CFN Five-Year Program Analysis
No. 41 to 60
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
allow 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 have created our CFN Five-Year Program
Analysis (it used to be three years, but we
supersized it) 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 have listed 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: 4.38
- 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: 5.85
- Quality Wins: Wins over FBS teams that finished with
a winning record. Avg. Score: 9.77
- Total Wins: Wins over FBS teams. Avg. Score:
28.75
- Players Drafted: Number of players drafted. Avg. Score: 9.70
- Conference Win %: Conference winning percentage
times 10. Avg. Score: 4.99
- 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: 1.39
- 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: 2.25
- Elite Losses: Losses to teams that finished with
two wins or fewer. Take 0.25 of the number. Avg.
Number: 5.15
- Bad Wins: Wins teams that finished with three wins or fewer or any win to a non-FBS team Avg. Number: 10.64
-
Detailed Explanation of the Scoring System and
Categories
-
CLICK HERE for FREE Expert Football Selections from
ATS Consultants
60.
Colorado
Total Five-Year Program Score:
52.14
Attendance Score: 4.89
APR Score: 4
Draft: 9
FBS Wins: 27
Quality Wins: 10
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 2.5
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 5
Conf. Score: 3.75
Program Analysis ... It's not working.
Colorado was hovering just outside of the top 20 in
the 2003 and 2004 rankings, and then came runs to
the 2004 and 2005 Big 12 Championship games and the
program was riding high ... for about ten minutes.
The ugly end to the 2005 season, with the lowlight
coming in a 70-3 loss to Texas in the Big 12 title
game and with a slew of off-the-field problems, Gary
Barnett was canned and Dan Hawkins, seemingly the
perfect fit, came in and promptly took the team into
the tank with a 2-10 season starting out with a
19-10 loss to Montana State. It's not that Colorado
has been bad under Hawkins, but it hasn't done
anything of note outside of 27-24 win over Oklahoma
in 2007. The Draft score, a big number back in the
team's heyday, has dipped, and the APR is lousy. But
considering the Buffs have won just 38% of their Big
12 games, this isn't an awful ranking.
59.
East Carolina
Total Five-Year Program Score:
52.69
Attendance Score: 3.69
APR Score: 4
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 31
Quality Wins: 8
Elite Win Score: 2
Bad Loss Score: 3
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 7
Conf. Score: 5.75
Program Analysis ... ECU shouldn't get
comfortable in this spot. Possibly the best team in
Conference USA this season, the defending league
champions should be in for a big season that'll
replace the 2-9 disaster of 2004. The APR and
Attendance scores are mediocre and there haven't
been a slew of players drafted, but there have been
plenty of wins, highlighted by last year's victories
over Virginia Tech and West Virginia before picking
off Tulsa for the Conference USA championship. Head
coach Skip Holtz is still around, but he'll soon be
courted heavily by the big boy programs, and he'll
continue to work wonders and will bring more and
more success.
58.
Houston
Total Five-Year Program Score:
52.76
Attendance Score: 2.01
APR Score: 6
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 32
Quality Wins: 9
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 16
Conf. Score: 6.50
Program Analysis ... There have been few
teams more fun to watch over the last few years. The
Cougars have been explosive, led by QB Kevin Kolb
and replaced by Case Keenum, while the success has
continued with Kevin Sumlin at the helm replacing
now-Baylor head man Art Briles. Ranking 103rd in
2003, Houston should complete a tremendous rise up
as its 3-8 2004 season, along with a Bad Loss to
Rice, will be replaced what should be a successful
2009 campaign. There haven't been a lot of great
wins outside of the 2006 Conference USA championship
over Southern Miss, and the Draft Score appears a
bit low, but this is a strong program that's getting
better and better.
57.
Connecticut
Total Five-Year Program Score:
52.92
Attendance Score: 3.92
APR Score: 7
Draft: 9
FBS Wins: 29
Quality Wins: 6
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 5
Bad Wins: 15
Conf. Score: 5.00
Program Analysis ... Randy Edsall has
carved out a nice program from near-scratch with
regular bowl appearances and lots of wins. Now there
need to be more big victories. The six Quality Wins
over the last five years are the lowest among the
top 61 teams, while there aren't any hang-the-hat-on
victories that shook up the world. Now it's time to
become a regular player in the Big East race, and
while there have been chances to take the next step
and be a champion, the team hasn't met them. With a
bit more offense, UConn could be in a BCS game soon.
56. NC
State
Total Five-Year Program Score:
53.07
Attendance Score: 5.57
APR Score: 5
Draft: 16
FBS Wins: 21
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 1
Elite Losses: 1
Bad Wins: 6
Conf. Score: 3.75
Program Analysis ... Always slightly
above-average, NC State needed to be torn down a bit
to be built back up. Everything appears to be
pointed in the right direction under Tom O'Brien
with QB Russell Wilson a great young player to build
around and with enough talent to challenge anyone in
the ACC. The 38% winning clip in ACC play hurts the
rankings, and the 21 FBS wins are low, but this is
about as low as the program will get. It got as high
as 31 in 2004, and while it's not going to get too
much higher for a few years, the 3-9 2006 will hang
around the formula for a while.
55.
Northwestern
Total Five-Year Program Score:
53.84
Attendance Score: 2.84
APR Score: 9
Draft: 6
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 9
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 4
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 5.00
Program Analysis ... Pat Fitzgerald has
picked up the pieces from the tragedy of the Randy
Walker death to make the program his. It took a
little while, and there were some growing pains, but
the football team appears to be close to what
Fitzgerald's original vision was, at least
defensively. The APR score is always going to be
great, and the Attendance score will always be
lousy, but the wins are starting to come. The key is
to always beat the awful teams. Northwestern might
not be able to always stay with the elite teams, but
it can't afford the Bad Losses like the gaffe at
Indiana last year or the home loss to New Hampshire
two years ago.
54.
North Carolina
Total Five-Year Program Score:
54.86
Attendance Score: 5.36
APR Score: 7
Draft: 11
FBS Wins: 22
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 4.25
Program Analysis ... It's impressive that
the ranking is this high with a 3-9 2006 season and
a 4-8 2007 weighing things down. The fortunes should
quickly change as Butch Davis has built up the
program into an ACC title contender with more
draftable players, more butts in the seats, and with
a better conference winning percentage sure to come.
The APR score is solid and there aren't any really
bad losses, but it's going to take a few more big
years to overcome the problems of the recent past.
53.
South Florida
Total Five-Year Program Score:
55.20
Attendance Score: 3.98
APR Score: 2
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 31
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 2.5
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 5
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 4.72
Program Analysis ... Consistency. That's
the problem. With plenty of great athletes and the
mindset that it can beat anyone in America, Jim
Leavitt's team is as dangerous as they come,
especially at home. There's the huge 2007 win over
West Virginia a few weeks after pulling off a
stunner at Auburn, there was the 2006 win at West
Virginia, and there was a huge victory over a loaded
Louisville team in 2005. But there was also a loss
at home to Army in 2004 to go along with just enough
misfires in key games to be out of the Big East
title hunt. Over the past few years there haven't
been any major gaffes, but if the team can play up
to its speed and athleticism every week, it should
be an even bigger player in the race. In the
rankings, the APR score is abysmal, but the Draft
score is about to get a boost.
52.
Southern Miss
Total Five-Year Program Score:
56.35
Attendance Score: 2.85
APR Score: 6
Draft: 5
FBS Wins: 35
Quality Wins: 7
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 6.25
Program Analysis ... Jeff Bower had created
a Conference USA powerhouse that won plenty of
games, was a regular in the league title chase, and
went to bowl games almost every year. Being
consistently above-average wasn't enough, and in
came Larry Fedora to try to give the program a shot
in the arm. After a rough start, his team reeled off
five straight wins to close out the 2009 season and
it all but saved the overall ranking from tumbling.
Winning 63% of league games offsets the lousy
Attendance score, but the wins will have to keep on
coming to start to make more of a move up. The Bad
Loss came at home against Rice in 2007.
51.
Oklahoma State
Total Five-Year Program Score:
57.67
Attendance Score: 4.42
APR Score: 6
Draft: 7
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 10
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 8
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 4.25
Program Analysis ... This low ranking isn't
going to last too much longer. The 4-7 2005 season
drags down the overall score, but last year was a
big boost and an expected huge 2009 should help
change the numbers in a big hurry. Winning half of
the Big 12 games over the last five years keeps OSU
in the 50s, but the wins are starting to flow. Now
the huge South wins have to start coming after going
2-13 against Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech (with
the two wins coming against the Red Raiders).
50.
Navy
Total Five-Year Program Score: 58.16
Attendance Score: 3.34
APR Score: 10
Draft: 0
FBS Wins: 40
Quality Wins: 5
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 24
Conf. Score: 6.83*
* Since Navy doesn't play in a conference, the
Conference Score is the winning percentage over the
last five years.
Program Analysis ... A stunningly
consistent winner, with Ken Niumatalolo keeping the
success rolling after Paul Johnson left for Georgia
Tech, Navy has been one of the greatest success
stories in recent college football history. What
isn't quite understood by most fans is just how
average the talent level is compared to the rest of
the FBS. Navy has a mere handful of D-I talents, but
it still wins and wins and wins. The APR score is
always strong and the 40 FBS wins are the most of
anyone ranked outside of the top 32, but the Draft
score will always be a zero and there aren't a lot
of Quality Wins. Navy doesn't have a killer
schedule, but it beats the teams it has to play.
49.
Arkansas
Total Five-Year Program Score:
60.88
Attendance Score: 6.88
APR Score: 3
Draft: 14
FBS Wins: 28
Quality Wins: 8
Elite Win Score: 3
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 14
Bad Wins: 12
Conf. Score: 4.50
Program Analysis ... As high as 18th in the
2004 rankings, losing seasons in 2004 and 2005
quickly dropped the Hogs and there wasn't a big
rebound even with a breakthrough 2006 campaign.
Houston Nutt and Arkansas parted ways, but it might
have been a step back to take a huge leap forward.
Bobby Petrino, issues and all, is a fantastic
college coach who now has the pieces in place to
make the program a consistent winner. Getting the
players to class would help the APR score and the
overall ranking, and there has to be more Quality
Wins, with a mere eight over the last five years,
but there are epic victories over LSU in 2007 and at
Auburn in 2006 to show what the program has been
able to do from time to time.
48.
Fresno State
Total Five-Year Program Score:
61.34
Attendance Score: 3.84
APR Score: 7
Draft: 12
FBS Wins: 34
Quality Wins: 7
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 1
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 18
Conf. Score: 6.25
Program Analysis ... For all the bluster
and all the big performances, no matter how the
results turned out, against the big name teams (like
the great loss to USC 2005), there haven't been
enough WAC wins and there's a Boise State anchor
around the program's neck. Winning 63% of conference
games is nice, but it's not enough to a Fresno State
to just be hanging around the mediocre, throwaway
bowl games. This is a program that Pat Hill wanted
to become a superpower, and it hasn't happened.
He has had players, the Draft score is solid, and
there have been plenty of good wins, but there
haven't been enough victories to be Boise State.
47.
Pitt
Total Five-Year Program Score:
61.70
Attendance Score: 4.16
APR Score: 6
Draft: 13
FBS Wins: 29
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 5
Bad Wins: 8
Conf. Score: 5.29
Program Analysis ... The Panthers have been
fine, but they haven't taken off like they should've
under Dave Wannstedt. Walt Harris took Pitt to a BCS
game in 2004, but the program has underwhelmed and
underachieved over the past four seasons. There are
plenty of Quality Wins, Pitt has been fine against
most mid-range teams, but it hasn't come up with the
one or two big wins needed to be special. And then
there's the yearly clunker. There was a shocker to
Bowling Green last year, the 48-45 loss to Navy two
years ago, and losses to Michigan State and UConn
teams that went 4-8 in 2006. Basically, the program
hasn't been able to put it all together.
46.
Michigan State
Total Five-Year Program Score:
63.05
Attendance Score: 7.30
APR Score: 4
Draft: 14
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 1.5
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 4.00
Program Analysis ... After a rough run
under John L. Smith, Mark Dantonio stepped up and
has the Spartans hitting their stride with a team
good enough to challenge for the Big Ten title (if
they get several big breaks). The Attendance score
is always going to be good, but the APR is low and
winning 40% of Big Ten games keeps the team this
low. But all of that is changing. The Bad Loss came
to Illinois at home in 2006, while the Elite Win
came at Notre Dame in 2005.
45.
Kansas
Total Five-Year Program Score:
64.53
Attendance Score: 4.53
APR Score: 6
Draft: 5
FBS Wins: 33
Quality Wins: 14
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 4.25
Program Analysis ... After stinking it up
for years, Kansas started to show some signs of life
with a Fort Worth Bowl appearance in 2005. Passed
over by the bowls in 2006, the Jayhawks roared in
2007 with a 12-1 season and a shot to play for the
national title up until late November with a loss to
Missouri. Can Mark Mangino keep the success going
next year when QB Todd Reesing, the unsung star who
has been the triggerman through the burst of
success, is gone? The ranking should keep going up
as long as there aren't any losing seasons in the
near future, and there's enough talent coming in to
keep KU among the best teams in the North for a
while.
44.
Hawaii
Total Five-Year Program Score:
64.56
Attendance Score: 3.81
APR Score: 5
Draft: 10
FBS Wins: 39
Quality Wins: 10
Elite Win Score: 0
Bad Loss Score: 2
Elite Losses: 6
Bad Wins: 19
Conf. Score: 7.00
Program Analysis ... Helped by one of the
best home field advantages in college football (the
trip, the girls, the beach ... it's Hawaii), the
Warriors have always been great when it gets teams
in its park. In WAC play, the high-octane offense
has led the way to a 70% clip in WAC games, but
there have been some clunkers like last year's 30-14
loss at Utah State (a Bad Loss) and a blowout loss
to Rice in 2004. There are lot of Bad Wins, but
that's part of the deal when playing in the WAC.
Teams will always want to make the trip, it's like
an extra bowl game, and Hawaii will always play them
tough.
43.
Tulsa
Total Five-Year Program Score:
64.70
Attendance Score: 2.20
APR Score: 4
Draft: 3
FBS Wins: 39
Quality Wins: 13
Elite Win Score: 3
Bad Loss Score: 1
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 18
Conf. Score: 6.75
Program Analysis ... Conference USA's
premier program over the last four years should
rocket up the rankings if it can come up with a good
2009. The 4-8 2004 season started out rough, losing
six of the first seven games, but Tulsa has won 41
games ever since (although not all of them against
FBS teams). The Attendance and APR scores are lousy,
and only three players have been drafted, but the
team keeps beating the bad ones and has been in
three of the last four conference title games.
Considering the program was ranked 110th in 2003,
being this high shows how fast the success has come.
42.
Rutgers
Total Five-Year Program Score:
66.12
Attendance Score: 3.83
APR Score: 10
Draft: 10
FBS Wins: 34
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 2.5
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 14
Conf. Score: 5.29
Program Analysis ... As impressive as the
turnaround has been under head coach Greg Schiano on
the field, the perfect APR score could be more
amazing as the football program has answered the
critics inside the university that thought the
school was selling out the academic side. The
players have been coming, as evidenced by the good
Draft score, and there have been a ton of wins over
the last three years, but there's still room to rise
up with the 4-7 2004 season going off the books next
year. How much has the program improved? It was
ranked 112th in 2003, 107th in 2004, and 101st in
2005.
41.
Maryland
Total Five-Year Program Score:
66.24
Attendance Score: 5.24
APR Score: 4
Draft: 14
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 16
Elite Win Score: 1
Bad Loss Score: 0
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 4.50
Program Analysis ... As high as 13th in the
2004 rankings, Maryland has become decidedly
mediocre and has gotten a bit stale. There has been
good talent coming to College Park, and there have
been plenty of Quality Wins, but there haven't been
enough ACC wins over the last five years losing more
than half the conference games. The APR is also
lousy. With three losing seasons in the last five
years, the Terps have to come up with a few strong
seasons to stop treading water. To start, there
needs to be more consistency. Last year the Terps
didn't show up in a loss to Middle Tennessee, and
came out roaring in a win over Cal the following
week. It beat Clemson, and lost at Virginia the week
after 31-0.