Jack Kelley...won titles in 71 and 72 with BU
There is a great imbalance today as RIT, Union, the Ivies and others have 0 scholarships.However, as I recall, he did this during an era in which there could be a great imbalance between colleges in the number of scholarships that were permitted. Perhaps, that factor should be considered when comparing coaches from days gone by to coaches of today.
That could easily be done as well. It IS possible to score negative points.
Oui, evury playeur in d'Ivey leagu eez paying de full tuishin on his own.There is a great imbalance today as RIT, Union, the Ivies and others have 0 scholarships.
Sean
Will negative points be given for cheating?
buoldtimer said:However, as I recall, he did this during an era in which there could be a great imbalance between colleges in the number of scholarships that were permitted. Perhaps, that factor should be considered when comparing coaches from days gone by to coaches of today.
co14ers said:What other criteria are you using for rating coaches? Such potential categories may include All-Americans produced, graduation rates of players, academic achievement, "turning" a program around, etc.
What about when a coach is found to be cheating after the fact... and then gets a one game suspension after that game? If both those games are wins does the coach get credit for them? :cough cough: Gwoz :cough cough:
Sure there would, all the coaches from before the days of the internet!any coach that had a fire coach _______ thread should be banned from the list !! Dang there would be no list then!!!
Sure there would, all the coaches from before the days of the internet!![]()
INCH did this a few years ago. I've been asking for a few years for them to do this over to see what would change but they are not into it right now. Obviously a lot has happened... Gwoz has won two. York has won two. Parker got one more and Comley got one more and joined a list of York and Harkness as the only 3 coaches to get a title at two different schools.
http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/Features/coaches_0203.htm
Anyway, upon going back and looking at this one day I found some amazing things when comparing Jerry York's tenure at BC to the tenure of Herb Brooks at Minnesota.
About Herb:
- "No other coach has won three national championships in a six-season span as Herbie did from 1974-79."
Jerry York has a chance to do this if he can win one more in the three seasons.
- "Somehow, he never won the Spencer Penrose Award and was named WCHA Coach of the Year just once."
Strangely, York has never won a Penrose since moving to BC (he did win one in 1977 with Clarkson) and also has just one conference COTY award at BC.
It just struck me as something so darn similar. Compare the time York spent here at BC(16 years I believe) and the time Brooks spent at Minnesota (granted a much smaller 7 years?), and you have 0 Penroses, 1 COTY from their conference, and 3 national titles... each. Wow.
Do we get to count his 35-1 record as Cornell's lacrosse coach as well? Pity the NCAA tournament hadn't been established yet...Ned Harkness won 3 as well, 1 at RPI and 2 at Cornell and is in the conversation.
He did say threadsDo local newspaper editorials count?![]()
That article isn't well proofred, or the comments about Herb wouldn't be there- mainly the-
-"No other coach as won three national championships in a six-season span as Herbie did from 1974-79"
And then down the list for Heyliger, they point out that he won 3 national championships in a ROW. And 6 out of 9 years.
Grant Standbrook, no question.
he was a head coach at dartmouth and I believe he has 5 national championship rings.
3 with Wisconsin and
2 with Shawn Walsh's Maine team... been to the frozen 4 more years than Red has coached at Michigan (or close to it... he heh heh)
What about when a coach is found to be cheating after the fact... and then gets a one game suspension after that game? If both those games are wins does the coach get credit for them? :cough cough: Gwoz :cough cough:
If Gwoz had really wanted to cheat, he wouldn't have stood there in full view of thousands in the press box with his headphones on. His move was either naive or ill-considered, but hardly cheating, as there was clearly no intent to deceive anyone. That said, he got punished for his transgression.