Who's the coach of the year?

Mods, feel free to move this thread, but since it involves my job, I put it here.

OK, every fall and spring I do an all-area soccer team. This spring, girls soccer in the area wasn't very good. It was OK. Lot's of .500 teams but nothing exceptional. Thus, I'm having a hard time coming up with a coach of the year, so you tell me what you think.

Coach No. 1: Team had the best record, by far, in the area. Had a dynamic goal scorer. But this coach knows absolutely little about how to coach soccer. He knows the game but really doesn't have the foggiest clue on how to coach. He has an assistant who when he came aboard a few years ago, both boys and girls programs took off. Can't name him, however. Now, this team was the only one to make a regional final but they got upset on their home field. Best record, overall talent similar to some other teams in our area based on the schedule they played.

Coach No. 2: Team was a game over .500 but shared a conference title. His team is usually good but he had tons of injuries this year, including one to his top goal scorer from a season ago. She tore her ACL in the first game. They didn't win a postseason game but lost to a very good team in a tough regional.

Coach No. 3: Team was a game under .500 but was doing very well this year at one point. The last three years, this team was awful, awful, awful. A seven-goal loss was a "close" game. This year, they were 8-3 at one point and they beat some pretty good teams. They only had one pud team the whole year on the sked. But ... they finished the season with six losses and didn't score a goal in any of those games. Again, in their whole season they played one pud team. They pulled off a couple of shocking wins. But the end to the season ... I don't know.

Who would you choose?

 

I'd be inclined to go with the coach who had a good season despite the injuries. Although, depending on how bad No. 3 was the past few years, you might have a case for that coach, as well. But I still think I'd go with No. 2. For a team to do well despite a string of bad injuries is compelling stuff.

 

I'd go with Coach No. 3 because of the improvements. No. 1 is out right away, in my mind. No. 2 is close, but the injuries are just a tough break. At least No. 3 showed some kind of reasonable improvement and, amongst the bunch, you could make the best case that the coach deserved it.

Stick with your choice, of course. It might be hard to defend it. Just give the coach with the best reason for winning the award the honor.

 

Which did the most with the least talent? Sometimes, the best coaching job isn't a state title, it;'s to get to .500...

 

I'd say coach No. 3 had the least talent, although with the injuries, coach No. 2's team wasn't far off.

 

If coach No. 3 had gotten his team to .500, I would go with him without thought. But he didn't, and I don't believe you get a COY award for a less-than-.500 team. That's my opinion; you might disagree.

My vote goes to coach No. 2, just because coach No. 1 sounds like the guy who landed the Yankees straight out of graduating from the University of Burger King.

 

Agreed. While you don't have to win a state title, getting to .500 is kinda a minimum threshhold.

 

Coach No. 4: The son of the president of the local Lions Club, of which your publisher is the treasurer.

 

I think No. 2. Sounds like he had more controversy to overcome.

 

King Creole ... just by the descriptions you give, it sounds like you are leaning No. 2, then No.3, then No. 1. Is this accurate?

 

Yeah, go with coach No. 2
Where I'm at we have a basketball coach that most resembles coach No. 1 in that he's cost the team more games because he doesn't know how to utilize talent. Everyone here knows they won the conference again this year because they play against a bunch of super weak conference teams.
What's ironic is he was named co-coach of the year in the conference, as voted by the other coaches.
Once the state tournament started though, they lost two games to much better coached teams with less talent.
So I guess my qualification for COY is how well a coach deals with making the team a cohesive unit that wins despite not having the most talent. I agree with Bullwinkle though that you should at least have the team at .500.

 

#2