Coach-em-up Rankings, Pt II -- Duke, GT, Pitt

In the long-anticipated (by very few) part II of the coach-em-up
series, we take a look at Duke, Georgia Tech and Pitt...
Methodology
For each coach, I used the 247.com composite rankings to rate their recruiting classes. Using a formula based on weighted contribution from each recruiting class,I calculated the expected performance of the team. Finally, I used either the final AP poll (or sagarin ratings if the team was unranked by AP) to determine the actual performance for that year.

My formula for expected results is the sum of the expected level of contribution for each class multiplied by the class ranking:
expected = (0.10 * 1st-year) + (0.20 * 2nd-year) + (0.25 * 3rd year) + (0.25 * 4th-year) + (0.20 * 5th-year)
where 1st-year are true freshmen, 2nd-year are redshirt freshmen and true sophomores, etc. Hope that makes sense. If not, leave a comment, and I'll try to better explain.

EDIT: Shout-out to brockman_148 for giving me a more accurate set of per-class contribution weightings. My original percentages were 10/15/30/30/15.

Duke

Coaches:

Recruiting Rankings, Expected Results, and Actual Results, by Year:

Year	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Recruiting	69	47	45	69	72	55	70	62	62	71	60	51	33	48
Expected	73	70	66	62	58	58	62	66	64	64	65	63	59	53
Actual	78	110	115	89	55	73	86	101	70	23	30	35	75

Grades:

Roof:

Pretty straighforward here. The recruiting was certainly mediocre, but the on-field results were awful. Underperformed expectations. Every. Single. Year. And by a large margin. His -30 differential is among the worst for ACC coaches during the period analyzed.
Recruiting: C-, Results: F, Coaching-em-up: F

Cutcliffe:

I was a little surprised when running the numbers on Cutcliffe. He had a run of three good years (including the
division title in 2013), and he's improved the recruiting at Duke over the last few years. But... his teams have underperformed more often than not, and overall his coach-em-up differential is barely on the plus side. I was also surprised at the overall winning percentage. Not a lot of coaches get 10 years to coach with an overall losing record. That's Duke football, I guess.
Recruiting: C-, Results: C, Coaching-em-up: C

Georgia Tech

Coaches:

Recruiting Rankings, Expected Results, and Actual Results, by Year:

Year	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Recruiting	41	62	61	15	49	41	42	44	52	76	56	44	59	47
Expected	46	45	49	47	47	45	41	38	45	48	53	56	58	57
Actual	35	39	31	58	22	13	67	55	45	36	8	53	27

Grades

Chan Gailey:

I'll be honest: I don't really remember the Chan Gailey bumblebees that well. But the numbers paint a flattering
coach-em-up picture. Exceeded expectations three out of the four years charted, won one ACC Coastal title, and had a .579 winning percentage with just OK recruiting. But that and losing to UGA six times in a row will still get you fired.
Recruiting: C, Results: C+, Coaching-em-up: B+

Paul Johnson:

The ultimate system guy. He's never brought in a top-40 recruiting class, but has managed three top-25 finishes, four Coastal division titles, and one ACC championship. It's always a chess match playing against his flexbone offense, and, while the results are inconsistent, they are good more often than not. His teams have exceeded expectations by an average of nearly 12 spots per year over his ten-year tenure. Noone's better at
getting-their-guy-and-coaching-em-up than coach chop block.
Recruiting: C, Results: B, Coaching-em-up: A+

Pitt

Coaches:

Recruiting Rankings, Expected Results, and Actual Results, by Year:

Year	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Recruiting	43	48	12	16	17	40	31	63	42	32	44	47	30	36
Expected	37	42	39	36	29	24	22	30	38	43	43	45	40	39
Actual	25	59	45	64	27	15	32	66	58	53	59	39	31

Grades

Walt Harris:

This look only covers the last year of Harris' career at Pitt, but what a year. Top 25 finish, Big East coach of the year, BCS bowl bid. And for this, he got fired. Thanks, Pitt!
Recruiting: B-, Results: A-, Coaching-em-up: A

Dave Wannstedt:

Pitt thought they had their guy when they tapped the Pitt alum and former NFL head coach in 2004. He recruited well, piling up three straight top-20 recruiting classes, so the talent was there. His teams peaked in 2009 with a bowl win and a #15 ranking. That was it, though. The Panthers failed to meet expectations for three of his five years, but in two of those campaigns they were close. The overall .575 winning percentage is also good, but expectations were high, and ultimately Wannstedt could not live up to them.
Recruiting: B, Results: C+, Coaching-em-up: C-

Todd Graham:

A classic case of be-careful-what-you-wish-for. Pitt replaced the marginally underachieving Dave Wannstedt with the greatly underachieving Graham. Graham led them to a 6-6 finish with borderline top-25 talent, and couldn't recruit. Definitely not the coach-em-up fix the Panthers wanted.
Recruiting: D+, Results: D, Coaching-em-up: F

Paul Chryst:

Mediocre recruiter. Mediocre results on the field. His overall .500 winning percentage was the same as Graham's, and even though the teams weren't as talented. Chryst's Panthers underachieved by more than 15 spots per year over his three years.
Recruiting: B-, Results: C, Coaching-em-up: D

Pat Narduzzi:

Narduzzi inherited the mediocre talent pulled in by his predecessors, and turned in two winning seasons. The recruiting has been solid, but not great, and he's yet to pull in a top-25 class. From the coach-em-perspective, however, he's been very good: Pitt has exceeded expectations in both of his years, with an average plus of 7.5. Hate to say it, but coach (insert your favorite epithet here) can coach 'em up.
Recruiting: B-, Results: B, Coaching-em-up: A

Conclusion
At the top of this edition's coach-em-up list are Paul Johnson, Pat Narduzzi, and Chan Gailey. Much as we dislike Johnson and Narduzzi, they can coach. Fortunately, neither has proved that they can recruit at an elite level. Johnson probably never will, but the jury is still out on Narduzzi. Pitt unfortunately looks like a top-25 contender unless the recruiting falls off.

At the bottom of this set of coaches are Paul Chryst, Ted Roof, and Todd Graham. Of these, Roof is the peak (see what I did there?) underperformer.