Now that the Pigskin Post "poll" of the top coaches of all time has ranked Rockne second (and surely Bryant is first), a few thoughts on ranking coaches. Of course this is essentially a futile endeavor. Rockne and Bryant coached a generation a part. Players were different, the rules of the game were significantly different, the identity of the major competitors has changed.

I'm (and I think most on this Board are) not the least bit surprised that the final ranking puts Bryant ahead of Rockne. The handwriting has been on the wall since Ara's absurdly low ranking (#19) that the poll hugely favored longevity over every other criterion.

Now, to give the devil his due, Bryant (whatever his methods) was a terrific coach. He built teams that for three-plus decades were consistently in the hunt for the national championship. But, of course, over his very long career at Alabama (1958-82) he won only two essentially undisputed national championships: 1961 and 1979.

He had several other "sorta" national championships. For instance, in 1964 he captured both wire services, but that was in an era where the polls were determined before bowl games. In post-season play in 1964, Alabama, however, lost to Texas in the Sugar Bowl and Arkansas (who finished 11-0) beat Nebraska 10-7 in the Cotton Bowl and had defeated Texas during the regular season, so in any rational process Arkansas would have to be adjudged the best team. Some minor services gave Alabama the national championship in 1966, but clearly the best two teams that year were Notre Dame and Michigan St. and after N.D. managed the 10-10 at M.S.U. and wiped out U.S.C. 51-0 there was little doubt who was the best that year. Alabama also makes a claim to the 1973 national championship based upon the U.P.I. poll (which was still pre-bowl) but N.D.'s 24-23 win in the Sugar Bowl and undefeated record left no doubt who was the true champion. Minor services, but no wire services, gave once-beaten Alabama teams titles in 1974, 1975 and 1977, but there were pretty clearly better teams each of those years (including Devine's 1977 squad). Alabama captured one wire service in 1978, but its one loss was to U.S.C., who captured the other wire service (though U.S.C. didn't really beat N.D. despite the reported final score, but I digress). And, of course, he was 0-4 against N.D., but there's not much shame in this. They were all heartstopping games between excellent teams.

Anyway, you get the idea. The Bear got his team to the table with great regularity, but won't go down in history as one of the great deal closers of all time.

Rockne, however, in his tragically shortened career (1918-1930) won three national championships (1924, 1929 and 1930) about as cleanly as they can be won without a playoff. Each squad was undefeated, untied and beat most of the major competition along the way. Moreover, he left about as on top of his game as anyone could, as his 1929 and 1930 teams were perhaps the two most impressive teams in college football history, a point to which I return below. Had Rockne not been taken from this earth, Notre Dame probably would've dominated college football in a fashion and for a stretch unlike any other in history. In fact, imagine for a moment that Rockne had lived and continued to coach until 1941 when Leahy took over the reins. Although one of the intervening coaches (Elmer Layden) was a reasonably good coach, N.D. did not win another National Championship until Leahy's era.

So, to a certain extent, trying to pick between Bryant and Rockne (or Leahy or Parseghian or Holtz) is a value judgment: Do you prefer someone who produced very, very good teams over a long stretch or someone who showed true brilliance for a decade or so? I favor the latter, but evidently the ones doing this "poll" favor the former. So be it.

One interesting way to stack up coaches is to use the Howell rankings. Howell (I provide the link below) has calculated power rankings (PR) for each team for each year back to 1869. He also calculates strength of schedule indices. In his system, 1.000 is the mythical "perfect" team or "perfectly" difficult schedule. Normally the best team each year has a PR in the mid to low .900's. Miami in 2001 was .955, Oklahoma in 2000 was .934, F.S.U. in 1999 was .918. A PR of .800 will normally put you right on the cusp of the top 10. The most difficult schedule is usually around .800. In 2001, Colorado owned the most difficult schedule at .812. Both N.D. and Stanford had difficult schedules: N.D.'s was .722 and Stanford's was .697.

For each N.D. coach starting with Rockne (and omitting interim coaches like Hugh Devore) I averaged their final rankings under Howell's system as well as their PR and SOS. I also report their best rank and their worst rank. I also calculated a one and two-year effect of the coach taking over, measured by whether they moved N.D. up or down in the rankings. For the two-year effect I averaged N.D.'s ranking the two years before the coach took over and his first two years.

Here are the results with each coach ranked by his average ranking (the total number of teams ranked is actually pretty consistently a few over 100 — currently it all the Division I-A teams, about 115) on the Howell scale and some comments afterwards:

Ara Parseghian (1964-1974)

Average rank: 7.6
Average PR: .840
Best rank: 1 (1966)
Worst rank: 16 (1968, 1971)
Average SOS: .674
First year effect: +74
Two year effect: +60
 

Knute Rockne (1918-1930)

Average rank: 8.6
Average PR: .834
Best rank: 1 (1924, 1929, 1930)
Worst rank: 29 (1928)
Average SOS: .632
First year effect: -8
Two year effect: -2

Lou Holtz (1986-1996)

Average rank: 10.5
Average PR: .809
Best rank: 1 (1988, 1989)
Worst rank: 29 (1986)
Average SOS: .773
First year effect: +1
Two year effect: +8

Frank Leahy (1941-43, 1946-1953)

Average rank: 10.6
Average PR: .840
Average SOS: .696
Best rank: 1 (1943)
Worst rank: 66 (1950)
First year effect: +15
Two year effect: +16

Dan Devine (1975-1980)

Average rank: 13.3
Average PR: .812
Best rank: 1 (1977)
Worst rank: 27 (1979)
Average SOS: .799
First year effect: -17
Two year effect: -13

Elmer Layden (1934-1940)

Average rank: 16.9
Average PR: .767
Average SOS: .710
Best rank: 5 (1938)
Worst rank: 27 (1940)
First year effect: +49
Two year effect:+25

Terry Brennan (1954-1958)

Average rank: 24.0
Average PR: .713
Average SOS: .764
Best rank: 3 (1954)
Worst rank: 81 (1956)
First year effect: -1
Two year effect: -5

Hunk Anderson (1931-1933)

Average rank: 28.0
Average PR: .725
Best rank: 4 (1931)
Worst rank: 69 (1933)
First year effect: -3
Two year effect: -6

Gerry Faust (1981-1985)

Average rank: 31.4
Average PR: .672
Best rank: 27 (1982)
Worst rank: 41 (1981)
Average SOS: .766
First year effect: -32
Two year effect: -16

Bob Davie (1997-2001)

Average rank: 33.0
Average PR: .653
Best rank: 13 (2000)
Worst rank: 50 (2001)
Average SOS: .698
First year effect: -14
Two year effect: -15

Joe Kuharich (1959-1962)

Average rank: 51.3
Average PR .562
Best rank: 39 (1961)
Worst rank: 83 (1960)
Average SOS: .766
First year effect: -27
Two year effect: -49

First, as I alluded to above, Ara was severely shortchanged by being ranked #19. Ara was the most consistently excellent coach that N.D. has ever had in the sense that he never had a poor team. Even the great Rockne had a 5-4 team that finished 29th on the Howell ranking. Howell only gives Ara one first place year (1966), in 1973 he has Oklahoma a whisker ahead, though N.D. was quite rationally declared the national champion based upon its unblemished record — Oklahoma had a tie. Moreover, Ara's improvement curve was almost unbelievable. In the two years before Ara took over (1962 and 1963) N.D. was 41st and 78th. In Ara's first two years, N.D. was 4th and 6th. It's more likely that I'll become a Husker fan than that someone will convince me that there are 18 coaches in history who were better than Ara.

Now, as to Rockne, his lifetime performance was phenomenal. His average rating is handicapped a little by his one mediocre year and the fact that his career was so short. Interestingly, Rockne's hire did not immediately help N.D., but it's important to remember that N.D. was a very good program when he arrived. N.D. suffered a grand total of 7 losses in the DECADE before Rockne arrived. It would take a master coach to move N.D. ahead and Rockne succeeded. Rockne didn't have bad opening years: in 1918 he went 3-1-2 and finished 12th and then in 1919 went 9-0-0 but finished 11th according to Howell's rankings, but largely because there were several good teams that year (4 undefeated) and N.D.'s schedule was weak. But by 1929 and 1930, Rockne had built the greatest college football machine, ever. His 1929 team rated a .983; it was undefeated against an insanely difficult schedule of .950. His 1930 team was a .985 and was undefeated against a schedule of identical difficulty.

To contemplate, for a moment, what PR of .985 or .983 means, consider some of the great teams: Miami this year was .955, the 1995 Nebraska team (you remember them, they hung 62 points on Florida) was .941, Ara's 1966 team was .952, the undefeated Army teams of 1944 and 1945 were .959 and .937, Leahy's 1943 team (once beaten) was .963 and his undefeated team of 1949 was .933, Lou's 1988 team was .950 and Devine's 1977 team was .934. Bryant's two essentially undisputed national championship teams (1979 and 1961) were .942 and .952. Rockne's 1929 and 1930 teams dominated against tougher competition in a way that has never been duplicated.

On the all-undervalued team is Lou Holtz. Holtz is very much the peer of N.D.'s great coaches. Interestingly, Howell gives him two national championships: 1988 and 1989. In 1989 N.D. played one of the hardest schedules in the modern era: a rating of .901 and the Irish finished 12-1. Howell gives N.D. the championship that year (.939 to .901) over Miami. For those of you wondering about 1993, he gives F.S.U. the nod (.933 to .881, with Nebraska third at .867).

Leahy also shows up extremely well, as he should. He improved N.D. immediately and his average PR of .840 ties for first with Ara's. His average ranking is handicapped by his one bad year and his relatively short career.

Devine also shows up as a strong coach, he just had the bad luck to follow Ara. Nobody in the history of N.D. played schedules as tough as Devine's.

As we come to the N.D. coaches that didn't win a National Championship, Elmer Layden appears to be the best. He did a good deal to pull the program out of the doldrums to which it had been sent by Hunk Anderson, who succeeded Rockne (remember that basic advice that apparently sunk in with Willingham but not with Davie: you want to follow the guy who followed the legend). Layden's building helped to produce Leahy's success.

As we drift into the land of the mediocre, we find Terry Brennan. Brennan probably was a decent coach and he certainly produced one of the most famous victories in N.D. history, the 7-0 win over Oklahoma that stopped Wilkinson's winning streak. He stayed at a pretty high level for the first couple of years after Leahy, but then had one of the worst years in N.D. history in 1956. He actually had N.D. on reasonable footing, however, by the time he left the job. In 1957 N.D. was 7-3 — finishing 12th on Howell's scale — against a very difficult schedule and in 1958 was 6-4 against an insanely difficult schedule, finishing 15th.

The darkest days ever for the N.D. football program followed Brennan. Kuharich never had a winning season and never had N.D. higher than 39th. That, coupled with Devore's 2-7 interim stint in 1963 (Howell ranking 78th) put N.D. in dire straits. In fact, if N.D. hadn't stolen Ara from Northwestern, N.D. might be Northwestern. N.D had fielded no decent teams in five years, no really good teams in a decade, and yet N.D. hired Ara and suddenly the Irish were a perpetual contender again. (18 coaches better than Ara? I'm still waiting.)

To consider a bottom-feeder's issue for a moment: Who was the worse coach, Davie or Faust? Howell's data supports the conclusion to which I have been gradually drifting, which is that Davie was actually a bit worse, despite his slightly better record (35-25 to 30-26-1). Davie, despite his perpetual moaning about the schedule, actually had considerably easier schedules than every other coach post-Ara. Davie actually produced one team (the 2000 team, which was 13th) that was reasonably good and another (the 1998 team, 24th) that was better than Faust's best team, but his bad teams were much worse.

Finally, a few words about the first-year and two-year effects of coaches. Particularly if a coach follows a mediocre or worse coach, the first two years usually are a pretty good signal as to where the program is headed. Faust's last two years N.D. was 28th and 30th, so when Holtz was 29th and 13th in 1986 and 1987 it was a good sign that he had things turned around. Ara's remarkable turnaround has been discussed above. Leahy and Layden both provided immediate relief. A slight decline (for example Rockne's and Devine's first two years) is not necessarily a bad sign if the program is already functioning at a high level. However, with coaches who prove to be poor, the signs are there the first two years. Anderson, Kuharich, Davie and Faust all had the program headed in the wrong direction in the first two years.

If you want to find something encouraging in Willingham's record, consider that Stanford was 48th and 67th in the two years before Willingham was hired and then 32nd and 34th in his first two years. A repeat of that effort at N.D. would have the Irish at roughly 25th next year and then among the top handful in 2003.

http://www.jhowell.net/cf/cfindex.htm