[StanFan88]

I don't really think winning close games is something under the coach's purview.

You're kidding right?  Close games is where coaching shows itself the most: substitution patterns, X's and O's/playcalls (O and D) especially when timeouts are called, choosing when to call timeouts.

I'm surprised to see it climb above 40%.  The metric I've seen and calculated myself was that going into this season Dawkins was below 35% in games decided by 5pts or fewer (including all OT games).  Regardless, anything below 50% is a strong indication of poor coaching especially when taken across so many years because one player or recruiting class can't bias it too much.

Better this year, but Dawkins has a lot of baggage hanging on him and a lot of skeptics.  He needs to show that it's different now over more than a couple games.

[StanFan88]

I don't really think winning close games is something under the coach's purview.

You're kidding right?  Close games is where coaching shows itself the most: substitution patterns, X's and O's/playcalls (O and D) especially when timeouts are called, choosing when to call timeouts.

I'm surprised to see it climb above 40%.  The metric I've seen and calculated myself was that going into this season Dawkins was below 35% in games decided by 5pts or fewer (including all OT games).  Regardless, anything below 50% is a strong indication of poor coaching especially when taken across so many years because one player or recruiting class can't bias it too much.

Better this year, but Dawkins has a lot of baggage hanging on him and a lot of skeptics.  He needs to show that it's different now over more than a couple games.