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

2010 CFN 5-Year Program Rankings - 41 to 60
Kansas CB Chris Harris
Kansas CB Chris Harris
CollegeFootballNews.com
Posted Aug 24, 2010


CFN's 2010 Five-Year Program Rankings and Analysis ... Teams 41 through 60



Preview 2010 - No. 41 to 60

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

60. Texas A&M

2010 Total Score: 56.94
2009 Ranking: 40
Attendance Score: 7.94
APR Score: 4
Draft: 10
FBS Wins: 28
Quality Wins: 8
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 8
Conf. Score: 4.25
Program Analysis: Mediocrity has been the norm in College Station over the last several years, but at least the team will be exciting and fun this year. Shockingly, the Aggies have wons 42.5% of their conference games over the last five seasons and the 28 FBS wins are way too few, but the fan support always helps the overall score with the best Attendance Score of anyone outside of the top 32. If Jeror Johnson and the offense play as well as expected this year, there should be a move up the rankings.

59. Northwestern

2010 Total Score: 57.01
2009 Ranking: 55
Attendance Score: 2.76
APR Score: 10
Draft: 6
FBS Wins: 31
Quality Wins: 9
Elite Wins: 1.5
Bad Losses: 4
Elite Losses: 8
Bad Wins: 13
Conf. Score: 5.00
Program Analysis: Pat Fitzgerald is a true believer who has the program playing like it belongs in a New Year’s Day game. The perfect APR score is always a help, but the always bad Attendance Score will drag the ranking down. With 31 FBS wins over the last five years, this has been a nice run. However, the consistency hasn’t been there with too many Bad Losses and not enough conference wins for Fitzgerald, who wants to be challenging for the Big Ten title.

58. North Carolina

2010 Total Score: 57.20
2009 Ranking: 54
Attendance Score: 5.45
APR Score: 7
Draft: 10
FBS Wins: 23
Quality Wins: 15
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1.5
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 4.00
Program Analysis: Under Butch Davis, UNC appears to be headed in one of two directions. Either the program will be on probation with some major problems with one of the NFL talents being stockpiled over the last few years, or it’ll blow up and become special on a regular basis. To be this high after winning just 40% of the conference games over the last five years shows just how strong everything else is with 15 Quality Wins leading the way. The Draft Score will go through the roof next year.

57. UCF

2010 Total Score: 57.38
2009 Ranking: 74
Attendance Score: 3.63
APR Score: 9
Draft: 7
FBS Wins: 31
Quality Wins: 7
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 15
Conf. Score: 6.50
Program Analysis: George O’Leary has taken a program that was floundering along in the lower tier of the rankings to its highest level in years. Winning 65% of Conference USA games has helped the cause and the fantastic APR helps. There haven’t been that many big wins, with just seven quality wins, but there aren’t any Bad Losses as the Knights have beaten the teams they’re supposed to.

56. Kentucky

2010 Total Score: 57.80
2009 Ranking: 65
Attendance Score: 6.55
APR Score: 7
Draft: 9
FBS Wins: 27
Quality Wins: 10
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1
Elite Losses: 8
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 3.50
Program Analysis: Rich Brooks did a terrific job with a Wildcat team that consistently went to bowls despite being undermanned talent-wise. The Attendance and APR Scores helped overcome the problems in conference play (winning just 35% of the time), and for the most part, the team has been beating the teams it’s supposed to. Considering UK was 91st in the rankings in 2006, the program is in far better shape. Joker Phillips is walking into a good situation.

55. Maryland

2010 Total Score: 58.35
2009 Ranking: 41
Attendance Score: 5.10
APR Score: 3
Draft: 14
FBS Wins: 26
Quality Wins: 15
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1.5
Elite Losses: 4
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 4.00
Program Analysis: Considering the program was 13th in the 2004 rankings, this isn’t a good spot to be in. However, with a weak APR, struggles in conference play, and just 26 FBS wins over the last five years, being in the top half isn’t bad. Ralph Friedgen’s job is hanging by a thread, and he needs to show that he can restore the luster of the first part of his tenure. However, it’s been several years since Maryland has been relevant in the ACC title chase bottoming out with a 2-10 2009.

54. Fresno State

2010 Total Score: 58.46
2009 Ranking: 48
Attendance Score: 3.71
APR Score: 6
Draft: 11
FBS Wins: 33
Quality Wins: 6
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1
Elite Losses: 8
Bad Wins: 17
Conf. Score: 6.50
Program Analysis: Fresno State would be considered something special if it wasn’t for Boise State. The Bulldogs have won 65% of their WAC games over the last five years, the 33 FBS wins are good, and APR isn’t all that bad, but there aren’t the Quality Wins (6) you might think there are and there’s the problem with the Elite Losses … mostly to guess who. However, after being up in the 30s on a regular basis, this is as low as the program has been.

53. Arizona State

2010 Total Score: 59.59
2009 Ranking: 36
Attendance Score: 5.82
APR Score: 6
Draft: 14
FBS Wins: 32
Quality Wins: 5
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 4.77
Program Analysis: It seemed like Dennis Erickson was going to work his magic after taking over for Dirk Koetter, but the offensive line has blocked anyone in years and the 48% clip in Pac 10 play has been an issue. There have only been five Quality Wins in the last five years, the fewest of anyone in the top 66. With a high draft score, there’s no reason to wins aren’t coming. The drop from 36 to 53 might keep on going, but the 10-3 2007 season will be in the equation for the next few years.

52. Navy

2010 Total Score: 60.96
2009 Ranking: 50
Attendance Score: 3.35
APR Score: 9
Draft: 0
FBS Wins: 41
Quality Wins: 7
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 1.5
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 21
Conf. Score: 6.62
Program Analysis: No one beats up the bad teams like Navy. Being an independent, the program gets to schedule who it wants to, and part of the reason for the great success comes from all the layups. Over the last five years, no one has more Bad Wins than Navy, and the 41 FBS wins are the most of anyone outside of the top 40. Meanwhile, the Quality Win Score is the lowest of anyone in the top 52. It’s important to remember that the team is winning all these games with lower level talent, smarts, and a ton of discipline.

51. Oklahoma State

2010 Total Score: 61.31
2009 Ranking: 51
Attendance Score: 4.56
APR Score: 6
Draft: 8
FBS Wins: 31
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 7
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 4.75
Program Analysis: Sort of surprisingly, Oklahoma State remains mediocre even with all the seemingly big wins. However, there are only 12 Quality Wins and winning 47% of conference games is a problem. On the plus side, the ranking should go way up next year when the 4-7 2005 season isn’t a part of the equation. If the Cowboys are merely adequate, they’ll be up in the 40s and might make one of college football’s biggest jumps.

50. Michigan State

2010 Total Score: 61.31
2009 Ranking: 46
Attendance Score: 7.32
APR Score: 5
Draft: 11
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 11
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1.5
Elite Losses: 9
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 4.00
Program Analysis: Over the next few seasons, Michigan State should shoot up the rankings. After years of hovering around the low 40s and mid-50s, the Spartans will flourish when the rough 5-6 2005 and 4-8 2006 out of the formula … assuming the team plays as well as expected this year. Mark Dantonio has put together a solid, strongteam that has to win more Big Ten games and has to pull off a few more Quality Wins to challenge for the conference title.

49. Arizona

2010 Total Score: 62.10
2009 Ranking: 67
Attendance Score: 5.33
APR Score: 5
Draft: 14
FBS Wins: 26
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Wins: 4
Bad Losses: 1.5
Elite Losses: 9
Bad Wins: 10
Conf. Score: 4.77
Program Analysis: After several years of being ranked among the dregs, bottoming out a 100 in 2006, Arizona has come back roaring. Mike Stoops might still be trying to make the program a power, but getting up from 67 to 49 in a year is a big plus. The 48% clip in Pac 10 play has to change, but with four Elite Wins, the most of anyone outside of the top 26, and a great Draft Score, the Cats came through with their best ranking in years.

48. Virginia

2010 Total Score: 62.61
2009 Ranking: 34
Attendance Score: 5.61
APR Score: 6
Draft: 16
FBS Wins: 28
Quality Wins: 13
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 1.5
Elite Losses: 3
Bad Wins: 9
Conf. Score: 5.00
Program Analysis: Virginia …here?! Didn’t the program just fire Al Groh after an ugly 3-9 campaign? After two straight losing seasons, the ranking dropped in a big way continuing the freefall after being ranked 18th in 2005. The .500 winning percentage in conference play could change in a hurry if Mike London doesn’t come up with a great first season, and considering the school is a great academic institution, the APR should be better. The 28 FBS wins are the fewest of anyone in the top 48.

47. Houston

2010 Total Score: 63.09
2009 Ranking: 58
Attendance Score: 2.09
APR Score: 5
Draft: 4
FBS Wins: 38
Quality Wins: 13
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 1
Bad Wins: 18
Conf. Score: 7.25
Program Analysis: Along with all the big offensive numbers and all the shootouts have been a whole slew of wins. With Kevin Sumlin continuing the winning attitude started by Art Briles, the Cougars have won 73% of their Conference USA games and came up with 38 FBS wins. The Attendance Score is the lowest among anyone in the top 60 teams, and that’s going to be an issue when it comes to expansion talk. However, considering the ranking was 103 in 2003, getting up this high shows how strong the program has been.

46. Hawaii

2010 Total Score: 63.31
2009 Ranking: 44
Attendance Score: 3.81
APR Score: 7
Draft: 9
FBS Wins: 36
Quality Wins: 10
Elite Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 1
Elite Losses: 6
Bad Wins: 31
Conf. Score: 6.75
Program Analysis: The 12-1 2007 season helped the score by leaps and bounds, but the consistently strong seasons (helped by one of the best home field advantages in college football) have given the Warriors some staying power. The APR Score is nice and high, and the NFL talent has been there with the same Draft Score as Texas Tech and better than Oklahoma State. The 21 Bad Wins are tied with Navy for the most in college football … welcome to life in the WAC.

45. Louisville

2010 Total Score: 64.96
2009 Ranking: 44
Attendance Score: 3.89
APR Score: 3
Draft: 15
FBS Wins: 33
Quality Wins: 13
Elite Wins: 3
Bad Losses: 2.5
Elite Losses: 5
Bad Wins: 7
Conf. Score: 4.57
Program Analysis: Was the Steve Kragthorpe era really that bad? Yup, and it’s going to show in the rankings over the next few seasons unless Charlie Strong can rock out of the gate. The 12-1 2006 season and the 9-3 2005 campaigns will quickly go away, and the freefall will continue after checking in at No. 18 in 2006. Winning fewer than half of the Big East games over the last five years is the biggest problem, and the awful APR doesn’t help.

44. South Florida

2010 Total Score: 65.10
2009 Ranking: 53
Attendance Score: 4.49
APR Score: 3
Draft: 8
FBS Wins: 34
Quality Wins: 14
Elite Wins: 2.5
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 5
Bad Wins: 12
Conf. Score: 4.86
Program Analysis: Jim Leavitt did a great job of making South Florida into a real, live football power, and now it’ll be up to Skip Holtz to take things to another level. The Draft Score is surprisingly low for a team with so many great athletes over the last few seasons, and winning fewer than half of Big East games is a real shocker. The numbers will quickly change as USF goes on a steady climb into the 30s starting next year as long as Holtz can come up with a solid season.

43. Tulsa

2010 Total Score: 65.56
2009 Ranking: 43
Attendance Score: 2.31
APR Score: 5
Draft: 2
FBS Wins: 40
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Wins: 3
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 2
Bad Wins: 20
Conf. Score: 6.75
Program Analysis: No one ever thinks of Tulsa as any kind of a power, but the wins have flowed through the program over the last several years as the ranking has blown up after being 110th in 2003 and 104th in 2004. Only Navy has more FBS wins of anyone outside of the top 39, and the conference winning percentage is impressive. The Attendance Score will always be a problem for a school so small, and the Draft Score is the lowest of anyone in the top 50. In other words, the ranking will quickly drop if there’s a down year or two.

42. Kansas

2010 Total Score: 65.97
2009 Ranking: 45
Attendance Score: 4.72
APR Score: 7
Draft: 7
FBS Wins: 33
Quality Wins: 15
Elite Wins: 1
Bad Losses: 1
Elite Losses: 6
Bad Wins: 11
Conf. Score: 4.00
Program Analysis: Mark Mangino got the Jayhawks close to being a consistent power after years of being ranked in the 90s, but last year’s collapse and the bizarre problems led to a major change. Can Turner Gill be the one who makes KU more of a football school? The Conference Winning %, just 40%, is the lowest of anyone in the top 54, and the Draft Score is mediocre, but the FBS wins aren’t bad and the APR is nice. Considering KU was ranked 98th in 2003, being this high up is great no matter how it happened.

41. Arkansas

2010 Total Score: 66.82
2009 Ranking: 49
Attendance Score: 6.82
APR Score: 4
Draft: 13
FBS Wins: 30
Quality Wins: 12
Elite Wins: 3
Bad Losses: 0
Elite Losses: 13
Bad Wins: 13
Conf. Score: 4.50
Program Analysis: The Hogs took a bit of a tumble over the last few years after being ranked 18th in 2004, but they’ll rocket up the charts with a decent year. The 4-7 2005 campaign won’t count next year, and if Bobby Petrino and Ryan Mallett come up with the 2010 they’re expected to, being in the 20s should be a lock. The APR is mediocre, the Conference Winning % is the lowest of anyone in the top 41, and the FBS wins are the lowest of anyone in the top 49, but the numbers will change in a hurry in next year’s rankings.