[joemontes]

It's a great acheivement to lead your team to the Final Four, 
but how did the multi-titled WCBB Coaches perform
once their teams reached the Final Four?

(1)
KIM MULKEY    
(Baylor, LSU)
4 titles
1 national semifinalist
Record: 8-1
88.9%

(2)
PAT SUMMITT
(Tennessee)
8 titles
5 national finalists
5 national semifinalists
Record: 21-10
67.7%

(3)
GENO AURIEMMA
(UConn)
11 titles
1 national finalist
10 national semifinalists
Record: 23-11
67.6%

(4)
DAWN STALEY
(South Carolina)
2 titles
3 national semifinalists
Record: 4-3
57.1%

(5)
MUFFETT McGRAW
(Notre Dame)
2 titles
5 national finalists
2 national semifinalists
Record: 9-7
56.3%

(6)
TARA VANDERVEER
(Stanford)
3 titles
2 national finalists
10 national semifinalists
Record: 8-12
40%

[joemontes]

It's a great acheivement to lead your team to the Final Four, 
but how did the multi-titled WCBB Coaches perform
once their teams reached the Final Four?

(1)
KIM MULKEY    
(Baylor, LSU)
4 titles
1 national semifinalist
Record: 8-1
88.9%

(2)
PAT SUMMITT
(Tennessee)
8 titles
5 national finalists
5 national semifinalists
Record: 21-10
67.7%

(3)
GENO AURIEMMA
(UConn)
11 titles
1 national finalist
10 national semifinalists
Record: 23-11
67.6%

(4)
DAWN STALEY
(South Carolina)
2 titles
3 national semifinalists
Record: 4-3
57.1%

(5)
MUFFETT McGRAW
(Notre Dame)
2 titles
5 national finalists
2 national semifinalists
Record: 9-7
56.3%

(6)
TARA VANDERVEER
(Stanford)
3 titles
2 national finalists
10 national semifinalists
Record: 8-12
40%

[76lsjumb]

Two words:

Third Rail.  :-)

[76lsjumb]

Two words:

Third Rail.  :-)

[cardcrimson]

Interesting analysis. 

Perhaps you'd be willing to go a bit further. Why not add team average HS GPA and Test Scores, as well as overall team Rivals (or whomever) recruiting rankings for a start. Then perhaps weigh in the degree of difficulty of the majors of the women basketball players are undertaking at their schools, and perhaps their graduation rates as well. 

A good, solid regression analysis should show who really is a better coach, right?

[cardcrimson]

Interesting analysis. 

Perhaps you'd be willing to go a bit further. Why not add team average HS GPA and Test Scores, as well as overall team Rivals (or whomever) recruiting rankings for a start. Then perhaps weigh in the degree of difficulty of the majors of the women basketball players are undertaking at their schools, and perhaps their graduation rates as well. 

A good, solid regression analysis should show who really is a better coach, right?

[chimera]

Two words:

Third Rail.  :-)

Nah.  Sample size is small and it could mean more than one thing.  Does it mean Stanford underachieves in F4s?  Does it mean that Stanford overachieves to get to F4s and then runs into superior teams they can't beat once they get there?  Is it some bad luck, like Appel with the broken foot that year?  Is it that UConn had super teams that hardly anyone could beat for a long while when Stanford was making F4s?  Is it a bit of all the preceding?  Bottom line = winning a championship is hard.  LSU had some great teams with players who went on to be WNBA legends (Augustus and Fowles) but never won a championship until now, and they got a bit lucky to do it what with Iowa taking out a South Carolina team that easily beat LSU this season.  Winning it all is hard.  Making a F4 is hard.  Doing either of those things consistently is very, very hard.

[chimera]

Two words:

Third Rail.  :-)

Nah.  Sample size is small and it could mean more than one thing.  Does it mean Stanford underachieves in F4s?  Does it mean that Stanford overachieves to get to F4s and then runs into superior teams they can't beat once they get there?  Is it some bad luck, like Appel with the broken foot that year?  Is it that UConn had super teams that hardly anyone could beat for a long while when Stanford was making F4s?  Is it a bit of all the preceding?  Bottom line = winning a championship is hard.  LSU had some great teams with players who went on to be WNBA legends (Augustus and Fowles) but never won a championship until now, and they got a bit lucky to do it what with Iowa taking out a South Carolina team that easily beat LSU this season.  Winning it all is hard.  Making a F4 is hard.  Doing either of those things consistently is very, very hard.

[old spanish trail]

Two words:

Third Rail.  :-)

Nah.  Sample size is small and it could mean more than one thing.  Does it mean Stanford underachieves in F4s?  Does it mean that Stanford overachieves to get to F4s and then runs into superior teams they can't beat once they get there?  Is it some bad luck, like Appel with the broken foot that year?  Is it that UConn had super teams that hardly anyone could beat for a long while when Stanford was making F4s?  Is it a bit of all the preceding?  Bottom line = winning a championship is hard.  LSU had some great teams with players who went on to be WNBA legends (Augustus and Fowles) but never won a championship until now, and they got a bit lucky to do it what with Iowa taking out a South Carolina team that easily beat LSU this season.  Winning it all is hard.  Making a F4 is hard.  Doing either of those things consistently is very, very hard.

Yep

[old spanish trail]

Two words:

Third Rail.  :-)

Nah.  Sample size is small and it could mean more than one thing.  Does it mean Stanford underachieves in F4s?  Does it mean that Stanford overachieves to get to F4s and then runs into superior teams they can't beat once they get there?  Is it some bad luck, like Appel with the broken foot that year?  Is it that UConn had super teams that hardly anyone could beat for a long while when Stanford was making F4s?  Is it a bit of all the preceding?  Bottom line = winning a championship is hard.  LSU had some great teams with players who went on to be WNBA legends (Augustus and Fowles) but never won a championship until now, and they got a bit lucky to do it what with Iowa taking out a South Carolina team that easily beat LSU this season.  Winning it all is hard.  Making a F4 is hard.  Doing either of those things consistently is very, very hard.

Yep