Lets have some fun! Who is the best coach in the Big 12 and why? The post was created because it is a Soccer forum and some of the other threads lack the discussion of soccer! Lets hear what people think. If you post someone let us know why you think that way.
It depends... Best career while coaching within the Big 12, or best coach overall now coaching in the Big 12. Best Coach Overall - Chris Petrucelli - 2-time National Coach of the Year and 1 National Championship Sad as it is, his previous success has not translated into success for the Texas soccer program. From the Texas website: Through 16 seasons as a head coach, Petrucelli’s current overall record stands at 262-74-16 (.767), which places him among the top 15 active Division I women’s soccer coaches in both career winning percentage and victories. Since joining the Big 12: Chris Petrucelli 48-19-3 (.707) Conference Titles 1 (2001) Two coaches with the most success in the Big 12... John Walker - Produced many conference championships with mild success in the NCAA tournament. From the NU website: In 11 years at the helm for the Huskers, Walker has produced the sixth-best career winning percentage among active Division I women’s soccer coaches at .772 (186-52-8). He also ranks seventh all-time with his .772 winning percentage. Walker is the only head coach to produce more than 100 wins in fewer than eight seasons. 8 Conference Titles (3 regular season '96, '99, '00 & 5 tournament '96, '99-'00, '02) G. Guerrieri - Same as Walker, more success recently. From the TAMU website: Under Guerrieri’s watch, A&M has posted an overall record of 202-60-9 (.762) and a 69-17-5 (.786) mark in Big 12 competition. He has posted a career record of 218-71-9 (.747) in 14 seasons as a collegiate head coach. 7 conference titles (4 regular season '97, '02, '04, '05 & 3 tournament '01, '04, '05).
If we can choose from other than just head coaches, I am going to have to add Phil Stephenson at A&M.
Despite the incredible amount of underachieving that goes on in this conference as whole, in particular come tourney time, my votes are Francis and G. Both have taken programs to top 25 status. HOW anyone can mention Chris P is beyond me. It is BY FAR the best job in the Big 12 and he has won 1 conference championship in 7 or 8 years?!?! And his last 4 NCAA tourneys - Losses to UTEP, Ole Miss and SMU twice! He won a national championship at Notre Dame but that has to be the coach doing the least with the most. Any other sport and he would fired! And please save your he knows the game. He is performing WELLLL under expectations for that University. End of story. That is how coaches are graded. Walker has done nothing apart help train the Canadian National team. He hasn't done jack in 4 years. He gets the best Canadian's, plays an atrocious style AND underachieves. I do know that the SEC and the Big 12 should have their own NCAA tourney, that way one of them is GUARNTEED to win.
Correction: Previous season (not the one that just ended, the year before) the NCAA results for Texas were wins in the first two rounds (North Texas, West Virginia) but losing in the round of 16 to Portland.
5hole, I said this about 6 months ago on a different thread and I had folks chewing me out, almost to the point that I not step foot in the state.
And not stepping foot in Nebraska is a bad thing how? I just think coaches should be evaluated on performance. And they have not performed.
Have to agree with the comments regarding the Huskers. They have stagnated a bit and play extremely ugly soccer. It used to be effective when it was athletes vs athletes, but they haven't evolved as the quality of play has improved.
You gotta go with G. for Big XII's best coach. Consistently beating Texas is huge (and they've done well in NCAA's). He did more with less and now he's getting top level talent. Texas has definitely disappointed, but the expectations are SO high . . . I disagree the Big XII under-achieves. The Big XII isn't the ACC, or West Coast Conference. That's all. Big XII, Big Ten, and SEC soccer are still a step below (not that Nebraska, A&M, Texas, Florida, etc. aren't great teams, but these leagues don't have the depth). Hmm, what sport are they investing in rather than soccer, I wonder?
Morris, Uhmmm . .A few corrections. 1. A&M has done more with less? Less than who? Have you seen their facilities? In case you hadn't noticed they had the College Cup (NCAA's Final Four) there. And the program is funded very well. Hats off to G as he has accomplished the most in the Big XII. He has my vote but more with less? Other teams to make the list: Pepperdine, Princeton West Virginia, Santa Clara and Clemson. Pepperdine, Princeton and Santa Clara are $40k+ to go to school. Equivelancy sport. You do the math. 2. "Hmm, what sport are they investing in rather than soccer, I wonder? " The BigXII and the SEC is probably the 2 most most funded conferences in the country. That is my WHOOOLLEEE point. The Big XII had the HIGHEST paid coaches in the country according to the last study. They aren't underachievers because they don't have money. They are underacheivers because they DO have the money. I couldn't find a team other than A&M to ever make it to the Elite 8 (outside of perhaps NU and that would have had to have been more than 10 years ago.) 3. "I disagree the Big XII under-achieves. The Big XII isn't the ACC, or West Coast Conference. That's all." Welcome to the conversation captain obvious. Since (and I had a hard time compiling this.) 1996 (thats 10 years! and it may go back further but that as far back as i could find) only 2 teams in EITHER the SEC or the BigXII had finished inside the top 10 of the country or made it to the Elite 8! Florida and A&M. That's it! And it only happened a combined 5 times. Out of 80 teams that have played in the Elite 8 in the last 10 years, the Big XII and SEC have produced 2 teams that have gotten that far. 2! And NOONE in the last 2 years. AND Florida has lost the last 2 rounds of the tourney to Ilinois and Central Florida EVEN THOUGH THEY HOSTED! 4. In fact the Big XII and SEC were a combined 3-5 in the 1st round of the NCAA with only 1 TEAM IN THE SWEET 16 and THEY got beat 4-1! The SEC was 1-3 in the 1st round and the 2 conferences' 5 losses: Samford, Pepperdine, UTEP, Illinois and a 5-0 Throttling of the Big XII's second best team to Portland. Not exactly (with the excpetion of Portland) a tough 1st round schedule. The expecations are high at Texas. Because they poor millions into their athletics. Do you think them unfair to EXPECT a return?
A&M beat Texas with vastly inferior talent, then used that to attract better players, I wasn't comparing stadiums (although it's gotta be easier to get a kid to go to Austin, although A&M does have nice facilities). As for the money issue, Big XII & SEC programs may pay coaches and have nice stadiums, but their athletic departments are obviously beholden to another sport (moreso than their ACC/West Coast/Big East counterparts). That impacts the soccer program in many ways, small and large, regardless of budget (just ask Hempen how that works at CU). At that level, everyone is working hard and those small things add up. Also, despite relatively high pay, a number of SEC/Big XII/Big Ten schools have been happy to hire mediocre coaches and keep them long after they've shown they can't win. oh yeah, we might disagree on what constitutes a "return" on investment in a soccer coach - they've certainly won a lot of games (although I have no sympathy for Petrucelli at all) and getting through the tournament isn't strictly a measure of talent or coaching.
Uhmmmm . . .HUH?!?!? I have no idea what you are talking about. BEHOLDEN? Which means to owe thanks. "Obviously the athletic programs owe thanks to another sport?" OF COURSE THEY DO! THE OTHER SPORTS WIN! I don't see how this relates to what we are talking about. That is my whole point. They can "beholden" the women's soccer programs when they do something. In the sports of women's soccer, the 2 aforementioned conference are as well, if not more, funded than any other women's soccer programs in the country. And they haven't done crap. Hiring mediocre assistants is the coaches judgement which proves my point! So answer me these questions: 1. What does constitute a return on investment? If you are paying your soccer coach more than anyone else in the country, your program has more money then God, and you in one of the best places on earth to live as a college student, how are you, as the athletic program, happy with 4 1st round exits in the last 5 years (and 3 of those losses were to WAC and CUSA IN-STATE COMP!) as a return on investment? 2. If you don't think the coach is responsible, (he recruited them, he trains them and he coaches them) who is? 3. If winning when it counts isn't "strictly a measure of talent or coaching" I'm interested to see what you think it is a measure of?
2 more things while I'm at it. . "RELATIVELY high pay." Yeah relative to the rest of the country! Who else would we be RELATING their salaries to? Doctors? Real Estate Tycoons? And to what little things that add up do you speak? Hempen left a sweet as cap job for more money and it bombed. Not to mention that Duke has done better without him. What little things are adding up? Like the athletic dept is leaving little notes on the their windshields? It's your job to win. You've been given the resources to do so. You are a collegiate coach, you are judged on winning when it matters. Am I missing something here?
Duke has done better without Hempen??????????????????? They went to the Championship game in 1992 or was it 1993 yes they lost 9-1 but they scored first and they got there. Did we forget about that.
Thanks for supplying some grist for the mill in my Theory & Management of Coaching class. So basically, your argument would be that April Heinrichs is a better coach than Rene Simoes because the US beat Brazil in the Olympics (for instance)? Personally, I think winning or losing in a one-off match is about putting yourself in the position to get the breaks. You do that by having great athletes who are thoroughly prepared, highly motivated, and peaking for competition. But (for instance) that doesn't help you when you're all-met player of the year has a lay-up rim out with 3 seconds left in the state final, you just lose. It doesn't mean you were out-talented or out-coached (we won it the next year when our point guard hit 8 straight free throws down the stretch, which meant that when their kid hit a half court shot with 3 seconds left we still won by a point - was that coaching? or even talent?). The soccer or basketball or whatever gods have a LOT to do with a one-off game result. That's why the Premier League champion has to be the best over 38 matches. Obviously, if Petrucelli can't get past A&M or whoever this year or next, he's toast (and he'd already be toast in a lot of sports at Texas), but that doesn't mean he isn't a good coach and wouldn't succeed somewhere else (and I'm not sure winning the championship on an own goal with UND meant he was a good one). If he can just get A&M to head the ball into their own net . . .
Beleive it or not I agree with a lot that you said. And even more surprisingly, you made sense. HOWEVER . . . It is tough to use the Gods of Soccer excuse OVE THE LAST 10 years! If Petrucelli would have had the best team 1 year and gotten unlucky with a team that bunkered, troubles finishing, bad bounce etc then I'm cool and I say, as does every knucklehead coach in the US. . . "unlucky." But that is NOT the case. The soccer Gods must HATE Texas, the Big XII and the SEC because they have been kickin them in the nuts (ovaries if you prefer) for the last 10 YEARS! That's not a one and done. Simoes is a brilliant coach. And he lost in ONE game that mattered. If he would have lost with the better team for 10 YEARS to April then I would say, "hey, you know something .. I see a pattern." Larry Brown, Coach K, Phil Jackson, Pats coach, etc. . .haven't won them all .. but they have won A LOT of games that mattered . .All I am saying is that those 2 conferences have not produced a lot considering they are in soccer hot beds (Florida, Georgia, Texas etc), they have more money than anyone and they are in power BCS conferences. I don't see how that is sooo difficult to understand. You are welcome to disagree, but please don't use ignorant arguements (see RELATIVELY high salaries, beholden other sports etc.) The better coach will not always win, but he rarely loses to Ole Miss, SMU, SMU and UTEP in 4 out of 5 years! I'm sure the man could coach circles around me, but then again, they aren't paying me $200,000 to coach soccer.
Strong opinions for someone who obviously doesn't know jack. Besides Timko, what best Canadians are you spouting off about? Sinclair? Thorlakson? McLeod? Chapman? Tancredi? Matheson? Lang? Here's a tip. Get a clue.
Uhmmm . .You mean besides 4 of his top 5 scorers and his BEST defender? Timko- Full National Team Jamani- u19 World Championships, 8 goals with the Full National Team in 11 games Andrews- 2003 World Cup Starter, Full National Team, U-19 Team Iacchelli- U19 National team, Played in u19 World Cup and the Pan Am games Raber- u19 and u20 Team Dennis- Full National Team. And that's not even mentioning past ones such as a less than spectacular . .uhmmm . .Latham . .I said he trained the National team not the best ones. Do your reading (and your homework) and thanks for making my next point that he's not even that good of a recruiter! Isn't it your bedtime little one . .?
When Walker WAS getting the best Canadian players, prior to everybody else getting involved with Canadians, Nebraska was untouchable by the other Big 12 teams. the 1996, 1999, 2000 and 2001 Nebraska teams are the best teams the Big 12 has ever produced. Nebraska has fallen since other teams have raided the Canadian ranks.