01-10-2016, 07:07 PM
(01-10-2016, 06:45 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Agreed Sunset. I also don't understand why some think that the only possible outcome of making a change would be gloom and doom.
No one has said that that is the ONLY possible. But history shows that most coaching changes don't improve the team, and that is even considering that most coaching changes come from losing teams.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504851.2013.829181?journalCode=rael20
I examine the effects of coaching changes for National Football League (NFL) teams between the 1995 and 2012 seasons. A variety of factors contribute to an NFL team’s performance reverting towards league-average levels between seasons. Thus, a nominal improvement in team performance could be due to improved management or it could simply be mean reversion. I find that, after accounting for the highly significant mean reversion effect during this time period, firing a coach reduces a team’s expected performance during the next season and the team’s average performance over the next two seasons. This effect is present when wins are used to measure performance, but also when performance is measured by point differential and playoff appearances, two variables that avoid some shortcomings of using team wins as a measure of performance. I conclude that teams are firing coaches an inefficiently high percentage of the time.
