Career Quality
Decisive edgeEdge: GE Pyle
GE Pyle: 30th pct vs Tom Lovat: 8th pct
Percentile score against all tracked coaches.
Coaches Compare
Compare coach careers on the same scale.
See top-line edges, side-by-side profiles, overlaid career arcs, and school-stop comparisons in one matchup view.
Tom LovatGE Pyle
2 of 4 slots filled. Comparison is active.
Top-line verdicts
Who leads, and by how much
Peak Score
Narrow edgeEdge: GE Pyle
GE Pyle: 14th pct vs Tom Lovat: 11th pct
Percentile peak score derived from each coach's best season.
Consistency
Narrow edgeEdge: Tom Lovat
Tom Lovat: 90th pct vs GE Pyle: 87th pct
Percentile steadiness score across season-to-season performance.
National Championships
SimilarSimilar: GE Pyle vs Tom Lovat
GE Pyle: 0 titles vs Tom Lovat: 0 titles
Raw championship seasons from the curated national-title dataset.
Longevity
SimilarSimilar: GE Pyle vs Tom Lovat
GE Pyle: 3 seasons vs Tom Lovat: 3 seasons
Raw career span based on first and last tracked season.
Career Win Percentage
Decisive edgeEdge: GE Pyle
GE Pyle: 71.4% vs Tom Lovat: 15.2%
Raw career win rate, not a normalized score.
Style and Strength Profile
Compare strength, identity, steadiness, and ceiling through normalized bars with raw SP and SRS context underneath.
These bars are normalized against the full coach dataset. Raw SP and SRS values stay visible so the profile reads as evidence, not decoration.
Overall Strength
Start with total quality before splitting style and variance.
Tom Lovat sets the reference point in overall strength.
Overall Strength
Decisive edgeTom Lovat sets the reference point in overall strength.
Normalized score; raw SP overall stays underneath for reference.
Tom Lovat
Lower end
Raw avg SP Overall: -23.9
3th pct
Lower end
GE Pyle
Insufficient sample
Raw avg SP Overall: —
—
Insufficient sample
Career Arc Overlay
Overlay the same SRS scale to compare where each career climbed faster, held steadier, peaked higher, or dipped harder.
Focus on where peaks separate, where floors hold, and how the shape of each career changed over time.
Tom LovatGE Pyle
EliteStrongAverageLean
1911Actual season year • SRS range -20.6 to -10.81976
Active comparison point
Tom Lovat • 1976
1976 Utah
Best seasonBiggest drop3-8 • SRS -13.1 • SP Overall -20.8
Win %
27.3%
YoY SRS
+1.3
SP Off / Def
24.5 / 41.4
Finish
Unranked
Comparison context
Compared against the nearest season year point for the other selected coach.
GE Pyle
Nearest year 1913 • Florida
4-3 • SRS -10.8 • SP Overall —
Tom Lovat trails by a 2.3-point SRS edge at this point.
Tenure comparison
Compare school stops, duration, average level, and peak seasons across each coach's path.
| School | Years | Seasons | Record | Avg SRS | Peak |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tom Lovat | |||||
| Utah | 1974-1976 | 3 | 5-28 | -16.0 | -13.1 |
| GE Pyle | |||||
| Florida | 1911-1913 | 3 | 14-5-2 | -15.7 | -10.8Highest peak |
Closing takeaway
What separates these careers at the finish
Similar overall level
Full profile →Tom Lovat
5-28 • 15.2% • 3 seasons • 0 titles
This matchup stays tight across the headline comparison signals.
Best Season
Utah 1976
SRS -13.1
Worst Season
Utah 1974
SRS -20.6
Biggest Improvement
Utah 1975
6.2 SRS
Higher career quality
Full profile →GE Pyle
14-5-2 • 71.4% • 3 seasons • 0 titles
30th pct career-quality score.
Best Season
Florida 1913
SRS -10.8
Worst Season
Florida 1911
SRS -19.5
Biggest Improvement
Florida 1913
5.9 SRS
Program impact deltas are hidden because at least one selected coach lacks a credible pre-tenure baseline.