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

CFN Three-Year Program Ranking - 100 to 119

CollegeFootballNews.com
Posted Aug 17, 2007


CFN's 2007 Three-Year Program Rankings and Analysis ... Teams 100 through 119

Three Year Program Analysis

Teams 100 to 119

Program Rankings
Scoring System  
1 to 10 | 11 to 25
26 to 39 | 40 to 59
60 to 79 | 80 to 99

By Category
APR | Attendance

Bad Losses
Best Leagues
By Conference
Conf. Win %
Draft
| Elite Wins
Quality Wins
| D-I Wins

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

1
00. Army

Score:
22.02
2006 Ranking:
105   2005 Ranking: 115
2004 Ranking:
109   2003 Ranking: 105

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
3.12 9 0 7 2 0 2 2.90 22.02

Program Analysis: The Bobby Ross era never took off, and now it'll be up to new head man Stan Brock to try to turn things around; or at least be as good as Navy. The Black Knights simply haven't come up with many wins, but the overall score could quickly go up with a nice season and after the 2-9 2004 clunker is off the books.


101. UCF

Score:
21.83
2006 Ranking:
95   2005 Ranking: 99
2004 Ranking:
84   2003 Ranking: 75

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
2.67 3 2 11 2 0 2 4.17 21.83

Program Analysis: Watch out for UCF to rocket up the rankings next year after the 0-11 2004 season gets wiped away. Not only will the win total go up, but the Bad Loss score should go down as long as there aren't any hiccups this year. George O'Leary should finally have the players he needs to win, but now the program has to get back to a Conference USA title-level like it was two years ago.


102. Vanderbilt

Score:
21.40
2006 Ranking:
104   2005 Ranking: 107
2004 Ranking:
106   2003 Ranking: 94

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
3.31 8 3 8 1 0 2.5 2.08 21.40

Program Analysis: Even with all the big strides made over the last few years under Bobby Johnson, Vandy is still struggling to get out of the 100s. Only eight D-I wins makes it hard to make a lot of noise, and winning just 20% of the conference games makes things worse. The APR will always be there, and the drafted players will only go up, but the Bad Losses have to stop and there simply must be more conference wins.


103. San Diego State

Score:
20.29
2006 Ranking:
87   2005 Ranking: 85
2004 Ranking:
85   2003 Ranking: 91

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
3.38 1 5 11 1 0 2.5 3.91 20.29

Program Analysis: A strange program over the last few years, it always seems like it should be on the verge of turning a major corner, and it hasn't happened yet. Second-year head coach Chuck Long should have a much better offense, as long as everyone stays healthy. The Attendance Score isn't bad, but the APR is a joke. Last year's Bad Loss at home to Cal Poly will stick around in the score for another two years.


104. UL Lafayette

Score:
19.05
2006 Ranking:
102   2005 Ranking: 105
2004 Ranking:
100   2003 Ranking: 114

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.78 2 1 13 1 0 4 4.76 19.05

Program Analysis: Sort of a surprise here, UL Lafayette hasn't been that bad a team in Sun Belt play. However, the low APR and bad attendance, and worse yet, four Bad Losses, has kept the Ragin' Cajuns from getting out of the 100s. After two straight six wins seasons, a third would probably get the job done. This should be one of the Sun Belt's better teams this year, so a huge jump could be there for the taking.


105. Tulane

Score:
18.37
2006 Ranking:
97   2005 Ranking: 76
2004 Ranking:
82   2003 Ranking: 82

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.87 5 2 9 3 1 5 2.50 18.37

Program Analysis: All things considered, it's a positive that Tulane still has a program to be ranked. The Hurricane Katrina 2005 season all but assured a drop in the rankings that will take a while to bounceback from. Another bad year will mean a further drop after the 5-6 2004 season won't count anymore. Tulane is a magnificent school and should have a much higher APR Score.


106. North Texas

Score:
18.31
2006 Ranking:
81   2005 Ranking: 62
2004 Ranking:
65   2003 Ranking: 85

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.58 3 0 12 0 0 3.5 5.24 18.31

Program Analysis: Once the shining light of the Sun Belt, North Texas has sunk like a stone after two straight miserable years. There's still a lot further for the Mean Green to go if 2007 isn't strong, considering the 7-5 Sun Belt title-winning 2005 is out of the mix next year. New head coach Todd Dodge will make the offense more interesting, and it should make a difference considering the lack of overall pop in the Sun Belt.


107. Illinois

Score:
17.00
2006 Ranking:
101  2005 Ranking: 84
2004 Ranking:
64   2003 Ranking: 52

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
4.66 4 3 5 1 0 0 0.83 17.00

Program Analysis: With the way Ron Zook has recruited, this needs to be the end of the Illinois freefall. Going 2-22 in three years of Big Ten play has signaled a bottoming out for the program, but there's a ton of upside going into the next few years. The Attendance Score is an embarrassment for a big-time Big Ten school, while the lack of drafted players hasn't helped. Considering Illinois is a solid academic institution, the APR needs to be better.


108. Mississippi State

Score:
16.60
2006 Ranking:
98   2005 Ranking: 92
2004 Ranking:
91   2003 Ranking:
60

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
4.43 4 4 7 1 0 3.5 1.67 16.60

Program Analysis: Just four years ago, Mississippi State was on the verge of respectability, and then .... crash. Seven D-I wins in three years, along with a 4-20 SEC record, hasn't made the Sylvester Croom area anything to get excited about. The ranking should move up next year when the 3-8 2004 season, along with Bad Losses to Main and Vanderbilt are off the books.


109. Kent State

Score:
15.97
2006 Ranking:
110   2005 Ranking: 94
2004 Ranking:
94   2003 Ranking: 107

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.22 4 1 10 0 0 3.5 3.75 15.97

Program Analysis: The 1-10 2005 campaign, with no wins over D- I teams, has kept the program ranking in a standstill. This is a better team than the current ranking might indicate, but with one more year of the 2005 season still on the books, there won't be a whole bunch of movement unless 2007 is something special. Doing more in MAC play would provide a big boost.


110. Idaho

Score:
14.59
2005 Ranking:
114   2005 Ranking: 114
2004 Ranking:
114   2003 Ranking:
106

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.54 6 0 8 0 0 4 3.04 12.59

Program Analysis: Turnover in the coaching staffs, with Nick Holt bolting for USC and Dennis Erickson barely opening his bags before going to Arizona State, hasn't allowed for much in the way of stability in Moscow. Under Robb Akey, the wins should start to slowly come. First, the Vandals have to beat all the teams they're supposed to; they can't afford any Bad Losses.


111. Eastern Michigan

Score:
13.98
2006 Ranking:
111   2005 Ranking: 111
2004 Ranking:
116   2003 Ranking:
117

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.14 2 1 9 1 0 3 3.33 13.98

Program Analysis: It's been a hard go for Jeff Genyk and the Eagles. Getting any consistency has been an issue, but watching Central Michigan and Western Michigan become major MAC players has made the struggles even worse. Even with all the problems and a 1-11 2006, this is the highest the program has been in five years. The Eagles will likely need to come up with a .500 season to not slide down next year.


112. San Jose State

Score:
13.59
2006 Ranking:
117   2005 Ranking: 110
2004 Ranking:
98   2003 Ranking:
90

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.26 1 2 11 0 0 4 3.33 13.59

Program Analysis: How bad has San Jose State been? A 9-4 season with a bowl win only got the Spartans from 117 to 111. No attendance, both in the stands and apparently in the classroom, has been the downfall. A better APR Score will do wonders, but a second straight good season, but erasing the 2-9 2004 season that had only one win over a D-I team, would be better..


113. New Mexico State

Score:
11.22
2006 Ranking:
115   2005 Ranking: 87
2004 Ranking:
86   2003 Ranking:
80

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.62 2 0 7 2 1 5 2.61 11.22

Program Analysis: This might be as low as things get for a long, long time. Hal Mumme has his passing game in place and ready to start outbombing the mediocre to average teams, but the defense has to be far better in order to start making any movement in the rankings. The Attendance and APR scores are awful, so the wins have to start coming to move up.


114. Utah State

Score:
10.57
2006 Ranking:
113   2005 Ranking: 102
2004 Ranking:
97   2003 Ranking: 95

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.39 3 0 7 0 0 3 2.17 10.57

Program Analysis: Utah State should be happy it stayed at 113 after a one-win season. The bad play in conference and low attendance numbers don't help the cause, and like anything else, more wins help everything else. Things don't appear to be too bright going into 2007, with almost everyone picking the Aggies to finish last in the league, so any production will be a plus.


115. UNLV

Score:
9.34
2006 Ranking:
96   2005 Ranking: 83
2004 Ranking:
77   2003 Ranking:
71

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
2.03 2 3 5 0 0 3.5 1.30 9.34

Program Analysis: It's not much of a stretch to call UNLV one of the nation's most disappointing programs over the last few years. Mike Sanford took over an underachieving program and things have gone even further south with a mere five wins in three years and none of note. Worse yet, the Rebels have been losing to bad teams with a 3.5 Bad Loss score bringing things down. There's a floor on how low the program can go, and this is it.


116. Duke

Score:
8.90
2006 Ranking:
94   2005 Ranking: 98
2004 Ranking:
105   2003 Ranking:
108

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.99 10 0 1 1 0 5.5 0.42 8.90

Program Analysis: Here's where the brain power kicks in with a fantastic APR. You win one game against a D-I team in three years, there are going to be problems. It's not like the team hasn't been competitive, and under head coach Ted Roof, there is a little bit of promise with some good young players to work with. Unfortunately, the ACC isn't going to get any easier. The key will be winning a few games against the dregs. A 5.5 Bad Loss score is a killer.


117. Buffalo

Score:
6.42
2006 Ranking:
119   2005 Ranking: 117
2004 Ranking:
117   2003 Ranking:
117

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.25 1 0 5 0 0 2.5 1.67 6.42

Program Analysis: Basically, Buffalo beat Temple 9-3 in last year's opener, and that means the highest ranking (remember, there were 117 teams ranked two years ago) in the last four years. Yippee. The APR Score is an embarrassment, no one's coming to the games, and there haven't been any wins of consequence. Head coach Turner Gill has to start making some headway in the MAC in a big hurry.


118. Florida International

Score:
2.51
2006 Ranking:
116   2005 Ranking: NA
2004 Ranking:
NA   2003 Ranking: NA

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.37 5 2 3 0 0 7 2.14 5.51

Program Analysis: FIU appeared on the verge of being an immediate power in the Sun Belt with a great defense and a veteran offense returning, but the team couldn't win a close game, it had the fight with Miami, got a lot of players suspended, and finished 0-12. New head coach Mario Cristobal has to start generating some wins, and then the attendance has to start going up. That won't be easy. The Miami sports fans don't flock to Hurricane games unless they're against the elite and won't start packing them in up the road.


119. Temple

Score:
4.69
2006 Ranking:
118   2005 Ranking: 113
2004 Ranking:
102   2003 Ranking: 96

Attendance Score APR Score Draft Wins Quality Wins Elite Wins Bad Losses Conf. TOTAL
1.50 1 1 2 0 0 1 0.69 4.69

Program Analysis: Two wins in three years makes it hard to make any noise. On the plus side, there's only been one Bad Loss (to Buffalo last year). The APR Score is abysmal, the attendance is next to nothing, and there simply hasn't been anything to get excited about. Head coach Al Golden appears to have things on the upswing with a few decent recruiting classes and an overall talent upgrade.

   

Related Stories
CFN Three-Year Program Rankings - APR
 -by CollegeFootballNews.com  Aug 18, 2007
CFN Five-Year Program Ranking & Analysis
 -by CollegeFootballNews.com  Aug 23, 2011
Navy football: Ranking the 12 opponents
 -by GoMids.com  Jul 31, 2007