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

2010 CFN 5-Year Program Rankings - 81 to 100
Mississippi State LB K.J. Wright
Mississippi State LB K.J. Wright
CollegeFootballNews.com
Posted Aug 24, 2010


CFN's 2010 Five-Year Program Rankings and Analysis ... Teams 81 through 100


Preview 2010 - No. 81 to 100

CFN Five-Year Program Analysis


2010 CFN Five-Year Program Analysis
- Bottom 20 | No. 81 to 100 | No. 61 to 80
- No. 41 to 60 | No. 21 to 40 | No. 11 to 20
- No. 10 Alabama | No. 9 Penn St | No. 8 Virginia Tech
- No. 7 Georgia | No. 6 LSU | No. 5 Oklahoma
- No. 4 Ohio State | No. 3 Texas | No. 2 Florida | No. 1 USC

- Expert Football Predictions from ATS Consultants - Absolutely Free.
- Get Tickets For Your Team, Any Game

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: 4.37
- 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: 9.62
- Total Wins: Wins over FBS teams. Avg. Score: 29.25
- Players Drafted: Number of players drafted. Avg. Score: 9.62
- Conference Win %: Conference winning percentage times 10. Avg. Score: 4.96
- 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: 1.25
- 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: 2.03
- Elite Losses: Losses to teams that finished with two wins or fewer. Take 0.25 of the number. Avg. Number: 5.02
- Bad Wins: Wins over teams that finished with three wins or fewer or any win to a non-FBS team Avg. Number: 10.83

- Detailed Explanation of the Scoring System and Categories

100. Toledo

2010 Total Score: 29.38
2009 Ranking: 95
Attendance Score: 1.88
APR Score: 4
Draft: 3
FBS Wins: 20
Quality Wins: 2
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 2
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 13
Conf. Score: 4.25
Program Analysis: For years, Toledo was a perennial favorite to win the MAC title under Tom Amstutz ranked as high as 29 in 2005, but the wins stopped coming (mainly because the team stopped playing defense) and the ranking took a major tumble. Tim Beckman has kept the offense exciting, but he has to work on the D and he has to bring more conference wins (and hope more fans start to show up) to get the Rockets back to the high level they were at a few seasons ago.

99. Washington State

2010 Total Score: 30.50
2009 Ranking: 88
Attendance Score: 2.95
APR Score: 2
Draft: 5
FBS Wins: 16
Quality Wins: 5
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 7
Conf. Score: 2.05
Program Analysis: Yes, really, there was a time when Wazzu football wasn’t so sad. Ranked 15th in 2004, the Cougars have taken a painful tumble that might get worse if Paul Wulff can’t start to bring more wins (or at least a few victories). Being bad on the field is one thing, but having a low APR, too, is also a problem. Unless there’s a major shocker this season, the ranking will be in the 100s next year as things are likely to get uglier.

98. Baylor

2010 Total Score: 30.62
2009 Ranking: 100
Attendance Score: 3.62
APR Score: 6
Draft: 6
FBS Wins: 15
Quality Wins: 3
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 1.5
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 2.00
Program Analysis: Baylor isn’t the total doormat it was a few yeas ago, but it’s not exactly tearing up the Big 12 South under Art Briles. The team is more interesting, and Robert Griffin might be the league’s most exciting player, but the wins haven’t come on a consistent basis. The APR Score is good and the Draft and Attendance Scores aren’t awful, but without more Big 12 wins, the ranking won’t improve.

97. Syracuse

2010 Total Score: 31.34
2009 Ranking: 84
Attendance Score: 3.70
APR Score: 6
Draft: 10
FBS Wins: 12
Quality Wins: 3
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 8
Bad Wins: 6
Conf. Score: 1.14
Program Analysis: There was a time when Syracuse was a BCS Bowl-level powerhouse, but the program went in the tank under Greg Robinson and Doug Marrone has a ton of work to do. The Conference Score is by far the worst among the top 114 ranked teams (and is the second-worst in the nation behind Duke … not counting Western Kentucky’s one season on the books) and the 12 FBS wins are the lowest among the top 110 teams. The decent attendance (although it’s awful by SU standards) and the good APR keep the ranking from falling even further.

96. Miami University

2010 Total Score: 31.82
2009 Ranking: 79
Attendance Score: 1.48
APR Score: 9
Draft: 3
FBS Wins: 17
Quality Wins: 3
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 3
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 7
Conf. Score: 3.59
Program Analysis: Enjoy being up this high, RedHawk fans, because the ranking is about to take a mega-tumble unless second-year head man Mike Haywood can come up with a huge season. It wasn’t all that long ago when this was the preeminent powerhouse in the MAC and ranking 20th overall. And then the losses started to mount in disappointing year after disappointing year, and it’s only going to get worse even with a phenomenal APR Score providing a floor.

95. Iowa State

2010 Total Score: 32.22
2009 Ranking: 94
Attendance Score: 4.72
APR Score: 3
Draft: 5
FBS Wins: 19
Quality Wins: 4
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 4
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 6
Conf. Score: 3.50
Program Analysis: The Attendance Score is by far the best among the bottom 38 teams, but the end of the Dan McCarney era and the problems under Gene Chizik killed the program’s ranking. Always around the 70s until the last few years, the Cyclones have fallen quickly even after winning a bowl game last year. Paul Rhoads had a great first year, and he has just enough talent returning to hope for another good year. The APR needs to be better and there are too many bad losses, but the potential is there to shoot up the rankings quickly.

94. Louisiana Tech

2010 Total Score: 32.50
2009 Ranking: 90
Attendance Score: 1.75
APR Score: 5
Draft: 3
FBS Wins: 23
Quality Wins: 2
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 2
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 18
Conf. Score: 4.75
Program Analysis: Tech has been quietly decent for a long time, but it’s a program in flux with Derek Dooley off to Tennessee and Sonny Dykes taking over to rev up the attack. Will the Bulldogs stick with the dying WAC? Will they be off to Conference USA? The Mountain West? After being mired in the mid-70s for a few years, a few down seasons meant a tumble down this low. Mediocre attendance and not enough good wins are a problem, but this is still a good mid-level non-BCS program.

93. Akron

2010 Total Score: 33.49
2009 Ranking: 85
Attendance Score: 1.49
APR Score: 3
Draft: 3
FBS Wins: 23
Quality Wins: 3
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 14
Conf. Score: 4.00
Program Analysis: After hitting a high mark ranked 69th in 2006, the Zips are about to take a very, very big tumble down further unless new head coach Rob Ianello has a huge first year. The 2005 MAC Championship season won’t count towards next year’s rankings, and unless the boost from the new stadium does more for the attendance, and unless there’s an improvement in the classroom, Akron could be headed for the 100s.

92. Memphis

2010 Total Score: 34.06
2009 Ranking: 76
Attendance Score: 3.06
APR Score: 7
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 19
Quality Wins: 5
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 4
Elite Losses: 0
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 4.25
Program Analysis: The Tommy West era is finally over, and while he had his moments, the program hit the skids over the last few years after being ranked 38th in 2006. The big drop will only continue unless new head man Larry Porter can get some sort of defensive production and more consistency from the offense. The APR Score is fantastic, but the Bad Losses are a killer for a team with just 19 FBS wins over the last five seasons.

91. Wyoming

2010 Total Score: 34.99
2009 Ranking: 87
Attendance Score: 1.99
APR Score: 3
Draft: 2
FBS Wins: 24
Quality Wins: 4
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 2
Elite Losses: 10
Bad Wins: 12
Conf. Score: 3.50
Program Analysis: One of college football’s most unique programs, there aren’t a ton of Cowboy fans (evidenced by the Attendence Score), but they’re really, really rabid. The wins aren’t consistent, and while head coach Dave Christensen got the team to a bowl game last year, he has to prove he can do it again. Wyoming was the “hot” program at one time under Joe Glenn, and that changed quickly. More Mountain West wins are a must to get out of the 90s.

90. Marshall

2010 Total Score: 35.20
2009 Ranking: 97
Attendance Score: 2.59
APR Score: 7
Draft: 1
FBS Wins: 19
Quality Wins: 6
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 2.5
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 4.36
Program Analysis: There was a time when Marshall was making a bid to be among the elite of the elite in these rankings, but after tumbling down to 30 in 2004 72 in 2006, and 90 last year, the Mark Snyder era ended on a dead note even with a bowl appearance (sans Snyder). Doc Holliday appears to be the perfect fit for the program, but the talent level needs to be raised, more conference wins have to come, and more wins over good teams is a must.

89. Colorado State

2010 Total Score: 35.65
2009 Ranking: 83
Attendance Score: 2.40
APR Score: 6
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 19
Quality Wins: 6
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 2
Elite Losses: 8
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 3.00
Program Analysis: It looked like Steve Fairchild had the Rams on the verge of big things, and then came last year’s puzzling collapse leading to another drop in the overall rankings. Going from 53rd in 2004 to 89th, there’s still room to drop if CSU goes winless in conference play again. Winning 30% of conference games over the last five years is unacceptable.

88. Florida Atlantic

2010 Total Score: 36.61
2009 Ranking: 91
Attendance Score: 1.36
APR Score: 2
Draft: 1
FBS Wins: 26
Quality Wins: 4
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 1
Bad Wins: 14
Conf. Score: 6.00
Program Analysis: Howard Schnellenberger created a Sun Belt power, but he needs to get things back on track after taking a step back over the last few seasons. The Attendance Score will always be a problem and the APR is a disaster, but the 26 wins are the most among the bottom 35 teams, and Conference Score is tied for the best among the bottom 40. Being better in the classroom might be the only way to make a big move up without more Sun Belt titles also coming.

87. UTEP

2010 Total Score: 37.36
2009 Ranking: 71
Attendance Score: 3.86
APR Score: 3
Draft: 6
FBS Wins: 24
Quality Wins: 8
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 7
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 4.25
Program Analysis: Mike Price hasn’t done wonders with the Miners, but his teams have been just good enough to not be total failures. The APR Score is lousy and the conference wins aren’t there, but some talent has come through the program and the attendance isn’t bad. If Price can come up with just one big year, there could easily be a big jump up the rankings.

86. Indiana

2010 Total Score: 38.41
2009 Ranking: 92
Attendance Score: 3.66
APR Score: 9
Draft: 7
FBS Wins: 18
Quality Wins: 5
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 2.5
Elite Losses: 9
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 2.25
Program Analysis: The late Terry Hoeppner had a vision for Indiana football, and it started to come true before he passed away. There have been some decent moments over the last few years, including an inspired bowl game run after Hoeppner’s death, and this is as high up as the program has been for a few years. The APR is great, but the Conference Score of 2.25 is a problem and there haven’t been enough wins with a mere 18 FBS victories in five years.

85. Arkansas State

2010 Total Score: 38.48
2009 Ranking: 82
Attendance Score: 1.84
APR Score: 6
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 23
Quality Wins: 4
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 17
Conf. Score: 5.14
Program Analysis: A strong Sun Belt program over the last five years, Arkansas State was able to overcome a bad Attendance Score (that will never be much better) with a good APR, plenty of wins, and good performances in conference play. While being ranked here might not be great, it’s not bad for a Sun Belt team with just one title in the Steve Roberts era.

84. New Mexico

2010 Total Score: 38.57
2009 Ranking: 63
Attendance Score: 3.07
APR Score: 4
Draft: 7
FBS Wins: 25
Quality Wins: 5
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 5.5
Elite Losses: 8
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 6.00
Program Analysis: Rocky Long, where are you? The first year under Mike Locksley couldn’t have gone much worse, and the slide now becomes among the biggest in college football going from the 50s just a few years ago, to 63 last year, to 84th. Winning only 40% of the time in Mountain West play is the biggest problem, but too many bad losses and a low APR doesn’t help. Locksley needs to come up with something special or the drop will continue.

83. Bowling Green

2010 Total Score: 39.05
2009 Ranking: 81
Attendance Score: 1.55
APR Score: 4
Draft: 2
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 4
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 5.5
Elite Losses: 5
Bad Wins: 13
Conf. Score: 6.00
Program Analysis: One of the MAC’s best programs over the last several years, Bowling Green became even more exciting with Dave Clawson taking over last year and setting records with the high-octane passing game. The Attendance Score will always be an anchor, and the conference winning percentage is strong, but the real key is the FBS win total. The 30 victories are the most among the bottom 50, but the Bad Losses keep the score from getting too much higher.

82. Mississippi State

2010 Total Score: 39.69
2009 Ranking: 98
Attendance Score: 4.72
APR Score: 5
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 18
Quality Wins: 7
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1
Elite Losses: 10
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 2.75
Program Analysis: Dan Mullen has the program pointed in the right direction with an improved offense and just enough good talent on defense to be more than just a doormat in the SEC West. The conference winning percentage is a problem and the 18 FBS wins are among the lowest of anyone in the top 100, but the attendance is solid and the wins MSU comes up with are usually solid. However, being in a division with Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Arkansas and Ole Miss will always be a problem.

81. Rice

2010 Total Score: 39.69
2009 Ranking: 75
Attendance Score: 1.55
APR Score: 10
Draft: 2
FBS Wins: 23
Quality Wins: 6
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 5
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 4.75
Program Analysis: For Rice, the ranking isn’t all that bad thanks to a perfect APR Score, a decent Conference Score, and a 10-3 2008 season that will stay in the equation for a long time. Outside of a total disaster, the ranking will get better next year with the 1-10 2005 season doesn’t get factored in. There will always be a ceiling on what Rice can do, but the Owls could be up in the 70s next year with a decent 2010.