How many?

[trufan]

How many 20-win seasons do you think a head coach should have in order to establish the idea that they are a good Division I head basketball coach?
To give some no-brainers to start with, Geno (19 of 23 seasons for 83%( and Pat Summitt (27 of 33 for 82%) and Tara Vandeveer (22 of 28 for 79%) are Hall-Of-Fame coaches---clearly good.
Then many might agree that Shari Coale at OU is quite good (6 of 11 for 67%) as was Cheryl Burnett at SMSU then Michigan (10 of 18 for 56%).
Mark Turgeon, on the men's side (maybe not a truly fair comparison, but at least we all can agree that he's a good coach) has had three 20 win seasons of 7 as a head coach, for 43%.
Just wondering what you all think? Is there a threshhold number or percent?

[molly jabali]

with this program, you might want to lower the number to 15 win seasons! :D

[1972Shocker]

I think just picking a set number of wins as the dividing point that separates good coaches from bad coaches is arbitrary. While if you are consistently winning 20 games a year you are probably a good coach. However, if you are not doing this does not necessarily mean you are a bad coach.

Furthermore, winning 20 games a year in the Summit League is not the same as winning 20 games a year in SEC or Big 12. This is especially true in Women's College Basketball where the there is a huge gap in the quality of Team's at the top and at the bottom.

Also the situation you are in will also have an impact on evaluating the job a Coach is doing. Obviously, expectations at taking over a struggling, rebuilding program are a lot different than taking over a traditional powerhouse.

WSU replaced a Coach who had a 5-year career record of 74-70 for a 0.514 winning %. While there are no doubt factors other than simply on the court performance that may have led to this change, this does give you some baseline of expectations for the new Coach, in this case Jane Albright. Also keep in mind that Jane was the 1st WSU Coach to benefit from the investment in the Roundhouse Rennaissance.

In her first four seasons through the end of last year Jane was 39-73 for a 0.348 winning %. Clearly a sub-par performance so far, I think most would agree. In fact, it is the worst performance of the six coaches WSU has had since Women's basketball joined the AIAW in 1974 and the NCAA in 1981.

Here are the career numbers:

Larry Thye (4 seasons) 1974-1978: 32-56 (0.364)
Kathryn Bunnell (5 seasons) 1978-1983: 71-73 (0.493)
Karen Harden (6 seasons) 1983-1989: 63-98 (0.391)
Linda Hargrove (9 seasons) 1989-1998: 113-136 (0.454)
Darryl Smith (5 seasons) 1998-2003: 74-70 (0.514)
Jane Albright (4 seasons) 2003-2007: 39-73 (0.348)

That being said there are other ways to evaluate a Coach. Of more than a little importance are integrity, running a clean program, good classroom performance and graduation rate, and good community relations.

As far as I know Jane does a good job in all those areas.

There are also other ways to evaluate a Coach's on the court performance. I like Coaches whose team's are notably better at the end of the year than at the beginning of the year. Also Coaches whose teams improve from year to year. The latter of course is more likely in a rebuilding situation than it is once you have reached a high level of success. At that point, sustaining a high level of success becomes the measuring stick and may be harder than the rebuilding process.

Also has the Coach gotten as much as possible or perhaps even more out of the talent they have to work with. I like Coaches who seem to produce a team that is greater than the sum of the parts.

Look at what Kurt Budke, Jim Littell and the OSU staff have done at OSU.

In 2003-04 OSU went 8-20 Overall and 3-13 in the Big 12 under Julie Goodenough including a 54-49 road loss to WSU in Jane's 1st year. In 2004-05 OSU went 7-20 and 2-14 in Goodenough's last year. She clearly did not live up to her surname.

Kurt Budke, who by the way has a Master of Science degree from Wichita State earned in 1985, then tookover the program. His first team in 2005-06 was 6-22 and 0-16. His 2006-07 team was 20-11 and 8-8 and voted the most improved team in the nation. So far this season they are 8-0 and torching most of their opponents including the 85-39 blowout of the Shockers. Based on his performance at OSU and his previous career record I think there is no doubt Kurt Budke is a good coach.

As far as Jane's on the court performance, I doubt that we would be having discussions about her job if she had a WSU career winning % of 0.500 or better and her teams showed consistent improvement as discussed above. However, this has not been the case. Personally, I have not seen much improvement in Jane's teams within a year or from year-to-year. In fact, perhaps just the opposite is true. In addition, I don't see that Jane's teams are better than the sum of there parts.

Are their mitigating factors beyond Jane's control such as injuries that have prevented her from being more successful? Perhaps, but I don't know enough about specific injury situations to really evaluate that, although other teams in the MVC have been hit much harder by injuries than the Shocks during Jane's tenure including Drake last year. (Shocks were 0-3 last year vs the depleted Drake team).

I do think the current Freshman class may prove to be Jane's best recruiting class so far, although that remains to be proven. Not sure that in and of itself will save Jane's job if her team continues to underperform.

Finally, the ultimate factor for how good a Coach is doing is not how many wins he or she gets (although this kind of goes hand-in-hand), but what is happening with the level of fan support and fan interest in the program. Ultimately, that is probably what Jim Schaus is looking at. In Jane's case, fan support and interest is clearly on the decline.

[tgcshock]

1972Shocker, this is by far the most rational and logical of the cases that have been made for possibly firing Albright. I find very little to argue with. Although I have generally defended Albright, to some extent, on this board I suspect that we would tend to agree more than we disagree. As I have said before (and as you hint at) the development of the freshman class (including RS freshman Jacie Hoyt) and the amount of total improvement in overall record and conference finish will probably ultimately decide whether Albright is retained for another year.

I think you have the nail on the head of the dilemma faced by JS. Albright runs a clean program and her players tend to become better people under her. For an AD, this means a lot. On the other hand, fan interest is clearly waning. That has to be taken into account as well. The question is, how many wins does it take to revive interest? I continue to think that it will be the end of the season before we really know which way this is going to go but again I don't disagree with your major points. Nice summary of the facts.

[newshock1234]

Jane is a nice lady and all, but she needs to go. She has had enough to put together a decent squad

[molly jabali]

i agree totally...very well stated.

[1972Shocker]

I continue to think that it will be the end of the season before we really know which way this is going to go but again I don't disagree with your major points. Nice summary of the facts.

Thanks for the compliment.

We may have a pretty good idea of which way the wind is blowing for Jane by the mid-point of the MVC season, although I guess anything can happen.

Regardless of how you feel about Jane, I don't think she is going anywhere during the season (unless things totally fall apart), so we really don't have a lot of choice but to see how the season goes. I am not rooting against Jane. I hope the team does well this year, although I'm not willing to bet on it.

However, I just don't see how Jane can survive another poor season.

Let's see how things go but so far I am not encouraged, but that is changeable.

:posterwu: :goshocks: :posterwsu: