|
|
|
CFN 2006 Program Analysis – No. 26-39
|
|
|
|
|
|
CollegeFootballNews.com
Posted Aug 27, 2006
|
|
Three Year Program
Analysis
Teams
26 to 39
|
2006
Program Rankings |
1 to 10
| 11 to 25
|
40-59
| 60-79
|
80-99 |
100-119
Conf. Team Rankings
|
Conf. Category Rankings |
Attendance
|
Bad Losses
Conference
Winning % |
Total Wins
|
Draft |
APR |
Elite Wins
|
Quality Wins
Quick
Explanation of Scores
- Attendance:
Home attendance average over the last three years divided by
10,000. Avg. Score: 4.35
- APR: The most recently released Academic Performance
Rate. Avg. Score: 5.45
- Quality Wins: Wins over D-I teams that finished with
a winning record. Avg. Score: 5.45
- Total Wins: Wins over D-I teams. Avg. Score:
17.02
- Players Drafted: Number of players drafted
divided by two. Avg. Score: 2.95
- Conference Win %: Conference winning percentage
times 10. Avg. Score: 4.97
- Elite Wins: Wins over D-I teams that finished with
two losses or fewer, or on the road 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. Score: 0.82
- Bad Losses: Losses to teams that finished with
four wins or fewer, or any loss to a non-D-I team. Subtract
each loss from the overall total. Subtract an additional 0.5
for each bad loss at home. Avg. Score: 1.2
26. West Virginia
Score:
55.00
2005 Ranking: 33
2004 Ranking: 57
2003 Ranking:
59
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
5.50 |
5 |
6 |
25 |
7 |
1 |
0 |
8.50 |
55.00 |
Program Analysis:
The Mountaineers just missed out on the top 25, but this
is their highest ranking yet by far after a great 11-1 season with a
program-changing (at least when it comes to national perception) Elite
Win in the Sugar Bowl over Georgia. Winning 85% of the Big East games is
tremendous, but there might be a limit on how high the overall ranking
can go unless the APR makes a jump.
27. Penn State
Score:
53.62
2005 Ranking: 48
2004 Ranking: 34
2003 Ranking:
40
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
10.45 |
8 |
10 |
18 |
7 |
1 |
0 |
4.17 |
53.62 |
Program Analysis:
It's amazing what an 11-1 season can do to boost a ranking. The Nittany
Lions had won a mere seven games in two years with a brutal stretch of
only three wins in 18 games from the end of 2003 to mid-November of 2004
keeping the overall score down. The Attendance Score alone would beat
four teams' overall scores, while the Draft and APR Scores helped offset
the lean times on the field. Expect the ranking to shoot up well into
the top 20 next year.
28. Nebraska
Score:
53.26
2005 Ranking: 35
2004 Ranking: 16
2003 Ranking: 9
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
7.76 |
6 |
13 |
21 |
7 |
0 |
0 |
5.00 |
53.26 |
Program Analysis:
After taking a huge drop last year, the Huskers started to bounce back
with head coach Bill Callahan having things pointed in the right
direction. The Attendance Score will always be a constant and the Draft
Score is terrific. So why isn't Nebraska in the top 20? The Conference
Winning Percentage Score. Yes, the mighty Big Red has only won half its
Big 12 games over the past three seasons.
29. Texas Tech
Score:
52.86
2005 Ranking: 21
2004 Ranking: 40
2003 Ranking: 53
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
5.11 |
5 |
7 |
23 |
8 |
2 |
0 |
6.25 |
52.86 |
Program Analysis:
Shouldn't Texas Tech be ranked higher after a strong nine-win season?
You'd think so. There's a ceiling on the Attendance Score, but the wins
in Big 12 play have helped the overall total. There isn't anything that
stands out, but the numbers are great across the board. The Elite
Win came over Cal in the 2004 Holiday Bowl.
30. Southern Miss
Score:
52.35
2005 Ranking: 40 2004 Ranking: 46
2003 Ranking: 43
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
2.85 |
9 |
6 |
22 |
7 |
1 |
0 |
7.50 |
52.35 |
Program Analysis:
The fantastic APR and Conference Winning Percentage Scores
helped boost Jeff Bower's program into the top 30. The Attendance Score
will always be an issue, so the team has to beat teams everyone,
everywhere, every time to stay this high. As one of the favorites for
the Conference USA title, don't expect much of a dip. The Elite Win came
over TCU in 2003.
31. Georgia Tech
Score:
50.96
2005 Ranking: 49
2004 Ranking: 36
2003 Ranking:
23
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
5.04 |
7 |
5 |
20 |
9 |
2 |
0 |
5.42 |
50.96 |
Program Analysis:
Talk about consistent, Georgia Tech has won seven games in the each of
the last four years. There are Elite Wins over teams like Auburn and
Miami last year, but there are also strange losses like the ones to BYU
and Duke (who each finished 4-8) in 2003. The Draft Score should
eventually go up, but the more ACC wins, the higher the ranking will go.
32. Alabama
Score:
50.29
2005 Ranking: 30
2004 Ranking: 24
2003 Ranking:
21
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
8.20 |
4 |
13 |
19 |
7 |
1 |
0 |
4.58 |
50.29 |
Program Analysis: The
ten-win 2002 season is gone from the rankings, but next year, the 4-9
2003 season will get wiped away. Mike Shula's great campaign of last
year helped keep the slide from being worse than just two spots, and
expect things to start going back up. The Draft and Attendance Scores
are fantastic, but it's all about the wins. The Elite Win came over
Texas Tech in last year's Cotton Bowl.
33. Maryland
Score:
49.17
2005 Ranking: 19
2004 Ranking: 13
2003 Ranking: 18
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
5.17 |
7 |
8 |
19 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
5.00 |
49.17 |
Program Analysis:
After a fantastic initial run under head coach Ralph Friedgen, the
overall ranking as dropped like a stone after two straight losing
seasons. Not only are the Terps out of the top 20, they're out of the
top 30 after winning
31 games (29 against D-I teams) from 2001 to 2003. The APR is solid and
the Quality Wins are there, but more overall wins have to come to move
back up.
34. Fresno State
Score:
49.01
2005 Ranking: 43
2004 Ranking: 32
2003 Ranking:
26
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
3.92 |
8 |
4 |
23 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
7.08 |
49.01 |
Program Analysis: The
46 wins over five years
are impressive and most teams would kill for the close to 70% conference
winning percentage, but there aren't the conference titles under Pat
Hill. One of the biggest stunners in the rankings was the high Fresno
State APR and the low Draft Score. 2006 needs to be a big season with
the nine-win 2003 campaign going off the books next year.
35. UCLA
Score:
47.88
2005 Ranking: 44
2004 Ranking: 42
2003 Ranking:
42
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
6.05 |
4 |
10 |
22 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
5.83 |
47.88 |
Program Analysis: The
ten-win 2005 season helped finally get UCLA out of the 40s. There's
always room for the Attendance Score to improve in the Rose Bowl, and it
did last year getting almost 4,000 more fans per game than 2004 and
almost 9,000 more per outing than 2003. The APR could stand to be higher
and there could be more wins over good teams.
36. Toledo
Score:
47.26
2005 Ranking: 29
2004 Ranking: 35
2003 Ranking:
25
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
2.26 |
1 |
2 |
24 |
9 |
2 |
0 |
8.00 |
47.26 |
Program Analysis: 55
wins in the last six years is impressive by any standard. Two bowl
appearances in the last two years shows just how solid a job head coach
Tom Amstutz has done. The APR Score is horrendous keeping the program
from being in the 20s. With the Attendance and Draft Scores always going
to be low, and the win total likely to never get much higher, getting to
class is important for a boost.
37. Colorado
Score: 46.57
2005 Ranking: 38
2004 Ranking: 23
2003 Ranking: 22
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
4.96 |
7 |
8 |
20 |
7 |
0 |
1 |
4.62 |
46.57 |
Program Analysis: Two
straight Big 12 title appearances didn't mean a big showing in the
rankings. Interestingly enough, the Buffs, despite all the league
success, have a conference winning percentage of under 50% over the last
three years. Gary Barnett's team might have had its issues, but it went
to class. The Bad Loss came at Baylor in 2003.
38. Memphis
Score:
46.31
2005 Ranking: 68
2004 Ranking: 71
2003 Ranking: 86
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
4.06 |
8 |
3 |
21 |
8 |
0 |
2.5 |
6.25 |
46.31 |
Program Analysis:
Gone is the 3-9 2002 season and up, up, up goes the ranking. Head coach
Tommy West has taken his program to three straight bowl games, the first
three in the school's history, and it shows with the wins and the good
Conference Winning Percentage Score. The APR is excellent, and the
Attendance Score isn't all that bad for a Conference USA team. One bad
loss came in the 2005 opener against Ole Miss, and the second was at UAB
in 2004.
39. Pitt
Score:
46.20
2005 Ranking: 31
2004 Ranking: 41
2003 Ranking: 48
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
4.70 |
7 |
10 |
19 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
6.50 |
46.20 |
Program Analysis:
Dave Wannstedt's first season might not have been anything special, but
there wasn't much of a drop despite only coming up with four D-I wins.
The Draft Score is sensational, the APR Score is strong, and the Big
East conference winning percentage helped. The four Quality Wins are the
lowest in the top 42.
|
|
|
|
|
|