Fiu, Cirminiello, Mitchell on TV - Campus Insiders | Buy College Football Tickets

2011 CFN 5-Year Program Rankings - 41 to 60
Arizona WR Juron Criner
Arizona WR Juron Criner
CollegeFootballNews.com
Posted Aug 23, 2011


CFN's 2011 Five-Year Program Rankings and Analysis ... Teams 41 through 60


Preview 2011 - No. 41 to 60

CFN Five-Year Program Analysis


2011 CFN Five-Year Program Analysis
- Bottom 20 | No. 81 to 100 | No. 61 to 80
- No. 41 to 60 | No. 26 to 40 | No. 11 to No. 25
- No. 10 Georgia | No. 9 Virginia Tech | No. 8 Alabama
- No. 7 Boise State | No. 6. LSU | No. 5 Texas | No. 4 Oklahoma
- No. 3 USC | No. 2 Ohio State | No. 1 Florida
- 2010 CFN Five-Year Program Analysis

- FREE EXPERT COLLEGE FOOTBALL SELECTIONS

- Love to Win? Get daily success lessons from the world of sports.
 
NEW Twitter ... Follow Us http://twitter.com/CFBNews | E-mail Us

Every new coach realistically needs five years to make a program his. He doesn't always get that much time, often being asked to turn things around right away. Five years allows a coach to go through an entire recruiting cycle, get comfortable in the position, and implement everything he'd like to do. With that in mind, we created the CFN Five-Year Program Analysis highlighting off-the-field factors like the Academic Progress Report (do the players go to class) and the players drafted by the NFL (a huge selling point to recruits), to attendance (it pays the bills) and wins, wins, wins. On-field success ends up being all that matters, so that's where the focus lies.

One note, the totals for each team might not add up because we list the total number of wins and losses for the categories, while the Bad Wins and Losses and Elite Wins and Losses might be scored differently (two home losses against 3-9 teams would be scored as a 3).

Quick Explanation of Scores
- Attendance: Home attendance average over the last five years divided by 10,000. Avg. Score: 4.39
- APR: The most recently released Academic Performance Rate. 90th to 100th percentile (best) gets a 10, 1st to 10th percentile (worst) gets a 1 Avg. Score: 5.84
- Quality Wins: Wins over FBS teams that finished with a winning record. Avg. Score: 10.58
- Total Wins: Wins over FBS teams. Avg. Score: 29.76
- Players Drafted: Number of players drafted. Avg. Score: 9.56
- Conference Win %: Conference winning percentage times 10. Avg. Score: 4.97
- Elite Win Score: Wins over FBS teams that finished with two losses or fewer, or on the road, at a neutral site, or in a bowl over teams that finished with three losses or fewer. Add an additional 0.5 for an Elite Win over a two-loss team on the road. Avg. Number: 1.18
- Bad Loss Score: Losses to teams that finished with three wins or fewer or any loss to a non-FBS team. Subtract each loss from the overall total. Subtract an additional 0.5 for each Bad Loss at home. Avg. Number: 2.20
- Elite Losses: Losses to teams that finished with two wins or fewer. Take 0.25 of the number. Avg. Number: 5.14
- Bad Wins: Wins over teams that finished with three wins or fewer or any win to a non-FBS team Avg. Number: 11.27
- Detailed Explanation of the Scoring System and Categories 

60. Kansas
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: Alright, Turner Gill, can you do something big after the disastrous 2010? Mark Mangino might have had his problems, but he made Kansas relevant and the 12-1 2007 isn’t all that long ago. In the low 90s is the mid-2000s, KU became great under Mangino, but the success was fleeting. The Jayhawks only won 35% of their Big 12 games over the last five years, and only seven players were drafted, but the attendance has improved and the APR and total wins aren’t bad. Kansas will always be a basketball school, and now Gill has to try to change the perception like Mangino did.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 57.25
2010 Ranking: 42
2009 Ranking: 45
Attendance Score: 4.75
APR Score: 7
Drafted Players: 7
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 11
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 2.5
Elite Losses: 6
Bad Wins: 10
Conference Score: 3.50

59. Central Michigan
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: For years, CMU wasn’t on the map with losing season after losing season, and then things started to pick up under Brian Kelly, and Dan LeFevour became a special quarterback, and then the wins started to flow. Butch Jones kept the terrific run going as the Chippewas won three MAC titles in four years, and that’s why the Conference Score of 7.44 is by far the best of anyone ranked lower. The 38 FBS wins are terrific, however, new head man Dan Enos was handed an empty cupboard and he couldn’t do much last year in an ugly 3-9 campaign with just two FBS wins. While there was a major dip this year, the ranking is far better than it was when CMU was 108th in both 2004 and 2005.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 57.75
2010 Ranking: 39
2009 Ranking: 61
Attendance Score: 2.06
APR Score: 5
Drafted Players: 5
FBS Wins: 38
Quality Wins: 10
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 4
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 15
Conference Score: 7.44

58. Troy
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: 87%. That’s what Troy has been doing in Sun Belt play over the last five years giving the program its highest ranking ever. The Attendance Score is never going to be a positive, and the Draft Score should be better, but the 37 FBS wins are great and the dominance in conference play has meant everything. Head coach Larry Blakeney has been hidden gem, and there’s no sign of the production slowing down with a tremendous offense returning and an aggressive defense likely to improve the overall numbers. As long as the wins keep coming, the ranking will still be solid.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 57.86
2010 Ranking: 68
2009 Ranking: 72
Attendance Score: 1.96
APR Score: 5
Drafted Players: 7
FBS Wins: 37
Quality Wins: 6
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 1
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 17
Conference Score: 8.65

57. Air Force
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: Troy Calhoun continues to do a phenomenal job. Everyone forgets that Air Force has the same recruiting restrictions and handcuffs as Navy and Army, and it’s doing far more against a much tougher schedule. The perfect APR Score helps to overcome the lack of players drafted, and winning 60% of Mountain West games is fantastic, but it’s going to be tough to continue the success with the league improving over the next few years. Even so, with Calhoun in place, this will still be a rock-solid program that will always be a tough out. Next year, the 4-8 2006 season won’t count in the formula and the Falcons could move into the top 40.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 58.80
2010 Ranking: 63
2009 Ranking: 66
Attendance Score: 3.80
APR Score: 10
Drafted Players: 0
FBS Wins: 34
Quality Wins: 9
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 2
Elite Losses: 9
Bad Wins: 17
Conference Score: 6.00

56. North Carolina
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: The program is about to get buried by the NCAA, and changes are coming with Butch Davis gone, but he put together a whale of a team that never got a chance to fully show what it could do. The 18 players drafted score is phenomenal, and three straight 8-5 seasons have helped overcome the John Bunting era, but the needle is pointing down depending on any sanctions that might be coming. The 3-9 2006 season won’t count in next year’s rankings, and this year’s team should be good enough to raise the ranking into just outside of the top 40, but that’ll be about as high as it goes for a long, long time.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 60.08
2010 Ranking: 58
2009 Ranking: 54
Attendance Score: 5.58
APR Score: 7
Drafted Players: 18
FBS Wins: 25
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 10
Conference Score: 4.00

55. Nevada
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: The breakthrough 2010 season put the Wolf Pack into the top 55, and now the program has to rebuild a bit in its final season in the WAC. The future Mountain Wester has staying power, and Hall of Fame head coach Chris Ault’s program shows no signs of slowing down too much. The Attendance Score is always going to be a problem, averaging fewer than 20,000 per game even last year, and the Draft Score will always be low, but winning 70% of conference games will always be a positive and the 39 wins are excellent. Coming up with the same conference winning percentage will be tough next year in the Pack’s new league.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 60.55
2010 Ranking: 61
2009 Ranking: 70
Attendance Score: 1.80
APR Score: 6
Drafted Players: 5
FBS Wins: 39
Quality Wins: 9
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 2.5
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 17
Conference Score: 7.00

54. Houston
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: 103rd in 2003, Houston went flying up the rankings with Art Briles and now Kevin Sumlin doing a great job of getting the offense going, and the wins have followed. 16 Bad Wins shows how bad Conference USA is at the bottom, but still, winning over 72% of conference games is still impressive and the 37 wins are fantastic. The four drafted players seems light, and the APR Score of 5 isn’t great, but the high-flying Cougars could move up if they can have a 2011 season as expected. However, the 10-4 Conference USA championship season of 2006 won’t count in next year’s formula.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 60.68
2010 Ranking: 47
2009 Ranking: 58
Attendance Score: 2.43
APR Score: 5
Drafted Players: 4
FBS Wins: 37
Quality Wins: 11
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 0
Bad Wins: 16
Conference Score: 7.25

53. Navy
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: No players drafted. 33,000 fans a game. Nine Quality Wins. There are plenty of things going against Navy’s ranking, but the APR Score of 9 and the 41 wins are the most of anyone outside of the top 20. Considering the program ranked 101st in 2004, the consistent greatness over the last several years is nothing to sneeze at. There will always be a ceiling on what the program can do, and this will never be a top 40 program, but the niche has been carved and the goal is to keep the success rolling – and to keep beating Army.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 61.76
2010 Ranking: 52
2009 Ranking: 50
Attendance Score: 3.34
APR Score: 9
Drafted Players: 0
FBS Wins: 41
Quality Wins: 9
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 3
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 20
Conference Score: 6.67

52. Maryland
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: The Terps were always good under Ralph Friedgen and got up to 13th in the 2004 rankings, but continued mediocrity and the inability to take any steps forward led to a change. Randy Edsall has done a lot more with a lot less than he had to work with a Connecticut, and given a year or two he should make the Terps rock. The APR Score of 3 is an embarrassment for a school this good, and on the field, the 29 FBS wins over the last five years doesn’t cut it. The 2-10 2008 season is going to be a drag on the Program Ranking for a long, long time.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 62.08
2010 Ranking: 55
2009 Ranking: 41
Attendance Score: 4.83
APR Score: 3
Drafted Players: 13
FBS Wins: 29
Quality Wins: 17
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 11
Conference Score: 4.50

51. Louisville
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: Bobby Petrino had Louisville hovering around the top ten after a few phenomenal seasons, but the ranking fell under Steve Kragthrope and it’s probably going to go into a freefall next year after the 12-1 2006 season doesn’t count. Charlie Strong is a tremendous coaching talent who’ll be great with a little bit of time, and now the Cardinals have to win more than 40% of their Big East games. 15 of the 30 FBS wins were against teams that finished with winning records, and now there needs to be even more production on the field and in the classroom. The drop in winning percentage is embarrassing, and the APR Score of 3 is just as bad.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 63.08
2010 Ranking: 45
2009 Ranking: 23
Attendance Score: 4.08
APR Score: 3
Drafted Players: 14
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 15
Elite Win Score: 3
Bad Loss Score: 2.5
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 5
Conference Score: 4.00

50. Connecticut
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: Winning the Big East and going to the BCS moved the needle a little bit, and being in the top 50 is great after ranking 101st in 2003, but it’s going to take more big seasons and a great start from new head man Paul Pasqualoni to move up. The 4-8 2006 season will be out of next year’s formula, and the Draft and Conference Scores will improve, but Pasqualoni has to prove he can take what Randy Edsall started and make it better. That’ll be hard to do for a school that still lives for its basketball programs and averages fewer than 40,000 fans per game.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 63.82
2010 Ranking: 82
2009 Ranking: 57
Attendance Score: 3.86
APR Score: 6
Drafted Players: 13
FBS Wins: 32
Quality Wins: 11
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 6
Bad Wins: 11
Conference Score: 5.71

49. Stanford
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: This could be one of the highest risers of any program over the next few years. Even if the Cardinal isn’t going 12-1 with a BCS win like last year, it’ll fly up the rankings once the 1-11 2006 season is off the books. It’s a bit stunning that the APR Score isn’t a perfect 10, but 9 is more than okay, and the Draft Score is going to quickly rise up. Also about to be much, much better will be the Conference Score and the FBS Wins, and if Andrew Luck can lead the way to 2011 close to as good as 2010, Stanford could be a top 25 program next year.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 64.08
2010 Ranking: 66
2009 Ranking: 68
Attendance Score: 3.94
APR Score: 9
Drafted Players: 10
FBS Wins: 29
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 2.5
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 7
Conference Score: 4.89

48. Kentucky
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: In the 90s not all that long ago, consistent success has moved UK slowly up the rankings and finally into the top 50. Winning 30 FBS games is the big key, and the Attendance and APR Scores have to stay high to overcome the SEC problem. UK might be good, and it might be a perennial bowl team, but it has only won 35% of conference games over the last five years. The nine Elite Losses are par for the SEC course, but the 12 Quality Wins are nice. This is a good program that needs a lot of luck to be great, and it’s going to take a few special years to make any sort of move into the 30s.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 64.13
2010 Ranking: 56
2009 Ranking: 65
Attendance Score: 6.63
APR Score: 7
Drafted Players: 10
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 9
Bad Wins: 13
Conference Score: 3.50

47. Wake Forest
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: This could get really ugly really fast. The Demon Deacons haven’t been that bad over the years, bottoming out at 71st in 2006, and then came the monster 2006 season going 11-3 with an ACC title and an Orange Bowl appearance. That won’t count next year, and the 9-4 follow-up won’t count in the 2013 rankings. Injures were a problem in last year’s 3-9 season, but the wins have to start coming again in a hurry. The APR is great, and the 11 drafted players helps, but more ACC wins are a must to stay this high.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 64.68
2010 Ranking: 37
2009 Ranking: 38
Attendance Score: 3.18
APR Score: 8
Drafted Players: 11
FBS Wins: 33
Quality Wins: 13
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 11
Conference Score: 4.25

46. Tulsa
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: Tulsa doesn’t get enough credit or attention. It’s a small school that doesn’t have a huge fan base in a state with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to deal with, but the offensive production is always there and the wins in conference play have been flowing. The 40 FBS wins are tied with Hawaii, Cincinnati and Boston College for the second most of anyone outside of the top 20. The Golden Hurricane does a great job of taking advantage of the weak conference teams with 20 Bad Wins while coming up with victories more than 67% of the time in Conference USA play. The Attendance Score is lousy, and only getting two players drafted doesn’t help the ranking, but for all the limitations, it’s not a bad thing to be a top 50 program.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 64.76
2010 Ranking: 43
2009 Ranking: 43
Attendance Score: 2.26
APR Score: 5
Drafted Players: 2
FBS Wins: 40
Quality Wins: 11
Elite Win Score: 3
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 20
Conference Score: 6.75

45. UCLA
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: It’s UCLA … how can it not make any sort of move higher up in the rankings? Actually, how can it stay this high considering the Rick Neuheisel era has been such a disaster? The 10-2 2005 season doesn’t count in this year’s rankings, and the 7-6 2005 campaign will be gone next year. The team is better than last year’s 4-8 record – injuries have been a problem – but winning just 40% of Pac 10 games, now Pac-12, is a disaster. The APR and Attendance Scores are solid, but the 28 FBS wins are the lowest of anyone in the top 55. Interestingly enough, 14 of the 28 wins were against teams that finished with winning records.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 65.53
2010 Ranking: 35
2009 Ranking: 37
Attendance Score: 6.78
APR Score: 7
Drafted Players: 10
FBS Wins: 28
Quality Wins: 14
Elite Win Score: 2
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 5
Bad Wins: 4
Conference Score: 4.00

44. South Florida
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: Skip Holtz walked into a good situation, and now the conventional wisdom is that everything is in place for the program to grow into a monster. The recruiting area is fertile, the commitment is there, and the foundation has been set. With 12 players drafted, the talent is coming through, and the 36 wins are nice, but the Bulls haven’t won half their Big East games and the APR Score of 3 is sad. It’s time to start doing more in Big East play, and it’s time to get to a bigger bowl game. For all the good things USF has done over the last few years, the best bowl win was the 2006 PapaJohns.com Bowl against East Carolina.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 67.35
2010 Ranking: 44
2009 Ranking: 53
Attendance Score: 4.53
APR Score: 3
Drafted Players: 12
FBS Wins: 36
Quality Wins: 13
Elite Win Score: 2.5
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 12
Conference Score: 4.57

43. Texas A&M
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: It always seems like Texas A&M should be ranked far higher, but it’s been nothing more than a mediocre program over the last several years. The end to the 2010 regular season was a great start, but that’s what the Aggies are supposed to be doing on a regular basis. The Attendance Score is by far the best of anyone outside of the top 40, but the APR stinks and only getting nine players drafted is awful considering Texas had 26 players taken and Oklahoma gave 23 to the big league over the last five years. Losing the 5-6 2005 season from the equation is good, but the 9-4 2006 campaign won’t count in next year’s rankings.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 67.49
2010 Ranking: 60
2009 Ranking: 40
Attendance Score: 7.99
APR Score: 4
Drafted Players: 9
FBS Wins: 32
Quality Wins: 13
Elite Win Score: 2
Bad Loss Score: 1
Elite Losses: 9
Bad Wins: 9
Conference Score: 5.00

42. Arizona
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: The Wildcats are supposed to turn the corner under Mike Stoops, but it hasn’t happened yet. The Attendance and APR Scores are mediocre for a supposedly strong BCS program, but more than that, the big wins aren’t there. The Elite Win Score is the highest of anyone outside of the top 40, and the 14 Quality Wins are impressive and having 16 players drafted helps, but the Cats have to do more in conference play. Winning half the time in the new Pac-12 isn’t going to cut it. It’s time for Stoops to come up with something big.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 69.98
2010 Ranking: 49
2009 Ranking: 67
Attendance Score: 5.37
APR Score: 5
Drafted Players: 16
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 14
Elite Win Score: 3
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 9
Bad Wins: 11
Conference Score: 5.11

41. East Carolina
- 2011 Preview

Program Analysis: Talk about moving back up into the land of the living, East Carolina flew up the charts after ranking 109th in 2006, and while there’s a slight step back after getting up to 40th last year, the program is looking good. No, there wasn’t any semblance of defense in Ruffin McNeill’s first season, but the offense was great and the wins keep coming. Winning over 72% of the time in conference plays takes care of a ton or problems, and the 15 Quality Wins are solid. The Attendance Score is always going to be an issue, and the wins have to keep coming to have a chance to move into the top 30.

2011 TOTAL SCORE: 71.49
2010 Ranking: 40
2009 Ranking: 59
Attendance Score: 4.24
APR Score: 5
Drafted Players: 7
FBS Wins: 38
Quality Wins: 15
Elite Win Score: 2
Bad Loss Score: 2
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 8
Conference Score: 7.25