafted or not get a player drafted seems irrelevant to me. If anything, I'm more impressed with the coach who has 20 seasons of experience a .700 winning % and has less than 5 players drafted. That would mean they've learned how to avoid early entries and I would love to hear how that is done. I'm not disputing the list mind you...I only play in Tark and except for the ommission of gillispie I think it's pretty much the list that I would come up with. I think the winning % has a much greater relevance than the number of players drafted though. My criteria would be winning % and championships, and I would weight the last 10 seasons higher than anything that happened previously only because the game has changed so much over time.

If you have a .700 winning percent you will have players drafted. The reason for using 'players drafted' is to differentiate from those coaches that rack up wins in empty divisions v those where the competition is the greatest if my understanding of this is correct.

It's imperfect either way. The players drafted discriminates against coaches in non-BCS conferences, while the winning % is harder for the guys in BCS conferences. I actually think setting a baseline for DI NT wins would be much, much better to use than players drafted, but I don't know if that's a sortable category.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/01/2010It's imperfect either way. The players drafted discriminates against coaches in non-BCS conferences, while the winning % is harder for the guys in BCS conferences. I actually think setting a baseline for DI NT wins would be much, much better to use than players drafted, but I don't know if that's a sortable category.

Nope only shows top 10. I wish that was possible tho.

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 3/01/2010If you have a .700 winning percent you will have players drafted. The reason for using 'players drafted' is to differentiate from those coaches that rack up wins in empty divisions v those where the competition is the greatest if my understanding of this is correct

Yeah I didn't think about the guys who load up on sim wins, or whose conferences are full of sims.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/01/2010It's imperfect either way. The players drafted discriminates against coaches in non-BCS conferences, while the winning % is harder for the guys in BCS conferences. I actually think setting a baseline for DI NT wins would be much, much better to use than players drafted, but I don't know if that's a sortable category.

agreed I wish they had a screen of d1 only records, it's just too hard to go through and add up what guys did at d1. This little chart I did in like 5 minutes by just sorting by draft picks and then scanning down the list. But to do it by d1 wins (even just a baseline) seems like a big job.

Quote: Originally Posted By daveymac on 3/02/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/01/2010
It's imperfect either way. The players drafted discriminates against coaches in non-BCS conferences, while the winning % is harder for the guys in BCS conferences. I actually think setting a baseline for DI NT wins would be much, much better to use than players drafted, but I don't know if that's a sortable category.

agreed I wish they had a screen of d1 only records, it's just too hard to go through and add up what guys did at d1. This little chart I did in like 5 minutes by just sorting by draft picks and then scanning down the list. But to do it by d1 wins (even just a baseline) seems like a big job

With the names in those worlds I don't think they are the ones loading up on sims therefore, you probably have some of the best coaches and if any were off it's not many.

Wanted to bump this thread and ask another best coach question...

In my mind, there is the Mount Rushmore of HD coaches: OR, billy_g, Rails, and LM.  Who is the next great one?  Who is the next coach who is going to freakishly dominant and add himself to the greatest of all-time discussion?  Or is there just too much parity now for a new greatest coach to emerge?  Can girt/daalter be mentioned in this discussion?

My vote is for Narco to be the next one to break through.  6 NT's in the past 10 seasons in a very competitive D3 Tark world is mightily impressive.

I have 220 NT titles under my alternate ID, SIMAI. I get bored after a world has 10+ seasons so I kind of quit trying after that. But I do dominate,especially in D2 and D1 when new worlds open up and stuff.

Posted by sublightd on 1/9/2011 8:20:00 PM (view original):
I have 220 NT titles under my alternate ID, SIMAI. I get bored after a world has 10+ seasons so I kind of quit trying after that. But I do dominate,especially in D2 and D1 when new worlds open up and stuff.

haha

Posted by tkimble on 1/9/2011 7:50:00 PM (view original):
Wanted to bump this thread and ask another best coach question...

In my mind, there is the Mount Rushmore of HD coaches: OR, billy_g, Rails, and LM.  Who is the next great one?  Who is the next coach who is going to freakishly dominant and add himself to the greatest of all-time discussion?  Or is there just too much parity now for a new greatest coach to emerge?  Can girt/daalter be mentioned in this discussion?

ME... at D2/D3

edit:  I'm already the best coach in my own mind, it's just a matter of time...

I nominate dacj501 as the next great star.   At DII, he won Rupp with a 35-0 record (only one senior). He was RU (32-3) in Knight.