Three Year Program
Analysis
Teams 60 to 79
Quick
Explanation of Scores
- Attendance:
Home attendance average over the last three years divided by
10,000. Avg. Score: 4.32
- APR: The most recently released Academic Performance
Rate. Avg. Score: 5.66
- Quality Wins: Wins over D-I teams that finished with
a winning record. Avg. Score: 5.56
- Total Wins: Wins over D-I teams. Avg. Score:
17.13
- Players Drafted: Number of players drafted
divided by two. Avg. Score: 5.85
- Conference Win %: Conference winning percentage
times 10. Avg. Score: 5.00
- 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: 0.80
- 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: 1.22
-
Detailed Explanation of the Scoring System and
Categories
60. Central Michigan
Score:
36.50
2006 Ranking: 93 2005 Ranking: 108
2004 Ranking: 108
2003 Ranking:
102
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
1.75 |
3 |
5 |
19 |
6 |
0 |
2 |
6.25 |
36.50 |
Program Analysis:
With a 35 spot jump, Central Michigan is the highest riser in the
rankings. After years among the dregs, the Chippewas rocketed up with a
10-4 MAC title season and after losing the 3-9 2004 campaign. If the
team is as good as expected, even with new head man Butch Jones taking
over, the rise should be even higher. Both Bad Losses came in 2004, and
the Conference Winning % should be even more impressive.
61. New Mexico
Score:
36.13
2006 Ranking: 55 2005 Ranking: 57
2004 Ranking: 68
2003 Ranking:
70
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
3.48 |
3 |
5 |
18 |
5 |
0 |
1.5 |
5.65 |
36.13 |
Program Analysis:
Rocky Long has put together an extremely solid program with four bowl
appearances in the last five years, but the ranking dropped after losing
the 8-5 2003 season and with a horrible 17-6 home loss to Portland State
last year dragging things down. The APR Score is lousy, but there were
some good Quality Wins and a decent showing in Mountain West play.
62. Akron
Score:
35.76
2006 Ranking: 69 2005 Ranking: 78
2004 Ranking: 87
2003 Ranking:
87
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
1.43 |
6 |
3 |
18 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
5.83 |
35.76 |
Program Analysis:
Akron cranked out three straight winning seasons before falling short
with a 5-7 2006 campaign, but this is still one of the MAC's most solid
programs. J.D. Brookhart is a top coach who's only a year removed from
winning the MAC title. The Attendance and Draft Scores will always be an
issue, and the APR isn't anything fantastic, so it's all about coming up
with conference wins, and lots of them.
63. Connecticut
Score:
34.94
2006 Ranking: 59 2005 Ranking: 64
2004 Ranking: 90
2003 Ranking: 101
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
3.94 |
9 |
3 |
14 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
4.50 |
34.94 |
Program Analysis: The
slight drop this year after losing the 9-3 2003 season is going to be a
mega-plunge next year unless Randy Edsall can pull off a winning season.
Everyone's going to class, which helps overcome the mere 14 D-I wins and
just two victories over winning teams in three years. The 8-4 2004
season won't count next year, so UConn could be around the low 70s if
Edsall can't turn things around.
64. Nevada
Score:
34.89
2006 Ranking: 67 2005 Ranking: 81
2004 Ranking: 79
2003 Ranking:
99
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
1.64 |
3 |
2 |
21 |
4 |
0 |
2 |
6.25 |
34.89 |
Program Analysis:
Always solid under head coach Chris Ault, Nevada has been the forgotten
team in a WAC with higher-profile programs like Boise State and Hawaii.
21 D-I wins is the most of any team in the bottom 67, .and is tied with
Toledo for the most in the bottom 74. Unfortunately, low APR and Draft
Scores don't help, and the Attendance Score is always going to put a cap
on how high the program can get. Both Bad Losses came in 2004 and won't
count next year.
65.
Syracuse
Score:
34.52
2006 Ranking: 63 2005 Ranking: 60
2004 Ranking: 51
2003 Ranking:
41
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
3.82 |
9 |
7 |
11 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
2.50 |
34.82 |
Program Analysis:
Syracuse is a program at a crossroads. Greg Robinson hasn't produced a
winner as the once great team has only been able to come up with five
D-I wins in his first two years, bottoming out with a 1-10 2005 in his
first season. Winning 25% in the Big
East for a program like this is embarrassing. The APR Score is a savior,
but unless Robinson comes up with more wins, the attendance won't be
there and neither will he.
66.
Oklahoma State
Score:
34.75
2006 Ranking: 61 2005 Ranking: 46
2004 Ranking: 61
2003 Ranking: 78
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
4.42 |
4 |
6 |
16 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
3.33 |
34.75 |
Program Analysis: The
drop was going to happen after losing the 9-4 Cotton Bowl season under
Les Miles, but the future couldn't be brighter. Mike Gundy has put
together a tremendous array of athletes that'll up the Draft Score and
will certainly make the Conference Winning % look far better over the
next few years. There's a ceiling on how high the program can go,
considering it plays in the brutal Big 12 South and with an average
Attendance Score.
67.
Michigan State
Score:
34.74
2006 Ranking: 50 2005 Ranking: 54
2004 Ranking: 47
2003 Ranking: 49
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
7.32 |
3 |
10 |
14 |
3 |
1 |
1.5 |
2.92 |
34.74 |
Program Analysis:
Considering the Attendance Score will always be great, and the Draft
Score is always solid, Michigan State has a nice base to work from.
Unfortunately, the wins just haven't been there, especially in Big Ten
play cranking out just a 29% league winning percentage. Mark Dantonio
will try to quickly shape things up after the John L. Smith debacle, but
it'll take a little while.
68. Iowa State
Score:
34.73
2006 Ranking: 75 2005 Ranking: 71
2004 Ranking: 73
2003 Ranking: 51
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
4.48 |
6 |
3 |
15 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
3.75 |
34.73 |
Program Analysis:
Somehow, Iowa State has been able move up despite a horrible 4-8 season
with only three D-I wins, and a Bad Loss at Colorado that'll hang around
for two more years. How? The 2-10 2003 season is out of the mix. New
head coach Gene Chizik isn't likely to come up with miracles right away,
and that'll be a problem considering the 7-5 Independence Bowl winning
season of 2004 won't count here next year.
69.
Washington State
Score:
34.52
2006 Ranking: 49 2005 Ranking: 23
2004 Ranking: 15
2003 Ranking:
39
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
3.32 |
6 |
6 |
14 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
3.20 |
34.52 |
Program Analysis:
Washington State has been the epitome of Pac 10 mediocrity over the last
three years, and the mega-drop in the rankings reflects it. The
Attendance Score is always going to be an issue, and it's ranking below
several mid-majors. Winning a mere 32% of Pac 10 games is the killer,
along with the mere 14 D-I wins fir a team that can't seem to catch a
break. The Cougars have lost seven games over the last two years by
seven points or fewer.
70. South Florida
Score:
34.20
2006 Ranking: 74 2005 Ranking: 65
2004 Ranking: 59
2003 Ranking: 79
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
3.20 |
4 |
1 |
16 |
6 |
1 |
1.5 |
5.00 |
33.20 |
Program Analysis:
This seems stunningly low, and this will probably be the last time the
program is here for a while after losing a 4-7 2004 season with a bad
home loss to Army off next year's rankings. The Attendance Score is
hardly befitting a team that's competing with the best in the Big East,
and the Draft Score seems too low. Wins, wins and more wins will make
USF as strong in these rankings as it'll be on the field over the next
few years.
71. Stanford
Score:
33.84
2006 Ranking: 64 2005 Ranking: 74
2004 Ranking: 52
2003 Ranking:
54
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
4.04 |
10 |
13 |
10 |
2 |
0 |
1.5 |
2.80 |
33.84 |
Program Analysis:
Being smart helps. The perfect APR Score overcame the mere ten D-I wins
and a 28% clip in Pac 10 play. The 1-11 nightmare of last year will keep
the ranking down for the next few years, but the Draft Score should stay
surprisingly high, as should the APR. The stunning 2005 Bad Loss to
Cal-Davis will hang around for two more years.
72. Memphis
Score:
33.37
2006 Ranking: 38 2005 Ranking: 68
2004 Ranking: 71
2003 Ranking: 86
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
3.79 |
8 |
3 |
14 |
4 |
0 |
2.5 |
4.58 |
33.37 |
Program Analysis: One
of the rankings' biggest crashers, Memphis lost its 9-3 2003 season from
the equation and replaced it with a 2-10 2006 campaign that saw only one
win over a D-I team and with a Bad Loss to UAB. The APR Score is
terrific and the rest of the scores aren't all that bad. Now there has
to be more Conference USA wins.
73.
Houston
Score:
33.27
2006 Ranking: 84 2005 Ranking: 82
2004 Ranking: 89
2003 Ranking: 103
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
1.94 |
3 |
2 |
17 |
6 |
0 |
1.5 |
5.83 |
33.27 |
Program Analysis: Go
10-4 and win the Conference USA title; move up 20 spots. The Attendance
Score is stunningly awful, and the .2004 Bad Loss to Rice kept the
Cougars out of the 50s, but this is still a nice jump for a program that
was trying to find its way for so long. Kevin Kolb is a Philadelphia
Eagle, and there are other holes to be filled, but considering the 3-8
2004 season won't count towards next year's rankings, expect a further
rise.
74.
Kansas
Score:
33.13
2006 Ranking: 78 2005 Ranking: 88
2004 Ranking: 95
2003 Ranking:
98
|
Attendance Score |
APR Score |
Draft |
Wins |
Quality Wins |
Elite Wins |
Bad Losses |
Conf. |
TOTAL |
|
4.30 |
2 |
1 |
15 |
8 |
