Career Quality
Decisive edgeEdge: Homer Norton
Homer Norton: 85th pct vs George Hauser: 67th 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.
George HauserHomer Norton
2 of 4 slots filled. Comparison is active.
Top-line verdicts
Who leads, and by how much
Peak Score
Clear edgeEdge: Homer Norton
Homer Norton: 88th pct vs George Hauser: 74th pct
Percentile peak score derived from each coach's best season.
Consistency
Narrow edgeEdge: George Hauser
George Hauser: 50th pct vs Homer Norton: 43rd pct
Percentile steadiness score across season-to-season performance.
National Championships
Narrow edgeEdge: Homer Norton
Homer Norton: 1 title vs George Hauser: 0 titles
Raw championship seasons from the curated national-title dataset.
Longevity
SimilarSimilar: George Hauser vs Homer Norton
George Hauser: 19 seasons vs Homer Norton: 18 seasons
Raw career span based on first and last tracked season.
Career Win Percentage
Clear edgeEdge: Homer Norton
Homer Norton: 64.0% vs George Hauser: 60.0%
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.
Not enough data to compare.
Overall Strength
Decisive edgeNot enough data to compare.
Normalized score; raw SP overall stays underneath for reference.
George Hauser
Insufficient sample
Raw avg SP Overall: —
—
Insufficient sample
Homer Norton
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.
George HauserHomer Norton
EliteStrongAverageLean
George Hauser: 1942 MinnesotaHomer Norton: 1934 Texas A&M
1926Actual season year • SRS range -7.7 to 21.81947
Active comparison point
George Hauser • 1926
1926 Colgate
Best season5-2-2 • SRS 15.0 • SP Overall —
Win %
66.7%
YoY SRS
—
SP Off / Def
— / —
Finish
Unranked
Comparison context
Compared against the nearest season year point for the other selected coach.
Homer Norton
Nearest year 1930 • Centenary (LA)
8-1-1 • SRS 7.9 • SP Overall —
George Hauser holds a 7.1-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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| George Hauser | |||||
| Colgate | 1926-1927 | 2 | 9-4-5 | 6.2 | 15.0 |
| Minnesota | 1942-1944 | 3 | 15-11-1 | 11.0Best quality | 14.9 |
| Homer Norton | |||||
| Centenary (LA) | 1930-1933 | 4 | 29-6-6 | 6.4 | 13.5 |
| Texas A&M | 1934-1947 | 14 | 82-53-9 | 9.7 | 21.8Highest peak |
Closing takeaway
What separates these careers at the finish
Steadier arc
Full profile →George Hauser
24-15-6 • 60.0% • 5 seasons • 0 titles
50th pct steadiness score.
Best Season
Colgate 1926
SRS 15.0
Worst Season
Colgate 1927
SRS -2.7
Biggest Improvement
Minnesota 1942
14.8 SRS
Higher career quality
Full profile →Homer Norton
111-59-15 • 64.0% • 18 seasons • 1 title
85th pct career-quality score.
Best Season
Texas A&M 1939
SRS 21.8
Worst Season
Centenary (LA) 1931
SRS -7.7
Biggest Improvement
Centenary (LA) 1932
19.6 SRS