It seems like unless you're a coach who actively loses your team games by doing dumb shit, it's really hard to differentiate everyone. Even the ones at the top are hard, because a good bit of that is a function of their situation.
need a weighted formula of: overall coaching record record at current school overall recruiting history recruiting history at current school rolling 10 year average win % of said program rolling 10 year average of program's recruiting rankings I may or may not have explored such a formula...
I may or may not have also explored a formula (or an index) that awards points/weights to bowl wins, NY6 appearances, conference titles, CCG appearances, CFP appearances, NCGs, and NCs when judging coaches, all should come into play but the last 3-5 years should be far more weighted in the calc because in this sport it really is what have you done for me lately
I actually give Franklin pretty high scores for talent evaluation. His teams always seem more talented - especially with high draft prospects - than the recruiting rankings suggest.
personally, I feel like a better comp to Beamer is Whittingham/Utah overachieved. relied on toughness and strong defense. won a lot of games they probably shouldn't. grabbed some conference titles while the "powers" in conference wasted talent and stepped on their dicks Franklin is a less religious Mark Richt imo. primary rivals just have better rosters and development and neither have/were been able to unlock the program's full potential leaving the fanbase restless and unsatisfied
you guys will point to Tyler Warren and ignore the umpteen amount of kids he pulls from Virginia that did precisely nothing. the amount of VA talent alone that rotted away in Happy Valley is insane.
but that isn't talent evaluation, it's a development problem Beamer routinely pulled less heralded classes and then got them to overachieve
Beamer virtually never stole games, I have absolutely no idea where you even begin to come to that conclusion. I fucking wish Beamer could have stolen games, VT would have had more than two BCS/BCA wins by now.
well they must have stole wins given they have never recruited at an elite level. so to win conference titles with Miami or Florida St or Clemson in your conference sure would point to getting the absolute most out of what they signed and relying on strong development Va Tech has never and will never be a blue chip ratio program, unlike Penn St who is a mainstay there
nah, Beamer and staff evaluated talent better than most everyone else. recruiting imbeciles calling Kam Chancellor a 2* is a Mike Farrell problem. Beamer didn't overdevelop Chancellor, he (or rather Foster) simply saw what others couldn't.
you going to sit there with a straight face and tell me Kam Chancellor wasn't poorly evaluated and that Beamer simply unleashed his hidden potential? I never said stars didn't matter and it's cute you're inferring that from this but Beamer was an elite evaluator and it's ridiculous to argue everything came from development when you can go through countless recruiting profiles from that time period and see VT was often just the first to offer. christ, VT fans would joke about this very fact that a PSU or FSU or another blue blood would rush in with an offer once they saw some 2* get the Beamer seal of approval.
These one off Kam Chancellor and Virginia examples are not narrative tellers. I’m not debating that they’re accurate. I just think they feel like one-off grievances more than major trends. How many 1st round picks did Beamer develop vs Franklin? Especially 1st rounders that weren’t 5 stars. That, to me, is a better conversation (and one I don’t know the answer to but am generally interested).
the overwhelming amount of Beamer's success was because he happened to cross paths with a generational defensive mind, coach him, hire him as a GA, and keep him in place. that's the big secret. for a good fifteen years the best DC in the country was Bud Foster, it's not that difficult to win a bunch when someone like that is on your staff.
VT has had 14 first round picks in their school history and 9 came from the Beamer era...and Chancellor wasn't one of them, he was a 5th round pick so Mike Farrell must have gotten into a lot of GM's ears Franklin has had 6 first round picks while in Happy Valley
and 8 in 12 years is pretty damn good iyam especially since they aren't sitting on +70% blue chip rosters annually
And firmly top 10 in total number of players on NFL rosters. Talent evaluation is certainly not a gripe I would have with Franklin.
Yeah hitting on a random 2 star is way less impressive than developing a slew of non-Top 100 recruits into first round picks. Franklin seems to do a wonderful job of identifying low 4 star/high 3 star guys that absolutely explode.
nope. again, my only real concerns with Franklin has been his choices at QB coach and the development or lack thereof at the position and a general lack of impact guys at WR his trenches are always loaded with top line talent. they have a history regardless of coach at producing NFL caliber RBs and LBs. and the secondary play has been above adequate as well just can't seem to unlock the pass game no matter who he hires or what blue chips he signs
Everything I need to know about James Franklin I learned back in 2016 when he kicked a 21 yard FG down 28 in the 3rd quarter.
like I said, I explored. I in no way have finalized the metric it's difficult. you need a lot of data and you need it to be coach specific (rec, recruiting, bowl stats, CCG, etc). and then trying to establish the proper weights is where I really got lost in the weeds and kind of gave up. what is the scale? 0 to 1? is it like SP+ whether there are no upper or lower bounds to where it can end up. Do I value some bowls far differently than others (probably lol). Last check, I have coach specific recruiting data 2014-2025. I have bowl data and team records back to 1992. I still need to update 2024 coaching specific records (account for interim coaches, one off items like that). But also, most of my data is P5 specific, so how incomplete is the data set without G5? This is how my brain works once I start building something lol at some point I'll probably pick it up and try again as it would be fun to have some type of analytical based metric as a measuring stick for when these lists come out every year. I likely solicit y'all for feedback and a smell test to figure out tweaks that need made. But, something like best coach is a very subjective thing because of so many moving parts and what you value in a coach, or even what a specific program needs, might be different than my perspective on evaluating the worth/greatness of a coach
Saw beck split up with the basketball player. Miami fans should probably worry less about that shoulder and more about going down an ass rabbit hole from which he may never emerge
Franklin has never had a great QB at Penn State. I may be wrong, but is his best so far McSorely? He wins a lot more of these with a better QB.
no, none were great because they didn't develop them but he's had numerous QBs that with better coaching and development, probably leads to better results and more positive memories about their time at PSU he inherited Hackenberg (a 5 star) 2014-15 Hackenberg (composite 5 star) 2016-18 McSorley (3 star) 2019-22 Clifford (4 star) 2023-25 Allar (5 star) and to your question, he's had the best results with Allar
Franklin loves his white QBs from Ohio. Here’s his next great one after Allar: https://247sports.com/player/ethan-grunkemeyer-46116115/