Among Frog coaches, per
Wikipedia...
- Matty Bell never had a losing season in 6 years in the '20s (.635 win pct) but never won a conference title.
- Frances Schmidt had the best career record (.750); his teams won 2 SWC titles and 2 runner-ups in the '30s--but he only coached 5 seasons.
- Buster Brannon has the most wins (205) and most conference titles (4), plus 3 NCAA appearances in his first 11 seasons; had he retired in '59 he might be the choice. But his teams posted single-digit wins in 7 straight seasons in the '60s, dropping his career winning percentage to .442.
And none of the above did their winning in the integration era, so I think they have to be their own category, with Schmidt topping the list.
- Johnny Swaim won 2 SWC titles and an NCAA Tourney game in his first 5 years, but followed that with a long dry stretch, going only .403 for his career.
- Jim Killingsworth won 2 conference titles and an NCAA game, going .551 in 8 seasons when Houston was a national force.
- Billy Tubbs went .618, winning a WAC title and earning 1 NCAA bid and 2 NIT bids in 8 seasons (3 conferences).
- Dixon has compiled a .603 record in 7+ seasons, with 3 NCAA bids (2 games won) and 2 NIT bids, with an NIT championship. He has more top-10 wins than all other coaches combined...but no winning records in conference play.
Dixon will likely overtake Tubbs on total TCU wins this season. I'd take Dixon both on resume and because his teams have been more competitive against top competition than Tubbs' were, and has a much better record than Killer while playing in the toughest conference in America. Killer's conference championships were great, but it would be hard to give him the nod when Dixon played on both of those teams.
Great analysis. It's not always about winning percentage. I'd argue Dixon has the benefit of easier non-conference schedule, but then is at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to conference games. I would love a SOR for every historical season, but that might be asking too much.
Conference titles might be a good barometer. But Tubbs' WAC title would pale in comparison to a Big XII title. So those are not all created equal as well.
Not saying it will happen, but if TCU wins the conference this year, in a year when the Big XII is far and away the toughest conference, next year's might be just as good or better, would he catapult to the top of the list?
What about a season without a conference title, a third consecutive trip to the NCAAs, and a deep tourney run? Does that get him to the top? Or would he need a final four or championship game appearance?
I feel like Jamie is underappreciated. He's got to have way more wins against top 10 opponents than anyone else. Are we living in the golden age of TCU sports?