Hot Seat 2017 (?) Pitt - Syracuse - Oregon State - UNF - Jacksonville U (FL) - Georgia - VCU - Richmond - Sam Houston State - UTSA - LSU -
http://www.goviks.com/news/2017/6/20/WSOC_20170620.aspx Laura Schott is now listed as a coach at Portland FC.
PAC 12 - Hot: Oregon, Oregon St Warm: Washington Outlook- Does Oregon care? They have shown virtually no signs of improvement. Oregon St started out well but since have been awful. UW is a roller coaster of a program who recruit well but rarely seem to put it together on the field. Couple strong seasons probably saving her job. Big 10- Hot: Mich St (not sure they care), Indiana Warm: Iowa Outlook- MSU does not care and could be a good program. Indiana started out blistering but since have been huge duds. Iowa will be given at least a year but progress has to be shown this year. Big 12- Hot: Texas Warm: TCU Outlook- This has to be the hottest seat in America. Last in an absolutely dismal Big 12 isn't a good look. TCU going to the NCAA tournament probably saved his job. They lost a lot and will need to show that was not an anomaly. SEC- Hot: Georgia, LSU, Tenn, Warm: Alabama, Ole Miss, Kentucky Outlook- LSU have been really bad as of late. Does all of his early success buy him years? Tenn and Georgia have to win. Alabama will probably be given a year but needs to show progress. Step back out of conf tournament wouldn't be good. Ole Miss is a really weird program. They have missed the conference tournament more than they have made it but have a sweet 16. Roller Coaster that at some point needs to show consistency. Kentucky was given a 2 year contract. ACC- Hot: Pitt, Syracuse, Miami Warm: BC Outlook: Pitt and Syracuse either don't care or are extremely hot. Have shown zero signs of life. BC has had drama after drama follow it. It is very undersupported in the world of Big Girl soccer. Maybe they have set expectations accordingly. They have had success.
Take Miami and Texas off this list. Those coaches got contract extensions. Maybe you think they should be hot seats, but the AD's actions are what matters and they are fine for the time being. Not sure how TCU is warm after you said they just made the tournament. Same for Kentucky when you said he was given a 2-year deal. Agree about Boston College. Program was good and now can't even make the NCAAs. And appears to have 3-4 players leave the program each year which usually isn't a good sign. Wonder if new AD there has concern on that.
I understand what you are saying, but it in the world of college athletics, unless you have seen those contracts, they may mean absolutely nothing. For instance, Texas has some top future recruits coming to them. They could have given her a contract with zero financial impact on the University as a show of faith so the recruits didn't get spooked. Happens all of the time in other sports. Miami, you may be correct. Just doesn't seem like they care. You would think losing to FIU and FGCU would raise some flags there. TCU has been there 5 years and made 1 NCAA tournament. When they hired they swung for the fences. I can't imagine that is their end goal. 0 NCAA tournament wins in 5 years. They lost a ton of talent to graduation. Compare to what Arkansas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Baylor have done in similar times and this year is important. When you hire a coach and give him a 2 year deal, that speaks volumes. In fact, I have never even heard of a 2 year deal. Warm means they probably have 2 years, but this year is an important year.
You're right about Texas, but not TCU. One NCAA Tournament in 5 years sounds bad, but their 2016 tournament appearance was the FIRST in program history. Last year they were on the hot seat, and they answered the bell. Borrowing a precipitous downfall this year (and having seen some of their recruits in person I doubt it) they are fine. TCU is not Texas, nor a historic power. If you think someone else could do better there, you might be right, but credit where credit is due. Also, Randy Waldrum will be considered for the Texas job. Mark my words lol
5 year conference record is 7-22-10. It is the weakest P5 conference by a ways. They lose 8 starters including 5 of their top 7 scorers. Excuse me if I hold my applause. 2011: (year before they got there) 7-11-1 2012: 7-10-4 (1-5-2 conf) 2013: 6-10-3 (2-5-1 conf) 2014: 8-8-3 (1-4-3 conf) 2015: 8-7-4 (2-3-3 conf) 2016: 12-7-2 (2-5-1 conf)
Kentucky was probably given two years to see if there is any improvement; he probably gave the whole spiel "we are way better than our record suggests and if I was coach etc etc." I could be wrong but that is why the two year deal makes sense. I also believe Colorado State should now be added to the list; Hempen has been told the program "needs to improve quickly" so I'm guessing that seat is hot
Take Indiana off hot list -made the big ten tournament last year and posied for significant upswing in 2017
Listen, the conversation had gotten way off topic. I attempted to bring it back to topic. It has been greeted with asinine arguments such as "He isn't on the hot seat because he was less bad than the year before." OR "She isn't on the hot eat because she said that they are going to be better." This is major D1 soccer. The Georgia coach got let go after making the NCAA Tournament.
That's because your whole basis is asinine on many you listed without full knowledge of every program
OK, so you are clearly connected to the Indiana program. 2013 (her first year) 15-7-1 Since 2014: 7-11-1 2015: 3-10-6 2016: 7-9-4 Please don't let stats get in the way of your daughter being committed there or you coaching there. She won with someone else's players and has gotten worst significantly. If you don't think a recent 3 year record of 17-30-11 gets you on the hot seat I don't know what to tell you. As for poised for success? Please enlighten. They had 1 player make any of the All-Big 10 teams and she graduated.Not that TDS is the end all but IU shows 1 2 star recruit, 1 3 star recruit and the others are unranked. They don't have a single player ranked in the top 150.
So while your comment on the UGA coach (now at Lamar) is factual, it's not true throughout college soccer. Not every school is held to that standard or is looking to make a change in that situation, or even a situation close to that. A lot of AD's/SWA's just want graduation/APR rates to be good, kids to be out of trouble, and be remotely competitive. Whether that's right or wrong is up for you to judge. Either way, there are posters on this board (many actually in the profession) that may have second-hand knowledge (or in some cases maybe first hand knowledge) of what is going on inside certain athletic departments or staffs around the country. So while your posts (and others) may make logical sense to you, they may also be viewed as "asinine" (to use your word) to others who factually know differently. Or, in a rare, but possible occurrence maybe the knowledge acquired conflicts. Either way, sometime two truths can exist. Should TCU be doing better? Yeah, probably. Hard to see why a P5 team in the Metroplex (the only P5 IN the Metroplex) isn't a top 25, consistent NCAA tournament performer year in and year out, and has been outshone by UNT and even SMU. Could someone else do a better job there? Yeah, probably. Is the Big 12 weak relative to other P5 conferences? Yeah, definitely. Are they in danger of getting fired a year after a historical run (by program standards)? My secondhand knowledge is no, they're not. Especially if they reach another NCAA Tournament. All these truths can exist. Just because someone thinks a coach "should" be fired or the "numbers and records say they're on the hot seat" doesn't make it so. And posters who have knowledge of a situation shouldn't be name-called for posting actual facts, even if they're opposite of what someone else believes the "numbers say." One other case in point. There is NO way the Ole Miss coach Matt Mott is getting fired (I know you may have only been suggesting the seat is only warm, but still). Again, I totally agree with your points, but it doesn't change facts. He is in year two of a four year contract extension after the 2015 season, has one of the highest Team GPA's nationally, and the SEC takes all but the worst 4 teams to the tournament (10/14), giving him some measure of security. Again, could someone do better there? Maybe so. Has he been inconsistent? Yeah probably. Did he luck his way to the Sweet 16? You could make that argument, I'll let you judge. All these truths exist, but he and his staff are in no danger, even if people think he should be (for example, the coach who is now at Lamar was at Ole Miss and NEVER missed the conference tournament, and Mott already has in seasons prior to his sweet 16 run). But just because you might know players like I do that had a poor experience playing for a particular coach or at a particular school, etc. doesn't automatically put them on the hot seat. On another note, I do expect Mott to put in for the UT job if it were to open, not that he would necessarily get it. Just wanted to point out that truths can coexist, and also set the record straight on a couple of schools for THIS season. What happens after is up in the air. I don't have a horse in this particular race, but I feel that certain knowledge may be beneficial for the board. Of course no job is guaranteed, just ask the former coach at Southeastern Louisiana.
Excellent post! I am not saying anyone SHOULD be fired. I am saying, based on results, theses schools seem to have some important seasons coming up. Just as you said TCU is "not getting fired. Especially if they make another NCAA." I would argue that is correct. Just as I would argue if they have a poor season it moves the needle the other way. You make good points about other factors being involved. My point with TCU is that they swung for the absolute fences when they hired. Clearly they think they can win there (and want to.) Just not convinced they aren't looking at what OU, Arkansas, Baylor, Texas Tech (all hired around the same time) have done and don't have results envy.
Here are some numbers about rate of improvement or decline of the programs you've cited for comparison to TCU. They represent the average Adjusted RPI change per year since the coach's hire as head coach: TCU +.0076 Oklahoma +.0312 Arkansas + .0184 Baylor -.008 Texas Tech +.0114
What about ECU and Wake. I know Wake made a College Cup and that has been mentioned as his saving grace the past few years. When does what have you done lately kick in? Also, I would add Tenn.
Michigan State does not care and current coach's contract has a couple years left until he is eligible for retirement. Job will go to Assoc Head Coach. Wasted potential there... Kentucky got two years because they are still paying old coach up until then. Would asssume they will go after a big name once they aren't paying two people. But I assumed that at Miami and new coach got a 4 year extension, so who knows.
Gene Smith , new head coach at Marist. http://www.goredfoxes.com/ViewArtic...02&DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=211638810&DB_OEM_ID=27700
Pensky has been mentioned a few times on here and he seems to survive. Possibly the admins are being patient for better results? In regards to Indiana, how is it they are trending up when the best season was the first one? Just curious how that's t works. She took over a program that had talent with 9 and 10 wins the previous 2 years and took them downhill after a talented senior class left. 7 wins followed by 3 seems like going backwards. Also, what are the trends for Pitt, Syracuse, and Oregon?
cp, whispers has a point. Do you have anybody who's trending down? I asked about Syracuse and UCF (I think) who seem to stink (mid-bottom of conferences) but they both showed upward trend.
Holmes being harsh here huh? Let us know how you really feel. Mid-bottom means you stink. Define stink. If you are lets say number 8 in a 12 team good conference like the ACC or the SEC, etc, does that team stink? Or lets say that you are a top team in a lower level conference but cant beat a number eight team in the ACC does the lower conference team stink as well?
I'd say bottom of conference, sustained, and declining number of conference wins over 4 year period after assuming job (previous guy's legacy recruits outperformed your own). The latter is Tiff and wife. I'm not saying Syracuse is winnable in a southern based women's soccer conference, it's not (privately expensive, snow, fluorescent, bubble, tire chunx) so there really isn't anything a coach can do. They're about par, beat Pitt 1-0, beat the neighborhood Ivy and Patriots. I still don't understand how there can be any upward trend here other than better opponents. Nothing attributable to Phil as he's handcuffed. I am surprised he's not loaded with Canadians, though, it's better than most of the places they go, Maybe he's patriotic, although I think he was reared in the Commonwealth.
Tennessee's talent under Pensky is trending upward, for sure. He's now got to turn it into more wins. After a poor start last year, the Vols were solid in the last half of the season (though not able to beat the best teams) and have definite potential this year. He was slow to bolster the back end. Kelly apparently didn't do much recruiting her last two years--after doing quite well her first several years-- before taking the money at Texas. As for Kentucky, I was surprised they fired the former coach. Yea, last year was bad, but he did a respectable job and the Cats were definitely competitive in a conference that is steadily getting tougher. I saw that he's been hired as an assistant at Cal.
The ARPI trends over the head coaching spans of the current head coaches are: Indiana -0.0162 average ARPI decline per year (a big dive from year 1 to year 2 followed by slight improvements in years 3 and 4) Pittsburgh -0.001 decline per year (slight decline) Oregon +0.0017 improvement per year (slight improvement) Syracuse +0.0062 improvement per year