What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

JR's Wins until 33.3333%

Messages
13,276
I didn't answer it because you've fabricated a fact. His win rate was much higher than 25% after five years.
Ah, my maths (or sausage fingers on the calculator) might have been out.

BA's win rate in his fifth season 2018 was 25%... and 56 wins from 122 games over five years (50%) rather than 221 games (25%).


Still pretty poor performance after a 5 year sample, you'd have to agree?
Why would you make something like that up unless you were trying to set me up?
Set you up? As far as I know you're happily married... but I have some recently divorced single friends who might be up for some fun if you're interested?
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
94,312
Still pretty poor performance after a 5 year sample, you'd have to agree?
It depends on the club. 45% would be poor at the Storm or the Roosters, but at Parramatta it was fine, especially given the club's win rate in the preceding five years (34%). And then as Arthur's number of games rose each year (an increasingly reliable sample), so did his win rate (now 52%), proving he was indeed a solid NRL coach. There's not many of those in the world.
 
Messages
13,276
I think a lot of NRL coaches have turned out to be solid or close to average...

The expected bell curve of win percentages would suggest that the majority of people who've attempted NRL coaching would end up between 45-55% win percentage over all time (the largest sample size).

50% is poor if your club is interested in ending a large sample size of years without a premiership.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
94,312
The expected bell curve of win percentages would suggest that the majority of people who've attempted NRL coaching would end up between 45-55% win percentage over all time (the largest sample size).
No because plenty of coaches come in, fail quickly, and then 'retire' with a very negative record. This is what allows the greats to have career records over 60%. A coach who can hover around 50% is going to have a long career; Stuart, Hasler, Maguire, Flanagan, even Cleary before his current stint at Penrith. This is why Arthur is the front runner for the new franchise. A coach who has proven he can win half his games is a much safer option than one who hasn't proven anything.
 
Messages
13,276
No because plenty of coaches come in, fail quickly, and then 'retire' with a very negative record. This is what allows the greats to have career records over 60%. A coach who can hover around 50% is going to have a long career; Stuart, Hasler, Maguire, Flanagan, even Cleary before his current stint at Penrith. This is why Arthur is the front runner for the new franchise. A coach who has proven he can win half his games is a much safer option than one who hasn't proven anything.
By definition, because NRL games can only be won or lost (or drawn, on rare occasions now) the distribution of all coaches' win percentages will average out at 50%.

Therefore achieving 50% (after 11 f**king years) is nothing to write home about - and poor in terms of the targets of a club who has a disproportionately long time (over double the probability timing) since tasting "success", as defined by winning the competition in which we compete - not some arbitrary other mediocre definition of success as scraping into 8th spot in the finals and being uncompetitive.

But keep on Pou-ing up the forum, you're doing a great job of "educating", lol!
 

Latest posts

Top