Career Quality
Narrow edgeEdge: Vic Hurt
Vic Hurt: 57th pct vs Dan Henning: 50th 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.
Dan HenningVic Hurt
2 of 4 slots filled. Comparison is active.
Top-line verdicts
Who leads, and by how much
Peak Score
Narrow edgeEdge: Dan Henning
Dan Henning: 67th pct vs Vic Hurt: 61st pct
Percentile peak score derived from each coach's best season.
Consistency
Narrow edgeEdge: Vic Hurt
Vic Hurt: 52nd pct vs Dan Henning: 45th pct
Percentile steadiness score across season-to-season performance.
National Championships
SimilarSimilar: Dan Henning vs Vic Hurt
Dan Henning: 0 titles vs Vic Hurt: 0 titles
Raw championship seasons from the curated national-title dataset.
Longevity
SimilarSimilar: Dan Henning vs Vic Hurt
Dan Henning: 3 seasons vs Vic Hurt: 3 seasons
Raw career span based on first and last tracked season.
Career Win Percentage
Decisive edgeEdge: Vic Hurt
Vic Hurt: 60.3% vs Dan Henning: 45.8%
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.
Dan Henning sets the reference point in overall strength.
Overall Strength
Decisive edgeDan Henning sets the reference point in overall strength.
Normalized score; raw SP overall stays underneath for reference.
Dan Henning
Above average
Raw avg SP Overall: 3.6
69th pct
Above average
Vic Hurt
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.
Dan HenningVic Hurt
EliteStrongAverageLean
1936Actual season year • SRS range -5.9 to 12.21996
Active comparison point
Dan Henning • 1994
1994 Boston College
Best season7-4-1 • SRS 12.2 • SP Overall 16.1
Win %
62.5%
YoY SRS
—
SP Off / Def
29.3 / 14.1
Finish
#23
Comparison context
Compared against the nearest season year point for the other selected coach.
Vic Hurt
Nearest year 1938 • Tulsa
4-5-1 • SRS -5.9 • SP Overall —
Dan Henning holds a 18.1-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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dan Henning | |||||
| Boston College | 1994-1996 | 3 | 16-19-1 | 2.7 | 12.2Highest peak |
| Vic Hurt | |||||
| Tulsa | 1936-1938 | 3 | 15-9-5 | 3.0 | 9.8 |
Closing takeaway
What separates these careers at the finish
Higher ceiling
Full profile →Dan Henning
16-19-1 • 45.8% • 3 seasons • 0 titles
12.2 peak SRS at the top end.
Best Season
Boston College 1994
SRS 12.2
Worst Season
Boston College 1996
SRS -4.4
Biggest Improvement
Boston College 1996
-4.8 SRS
Higher career quality
Full profile →Vic Hurt
15-9-5 • 60.3% • 3 seasons • 0 titles
57th pct career-quality score.
Best Season
Tulsa 1937
SRS 9.8
Worst Season
Tulsa 1938
SRS -5.9
Biggest Improvement
Tulsa 1937
4.7 SRS