The Curious Case of Will Stein: Why Coaching Rankings Miss the Point
Let’s start with a bold statement: coaching rankings are more art than science. Take Will Stein, the new Kentucky head coach, who recently found himself near the bottom of CBS’s Power Conference coach rankings. On the surface, it’s easy to shrug this off—after all, he’s a first-time head coach with zero wins. But if you take a step back and think about it, this ranking says more about the flaws in how we evaluate coaches than it does about Stein’s potential.
What makes this particularly fascinating is how quickly we’re willing to judge someone before they’ve even stepped onto the field. Stein’s No. 64 ranking out of 68 coaches feels harsh, but it’s also predictable. We live in a culture of instant analysis, where resumes and past roles are treated as crystal balls for future success. Yet, as Stein himself pointed out, “I’m undefeated right now. We haven’t played a game.” There’s a humility there, but also a challenge to the very idea of these rankings.
From my perspective, the real story isn’t Stein’s low ranking—it’s the fact that he’s the highest-ranked first-time head coach. This raises a deeper question: Are we undervaluing the potential of newcomers because they lack a track record? Or is there a bias toward established names and flashy resumes? Personally, I think it’s a bit of both. The system rewards past success, but it often fails to account for context, opportunity, and the intangible qualities that make a great coach.
One thing that immediately stands out is the SEC bias in these rankings. Stein finished ahead of his former colleague, Tosh Lupoi, despite both being first-time head coaches. Tom Fornelli’s question is spot-on: Are voters favoring the SEC, or is there an offensive bias over defense? What this really suggests is that rankings are as much about perception as they are about performance. Stein’s success as Oregon’s play-caller clearly carries more weight than Lupoi’s defensive credentials, but is that fair?
What many people don’t realize is how much a coach’s situation matters. Kentucky hasn’t had much offensive success lately, so Stein’s ability to turn that around will be the ultimate test. If he succeeds, he’ll be hailed as a genius. If he fails, he’ll be written off as another overhyped assistant. But here’s the thing: coaching isn’t just about schemes or recruiting—it’s about fit. Stein might be the perfect fit for Kentucky, or he might not. We won’t know until we see him in action.
A detail that I find especially interesting is how quickly coaches can rise and fall in these rankings. Mark Stoops went from No. 20 to No. 36 in a single season. Curt Cignetti, on the other hand, jumped to the top spot after a remarkable turnaround at Indiana. This volatility highlights the fickle nature of these lists. They’re entertaining, sure, but they’re also a reminder of how little we truly know about what makes a coach successful.
If you take a step back and think about it, coaching rankings are less about predicting the future and more about reflecting the present. They’re a snapshot of media narratives, fan expectations, and past achievements. But they rarely capture the intangibles—the leadership, the adaptability, the ability to inspire. Those are the qualities that separate good coaches from great ones, and they’re impossible to quantify in a ranking.
In my opinion, Stein’s low ranking isn’t a knock on him—it’s a reflection of how we evaluate coaches. We’re too quick to judge, too reliant on resumes, and too focused on wins and losses. What we should be asking is: What does Stein bring to the table that Kentucky needs? Can he build a culture? Can he develop players? Those are the questions that matter, not where he ranks on a list.
Personally, I think Stein’s story is just beginning. Whether he rises to the top or stays near the bottom, his journey will be far more interesting than any ranking could ever capture. After all, coaching isn’t about where you start—it’s about where you finish. And for Will Stein, that story is yet to be written.
What this really suggests is that we need to rethink how we talk about coaches. Instead of obsessing over rankings, let’s focus on the process, the challenges, and the potential. Because at the end of the day, coaching is about people, not numbers. And that’s a story worth telling.
