Can't disagree with your logic although I think Self and Huggy are in their own tier. Shaka doesn't get a pass from me for underperforming with such talent though.
Ranking Big 12 coaches ...
- Thread starter surly
- Start date
Can't disagree with your logic although I think Self and Huggy are in their own tier. Shaka doesn't get a pass from me for underperforming with such talent though.
Weber is a good coach, but a terrible recruiter which is why he can never sustain success. I laugh at the Jamie Dixon is underachieving line, he took over a 2-16 roster and won the NIT in year 1 and will make the tournament in year 2 . Plus have you seen Pitt since he left, dude is a heck of a coach.
Top 3- Self, Huggins, Kruger.
Bottom 3- Boynton, Smart, Weber.
Middle 4- Drew, Dixon, Beard, Prohm
Top 3- Self, Huggins, Kruger.
Bottom 3- Boynton, Smart, Weber.
Middle 4- Drew, Dixon, Beard, Prohm
Career-wise (taking into account many factors) this is my ranking:
1. Self
2. Huggins
3. Kruger
4. Dixon
5. Drew
6. Weber (Advantage over Prohm, results over longer period)
7. Prohm
8. Smart
9. Beard (only 3 seasons as D1 HC, sample size too small)
10. Boynton (sample size minimal)
1. Self
2. Huggins
3. Kruger
4. Dixon
5. Drew
6. Weber (Advantage over Prohm, results over longer period)
7. Prohm
8. Smart
9. Beard (only 3 seasons as D1 HC, sample size too small)
10. Boynton (sample size minimal)
Bruce Weber is undoubtedly in the lower third. Chris Beard and Jamie Dixon playing with all their own recruits now, or is Coach Prohm the only one that gets dinged for that?
I'd put Coach Prohm at 5 or 6 simply based on body of work, but I think he will be ranked far higher in two to three years.
Weber playing with all his own. Drew with all his. Lonnie and Hugs with theirs.
That aside, I knew it would turn into this, sadly, but that aside, we at least agree on the top couple guys, which are hard to argue, I guess. Maybe, I should have stopped at two or three.
I'm probably one of the biggest Bruce fans on CF, but that's too high.
Although, it's pretty much the Top 3 in a tier, and then the rest in a tier for me. I like what Boynton has done at OSU -- I don't think he's much of a downgrade from Underwood. If he's a downgrade at all.
That's simply a fact. The other fact is that he had a drug problem that cleared an entire roster almost. Marcus Foster got fixed and has starred at Creighton.
Weber dealt with it by throwing those kids off the team and starting over. As a result, his performance has been spotty. This is his rebuilt roster now. Don't try to tell me Wade, Brown, Sneed, Stokes and Diarra are unworthy.
Weber's been to the NCAA 3 of 5 years at K-State, 13 of 18 years overall to the postseason, and teams from both Illinois and Southern Illinois went to the Sweet 16 and beyond.
Scott Drew and Lon Kruger's career winning percentages are 61, Prohm at ISU is 63, Bruce Weber's 65% for his career.
Last edited:
He's been at K State 5 years and never made it out of the first round and you think he's a top 5 coach in the conference. Lol cmon man
Weber 60.9% at K-State.
Let's compare apples to apples.
Weber is under 61% at KSU; Prohm is over 63%
Weber is 65% for his career; Prohm is over 72%
Weber is under 51% in conference games at KSU
Prohm is over 53% in conference games at ISU
It really hurts your credibility when you post something that is designed to look like a straight comparison but you slide in a not comparable number.
Last edited:
It's kind of backwards. Prohm gets dinged because he won with predecessor's guys. The other two get credit for winning despite having the predecessor's players. TCU was 39-58, including 6-48 in the B12 in the three years before Dixon. He's 40-23 so far in his first two seasons, despite losing his PG. TTU was not quite as bad, but Beard has them in the top 10 in year 2.
Dixon took over at Pitt, which was his first head coaching job, when they had gone to one NCAA tournament in the previous 10 years. He coached there for 13 seasons and took them to 11 NCAA tournaments. 5 of those went to at least the third round, including 2 sweet sixteens and 1 Elite Eight. After what he's now doing at TCU, I think he's right there with Huggins and Kruger.
Most of Weber's play has been at Power5 Illinois and K-State. Most of Prohm's in the OVC. 64% of his wins came in the Ohio Valley to be precise. And I'm not saying Prohm isn't a solid perhaps elite coach. But his record to this point in time isn't sufficient to make a judgment. Presently, he's playing with his guys as is Weber.
I think Bruce Weber does more with less than anyone in the conference. Having said that he sucks at recruiting and runs a lot of guys off which is why he usually has less. I can't stand the guy but he usually get's a lot out of whatever roster he has.
Almost every coach in the Big 12 is good enough at some aspect of coaching to give their program a chance. The rankings are largely based on expectations or the innate value of the program.
In terms of value-added Dixon and Beard appear to be very good. Then again, Paul Rhoads looked like he was a coach that would add value. Dixon does have a strong track record though.
On the flip side, that’s why Smart is usually down the list despite likely going to two tournaments in three years and having a FF.
Weber is odd, but he will probably be going to 4 tournaments in six years. Maybe I don’t respect KSU enough, but that’s a good job at a place like KSU. Drew is similar.
Self is Self. He’s won everywhere. It’s hard to demonstrate value-added at a blue blood, but yet he has. Kruger has the track record to be considered very good, but I wonder if he’s slipping a little. Same with Huggins.
Boynton is too new, but he appears much better than I had hoped (disaster). I’d put Prohm in the too new, but I lean towards him being in the Drew or Weber category. Outside the program many will view even a 50% tournament rate a success, but few fanbases will settle for that.
In terms of value-added Dixon and Beard appear to be very good. Then again, Paul Rhoads looked like he was a coach that would add value. Dixon does have a strong track record though.
On the flip side, that’s why Smart is usually down the list despite likely going to two tournaments in three years and having a FF.
Weber is odd, but he will probably be going to 4 tournaments in six years. Maybe I don’t respect KSU enough, but that’s a good job at a place like KSU. Drew is similar.
Self is Self. He’s won everywhere. It’s hard to demonstrate value-added at a blue blood, but yet he has. Kruger has the track record to be considered very good, but I wonder if he’s slipping a little. Same with Huggins.
Boynton is too new, but he appears much better than I had hoped (disaster). I’d put Prohm in the too new, but I lean towards him being in the Drew or Weber category. Outside the program many will view even a 50% tournament rate a success, but few fanbases will settle for that.
