Career Quality
Narrow edgeEdge: Tad Wieman
Tad Wieman: 54th pct vs Bill Hargiss: 49th 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.
Bill HargissTad Wieman
2 of 4 slots filled. Comparison is active.
Top-line verdicts
Who leads, and by how much
Peak Score
Clear edgeEdge: Tad Wieman
Tad Wieman: 68th pct vs Bill Hargiss: 58th pct
Percentile peak score derived from each coach's best season.
Consistency
SimilarSimilar: Tad Wieman vs Bill Hargiss
Tad Wieman: 55th pct vs Bill Hargiss: 54th pct
Percentile steadiness score across season-to-season performance.
National Championships
SimilarSimilar: Bill Hargiss vs Tad Wieman
Bill Hargiss: 0 titles vs Tad Wieman: 0 titles
Raw championship seasons from the curated national-title dataset.
Longevity
SimilarSimilar: Tad Wieman vs Bill Hargiss
Tad Wieman: 16 seasons vs Bill Hargiss: 15 seasons
Raw career span based on first and last tracked season.
Career Win Percentage
Narrow edgeEdge: Tad Wieman
Tad Wieman: 54.4% vs Bill Hargiss: 51.7%
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.
Bill Hargiss
Insufficient sample
Raw avg SP Overall: —
—
Insufficient sample
Tad Wieman
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.
Bill HargissTad Wieman
EliteStrongAverageLean
Bill Hargiss: 1928 KansasTad Wieman: 1938 Princeton
1918Actual season year • SRS range -10.7 to 12.91942
Active comparison point
Bill Hargiss • 1919
1919 Oregon State
Best season4-4-1 • SRS 8.7 • SP Overall —
Win %
50.0%
YoY SRS
—
SP Off / Def
— / —
Finish
Unranked
Comparison context
Compared against the nearest season year point for the other selected coach.
Tad Wieman
Nearest year 1927 • Michigan
6-2 • SRS 12.9 • SP Overall —
Bill Hargiss trails by a 4.2-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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bill Hargiss | |||||
| Oregon State | 1918-1919 | 2 | 6-8-1 | 8.7 | 8.7 |
| Kansas | 1928-1932 | 5 | 22-18-2 | -0.2 | 6.4 |
| Tad Wieman | |||||
| Michigan | 1927-1928 | 2 | 9-6-1 | 8.7 | 12.9Highest peak |
| Princeton | 1938-1942 | 5 | 20-18-3 | -0.4 | 6.2 |
Closing takeaway
What separates these careers at the finish
Similar overall level
Full profile →Bill Hargiss
28-26-3 • 51.7% • 7 seasons • 0 titles
This matchup stays tight across the headline comparison signals.
Best Season
Oregon State 1919
SRS 8.7
Worst Season
Kansas 1928
SRS -10.7
Biggest Improvement
Kansas 1929
14.8 SRS
Higher ceiling
Full profile →Tad Wieman
29-24-4 • 54.4% • 7 seasons • 0 titles
12.9 peak SRS at the top end.
Best Season
Michigan 1927
SRS 12.9
Worst Season
Princeton 1941
SRS -9.0
Biggest Improvement
Princeton 1942
8.4 SRS