College Football Year in Review Newsletter
The Top Ten Things President George W. Bush Would Say Were He a Coach of a Traditionally Successful College Football Team
10. “The fundamentals of this team are strong ”
9. “We’ve officially drawn up our board for the Axis of Evil. This year, the axis of evil includes: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Baylor, Missouri, Iowa State, Colorado, Rice, UTEP, Iran, and Arkansas.”
8. “I tell ya what, it’s hard work. These sixty minute games - that’s hard work. Practices? Hard work. Managing time outs? Hard work. Remembering how to draw a diagram for who runs the ball on a quarterback sneak? Hard work. It’s hard, hard work.”
7. “That’s our strategy. It’s better for us to go on the offensive and attack them on their side of the field than they attack us on ours, our soil, so to speak.”
6. “Our opponent this week should fear us. They should be fearful. They have much to fear, you see. What do I do when I’m panicked? I go shopping. With how much fear we’ve probably instilled in our opponent this week, I suggest they do all the shopping they can. They’ll need it ”
5. “Yeah, we’re going to be aggressive and attack their quarterback, from every which angle. I don’t care how many people are protecting him or even if he’s hiding in a cave somewhere, we’re going to get to him and take him down ”
4. “My players is going to classes. They is learning fine. What was the stat I saw the other day? Eh. (long pause) Um. Oh yeah, like 40% of my players will graduate in 9 years or less, so you know, that’s 1 out of every 2. Based on what I recall from my days at Yale, that’s pretty good.”
3. “Polls? I don’t care about polls Polls don’t mean anything to me We’ve only won 28% of our games? Your point?”
2. “Yeah, my players love the ladies. There’s nothing wrong with that. They’re just practicing their love with women all over the country.
1. (drum roll) “Ya know, these players are much bigger in person than they are on the tv.”
Bowl Match-ups
EagleBank Bowl: Wake Forest (7-5) vs. Navy (8-4) in Washington D.C. (RFK Stadium) on December 20th at 11 a.m. EST on ESPN
New Mexico Bowl: Colorado State (6-6) vs. Fresno State (7-5) in Albuquerque (University Stadium) on December 20th at 2:30 p.m. EST on ESPN
magicJack St. Petersburg Bowl: Memphis (6-6) vs. South Florida (7-5) in St. Petersburg (Tropicana Field) on December 20th at 4:30 p.m. EST on ESPN2
Pioneer Las Vegas Bowl: BYU (10-2) vs. Arizona (7-5) in Las Vegas (Sam Boyd Stadium) on December 20th at 8 p.m. EST on ESPN
R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl: Southern Mississippi (6-6) vs. Troy (8-4) in New Orleans (Superdome) on December 21st at 8:15 p.m. on ESPN
San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl: Boise State (12-0) vs. TCU (10-2) in San Diego (Qualcomm Stadium) on December 23rd at 8 p.m. EST on ESPN
Sheraton Hawaii Bowl: Hawaii (7-6) vs. Notre Dame (6-6) in Honolulu (Aloha Stadium) on December 24th at 8 p.m. EST on ESPN
Motor City Bowl: Florida Atlantic (6-6) vs. Central Michigan (8-4) in Detroit (Ford Field) on December 26th at 8 p.m. EST on ESPN
Meineke Car Care Bowl: West Virginia (8-4) vs. North Carolina (8-4) in Charlotte (Bank of America Stadium) on December 27th at 1 p.m. EST on ESPN
Champs Sports Bowl: Wisconsin (7-5) vs. Florida State (8-4) in Orlando (Florida Citrus Bowl) on December 27th at 4:30 p.m. EST on ESPN
Emerald Bowl: Miami (Florida) (7-5) vs. California (8-4) in San Francisco (AT&T Park) on December 27th at 8 p.m. EST on ESPN
Independence Bowl: Northern Illinois (6-6) vs. Louisiana Tech (7-5) in Shreveport (Independence Stadium) on December 28th at 8:15 p.m. EST on ESPN
Papajohns.com Bowl: North Carolina State (6-6) vs. Rutgers (7-5) in Birmingham (Legion Field) on December 29th at 3 p.m. EST on ESPN
Valero Alamo Bowl: Missouri (9-4) vs. Northwestern (9-3) in San Antonio (Alamodome) on December 29th at 8 p.m. EST on ESPN
Roady’s Humanitarian Bowl: Maryland (7-5) vs. Nevada (7-5) in Boise (Bronco Stadium) on December 30th at 4:30 p.m. EST on ESPN
Texas Bowl: Rice (9-3) vs. Western Michigan (9-3) in Houston (Reliant Stadium) on December 30th at 8 p.m. on the NFL Network
Pacific Life Holiday Bowl: Oklahoma State (9-3) vs. Oregon (9-3) in San Diego (Qualcomm Stadium) on December 30th at 8 p.m. on ESPN
Bell Helicopter Armed Forces Bowl: Houston (7-5) vs. Air Force (8-4) in Fort Worth (Amon G. Carter Stadium) on December 31st at Noon EST on ESPN
Brut Sun Bowl: Oregon State (8-4) vs. Pittsburgh (9-3) in El Paso (Sun Bowl) on December 31st at 2 p.m. EST on CBS
Gaylord Hotels Music City Bowl: Boston College (9-4) vs. Vanderbilt (6-6) in Nashville (LP Field) on December 31st at 3:30 p.m EST on ESPN
Insight Bowl: Kansas (7-5) vs. Minnesota (7-5) in Tempe (Sun Devil Stadium) on December 31st at 5:30 p.m. EST on the NFL Network
Chick-fil-A Bowl: LSU (7-5) vs. Georgia Tech (9-3) in Atlanta (Georgia Dome) on December 31st at 7:30 p.m. EST on ESPN
Outback Bowl: South Carolina (7-5) vs. Iowa (8-4) in Tampa (Raymond James Stadium) on January 1st at 11:00 a.m. EST on ESPN
Capital One Bowl: Georgia (9-3) vs. Michigan State (9-3) in Orlando (Florida Citrus Bowl) on January 1st at 1 p.m. EST on ABC
Konica Minolta Gator Bowl: Clemson (7-5) vs. Nebraska (8-4) in Jacksonville (Jacksonville Municipal Stadium) on January 1st at 1 p.m. EST on CBS
Rose Bowl: Penn State (11-1) vs. USC (11-1) in Pasadena (Rose Bowl) on January 1st at 4:30 p.m. EST on ABC
FedEx Orange Bowl: Cincinnati (11-2) vs. Virginia Tech (9-4) in Miami (Dolphin Stadium) on January 1st at 8:30 p.m. EST on FOX
AT&T Cotton Bowl: Mississippi (8-4) vs. Texas Tech (11-1) in Dallas (Cotton Bowl) on January 2nd at 2 p.m. EST on FOX
AutoZone Liberty Bowl: Kentucky (6-6) vs. East Carolina (9-4) in Memphis (Liberty Bowl Memorial Stadium) on January 2nd at 5 p.m. on ESPN
Allstate Sugar Bowl: Utah (12-0) vs. Alabama (12-1) in New Orleans (Superdome) on January 2nd at 8 p.m. EST on FOX
International Bowl: Buffalo (8-5) vs. Connecticut (7-5) in Toronto (Rogers Centre) on January 3rd at Noon EST on ESPN2
Tostitos Fiesta Bowl: Ohio State (10-2) vs. Texas (11-1) in Glendale (University of Phoenix Stadium) on January 5th at 8 p.m. EST on FOX
GMAC Bowl: Tulsa (10-3) vs. Ball State (12-1) in Mobile (Ladd-Peebles Stadium) on January 6th at 8 p.m. EST on ESPN
FedEx BCS National Championship Game: Florida (12-1) vs. Oklahoma (12-1) in Miami (Dolphin Stadium) on January 8th at 8 p.m. EST on FOX
Game of the Year
Texas Tech 39 Texas 33: This was one of the few prime-time ABC games that was actually worth watching. The two clubs were both an unbeaten 8-0 heading into this battle in Lubbock and showed the world why with the ensuing 60 minutes (game time minutes, that is). After Tech stormed out to a solid and what seemed like a steady lead, Colt McCoy led Texas back to a 33-32 lead with 90 seconds left on the clock. It was the Longhorns’ first lead of the game. The Red Raiders slowly, but steadily drove the ball down the field and with just one second left on the clock, senior quarterback Graham Harrell connected with sophomore stud Michael Crabtree with what would be the winning score. Crabtree made an unbelievable adjustment just to catch the football and found some way to keep himself in-bounds, as he pushed the corner aside, and tip-toed down the sideline for the game-winning score. If there was one game that I’ll remember the year for, it’s this one.
Runner-ups (in random order)
Georgia Tech 31 Florida State 28
East Carolina 27 Virginia Tech 22
Kansas 40 Missouri 37
South Florida 37 Kansas 34
Michigan State 25 Wisconsin 24
Arkansas 31 LSU 30
Mississippi 31 Florida 30
Alabama 27 LSU 21
Georgia 42 Kentucky 38
Most Disappointing Game of the Year
Oklahoma 65 Texas Tech 21: Heading into the game at 10-0 with a national championship on their mind, Texas Tech laid an egg against the Sooners in Norman. Watching Oklahoma execute their offensive game plan was like watching Derek Jeter hit on your girlfriend. It was so smooth, it was as if they weren’t even trying. This can be seen in the statistics, as well. Oklahoma totaled 625 yards in the game on 78 plays. The Sooners averaged just over 8 yards per play from scrimmage. OU threw for 326 yards on only 23 pass attempts, which means they averaged over 14 yards per pass attempt and almost 20 yards per pass completion. Two Oklahoma tailbacks ran for 100 yards a piece and a total of five touchdowns. The sad part is that it could’ve been worse.
Runner-ups (in random order)
Alabama 34 Clemson 10
Texas 56 Missouri 31
Ohio State 45 Michigan State 7
Penn State 49 Michigan State 18
USC 35 Ohio State 3
USC 44 Oregon 10
Florida 49 Georgia 10
Florida 51 LSU 21
Penn State 48 Wisconsin 7
Inside the Numbers
- Texas quarterback Colt McCoy led his team in rushing yards this year with 576. Second in line was sophomore tailback Vondrell McGee with 376 yards on the ground, 200 fewer than McCoy.
- The Michigan Wolverines, at 3-9, posted the worst record in the school’s vaunted 129-year history. Their 39-year bowl streak, the nation’s longest, was also snapped this year.
- Notre Dame, at 6-6 this year, is a combined 9-15 in the last two years, the first time in school history that the Irish have lost 15 or more games in a two-year span.
- When they started as a Division I-A football program in 1999, the Buffalo Bulls went on to win just 10 games in their first six seasons (1999-2005). Under Turner Gill the past three years (2006-2008), the Bulls have won 15 games.
- The Cincinnati Bearcats’ Big East title this year is their first conference championship since 1964.
- It’s the first time since 1953 that the Rice Owls (9-3) have won 9 or more games.
- The Pac-10 record for losses in a season was broken this year when the Washington Huskies finished 0-12. Including two losses to close the 2007 season, Washington has now lost 14 straight games and with a loss against LSU to start the 2009 season, will tie the all-time Pac-10 record for most consecutive losses with 15.
- Giving up a total of 570 points this year (average of 47.5 per game), Washington State set an all-time Division I-A record for points allowed in a season. The previous record was held by Eastern Michigan, who allowed 566 points in the 2002 season. On the year, Washington State gave up 58+ points in five consecutive games at one point and have allowed 60 or more in four games.
- In the Music City Bowl on December 31st against Boston College, Vanderbilt will break their 26-year drought of participating in a bowl game.
- Duke’s 4 wins this season matches their total wins in the previous four years combined. With a 31-3 victory over Virginia in the early going, Duke snapped their 25-game conference losing streak.
A Tale of Two Half Seasons
Auburn: 5-7 (.417)
First Half Record: 4-2 (.667)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 32-40 (.444)
First Half Scoring Margin: 112-67 (18.7 - 11.2 = +7.5)
Second Half Record: 1-5 (.167)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 42-34 (.553)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 96-149 (16.0 - 24.8 = -8.8)
Buffalo: 8-5 (.615)
First Half Record: 2-4 (.333)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 45-28 (.616)
First Half Scoring Margin: 162-175 (27.0 - 29.2 = -2.2)
Second Half Record: 6-1 (.857)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 36-49 (.424)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 242-186 (34.6 - 26.6 = +8.0)
Connecticut: 7-5 (.583)
First Half Record: 5-1 (.833)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 27-48 (.360)
First Half Scoring Margin: 161-109 (26.8 - 18.2 = +8.6)
Second Half Record: 2-4 (.333)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 45-28 (.616)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 125-128 (20.8 - 21.3 = -0.5)
Florida Atlantic: 6-6 (.500)
First Half Record: 1-5 (.167)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 44-28 (.611)
First Half Scoring Margin: 92-184 (15.3 - 30.7 = -15.4)
Second Half Record: 5-1 (.833)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 24-48 (.333)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 210-168 (35.0 - 28.0 = +7.0)
Kansas: 7-5 (.583)
First Half Record: 5-1 (.833)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 26-49 (.346)
First Half Scoring Margin: 206-108 (34.3 - 18.0 = +16.3)
Second Half Record: 2-4 (.333)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 56-18 (.757)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 186-246 (31.0 - 41.0 = -10.0)
Kansas State: 5-7 (.417)
First Half Record: 4-2 (.667)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 27-48 (.360)
First Half Scoring Margin: 260-179 (43.3 - 29.8 = +13.5)
Second Half Record: 1-5 (.167)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 43-31 (.581)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 159-251 (26.5 - 41.8 = -15.3)
Louisville: 5-7 (.417)
First Half Record: 4-2 (.667)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 29-46 (.387)
First Half Scoring Margin: 189-143 (31.5 - 23.8 = +7.7)
Second Half Record: 1-5 (.167)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 45-28 (.616)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 107-215 (17.8 - 35.8 = -18.0)
LSU: 7-5 (.583)
First Half Record: 5-1 (.833)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 29-47 (.382)
First Half Scoring Margin: 187-129 (31.2 - 21.5 = +9.7)
Second Half Record: 2-4 (.333)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 44-29 (.603)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 177-182 (29.5 - 30.3 = -0.8)
Minnesota: 7-5 (.583)
First Half Record: 5-1 (.833)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 31-44 (.413)
First Half Scoring Margin: 182-111 (30.3 - 18.5 = +11.8)
Second Half Record: 2-4 (.333)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 36-36 (.500)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 99-169 (16.5 - 28.2 = -11.7)
Rutgers: 7-5 (.583)
First Half Record: 1-5 (.167)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 42-34 (.553)
First Half Scoring Margin: 105-128 (17.5 - 21.3 = -3.8)
Second Half Record: 6-0 (1.000)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 34-38 (.472)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 243-94 (40.5 - 15.7 = +24.8)
South Florida: 7-5 (.583)
First Half Record: 5-1 (.833)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 31-44 (.413)
First Half Scoring Margin: 203-110 (33.8 - 18.3 = +15.0)
Second Half Record: 2-4 (.333)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 41-32 (.562)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 115-136 (19.2 - 22.7 = -3.5)
Vanderbilt: 6-6 (.500)
First Half Record: 5-1 (.833)
First Half Opponents’ Record: 35-37 (.486)
First Half Scoring Margin: 147-98 (24.5 - 16.3 = +8.2)
Second Half Record: 1-5 (.167)
Second Half Opponents’ Record: 43-30 (.589)
Second Half Scoring Margin: 86-143 (14.3 - 23.8 = -9.5)
Nebraska’s Season in Review (from an unbiased perspective)
Compared to the 2007 season, which saw the Nebraska Cornhuskers finish 5-7, this year’s 8-4 regular season finish and a trip to the Gator Bowl on New Year’s Day is a pleasant turn of events for Husker fans. But, while the year appears to be a step into the right direction, Nebraska fans must not get too excited, as flashbacks of the Bill Callahan tenure spring about.
Compared to last year’s club, Nebraska was vastly different in some statistical categories this year, yet more similar in others than they might have liked. Their overall offensive numbers were rather similar, as they finished the year ranked 12th in total offense (458.25 ypg) and 18th in scoring offense (36.17 ppg), compared to finishing last year ranked 9th in total offense (468.25 ypg) and 28th in scoring offense (32.42 ppg). The difference was in the balance of the offense. The club this year was more balanced than last, as Nebraska finished the year ranked 37th in rush offense (173.50 ypg) and 14th in pass offense (284.75 ypg) compared to finishing last year ranked 66th in rush offense (144.42 ypg) and 7th in pass offense (323.83). On the defensive side of the ball is where the true improvements were illustrated. Last year, the Nebraska defense set all kinds of school records and these aren’t records that a team wants to break. The only thing black about the “Blackshirts,” as they’ve been called, was turning to a black, burnt crisp after getting beat time and time again last season. The Cornhuskers finished the 2007 season ranked: 116th in rush defense (232.17 ypg), 75th in pass efficiency defense (130.22), 112th in total defense (476.83 ypg), and 114th in scoring defense (37.92 ppg). While NU didn’t fare too well on the defensive side of the ball at times this year (e.g. Oklahoma and Missouri), they did improve upon last year’s statistics, in ranking: 29th in rush defense (125.83 ypg), 89th in pass efficiency defense (137.54), 66th in total defense (361.50), and 83rd in scoring defense (29.17 ppg). These aren’t great numbers by any stretch of the imagination, but putting it all in the proper context, one has to be somewhat impressed by the fact that Nebraska allowed 115 fewer yards of total offense this year and about 8 fewer points. Somewhere Nebraska hasn’t fared well in either of the past two years is in turnover margin. In 2007, Nebraska finished 117th in this category at -1.42. They improved slightly to 105th (tied) this year at -0.83. They’re going to need to improve on that in the years to come if they want to compete for a Big XII Championship. Two categories Nebraska improved upon this year, thanks largely to the Pelini’s, was in sacks and tackles for a loss. Last year, Nebraska ranked 51st in sacks (2.00 p/gm) and 64th in tackles for a loss (5.58 p/gm). They moved into the top 25 in sacks this year, averaging 2.50 per contest and improved to 47th in tackles for a loss (6.00 p/gm). Nebraska also improved slightly in the number of sacks they allowed per game this year, improving from 76th in the country (2.17 p/gm) to 50th (1.75 p/gm).
When one wants to look at Nebraska’s season this year, they can really split it into three sets of four. There were four games that Nebraska dominated from start to finish, four they struggled to win, and four they lost. Against 5-7 Kansas State (56-28), 2-10 Iowa State (35-7), 3-9 New Mexico State (38-7), and 9-3 Western Michigan (47-24), Nebraska faced opponents with a combined record of 19-29 (.396) and outscored them 176-66 (average of 44.0 - 16.5). They faced tougher tests in their wins over: 6-6 San Jose State (the closest 35-12 game in college football history), 4-8 Baylor (32-20), 7-5 Kansas (45-35), and 5-7 Colorado (40-31). These opponents were a combined 22-26 (.458) and were outscored by the Cornhuskers 152-98 (average of 38.0 - 24.5). Lastly, Nebraska lost to the following teams: 9-4 Virginia Tech (30-35), 9-4 Missouri (17-52), 11-1 Texas Tech (31-37), and 12-1 Oklahoma (28-62). These four teams had a combined record of 41-10 (.804) and outscored Nebraska 186-106 (26.5 - 46.5, from NU’s perspective).
Up next on the slate for Nebraska are the 7-5 Clemson Tigers in the January 1st Gator Bowl. This is one of the few games I’m having a tougher time deciding on. Nebraska has improved some defensively, but went 2-4 against bowl-bound teams this year and 3-4 against bowl eligibles, with their three wins coming against: 9-3 Western Michigan of the MAC, 7-5 Kansas, and 6-6 San Jose State. Clemson went 3-5 against such teams, with wins over: 9-4 Boston College, 7-5 South Carolina, and 6-6 North Carolina State. The game will match-up strength vs. strength and weakness vs. weakness, as Nebraska’s 12th ranked offense will go up against Clemson’s 17th ranked defense and Clemson’s 81st ranked offense will face Nebraska’s 66th ranked defense. Both teams finished the year strong, Nebraska winning five of their last six and Clemson winning four of their final five regular season games.
It’ll be an important game for both clubs, in setting an immediate tone for next year. After firing Tommy Bowden mid-season and hiring his replacement at the end of the regular season, Clemson has an opportunity to get new head coach Dabo Swinney started on the right foot heading into the off-season. On the other side, first year head coach Bo Pelini has an opportunity to lead his Nebraska Cornhuskers to 9 wins and potentially head toward the 2009 season with an eye on the Big XII North title.
All-in-all, this is probably the season realistic Husker fans were expecting. Nebraska beat the clubs they were supposed to beat and lost to the clubs they weren’t supposed to defeat. NU showed some signs of improvement in certain areas, especially in their rush defense, from a year ago. One thing Nebraska hasn’t done for quite some time, though, is defeat a top 20 ranked team. This was a factor in the demise of Bill Callahan in Lincoln, as the Huskers were 0-10 against top 20 competition in his four years as head coach there. They were 0-4 this year against such opponents. As the old saying goes, to be the best, you have to beat the best and Nebraska has not done that for quite a while. Nebraska fans also have to remember the excitement that Bill Callahan generated in his second and third seasons as head coach in Lincoln. Following a 5-6 “transitional” year for the coach in 2004, Nebraska finished 8-4 in 2005, including an Alamo Bowl win over Michigan. They improved upon that in 2006, finishing the regular season at 9-3, before successive defeats to Oklahoma in the Big XII Title game and Auburn in the Cotton Bowl left them at 9-5. But, even after those two losses, most fans of the red and white proclaimed their Huskers were on the way back. Just a year after a trip to the Big XII Championship game and a January 1st bowl game (Cotton), Nebraska finished the 2007 season at 5-7 and 2-6 in Big XII play, which officially ended the Bill Callahan era. Bo Pelini is off to a much better start than Callahan in Lincoln and has a decent opportunity to compete for the North title in the next year or so, with Missouri losing most of their offensive weapons. Nebraska may never again be the dominant team they were from the mid-90's, but with an average to slightly above average North Division in the Big XII, they have a chance to be a steady 8-9 win team, with an occasional burst into double-digits, depending upon scheduling and senior leadership. One thing Pelini has instilled back into this program is effort. I can’t count the number of times the team, especially the defense, quit on Bill Callahan last year. That didn’t happen this season. Even after falling behind Oklahoma 35-0 at the end of the first quarter, Nebraska played hard for the final three quarters. They also fought back against Virginia Tech, Baylor, and Texas Tech. Arguably their strongest quarter this year was the fourth, which was their weakest just a year ago. Props to Pelini for that improvement, but after 52-17 and 62-28 losses this year, it’s not time for total jubilation. There’s still a long way to go for that.
THE Ohio State University (from an unbiased perspective)
Moving to Columbus this past year, I’ve had the fortune (some may disagree) of regularly observing THE Ohio State Buckeyes. I even witnessed a performance of theirs live, in their 13-6 loss to Penn State on October 25th.
While compared to their previous couple seasons, when the Buckeyes managed to play in the National Championship game, Ohio State will not be doing such a thing this year. They will, however, be playing in a BCS game, the Fiesta Bowl, on January 5th against the 11-1 Texas Longhorns. Their 10-2 campaign may be seen by some as a disappointment, given their runner-up status the past couple years, but given the fact they started a true freshman at quarterback for most the year and their early-season drumming at the hands of Southern California, I’d be hard-pressed into seeing why, on a whole, Ohio State fans would be too distraught.
Comparing the 11-2 Buckeyes of last year to this year’s 10-2 club, there are several similarities, but a few differences worth mentioning statistically. First off, the rushing yards on offense was nearly identical, both in quantity and in ranking. Both the ‘07 and ‘08 teams finished the year ranked 28th nationally in rushing yards, with this year’s club averaging about 5 yards less per game on the ground (196.92 to 191.58). The scoring was fairly similar, with this year’s team averaging to score a little over 28 points per game, ranking them 45th, and last year’s team averaging 31.38 points per game, ranking them 41st. The big difference offensively was in the passing and total yards, where the ‘08 Buckeyes averaged to accumulate almost 50 fewer passing yards per game than last year’s team (148.08 to 196.77) and averaged to garner close to 55 less total yards a game (339.67 to 393.69). That ranked them 104th in passing offense and 78th in total offense this year. Ohio State was impressive statistically on the defensive side of the ball, as usual. While the numbers weren’t quite as staggering as last year’s club, which finished the season ranked in the top 5 in: rush defense (3rd), pass efficiency defense (4th), total defense (1st), and scoring defense (1st), the numbers were still better than most, as the ‘08 team finished the season ranked: 20th in rush defense, 11th in pass efficiency defense, 8th in total defense, and 7th in scoring defense. OSU allowed approximately an equal amount of points both this year and last (13.08 this year compared to 12.77 last year), but did allow an average of 30 more rushing yards this year (114.92 to 82.85) and 45 more total yards (279.25 to 233.00). When comparing the two teams, the four key statistical categories were: turnover margin, sacks, tackles for loss, and sacks allowed. One integral reason that Ohio State was able to go 10-2 this year, while not quite equaling their statistics on either side of the ball of last year’s team, was turnover margin. In 2007, Ohio State ranked 76th in all the country in this category, finishing the year at a -0.23. They ranked 6th in the country this year, at +1.25. While Jim Tressel was criticized some for his conservative play-calling, one has to admit that it worked in regard to turnover margin. The other three categories, however, didn’t play into Ohio State’s favor. Last year, Ohio State finished the season ranked: 6th in sacks (3.31 p/gm), 8th in tackles for a loss (7.92 p/gm), and 29th in sacks allowed (1.46 p/gm). It was a completely different story this year, as the Buckeyes’ finished the 2008 regular season ranked: tied for 51st in sacks (2.00 p/gm), 64th in tackles for a loss (5.58 p/gm), and tied for 76th in sacks allowed (2.17 p/gm).
One has to give Ohio State credit for playing USC in their non-conference schedule. They also played the always pesky Troy (just ask LSU), along with in-state teams Ohio and Youngstown State. Their non-conference schedule this year was definitely an improvement over last, where they squared off against: Youngstown State, Akron, Washington, and Kent State. One criticism of the Buckeyes being a participant in the National Championship game a year ago was their weak non-conference schedule. If they had beaten USC early this year, that same critique couldn’t have been promulgated. But, as we all know by now, that point is moot, because Ohio State did anything but beat the Trojans at the Coliseum.
Perhaps it was a mere reflection of their young quarterback, but Ohio State, particularly on offense this year, was less dominant and much more inconsistent. In 2007, Ohio State won 7 of their 11 games by 19 points or more. They did that four times this year, I-AA Youngstown State and 3-9 Michigan being two such victims. Their two most impressive victories of the year came on October 18th in East Lansing and November 8th at Northwestern. Primed for a look-ahead week on the 18th, as Ohio State was to face then-unbeaten Penn State at home the week following, the Buckeyes did no such thing, thrashing the improved Michigan State Spartans by the final score of 45-7. They put up similar numbers against 9-3 Northwestern, beating the Wildcats 45-10. Their sluggish victories outnumbered their dominating performances, however. On September 6th, the 4-8 Ohio Bobcats gave the Buckeyes fits, with OSU escaping 26-14. Troy was pesky for three quarters with Ohio State pulling away in the 4th , 28-10. Minnesota was never truly in the game against the Buckeyes, but were never quite in the distant rear view, either, falling to OSU 34-21. An October 4th game in Madison was quite possibly the toughest win of the year for Jim Tressel’s crew, as the red-vested coach found a way to sneak out of Wisconsin with a 20-17 victory over the Badgers. Ohio State’s 16-3 win over Purdue on October 11th was anything but a popcorn movie. Finally, on November 15th, Illinois put up a decent fight in Champaign, eventually falling 30-20 to the Buckeyes. In those six games, against teams with a combined 35-37 (.486) record, Ohio State outscored these opponents 154-85 (average of 25.7 - 14.2). This was half of their season, against clubs with a sub-.500 record and they only managed to win by a little over 10 points per game. This inconsistency was prominent all season and it’ll be interesting to see how they finish, with another BCS game opportunity, this time against Texas.
Speaking of Texas, this Fiesta Bowl presents an interesting match-up. What makes it so interesting is incentive. The Texas Longhorns are 11-1 on the year, defeated the Oklahoma Sooners on a neutral field 45-35, yet were not a part of the Big XII Title game nor a part of the National Championship game. They have a lot to play for, to show the college football world that they were, for lack of a better word, screwed, and in turn, could potentially “screw” the BCS system. There’s still an outside chance that if both Oklahoma and Texas win their bowl games, we could see a split in the polls. Ohio State, meanwhile, has even more to play for in terms of respect. They’ve gotten pummeled the last three times they faced a successful, big-name, non-conference opponent, twice in the National Championship game. Two years ago in the Title Game, Ohio State got slaughtered by Florida, 41-14. Last year, they fell to LSU, 38-24. This year, in an early-season battle against USC, the Trojans pounced on the Buckeyes early and often in their 35-3 dismantling of Ohio State. Next up on the slate is Texas. If Ohio State loses handily again, what will word be around Columbus? It sounds ridiculous to even ponder, but would Tressel be on the hot seat next year? For how outstanding Ohio State’s defensive statistics are and have been, why is it they can’t seem to stop these major programs on the offensive side of the ball? I know Big Ten fans are tired of hearing about this, but the answer is speed. Ohio State can dominate defensively in the Big Ten conference, with the likes of Michigan State, Northwestern, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, etc., but when they have to face Florida, LSU, USC, or perhaps even Texas, their seemingly dominant in-conference defense can’t match the speed of their opponents’ offense. They allowed 114 points to the three teams I mentioned, an average of 38.0 points allowed per contest. In the meantime, just like their defense has struggled, so too has their offense, only scoring 41 points in those games, an average of 13.7 per. It doesn’t matter how dominant a minor leaguer is, it’s a completely different ball game when he gets called up to the majors. Good news for the Buckeyes, I don’t think Texas is quite as quick as the Florida, LSU, or USC teams Ohio State faced in the past couple years, but they still present that spread offense which has given Tressel’s team fits. Texas ranks 34th in rush offense, 11th in pass offense, 9th in total offense, and 5th in scoring offense. To boot, the Longhorns’ defensive strength matches up nicely with Ohio State’s offensive strength - the ground game. Texas ranked 2nd in the country in rush defense this year, allowing only 73.58 yards per game. They also know how to get after the quarterback, ranking 1st in the country in that category, sacking the quarterback an average of 3.67 times per game. Looking at these numbers and match-ups, I’m having a hard time believing Ohio State will come out of the Fiesta Bowl with a victory, unless Texas comes in with their heads down due to not being a participant in the National Title game. But, on the other hand, I don’t think the final result will be quite as lopsided as the games against either Florida or USC were.
To sum up, I think Ohio State has positioned themselves nicely in the top 1-2 spots in the conference for some time to come. They’ll need to improve their speed both offensively and defensively, however, in order to improve their national standing and to consistently compete with elite programs. In a couple years or so, I think they’ll be able to improve to some extent, due to the alteration of play style in the conference, started with Ron Zook at Illinois. Illinois’ spread option offense, led by dual-threat quarterback Juice Williams, gave the nation a first glimpse of what would become a troubling trend for the Buckeyes’ defense. With Rich Rodriguez now at Michigan, infiltrating a similar style offense and Ohio State with their own dual-threat at quarterback, Terrelle Pryor, I think Jim Tressel and company will be forced to recruit more speed, especially on the defensive side of the ball, in order to counter the in-coming speed for the spread option offense in the conference.
Solich Update
In his 4th season with the Ohio Bobcats, Frank Solich led the club to a 4-8 record, 3-5 in MAC play, which brings Solich to an overall record of 23-26 (.469) at Ohio, with a conference record of 17-16 (.515). Frankie may be on the hot seat next year. His team has gone to one bowl game in his four years and if they’re absent again from bowling season next year, that would mark the third consecutive season that they’d have to play the part of a spectator during the late December and early January games.
Turner Gill Update
In his third season with the Buffalo Bulls, Turner Gill did the unthinkable. He led them to a MAC Championship, following a 42-24 win over then unbeaten Ball State in the MAC Title game. Buffalo finished the regular season 6-3 in conference play, 8-5 overall, and will be heading to Toronto to square off against the 7-5 Connecticut Huskies on January 3rd in the International Bowl. Gill’s Bulls are now a combined 15-22 (.405) in his three years there, including a 12-13 (.480) MAC record.
Harrell and Crabtree Watch
Due to an improved ground game for the Red Raiders, quarterback Graham Harrell and wide receiver Michael Crabtree didn’t have as gaudy of numbers this year as they did last, but the pair’s numbers were still better than most.
On the season, Harrell completed 406 of 568 passes (71.5%) for a nation-leading 4,747 yards, 41 touchdowns and 7 interceptions (close to a 6:1 ratio), for a quarterback rating of 163.03. He was also responsible for 6 rushing touchdowns. Harrell was steady all year. He completed at least 60.0% of his passes in 11 of 12 games, threw at least one touchdown pass in all 12, threw at least two touchdown in 11 of 12 contests, threw for more than 280 yards in all 12 games, and threw for at least 400 yards in 6 of 12. Three games that stood out to me were: in the 37-31 October 11th victory against Nebraska, the 39-33 win over Texas on November 1st, and the 56-20 win over Oklahoma State on November 8th. Against Nebraska, Harrell was 20-25 (80.0%) for 284 yards (14.2 ypc and 11.4 ypa), 2 touchdowns throwing and another one on the ground. His quarterback rating for the day was 201.82. In Tech’s dramatic win over Texas, Harrell completed 36 of 53 pass attempts (67.9%) for 474 yards, 2 touchdowns, and a rating of 155.50. In the Red Raiders’ dominant performance against Oklahoma State, the senior quarterback completed 40 of 50 passes (80.0%) for 456 yards, and 6 touchdowns, for a rating of 196.21. With numbers like these, it’s amazing Harrell didn’t garner more attention a year ago. The then junior quarterback completed 512 of 713 passes on the season (71.8%) for 5,705 yards (average of 438.8 per game), 48 touchdown passes, 14 interceptions, and a quarterback rating of 157.31.
Michael Crabtree has unfortunately been battling injuries all year. Even with those nagging injuries, however, he’s performed brilliantly. On the year, the sophomore receiver has caught 93 passes for 1,135 yards (12.2 p/), and 18 touchdowns. He’s garnered 60+ yards in all 12 games this year, 80 or more in 6 of 12, has scored at least one touchdown in 10 of 12 battles, and has scored at least two touchdowns in 6 of 12 games. Two of his more admirable performances came in the November 1st comeback win over Texas and the week following, in Tech’s demolition of the Oklahoma State Cowboys. Against Texas, Crabtree caught 10 passes for 127 yards (12.7 p/) and a touchdown. Against the Cowboys, he caught 8 passes for 89 yards (11.1 p/), and 3 touchdowns. Like with Harrell, Crabtree’s numbers were down slightly this year and like with Harrell, I have to wonder why more didn’t notice the then freshman phenom and his numbers a year ago. In the 2007-2008 season, Crabtree caught 134 passes for 1,962 yards (14.6 p/), and 22 touchdowns.
Coaching Changes
Phillip Fulmer (Tennessee): Fulmer has successfully coached the Volunteers since the year 1992. While the team has not been as dominant in recent years as they were when Fulmer started, overall, they’ve still been a very successful program. In his 17 years as coach, Fulmer has compiled a 152-52 (.745) record, including a 98-34 (.742) record in the SEC. His Vols are 8-7 in bowl games (.533), and have 7 conference division titles, 2 conference titles, 1 national title, 6 top 10 finishes, and 14 top 25 finishes to show for it. What is there about these numbers that signifies the long-time head coach should have been fired, even after a disappointing 5-7 campaign in the 2008 season? Nothing. In comes Lane Kiffin, the man fired at the mid-way point in the season by Al Davis of the Oakland Raiders. In my opinion, Fulmer deserved at least another couple years for all the work he’s put into the program.
Tommy Tuberville (Auburn): Sure, he “resigned”. Let’s face it. Tuberville was fired after a 5-7 year with the Auburn Tigers. While it was an extremely disappointing season for the Tigers, capped off by a 36-0 shut-out loss to in-state rival Alabama, in Tuberville’s four previous years at the school, he’s amassed a 42-9 (.824) record, including a SEC record of 27-6 (.818) in that same time frame. In the four years previous to this one, Tommy’s Tigers went 3-1 in bowl games, and finished the season ranked: #2, #14, #8, and #14. The Tigers may not have had the flashiest of offenses during Tuberville’s tenure, but they could always play defense and typically found ways to win games. This move was ridiculous. What may be even more absurd is news that Auburn will hire Iowa State head coach Gene Chizik to replace Tuberville. In two years at Iowa State, Chizik is 5-19 (.208). Yeah, that makes a lot of sense, about as much sense as it’d be for the St. Louis Cardinals to trade Albert Pujols to inner-division rival Chicago for Steve Stone and 25 baseballs.
Tommy Bowden (Clemson): In his ten seasons at Clemson, Bowden’s club never finished below the .500 mark, yet they never finished with fewer than three losses and only one of his ten clubs finished the year (2000) with just three defeats. Tommy’s Tigers were 3-5 (.400) in bowl games and finished in the top 25 in only two of his ten years coaching there. There’s no question that Bowden was fairly successful at Clemson, but did he accomplish the team’s ultimate goals? It seemed as if year in and year out, Tommy Bowden’s name would appear on a list of coaches on the hot seat and every year, he’d find a way to go on a late season streak to prolong his stay at Clemson. That couldn’t have been any truer than at the tail-end of the 2007 campaign, when the Tigers went on a late season winning streak to finish the year at 9-4 and ranked at #21 and #22 in the polls. With veteran tailbacks James Davis and C.J. Spiller returning, along with a host of other talent, both offensive and defensive, Clemson came into this season as the favorite to win the ACC and a sleeper to win the national championship. But, after again starting the year off sluggishly, at 3-3, the school decided it was finally time to part ways with Bowden. Out of the five coaching moves I’ll be talking (writing) about, this is the only one I agree with. This year, Clemson had top 10 talent on the team and finished the regular season 7-5 and out of the top 25. Even with a victory in the Gator Bowl against Nebraska on January 1st, I can almost guarantee the then 8-5 Tigers would not finish the season ranked. Under Bowden, Clemson always seemed to have a load of potential, yet could never reach it. After 10 seasons, I think it was the right time to let go of Coach Bowden and try something new.
Slyvester Croom (Mississippi State): Croom was handed a messy situation in Starkville from former head coach Jackie Sherrill. Not much progress was seen on the football field in his first two years there, when his Bulldogs finished at 3-8 both seasons. But, drastic improvements were seen in the 2007 season, when Mississippi State finished the year 4-4 in conference play and 8-5 overall, following a Liberty Bowl victory over Conference-USA Champion Central Florida. The Bulldogs regressed some this year, finishing at 4-8, but it makes no sense to me, one year after winning the SEC Coach of the Year honors, why Croom would be fired after one year of regression. A lot of changes have occurred in the SEC of late, especially amongst coaches. Arkansas hired Bobby Petrino a year ago. Mississippi hired former Arkansas coach Houston Nutt. Nick Saban went to Tuscaloosa a couple years ago to coach Alabama. Tommy Tuberville and Phil Fulmer will no longer be at their respected schools. Auburn and Tennessee are instead looking toward Gene Chizik and Lane Kiffin for the right answers. Tennessee, Auburn, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alabama, and even LSU, going 7-5 this year, have all had their ups and downs in recent years. The only two consistently elite programs in the past 3 years have been Florida and Georgia. I don’t think it’s realistic for the heads at Mississippi State’s Athletic Department to have expected an all out turnaround for the Bulldogs in 5 years. The improvements have been very gradual, but they’re there, and I think they should’ve given Croom at least one more year as head coach of the football team to see if the Bulldogs could bounce back and earn their 2nd bowl trip in a three-year span.
Ron Prince (Kansas State): I, for one, have been very critical of the Kansas State coach. In his three seasons at K-State, I have not seen much progression in any facet of the game. Yet, at the same time, he’s been in Manhattan for only three years. During this time, Prince has led the Wildcats to a 17-20 (.459) record, including a 7-6 record in the 2006 season. While I don’t think Prince has improved the team much in his three years there, I also don’t think three years is enough time to fully evaluate a coach. I think four years is the minimum. The first two years in Manhattan, Prince was probably coaching players he didn’t recruit. Not until this past year did he finally start coaching players he recruited. Next year, his 4th year overall and 2nd with players he recruited, we’d able to accurately garner a cognizance of which direction the program was heading under Prince’s tutelage. Like I said at the outset, I’ve been as critical of Prince as just about anyone, but I think he should’ve gotten one more year out of the deal.
Rant: What else? The BCS
Since this will be my only newsletter of the football season, I might as well rant about something worthwhile - The BCS. What I find to be an efficient strategy when preparing to debate a person on a subject is to ponder the other person’s arguments and to counter those arguments. So, that’s what I’m going to do now, because, believe it or not, there are still proponents of the BCS out there
Argument #1: The current BCS system gives us something to talk about.
This is true, but just because a subject or a person is talked about a great deal, that does not make that topic or individual popular or correct. President Bush has given late night talk show hosts plenty of material from which to talk about for almost eight years now and last I saw, his approval rating was at 28%. So, so much for that argument.
Argument #2: The current BCS system makes college football unique to all other sports.
Again, this is an accurate statement, but it’s again grasping at straws in attempt of rationalization. Unique may be different, yes, but it is not always good. A comedian, unable to speak, impersonating David Letterman, may be unique, yes, but I highly doubt it’ll make for good comedy fun. In baseball, steroids may be unique, but... Wait, forget that statement. Next argument.
Argument #3: We already have a playoff, from game 1 through game 12 of the season
That’s right. Just like this year in the NFL, the Detroit Lions and Tennessee Titans battled on Thanksgiving in what was seen by many as a first-round playoff game. The Kansas City Royals and Seattle Mariners will lock horns in an early-season playoff battle in week two of the Major League Baseball season. Word just came in yesterday that Florida State’s early-season game against I-AA Chattanooga was an early-season playoff match-up, as well. Sorry guys... If that were the case, we’d have no need for an actual playoff in any sport and last I checked, in every sport except for I-A college football, we do have an actual playoff.
Argument #4: The kids will be missing out on critical classes and tests
Nice try. How is it that Division I-AA and Division II have workable playoff systems then? With an 8-team playoff, we’d just need three weekends of games to finish the deal. Some Big Ten schools wind up having 40+ days to prepare for their bowl game. More games will minimize the rust factor, will keep kids focused on football, as opposed to getting themselves into trouble, and will equal more money Everyone wins (except for the Detroit Lions)
Argument #5: A playoff will make the regular season less meaningful.
They are really stretching with this one, aren’t they? I could understand that argument in basketball, hockey, or baseball, in particular, but not in football. Last I heard, the NFL garners quite a bit of interest in their regular season and again, this is just from what I heard in the rumor mill, but I think they have a playoff system in the league. There are only 12 games for each team at the college football level, one game a week. We don’t have to keep track of our team on a daily basis, like in baseball, for a 162-game season. Whether college football hangs onto their current BCS system or installs a playoff, the high interest-level will remain. The idea that it makes the regular season less meaningful is ridiculous. There are 34 bowl games this year. Excluding Western Kentucky, 68 of 119 Division I-A teams are going bowling this year, or 57.1% of all the college football teams at the I-A level are playing an extra game at the end of the season for their “excellence”. Nine clubs with a 6-6 record are going bowling and they’re trying to tell us that a playoff would lessen the significance of the regular season? Give me a break. Approximately 30% of teams at the pro level of major sports goto the playoffs. With an eight-team playoff at the college level, only 6.7% of college teams (including Western Kentucky) would goto the three-round tournament. Think of the teams that would be excluded from such a tournament this year: 10-2 Ohio State, 12-1 Ball State, and possibly even 11-1 Texas Tech. For a team to go 11-1 in a major conference and be excluded from the playoffs tells me that the heads of college football are absurd in their claims that such a system would lessen the significance of the regular season.
Conclusion: For every argument I’ve heard made on behalf of the BCS system, I can immediately think of a logical reason to counter that very argument. Just imagine if after a 162-game schedule, Major League Baseball teams had to wait at home to find out if they were going to make the playoffs. They had to depend on the media and managers to put bias aside and vote for them to be placed in a spot they earned all year long. They then had to depend on computers to factor in the major polls, both human and computer, and average them. This wouldn’t work in any other sport. Heck, it doesn’t even work in the sport of college football. The BCS has become the joke of the sports’ world, but for coaches, players, and fans alike, it’s no laughing matter.
Fact or Fiction, “The Big XII and SEC are, without question, the top two conferences in college football this year.”
Fiction. I must admit that I was a firm believer that this statement was factual before I did some research and number-crunching in recent weeks. Before my research, I felt that the SEC was the top overall conference, with the Big XII slightly behind, the ACC and its depth in 3rd, Big East in 4th, the Big Ten 5th, and the Pac-10 6th. But, upon further review, that’s changed some.
This question seems to be as debatable as the MVP question in baseball. Does the player with the best overall statistics, regardless of how his team performs, deserve the award or should the name of the award be taken literally and the player most valuable to his team take the honor? When it comes to the best conference in college football, how do we make such a determination? Is one team’s dominance the most important factor? Depth? A combination of the two, if that’s possible? Again, this is subjective. But, looking at the NFL this year, what division appears tougher, the AFC South, with the one-loss Tennessee Titans or the NFC South, with four teams that are still fighting for potential playoff berths (Bucs, Saints, Falcons, and Panthers), including two (the Bucs and Panthers) that are virtual locks? I’ve concocted a formula which I think fairly grades the twelve conferences and their strength from top to bottom.
I’ve based this formula on seven key factors to measure a conference’s strength: 1) Overall Records, 2) Rankings (via my power rankings), 3) Power Numbers (again, via my power rankings), 4) Bowl Eligibles, 5) Record vs. Major Conference Teams, 6) Record of Major Conference Teams in Wins, and 7) Average Margin of Victory vs. Major Conference Teams. I rank the conferences from 1 to 12 in each of the 7 categories, take a sum of the numbers, and from a range of 7 to 84, I rank the conference with the lowest sum in the #1 slot and so on down to #12. I think this is a fair way to go about things, because it measures: the conference’s overall success (records), their success against the six major conferences, the quality of opponents they’ve beaten in those six major conferences, how dominant they’ve been against teams from major conferences, how much depth the conferences have (bowl eligibles), and overall grades based on several factors (rankings and power numbers).
Why are bowl games so fascinating and entertaining? Because we get to see major conferences square off against one another, which is a rarity anymore in the regular season. How are we to accurately compare a 9-3 Georgia team from the SEC with a 9-4 Boston College team from the ACC until they face one another? When these match-ups don’t occur, our analysis is based purely upon speculation and bias. There was not one occasion when I heard someone in the press this year lay claim that anyone not named the SEC or Big XII as the best conference in college football. Well, today, I’m here to do just that, not based upon any kind of speculation or bias, but based upon events that actually occurred during the regular season.
When one looks at overall records, many are likely to assume that the Big XII has a rather substantial lead over every other conference, due to the fact they have five teams in conference with nine wins or more, including three with 11+ victories. That assumption is incorrect. While it’s true the Big XII is currently ranked 1st in this category with an 87-59 (.596) record, they are only one game ahead of both the ACC and SEC, which are both a combined 86-60 (.589). The Big East is not far back either, as their eight teams are a combined 57-40 (.588). The only two other conferences above the .500 mark are the Big Ten, at 76-56 (.576) and the Mountain West Conference, at 61-47 (.565). The only major conference below the .500 mark is the Pac-10, at 59-62 (.488) and ranked 8th out of the 12 conferences.
As can be seen in my power rankings, the ACC leads the way with an average ranking of 42.3, which is over six spots ahead of the 2nd place conference in this category, the Big East, with an average ranking of 48.4. The Big XII and SEC are tied for 3rd at 49.0. The Big Ten, Mountain West, and Pac-10 round out the top 7, with average rankings of 51.8, 58.6, and 63.7.
Due to three teams ranked in the top 10 and five in the 19, the Big XII leads all conferences when it comes to power numbers, with an average of 239.1. That is only a single point ahead of the 2nd ranked conference, however, the ACC, with an average power number of 238.1. The SEC is not too far behind at 236.8. The Big East and Big Ten are 4th and 5th, respectively, with average power numbers of 232.5 and 229.2. Gaps begin to widen in the 6th and 7th spots, as the Mountain West and Pac-10 have average power numbers of 214.6 and 199.9.
The bowl eligibles’ category can be a bit tricky, because one can’t compare the quantity of bowl eligible teams from the 12-team SEC to the 8-team Big East. So, what I’ve done is divide the number of bowl eligible teams in a conference by the total number of teams in that conference to find the percentage of squads that are bowl eligible. With 10 of 12 (.833) squads being bowl eligible, the ACC leads the way, followed by the Big East with 6 of 8 (.750). The SEC and WAC are tied for 3rd, as two-thirds (.667) of their teams are eligible to play in bowl games. The Big Ten has 7 of 12 (.583) teams eligible, to rank them 6th. The Pac-10 is tied for 8th with three other conferences (Conference-USA, Independents, and Sun Belt), as half of their teams are eligible to play in bowl games.
The final three categories, I find to be the most interesting, as most people don’t realize how the conferences fared against one another to this point and the quality of opponents they either beat or lost to during the course of the regular season. Surprisingly, the Mountain West Conference has the best winning percentage against major conference opponents. The MWC is 9-4 (.692) against such teams this season. The ACC is 2nd, with a 13-8 record (.619). The Big East and Big Ten are tied for 3rd with .500 records against such competition. The Big XII is 7-8 (.467) to rank them 5th and the Pac-10 is also a game under .500, at 5-6 (.455), to rank them 6th. The SEC is actually ranked 7th in this category, having gone only 6-9 (.400) against major conference opponents this year.
What isn’t illustrated in the Mountain West’s 9-4 record against major conference opponents is the fact that the teams they beat from major conferences are a combined 39-69 (.361). This ranks them 9th in that category. Who leads the way? Conference-USA, as the opponents they’ve beat are 17-8 (.680), however, this is a tad misleading, as they’re only 2-21 against major conference competition this year. Ranking 2nd is the Pac-10, with their opponents going 33-27 (.550). The ACC is ranked 3rd, with an 83-73 (.532) record. The SEC ranks 4th at 38-34 (.528). The Big East is 6th with a 40-44 (.476) record. The Big XII and Big Ten are way down the list, ranking 8th and dead last in this category, as major conference opponents’ they’ve defeated have gone 33-54 (.379) and 20-40 (.333).
Finally, when it comes to margin of victory against major conference opponents, only four conferences are in the plus: The Big Ten (+5.3), the Big XII (+5.3), the SEC (+1.5), and the Mountain West (+1.2). The ACC ranks 5th, averaging to lose each game by 1 point. The Pac-10 is 6th, averaging to lose each game by 5.3 points. Finally, the Big East is 7th, just one-tenth of a point behind the Pac-10, at 5.4 points.
When summing up the points, the ACC ends up in first place with only 16 points. The Big XII and SEC are tied for 2nd with 25 points a piece. The Big East is in 4th, only two points back of 2nd and 3rd place, with 27 points. In 5th place, the Big Ten drops back a bit, with 36 points. The Mountain West winds up in 6th with 39 points. The Pac-10 finishes in 7th with 44 points. The WAC, Conference-USA, MAC, Independents, and Sun Belt close out the conferences with 53, 61, 67, 68, and 71 total points.
There you have it. I’ve called it. The ACC is the toughest conference in the country. They may not have that one dominant squad like a Florida in the SEC or Oklahoma in the Big XII, but they have depth and plenty of it. The Big XII has arguably the best top half of a conference in the country, but their bottom half is rather weak, featuring: Kansas (7-5), Colorado (5-7), Kansas State (5-7), Baylor (4-8), Texas A&M (4-8), and Iowa State (2-10). The bottom six teams in the ACC are a combined 36-36 (.500), four of them going to bowl games. Also, like I wrote about earlier, we can speculate all we want about head-to-head match-ups between conferences. The Big XII is just 7-8 (.467) this year against major conference opponents, with their seven wins coming against teams with a 33-54 record (.379). The SEC is an even worse 6-9 (.400) against the other big five, although their six wins did come against opponents with a record of 38-34 (.528). The ACC has shown both of those two conferences up in both categories, as they’ve gone 13-8 (.619), with those 13 wins coming against squads with a 83-73 (.532) record. On the season, the ACC has beaten the following teams out-of-conference: Vanderbilt (6-6), Colorado (5-7), Mississippi State (4-8), California (8-4), Texas A&M (4-8), Rutgers (7-5), Connecticut (7-5), Nebraska (8-4), Mississippi (8-4), Baylor (4-8), South Carolina (7-5), Georgia (9-3), and Vanderbilt (6-6). Nine of their thirteen out-of-conference wins have come against bowl teams. Only two of the Big XII’s seven non-conference wins have come against such competition (8-4 West Virginia and 11-2 Cincinnati).
At the end of this analysis, we come back to where we started. What are the major factors in determining the best conference in college football? That one dominant team? I don’t think so. If that were the case, the Pac-10 could make a case every year with their USC Trojans. With the ACC, they’ve proven themselves with the most depth of any conference in all of football this year and they’ve proven themselves in how they’ve fared against quality competition in major conferences. To suggest that the SEC or Big XII is better this year is based purely upon speculation and bias, unless one wants to lay claim that since Alabama beat Clemson in the first week of the season, the SEC is the superior of the two conferences. But, I’m not thinking many want to travel down that road, as the ACC is 6-4 against the SEC on the year and 4-0 against the Big XII.
Power Rankings
1. Florida (12-1): 377.0
2. Oklahoma (12-1): 375.0
3. Texas (11-1): 372.0
4. Boise State (12-0): 354.0
5. Utah (12-0): 347.5
6. USC (11-1): 345.5
7. Alabama (12-1): 343.3
8. Penn State (11-1): 334.4
9. Texas Tech (11-1): 325.2
10. Ohio State (10-2): 317.3
11. Ball State (12-1): 312.8
12. TCU (10-2): 305.7
13. Cincinnati (11-2): 304.2
14. Pittsburgh (9-3): 302.6
15. Georgia (9-3): 288.1
16. Michigan State (9-3): 284.5
17. Oklahoma State (9-3): 280.7
18. BYU (10-2): 276.0
19. Missouri (9-4): 275.4
20. Boston College (9-4): 274.7
21. Georgia Tech (9-3): 274.4
22. Virginia Tech (9-4): 273.9
23. Oregon (9-3): 273.3
24. Oregon State (8-4): 268.4
25. North Carolina (8-4): 266.0
26. East Carolina (9-4): 265.6
27. Nebraska (8-4): 265.0
28. Mississippi (8-4): 264.9
29. Florida State (8-4): 262.7
30. California (8-4): 262.0
31. Iowa (8-4): 261.8
32. Tulsa (10-3): 257.7
33. Western Michigan (9-3): 256.4
34. Rice (9-3): 255.8
35. Northwestern (9-3): 254.4
36. West Virginia (8-4): 251.9
37. Navy (8-4): 245.7
38. Buffalo (8-5): 245.3
39. Air Force (8-4): 242.7
40. Wake Forest (7-5): 242.5
41. Troy (8-4): 239.2
42. Rutgers (7-5): 238.2
43. Central Michigan (8-4): 237.3
44. Kansas (7-5): 235.4
45. South Carolina (7-5): 231.3
46. Miami (Florida) (7-5): 229.9
47. Maryland (7-5): 229.8
48. Clemson (7-5): 229.6
49. South Florida (7-5): 227.6
50. Connecticut (7-5): 226.7
51. Nevada (7-5): 225.5
52. Houston (7-5): 225.1
53. Wisconsin (7-5): 224.6
54. LSU (7-5): 221.6
55. Arizona (7-5): 219.5
56. Vanderbilt (6-6): 217.0
57. Minnesota (7-5): 215.1
58. Fresno State (7-5): 213.8
59. North Carolina State (6-6): 213.0
60. Southern Mississippi (6-6): 210.3
61. Hawaii (7-6): 207.4
62. Louisiana Tech (7-5): 204.6
63. Bowling Green (6-6): 202.8
64. Virginia (5-7): 196.3
65. Notre Dame (6-6): 195.9
66. Kentucky (6-6): 194.2
67. Northern Illinois (6-6): 193.2
68. Colorado State (6-6): 192.6
69. Tennessee (5-7): 191.1
70. Florida Atlantic (6-6): 188.7
71. Illinois (5-7): 188.5
72. Arkansas State (6-6): 187.1
73. Louisiana-Lafayette (6-6): 186.9
74. Arkansas (5-7): 186.1
75. Stanford (5-7): 183.8
76. Memphis (6-6): 180.0
77. San Jose State (6-6): 177.9
78. Auburn (5-7): 176.7
79. Louisville (5-7): 176.2
80. UTEP (5-7): 175.8
81. Temple (5-7): 175.1
82. Colorado (5-7): 173.3
83. UNLV (5-7): 170.4
84. Akron (5-7): 168.5
85. Kansas State (5-7): 165.9
86. Purdue (4-8): 164.9
87. Duke (4-8): 164.4
88. New Mexico (4-8): 163.9
89. Middle Tennessee State (5-7): 163.8
90. Arizona State (5-7): 163.4
91. Florida International (5-7): 162.3
92. Marshall (4-8): 159.5
93. Baylor (4-8): 155.3
94. Texas A&M (4-8): 150.0
95. Mississippi State (4-8): 149.8
96. UCLA (4-8): 147.0
97. Michigan (3-9): 145.9
98. Ohio (4-8): 145.4
99. Utah State (3-9): 141.3
100. Kent State (4-8): 140.7
101. Central Florida (4-8): 138.2
102. Wyoming (4-8): 146.1
103. UAB (4-8): 134.6
104. Syracuse (3-9): 132.6
105. Louisiana-Monroe (4-8): 131.3
106. Indiana (3-9): 129.4
107. Eastern Michigan (3-9): 128.2
108. Toledo (3-9): 124.5
109. Army (3-9): 120.0
110. New Mexico State (3-9): 119.0
111. Tulane (2-10): 99.1
112. San Diego State (2-10): 96.9
113. Iowa State (2-10): 95.8
114. Miami (Ohio) (2-10): 93.1
115. Western Kentucky (2-10): 89.4
116. Idaho (2-10): 84.1
117. SMU (1-11): 78.9
118. Washington State (2-11): 71.8
119. North Texas (1-11): 66.6
120. Washington (0-12): 64.1
Win Percentage
1. Boise State (12-0): 100.0%
1. Utah (12-0): 100.0%
3. Florida (12-1): 92.3%
3. Oklahoma (12-1): 92.3%
3. Alabama (12-1): 92.3%
3. Ball State (12-1): 92.3%
7. Texas (11-1): 91.7%
7. USC (11-1): 91.7%
7. Penn State (11-1): 91.7%
7. Texas Tech (11-1): 91.7%
11. Cincinnati (11-2): 84.6%
12. Ohio State (10-2): 83.3%
12. TCU (10-2): 83.3%
12. BYU (10-2): 83.3%
15. Tulsa (10-3): 76.9%
16. Pittsburgh (9-3): 75.0%
16. Georgia (9-3): 75.0%
16. Michigan State (9-3): 75.0%
16. Oklahoma State (9-3): 75.0%
16. Georgia Tech (9-3): 75.0%
16. Oregon (9-3): 75.0%
16. Rice (9-3): 75.0%
16. Western Michigan (9-3): 75.0%
16. Northwestern (9-3): 75.0%
25. Missouri (9-4): 69.2%
25. Boston College (9-4): 69.2%
25. Virginia Tech (9-4): 69.2%
25. East Carolina (9-4): 69.2%
29. Oregon State (8-4): 66.7%
29. North Carolina (8-4): 66.7%
29. Nebraska (8-4): 66.7%
29. Mississippi (8-4): 66.7%
29. Florida State (8-4): 66.7%
29. California (8-4): 66.7%
29. Iowa (8-4): 66.7%
29. West Virginia (8-4): 66.7%
29. Navy (8-4): 66.7%
29. Air Force (8-4): 66.7%
29. Troy (8-4): 66.7%
29. Central Michigan (8-4): 66.7%
41. Buffalo (8-5): 61.5%
42. Wake Forest (7-5): 58.3%
42. Rutgers (7-5): 58.3%
42. Kansas (7-5): 58.3%
42. Clemson (7-5): 58.3%
42. South Carolina (7-5): 58.3%
42. Miami (Florida) (7-5): 58.3%
42. Maryland (7-5): 58.3%
42. South Florida (7-5): 58.3%
42. Connecticut (7-5): 58.3%
42. Nevada (7-5): 58.3%
42. Houston (7-5): 58.3%
42. Wisconsin (7-5): 58.3%
42. LSU (7-5): 58.3%
42. Arizona (7-5): 58.3%
42. Minnesota (7-5): 58.3%
42. Fresno State (7-5): 58.3%
42. Louisiana Tech (7-5): 58.3%
59. Hawaii (7-6): 53.8%
60. Vanderbilt (6-6): 50.0%
60. North Carolina State (6-6): 50.0%
60. Southern Mississippi (6-6): 50.0%
60. Bowling Green (6-6): 50.0%
60. Notre Dame (6-6): 50.0%
60. Kentucky (6-6): 50.0%
60. Northern Illinois (6-6): 50.0%
60. Colorado State (6-6): 50.0%
60. Florida Atlantic (6-6): 50.0%
60. Arkansas State (6-6): 50.0%
60. Louisiana-Lafayette (6-6): 50.0%
60. Memphis (6-6): 50.0%
60. San Jose State (6-6): 50.0%
73. Virginia (5-7): 41.7%
73. Tennessee (5-7): 41.7%
73. Illinois (5-7): 41.7%
73. Arkansas (5-7): 41.7%
73. Stanford (5-7): 41.7%
73. Auburn (5-7): 41.7%
73. Louisville (5-7): 41.7%
73. UTEP (5-7): 41.7%
73. Temple (5-7): 41.7%
73. Colorado (5-7): 41.7%
73. UNLV (5-7): 41.7%
73. Akron (5-7): 41.7%
73. Kansas State (5-7): 41.7%
73. Middle Tennessee State (5-7): 41.7%
73. Arizona State (5-7): 41.7%
73. Florida International (5-7): 41.7%
89. Duke (4-8): 33.3%
89. New Mexico (4-8): 33.3%
89. Purdue (4-8): 33.3%
89. Marshall (4-8): 33.3%
89. Baylor (4-8): 33.3%
89. Texas A&M (4-8): 33.3%
89. Mississippi State (4-8): 33.3%
89. UCLA (4-8): 33.3%
89. Ohio (4-8): 33.3%
89. Kent State (4-8): 33.3%
89. Central Florida (4-8): 33.3%
89. Wyoming (4-8): 33.3%
89. UAB (4-8): 33.3%
89. Louisiana-Monroe (4-8): 33.3%
103. Michigan (3-9): 25.0%
103. Utah State (3-9): 25.0%
103. Syracuse (3-9): 25.0%
103. Indiana (3-9): 25.0%
103. Eastern Michigan (3-9): 25.0%
103. Toledo (3-9): 25.0%
103. Army (3-9): 25.0%
103. New Mexico State (3-9): 25.0%
111. Tulane (2-10): 16.7%
111. San Diego State (2-10): 16.7%
111. Iowa State (2-10): 16.7%
111. Miami (Ohio) (2-10): 16.7%
111. Western Kentucky (2-10): 16.7%
111. Idaho (2-10): 16.7%
117. Washington State (2-11): 15.4%
118. SMU (1-11): 8.3%
118. North Texas (1-11): 8.3%
120. Washington (0-12): 0.0%
Opponents’ Win Percentage
1. Utah State (87-58): 60.0%
2. Washington (87-59): 59.6%
3. Michigan (85-59): 59.0%
4. Texas (86-60): 58.9%
5. Pittsburgh (84-62): 57.5%
6. Syracuse (85-63): 57.4%
7. Arkansas (86-64): 57.3%
8. Virginia (85-64): 57.0%
9. Purdue (83-64): 56.5%
10. Nebraska (82-65): 55.8%
11. Oregon State (81-65): 55.5%
12. Illinois (82-66): 55.4%
12. Indiana (82-66): 55.4%
14. Oklahoma (89-72): 55.3%
15. New Mexico (79-64): 55.2%
16. Georgia (82-67): 55.0%
16. Kansas (82-67): 55.0%
18. Duke (81-67): 54.7%
18. Baylor (81-67): 54.7%
20. Wake Forest (79-66): 54.5%
20. Texas A&M (79-66): 54.5%
22. Michigan State (78-66): 54.2%
23. Tennessee (79-67): 54.1%
24. Florida (87-74): 54.0%
24. Marshall (81-69): 54.0%
26. Vanderbilt (78-67): 53.8%
27. North Carolina State (80-69): 53.7%
28. UCLA (77-68): 53.1%
28. Ohio State (78-69): 53.1%
30. South Carolina (75-67): 52.8%
31. SMU (78-70): 52.7%
32. Virginia Tech (85-77): 52.5%
33. Stanford (76-69): 52.4%
33. Tulane (77-70): 52.4%
35. Boston College (84-77): 52.2%
36. Colorado (77-71): 52.0%
37. UTEP (76-71): 51.7%
38. Missouri (83-78): 51.6%
39. Rutgers (76-72): 51.4%
40. Buffalo (81-77): 51.3%
41. Colorado State (75-72): 51.0%
41. Mississippi State (75-72): 51.0%
41. North Carolina (76-73): 51.0%
41. Miami (Florida) (76-73): 51.0%
41. Florida State (78-75): 51.0%
46. UNLV (73-71): 50.7%
47. California (73-72): 50.3%
47. Toledo (73-72): 50.3%
47. North Texas (73-72): 50.3%
47. Mississippi (75-74): 50.3%
47. Maryland (75-74): 50.3%
52. Oklahoma State (75-75): 50.0%
52. Auburn (74-74): 50.0%
52. Louisville (74-74): 50.0%
55. Alabama (78-79): 49.7%
55. San Diego State (73-73): 49.7%
55. Temple (72-73): 49.7%
58. Hawaii (80-82): 49.4%
59. Eastern Michigan (73-75): 49.3%
60. LSU (73-76): 49.0%
60. Wisconsin (72-75): 49.0%
60. Wyoming (72-75): 49.0%
60. Southern Mississippi (71-74): 49.0%
60. Notre Dame (71-74): 49.0%
65. Clemson (74-78): 48.7%
66. South Florida (72-76): 48.6%
66. Connecticut (72-76): 48.6%
66. Air Force (71-75): 48.6%
69. West Virginia (72-77): 48.3%
69. Nevada (72-77): 48.3%
69. Kentucky (72-77): 48.3%
69. Iowa (71-76): 48.3%
73. Washington State (77-83): 48.1%
73. East Carolina (76-82): 48.1%
75. USC (69-76): 47.6%
75. Oregon (69-76): 47.6%
77. Ohio (70-78): 47.3%
77. Idaho (70-78): 47.3%
79. Florida Atlantic (68-76): 47.2%
79. Cincinnati (76-85): 47.2%
81. Kansas State (70-79): 47.0%
82. Akron (69-78): 46.9%
82. Fresno State (68-77): 46.9%
84. TCU (69-79): 46.6%
85. Bowling Green (67-78): 46.2%
86. Georgia Tech (70-82): 46.1%
87. Navy (68-80): 45.9%
87. Arizona State (68-80): 45.9%
87. New Mexico State (68-80): 45.9%
87. Iowa State (68-80): 45.9%
91. Minnesota (67-80): 45.6%
92. Central Florida (68-82): 45.3%
92. Miami (Ohio) (68-82): 45.3%
92. Northern Illinois (67-81): 45.3%
95. Texas Tech (68-83): 45.0%
95. Houston (67-82): 45.0%
97. Army (66-82): 44.6%
98. Central Michigan (66-83): 44.3%
98. UAB (66-83): 44.3%
100. Penn State (65-82): 44.2%
101. Western Kentucky (67-86): 43.8%
101. Florida International (63-81): 43.8%
103. Kent State (65-85): 43.3%
104. Western Michigan (64-85): 43.0%
105. Utah (63-84): 42.9%
106. Rice (62-83): 42.8%
107. Boise State (63-85): 42.6%
107. Arkansas State (63-85): 42.6%
107. San Jose State (63-85): 42.6%
110. Arizona (61-84): 42.1%
111. Louisiana-Lafayette (60-84): 41.7%
111. Middle Tennessee State (60-84): 41.7%
113. Troy (61-86): 41.5%
114. Louisiana Tech (61-87): 41.2%
115. Northwestern (60-87): 40.8%
116. BYU (58-89): 39.5%
117. Memphis (58-90): 39.2%
118. Louisiana-Monroe (57-90): 38.8%
119. Ball State (61-99): 38.1%
120. Tulsa (55-105): 34.4%
Average Margin of Victory
1. Florida (+420/13): +32.3
2. USC (+357/12): +29.8
3. Oklahoma (+383/13): +29.5
4. Penn State (+333/12): +27.8
5. Boise State (+326/12): +27.2
6. Texas (+304/12): +25.3
7. TCU (+289/12): +24.1
8. Utah (+242/12): +20.2
9. Texas Tech (+220/12): +18.3
9. Tulsa (+238/13): +18.3
11. Alabama (236/13): +18.2
12. Ball State (+234/13): +18.0
13. Iowa (+204/12): +17.0
14. Arizona (+189/12): +15.8
15. Missouri (+203/13): +15.6
16. Ohio State (+181/12): +15.1
17. Oklahoma State (+176/12): +14.7
18. BYU (+170/12): +14.2
19. Oregon (+167/12): +13.9
20. California (+158/12): +13.2
21. Mississippi (+157/12): +13.1
22. Troy (+152/12): +12.7
23. Florida State (+143/12): +11.9
24. Rutgers (+126/12): +10.5
25. Houston (+120/12): +10.0
26. Clemson (+107/12): +8.9
27. West Virginia (+97/12): +8.1
28. Oregon State (+94/12): +7.8
29. Georgia Tech (+88/12): +7.3
29. Northern Illinois (+87/12): +7.3
31. North Carolina (+86/12): +7.2
31. Cincinnati (+93/13): +7.2
33. Nebraska (+84/12): +7.0
33. Boston College (+91/13): +7.0
35. Southern Mississippi (+82/12): +6.8
36. Rice (+80/12): +6.7
37. Georgia (+78/12): +6.5
38. Navy (+77/12): +6.4
39. Pittsburgh (+76/12): +6.3
39. Nevada (+76/12): +6.3
41. South Florida (+72/12): +6.0
41. Western Michigan (+72/12): +6.0
43. Air Force (+65/12): +5.4
44. Northwestern (+62/12): +5.2
45. Virginia Tech (+62/13): +4.8
46. Bowling Green (+54/12): +4.5
47. LSU (+53/12): +4.4
48. Michigan State (+51/12): +4.3
49. Connecticut (+49/12): +4.1
50. Miami (Florida) (+45/12): +3.8
51. Wisconsin (+41/12): +3.4
52. Buffalo (+43/13): +3.3
52. Arkansas State (+39/12): +3.3
54. Kansas (+38/12): +3.2
55. East Carolina (+39/13): +3.0
56. Memphis (+27/12): +2.3
57. Illinois (+25/12): +2.1
57. Wake Forest (+25/12): +2.1
59. South Carolina (+17/12): +1.4
60. Louisiana Tech (+13/12): +1.1
61. Kentucky (+9/12): +0.8
62. Tennessee (+7/12): +0.6
63. Notre Dame (+5/12): +0.4
64. Temple (+4/12): +0.3
65. Arizona State (+2/12): +0.2
66. Minnesota (+1/12): +0.1
67. Purdue (-5/12): -0.4
68. Central Michigan (-6/12): -0.5
69. Louisiana-Lafayette (-7/12): -0.6
70. Vanderbilt (-8/12): -0.7
70. Auburn (-8/12): -0.7
72. Kansas State (-11/12): -0.9
73. Stanford (-14/12): -1.2
73. Fresno State (-14/12): -1.2
75. Akron (-15/12): -1.3
75. Maryland (-16/12): -1.3
75. Baylor (-16/12): -1.3
78. New Mexico (-20/12): -1.7
79. Middle Tennessee State (-25/12): -2.1
80. Hawaii (-31/13): -2.4
81. North Carolina State (-31/12): -2.6
82. San Jose State (-35/12): -2.9
83. Ohio (-38/12): -3.2
84. Duke (-40/12): -3.3
85. Florida International (-44/12): -3.7
86. UTEP (-49/12): -4.1
87. Florida Atlantic (-50/12): -4.2
88. Louisville (-62/12): -5.2
89. Virginia (-67/12): -5.6
90. Colorado State (-71/12): -5.9
91. Kent State (-72/12): -6.0
92. UNLV (-84/12): -7.0
93. Marshall (-86/12): -7.2
94. Central Florida (-90/12): -7.5
94. Louisiana-Monroe (-90/12): -7.5
96. UAB (-102/12): -8.5
97. Michigan (-104/12): -8.7
98. Army (-107/12): -8.9
99. Toledo (-108/12): -9.0
100. Colorado (-109/12): -9.1
101. Arkansas (-111/12): -9.3
102. Mississippi State (-113/12): -9.4
103. Western Kentucky (-116/12): -9.7
104. Eastern Michigan (-118/12): -9.8
105. Iowa State (-126/12): -10.5
106. Utah State (-128/12): -10.7
107. UCLA (-136/12): -11.3
108. New Mexico State (-143/12): -11.9
109. Texas A&M (-149/12): -12.4
110. Miami (Ohio) (-171/12): -14.3
111. Syracuse (-175/12): -14.6
112. Indiana (-177/12): -14.8
113. Wyoming (-181/12): -15.1
114. SMU (-202/12): -16.8
115. Tulane (-214/12): -17.8
116. San Diego State (-215/12): -17.9
117. Idaho (-278/12): -23.2
118. Washington (-304/12): -25.3
119. North Texas (-331/12): -27.6
120. Washington State (-405/13): -31.2
Opponents’ Wins in Wins
1. Florida (12-1): 79
2. Oklahoma (12-1): 78
3. Texas (11-1): 75
4. Alabama (12-1): 66
5. Boise State(12-0): 63
5. Utah (12-0): 63
7. USC (11-1): 61
8. Pittsburgh (9-3): 60
9. Penn State (11-1): 57
9. Cincinnati (11-2): 57
11. Texas Tech (11-1): 56
11. Ohio State (10-2): 56
13. Ball State (12-1): 53
14. Virginia Tech (9-4): 52
14. East Carolina (9-4): 52
16. Boston College (9-4): 51
17. North Carolina (8-4): 49
17. Georgia (9-3): 49
17. Michigan State (9-3): 49
20. Georgia Tech (9-3): 48
21. TCU (10-2): 45
22. Missouri (9-4): 44
22. Oregon State (8-4): 44
24. Mississippi (8-4): 43
25. Buffalo (8-5): 42
25. Wake Forest (7-5): 42
27. Oklahoma State (9-3): 41
27. Florida State (8-4): 41
27. Nebraska (8-4): 41
30. California (8-4): 40
31. Iowa (8-4): 39
31. Maryland (7-5): 39
33. Oregon (9-3): 38
33. West Virginia (8-4): 38
33. Northwestern (9-3): 38
33. Central Michigan (8-4): 38
37. Navy (8-4): 37
37. Vanderbilt (6-6): 37
39. BYU (10-2): 36
39. Western Michigan (9-3): 36
41. Rice (9-3): 35
41. North Carolina State (6-6): 35
43. Tulsa (10-3): 34
43. Rutgers (7-5): 34
43. South Carolina (7-5): 34
46. Connecticut (7-5): 33
46. Miami (Florida) (7-5): 33
46. Kansas (7-5): 33
46. Virginia (5-7): 33
50. South Florida (7-5): 32
51. Troy (8-4): 31
51. Clemson (7-5): 31
51. Houston (7-5): 31
51. Air Force (8-4): 31
51. Wisconsin (7-5): 31
56. Southern Mississippi (6-6): 30
56. Nevada (7-5): 30
56. Minnesota (7-5): 30
59. Bowling Green (6-6): 29
60. Fresno State (7-5): 28
60. Hawaii (7-6): 28
62. LSU (7-5): 27
63. Tennessee (5-7): 26
63. Arkansas (5-7): 26
65. Louisiana Tech (7-5): 25
65. Louisiana-Lafayette (6-6): 25
67. Arizona (7-5): 24
68. Stanford (5-7): 23
68. Louisville (5-7): 23
70. Notre Dame (6-6): 22
70. Florida Atlantic (6-6): 22
70. Colorado State (6-6): 22
73. Kentucky (6-6): 21
73. Colorado (5-7): 21
75. Arkansas State (6-6): 20
75. Illinois (5-7): 20
75. Middle Tennessee State (5-7): 20
78. Memphis (6-6): 19
78. Auburn (5-7): 19
78. Duke (4-8): 19
78. UTEP (5-7): 19
78. Marshall (4-8): 19
83. Northern Illinois (6-6): 18
83. UNLV (5-7): 18
85. Temple (5-7): 17
85. San Jose State (6-6): 17
85. Florida International (5-7): 17
88. Akron (5-7): 16
88. New Mexico (4-8): 16
88. Michigan (3-9): 16
88. Mississippi State (4-8): 16
92. Kent State (4-8): 15
93. Purdue (4-8): 14
93. Louisiana-Monroe (4-8): 14
93. Eastern Michigan (3-9): 14
93. Texas A&M (4-8): 14
97. Kansas State (5-7): 13
98. Army (3-9): 12
98. UCLA (4-8): 12
98. Utah State (3-9): 12
98. New Mexico State (3-9): 12
102. Arizona State (5-7): 11
102. Ohio (4-8): 11
102. Central Florida (4-8): 11
102. Syracuse (3-9): 11
102. Indiana (3-9): 11
102. Wyoming (4-8): 11
108. UAB (4-8): 10
109. Baylor (4-8): 8
109. Toledo (3-9): 8
111. San Diego State (2-10): 7
112. Miami (Ohio) (2-10): 6
113. Tulane (2-10): 5
114. Iowa State (2-10): 4
115. Idaho (2-10): 3
116. North Texas (1-11): 2
117. Western Kentucky (2-10): 0
117. SMU (1-11): 0
117. Washington (0-12): 0
117. Washington State (2-11): 0
Conference Strength
ACC
20. Boston College (9-4): 274.7
21. Georgia Tech (9-3): 274.4
22. Virginia Tech (9-4): 273.9
25. North Carolina (8-4): 266.0
29. Florida State (8-4): 262.7
40. Wake Forest (7-5): 242.5
46. Miami (Florida) (7-5): 229.9
47. Maryland (7-5): 229.8
48. Clemson (7-5): 229.6
59. North Carolina State (6-6): 213.0
64. Virginia (5-7): 196.3
87. Duke (4-8): 164.4
Record: 86-60 (.589)
Ranking: 42.3 (508/12)
Power Number: 238.1 (2,857.2/12)
Big XII
2. Oklahoma (12-1): 375.0
3. Texas (11-1): 372.0
9. Texas Tech (11-1): 325.2
17. Oklahoma State (9-3): 280.7
19. Missouri (9-4): 275.4
27. Nebraska (8-4): 265.0
44. Kansas (7-5): 235.4
82. Colorado (5-7): 173.3
85. Kansas State (5-7): 165.9
93. Baylor (4-8): 155.3
94. Texas A&M (4-8): 150.0
113. Iowa State (2-10): 95.8
Record: 87-59 (.596)
Ranking: 49.0 (588/12)
Power Number: 239.1 (2,869.0/12)
Big East
13. Cincinnati (11-2): 304.2
14. Pittsburgh (9-3): 302.6
36. West Virginia (8-4): 251.9
42. Rutgers (7-5): 238.2
49. South Florida (7-5): 227.6
50. Connecticut (7-5): 226.7
79. Louisville (5-7): 176.2
104. Syracuse (3-9): 132.6
Record: 57-40 (.588)
Ranking: 48.4 (387/8)
Power Number: 232.5 (1,860.0/8)
Big Ten
8. Penn State (11-1): 334.4
10. Ohio State (10-2): 317.3
16. Michigan State (9-3): 284.5
31. Iowa (8-4): 261.8
35. Northwestern (9-3): 254.4
53. Wisconsin (7-5): 224.6
57. Minnesota (7-5): 215.1
71. Illinois (5-7): 188.5
86. Purdue (4-8): 164.9
97. Michigan (3-9): 145.9
106. Indiana (3-9): 129.4
Record: 76-56 (.576)
Ranking: 51.8 (570/11)
Power Number: 229.2 (2,520.8/11)
Conference-USA
26. East Carolina (9-4): 265.6
32. Tulsa (10-3): 257.7
34. Rice (9-3): 255.8
52. Houston (7-5): 225.1
60. Southern Mississippi (6-6): 210.3
76. Memphis (6-6): 180.0
80. UTEP (5-7): 175.8
92. Marshall (4-8): 159.5
101. Central Florida (4-8): 138.2
103. UAB (4-8): 134.6
111. Tulane (2-10): 99.1
117. SMU (1-11): 78.9
Record: 67-79 (.459)
Ranking: 73.7 (884/12)
Power Number: 181.7 (2,180.6/12)
Independents
37. Navy (8-4): 245.7
65. Notre Dame (6-6): 195.9
109. Army (3-9): 120.0
115. Western Kentucky (2-10): 89.4
Record: 19-29 (.396)
Ranking: 81.5 (326/4)
Power Number: 162.8 (651.0/4)
MAC
11. Ball State (12-1): 312.8
33. Western Michigan (9-3): 256.4
38. Buffalo (8-5): 245.3
43. Central Michigan (8-4): 237.3
63. Bowling Green (6-6): 202.8
67. Northern Illinois (6-6): 193.2
81. Temple (5-7): 175.1
84. Akron (5-7): 168.5
98. Ohio (4-8): 145.4
100. Kent State (4-8): 140.7
107. Eastern Michigan (3-9): 128.2
108. Toledo (3-9): 124.5
114. Miami (Ohio) (2-10): 93.1
Record: 75-83 (.475)
Ranking: 72.8 (947/13)
Power Number: 186.4 (2,423.3/13)
MWC
5. Utah (12-0): 347.5
12. TCU (10-2): 305.7
18. BYU (10-2): 276.0
39. Air Force (8-4): 242.7
68. Colorado State (6-6): 192.6
83. UNLV (5-7): 170.4
88. New Mexico (4-8): 163.9
102. Wyoming (4-8): 136.1
112. San Diego State (2-10): 96.9
Record: 61-47 (.565)
Ranking: 58.6 (527/9)
Power Number: 214.6 (1,931.8/9)
Pac-10
6. USC (11-1): 345.5
23. Oregon (9-3): 273.3
24. Oregon State (8-4): 268.4
30. California (8-4): 262.0
55. Arizona (7-5): 219.5
75. Stanford (5-7): 183.8
90. Arizona State (5-7): 163.4
96. UCLA (4-8): 147.0
118. Washington State (2-11): 71.8
120. Washington (0-12): 64.1
Record: 59-62 (.488)
Ranking: 63.7 (637/10)
Power Number: 199.9 (1,998.8/10)
SEC
1. Florida (12-1): 377.0
7. Alabama (12-1): 343.3
15. Georgia (9-3): 288.1
28. Mississippi (8-4): 264.9
45. South Carolina (7-5): 231.3
54. LSU (7-5): 221.6
56. Vanderbilt (6-6): 217.0
66. Kentucky (6-6): 194.2
69. Tennessee (5-7): 191.1
74. Arkansas (5-7): 186.1
78. Auburn (5-7): 176.7
95. Mississippi State (4-8): 149.8
Record: 86-60 (.589)
Ranking: 49.0 (588/12)
Power Number: 236.8 (2,841.1/12)
Sun Belt
41. Troy (8-4): 239.2
70. Florida Atlantic (6-6): 188.7
72. Arkansas State (6-6): 187.1
73. Louisiana-Lafayette (6-6): 186.9
89. Middle Tennessee State (5-7): 163.8
91. Florida International (5-7): 162.3
105. Louisiana-Monroe (4-8): 131.3
119. North Texas (1-11): 66.6
Record: 41-55 (.427)
Ranking: 82.5 (660/8)
Power Number: 165.7 (1,325.9/8)
WAC
4. Boise State (12-0): 354.0
51. Nevada (7-5): 225.5
58. Fresno State (7-5): 213.8
61. Hawaii (7-6): 207.4
62. Louisiana Tech (7-5): 204.6
77. San Jose State (6-6): 177.9
99. Utah State (3-9): 141.3
110. New Mexico State (3-9): 119.0
116. Idaho (2-10): 84.1
Record: 54-55 (.495)
Ranking: 70.9 (638/9)
Power Number 192.0 (1,727.6/9)
Records
1. Big XII (87-59): .596
2. ACC (86-60): .589
2. SEC (86-60): .589
4. Big East (57-40): .588
5. Big Ten (76-56): .576
6. MWC (61-47): .565
7. WAC (54-55): .495
8. Pac-10 (59-62): .488
9. MAC (75-83): .475
10. Conference-USA (67-79): .459
11. Sun Belt (41-55): .427
12. Independents (19-29): .396
Rankings
1. ACC (508/12): 42.3
2. Big East (387/8): 48.4
3. Big XII (588/12): 49.0
3. SEC (588/12): 49.0
5. Big Ten (570/11): 51.8
6. MWC (527/9): 58.6
7. Pac-10 (637/10): 63.7
8. WAC (638/9): 70.9
9. MAC (947/13): 72.8
10. Conference-USA (884/12): 73.7
11. Independents (326/4): 81.5
12. Sun Belt (660/8): 82.5
Power Numbers
1. Big XII (2,869.0/12): 239.1
2. ACC (2,857.2/12): 238.1
3. SEC (2,841.1/12): 236.8
4. Big East (1,860.0/8): 232.5
5. Big Ten (2,520.8/11): 229.2
6. MWC (1,931.8/9): 214.6
7. Pac-10 (1,998.8/10): 199.9
8. WAC (1,727.6/9): 192.0
9. MAC (2,423.3/13): 186.4
10. Conference-USA (2,180.6/12): 181.7
11. Sun Belt (1,325.9/8): 165.7
12. Independents (651.0/4): 162.8
Bowl Eligibles
1. ACC (10/12): .833
2. Big East (6/8): .750
3. SEC (8/12): .667
3. WAC (6/9): .667
5. Big Ten (7/11): .636
6. Big XII (7/12): .583
7. MWC (5/9): .556
8. Conference-USA (6/12): .500
8. Independents (6/12): .500
8. Pac-10 (5/10): .500
8. Sun Belt (4/8): .500
12. MAC (6/13): .462
Record vs. Major Conference Teams
1. MWC (9-4): .692
2. ACC (13-8): .619
3. Big East (7-7): .500
3. Big Ten (5-5): .500
5. Big XII (7-8): .467
6. Pac-10 (5-6): .455
7. SEC (6-9): .400
8. Independents (6-14): .300
9. WAC (5-12): .294
10. MAC (6-22): .214
11. Sun Belt (2-20): .091
12. Conference-USA (2-21): .087
Record of Major Conference Teams in Victories
1. Conference-USA (17-8): .680
2. Pac-10 (33-27): .550
3. ACC (83-73): .532
4. SEC (38-34): .528
5. Big East (40-44): .476
6. Sun Belt (11-13): .458
7. WAC (26-35): .426
8. Big XII (33-54): .379
9. Independents (26-46): .361
9. MAC (26-46): .361
9. MWC (39-69): .361
12. Big Ten (20-40): .333
Average Margin of Victory vs. Major Conference Teams
1. Big XII (+80/15): +5.3
1. Big Ten (+53/10): +5.3
3. SEC (+22/15): +1.5
4. MWC (+15/13): +1.2
5. ACC (-22/21): -1.0
6. Pac-10 (-58/11): -5.3
7. Big East (-75/14): -5.4
8. Independents (-166/20): -8.3
9. MAC (-345/28): -12.3
10. Conference-USA (-391/23): -17.0
11. WAC (-319/17): -18.8
12. Sun Belt (-468/22): -21.3
Final Results
1. ACC (7-84): 16
2. Big XII (7-84): 25
2. SEC (7-84): 25
4. Big East (7-84): 27
5. Big Ten (7-84): 36
6. MWC (7-84): 39
7. Pac-10 (7-84): 44
8. WAC (7-84): 53
9. Conference-USA (7-84): 61
10. MAC (7-84): 67
11. Independents (7-84): 68
12. Sun Belt (7-84): 71
Conference Breakdown by Halves
ACC
Top Half Record: 50-24 (.676)
Top Half Ranking: 26.2 (157/6)
Top Half Power Number: 265.7 (1,594.2/6)
Bottom Half Record: 36-36 (.500)
Bottom Half Ranking: 58.5 (351/6)
Bottom Half Power Number: 210.5 (1,263.0/6)
Big XII
Top Half Record: 60-14 (.811)
Top Half Ranking: 12.8 (77/6)
Top Half Power Number: 315.6 (1,893.3/6)
Bottom Half Record: 27-45 (.375)
Bottom Half Ranking: 85.2 (511/6)
Bottom Half Power Number: 162.6 (975.7/6)
Big East
Top Half Record: 35-14 (.714)
Top Half Ranking: 26.3 (105/4)
Top Half Power Number: 274.2 (1,096.9/4)
Bottom Half Record: 22-26 (.458)
Bottom Half Ranking: 70.5 (282/4)
Bottom Half Power Number: 190.8 (763.1/4)
Big Ten
Top Half Record: 54-18 (.750)
Top Half Ranking: 25.5 (153/6)
Top Half Power Number: 279.5 (1,677.0/6)
Bottom Half Record: 29-43 (.403)
Bottom Half Ranking: 78.3 (470/6)
Bottom Half Power Number: 178.1 (1,068.4/6)
Conference-USA
Top Half Record: 47-27 (.635)
Top Half Ranking: 46.7 (280/6)
Top Half Power Number: 232.4 (1,394.5/6)
Bottom Half Record: 20-52 (.278)
Bottom Half Ranking: 100.7 (604/6)
Bottom Half Power Number: 131.0 (786.1/6)
Independents
Top Half Record: 14-10 (.583)
Top Half Ranking: 51.0 (102/2)
Top Half Power Number: 220.8 (441.6/2)
Bottom Half Record: 5-19 (.208)
Bottom Half Ranking: 112.0 (224/2)
Bottom Half Power Number: 104.7 (209.4/2)
MAC
Top Half Record: 54-32 (.628)
Top Half Ranking: 48.0 (336/7)
Top Half Power Number: 231.8 (1,622.9/7)
Bottom Half Record: 26-58 (.310)
Bottom Half Ranking: 98.9 (692/7)
Bottom Half Power Number: 139.4 (975.5/7)
MWC
Top Half Record: 46-14 (.767)
Top Half Ranking: 28.4 (142/5)
Top Half Power Number: 272.9 (1,364.5/5)
Bottom Half Record: 21-39 (.350)
Bottom Half Ranking: 90.6 (453/5)
Bottom Half Power Number: 152.0 (759.9/5)
Pac-10
Top Half Record: 43-17 (.717)
Top Half Ranking: 27.6 (138/5)
Top Half Power Number: 273.7 (1,368.7/5)
Bottom Half Record: 16-45 (.262)
Bottom Half Ranking: 99.8 (499/5)
Bottom Half Power Number: 126.0 (630.1/5)
SEC
Top Half Record: 55-19 (.743)
Top Half Ranking: 25.0 (150/6)
Top Half Power Number: 287.7 (1,726.2/6)
Bottom Half Record: 31-41 (.431)
Bottom Half Ranking: 73.0 (438/6)
Bottom Half Power Number: 185.8 (1,114.9/6)
Sun Belt
Top Half Record: 26-22 (.542)
Top Half Ranking: 64.0 (256/4)
Top Half Power Number: 200.5 (801.9/4)
Bottom Half Record: 15-33 (.313)
Bottom Half Ranking: 101.0 (404/4)
Bottom Half Power Number: 131.0 (524.0/4)
WAC
Top Half Record: 40-21 (.656)
Top Half Ranking: 47.2 (236/5)
Top Half Power Number: 241.1 (1,205.3/5)
Bottom Half Record: 21-39 (.350)
Bottom Half Ranking: 92.8 (464/5)
Bottom Half Power Number: 145.4 (726.9/5)
Record
1. Big XII Top Half (60-14): .811
2. MWC Top Half (46-14): .767
3. Big Ten Top Half (54-18): .750
4. SEC Top Half (55-19): .743
5. Pac-10 Top Half (43-17): .717
6. Big East Top Half (35-14): .714
7. ACC Top Half (50-24): .676
8. WAC Top Half (40-21): .656
9. Conference-USA Top Half (47-27): .635
10. MAC Top Half (54-32): .628
11. Independents Top Half (14-10): .583
12. Sun Belt Top Half (26-22): .542
13. ACC Bottom Half (36-36): .500
14. Big East Bottom Half (22-26): .458
15. SEC Bottom Half (31-51): .431
16. Big Ten Bottom Half (29-43): .403
17. Big XII Bottom Half (27-45): .375
18. MWC Bottom Half (21-39): .350
18. WAC Bottom Half (21-39): .350
20. Sun Belt Bottom Half (15-33): .313
21. MAC Bottom Half (26-58): .310
22. Conference-USA Bottom Half (20-52): .278
23. Pac-10 Bottom Half (16-45): .262
24. Independents Bottom Half (5-19): .208
Rankings
1. Big XII Top Half (77/6): 12.8
2. SEC Top Half (150/6): 25.0
3. Big Ten Top Half (153/6): 25.5
4. ACC Top Half (157/6): 26.2
5. Big East Top Half (105/4): 26.3
6. Pac-10 Top Half (138/5): 27.6
7. MWC Top Half (142/5): 28.4
8. Conference-USA Top Half (280/6): 46.7
9. WAC Top Half (236/5): 47.2
10. MAC Top Half (336/7): 48.0
11. Independents Top Half (102/2): 51.0
12. ACC Bottom Half (351/6): 58.5
13. Sun Belt Top Half (256/4): 64.0
14. Big East Bottom Half (282/4): 70.5
15. SEC Bottom Half (438/6): 73.0
16. Big Ten Bottom Half (470/6): 78.3
17. Big XII Bottom Half (511/6): 85.2
18. MWC Bottom Half (453/5): 90.6
19. WAC Bottom Half (464/5): 92.8
20. MAC Bottom Half (692/7): 98.9
21. Pac-10 Bottom Half (499/5): 99.8
22. Conference-USA Bottom Half (604/6): 100.7
23. Sun Belt Bottom Half (404/4): 101.0
24. Independents Bottom Half (224/2): 112.0
Power Numbers
1. Big XII Top Half (1,893.3/6): 315.6
2. SEC Top Half (1,726.2/6): 287.7
3. Big Ten Top Half (1,677.0/6): 279.5
4. Big East Top Half (1,096.9/4): 274.2
5. Pac-10 Top Half (1,368.7/5): 273.7
6. MWC Top Half (1,364.5/5): 272.9
7. ACC Top Half (1,594.2/6): 265.7
8. WAC Top Half (1,205.3/5): 241.1
9. Conference-USA Top Half (1,394.5/6): 232.4
10. MAC Top Half (1,622.9/7): 231.8
11. Independents Top Half (441.6/2): 220.8
12. ACC Bottom Half (1,263.0/6): 210.5
13. Sun Belt Top Half (801.9/4): 200.5
14. Big East Bottom Half (763.1/4): 190.8
15. SEC Bottom Half (1,114.9/6): 185.8
16. Big Ten Bottom Half (1,068.4/6): 178.1
17. Big XII Bottom Half (975.7/6): 162.6
18. MWC Bottom Half (759.9/5): 152.0
19. WAC Bottom Half (726.9/5): 145.4
20. MAC Bottom Half (975.5/7): 139.4
21. Conference-USA Bottom Half (786.1/6): 131.0
21. Sun Belt Bottom Half (524.0/4): 131.0
23. Pac-10 Bottom Half (630.1/5): 126.0
24. Independents Bottom Half (209.4/2): 104.7
Bowl Eligibles
1. ACC Top Half (6/6): 1.000
1. Big XII Top Half (6/6): 1.000
1. Big East Top Half (4/4): 1.000
1. Big Ten Top Half (6/6): 1.000
1. Conference-USA Top Half (6/6): 1.000
1. Independents Top Half (2/2): 1.000
1. MWC Top Half (5/5): 1.000
1. Pac-10 Top Half (5/5): 1.000
1. SEC Top Half (6/6): 1.000
1. Sun Belt Top Half (4/4): 1.000
1. WAC Top Half (5/5): 1.000
12. MAC Top Half (6/7): .857
13. ACC Bottom Half (4/6): .667
14. Big East Bottom Half (2/4): .500
15. WAC Bottom Half (2/5): .400
16. Big Ten Bottom Half (2/6): .333
16. SEC Bottom Half (2/6): .333
18. MWC Bottom Half (1/5): .200
19. Big XII Bottom Half (1/6): .167
20. Conference-USA Bottom Half (0/6): .000
20. Independents Bottom Half (0/2): .000
20. MAC Bottom Half (0/7): .000
20. Pac-10 Bottom Half (0/5): .000
20. Sun Belt Bottom Half (0/4): .000
Record vs. Major Conference Teams
1. ACC Top Half (9-1): .900
2. Big XII Top Half (5-1): .833
3. Pac-10 Top Half (4-2): .667
4. Big Ten Top Half (5-3): .600
4. MWC Top Half (5-3): .600
4. SEC Top Half (5-3): .600
7. MWC Bottom Half (4-3): .571
8. Big East Bottom Half (5-4): .556
9. Independents Top Half (6-8): .429
10. WAC Top Half (5-7): .417
11. Big East Top Half (2-3): .400
12. ACC Bottom Half (4-7): .364
13. MAC Top Half (4-10): .286
14. Big XII Bottom Half (2-7): .222
15. Pac-10 Bottom Half (1-4): .200
16. Conference-USA Top Half (2-9): .182
17. SEC Bottom Half (1-6): .143
17. WAC Bottom Half (1-6): .143
19. MAC Bottom Half (2-14): .125
20. Sun Belt Top Half (1-9): .100
21. Sun Belt Bottom Half (1-11): .083
22. Big Ten Bottom Half (0-2): .000
22. Conference-USA Bottom Half (0-12): .000
22. Independents Bottom Half (0-6): .000
Record of Major Conference Teams in Victory
1. Conference-USA Top Half (17-8): .680
2. Pac-10 Top Half (28-20): .583
2. Sun Belt Bottom Half (7-5): .583
4. SEC Top Half (33-27): .550
5. Big East Top Half (13-11): .542
6. ACC Top Half (58-50): .537
7. ACC Bottom Half (25-23): .521
8. Big East Bottom Half (27-33): .450
9. WAC Top Half (26-35): .426
10. MAC Top Half (20-28): .417
10. Pac-10 Bottom Half (5-7): .417
10. SEC Bottom Half (5-7): .417
13. Big XII Bottom Half (10-15): .400
14. MWC Bottom Half (19-29): .396
15. Big XII Top Half (23-39): .371
16. Independents Top Half (26-46): .361
17. Big Ten Top Half (20-40): .333
17. MWC Top Half (20-40): .333
17. Sun Belt Top Half (4-8): .333
17. WAC Bottom Half (4-8): .333
21. MAC Bottom Half (6-18): .250
22. Big Ten Bottom Half (0-0): .000
22. Conference-USA Bottom Half (0-0): .000
22. Independents Bottom Half (0-0): .000
Average Margin of Victory vs. Major Conference Teams
1. Big XII Top Half (+140/6): +23.3
2. SEC Top Half (+106/8): +13.3
3. ACC Top Half (+128/10): +12.8
4. Big Ten Top Half (+69/8): +8.6
5. Pac-10 Top Half (+51/6): +8.5
6. MWC Top Half (+1/8): +0.1
7. Independents Top Half (-31/14): -2.2
8. Big East Bottom Half (-32/9): -3.6
9. MWC Bottom Half (-42/7): -6.0
10. Big XII Bottom Half (-60/9): -6.7
11. Big Ten Bottom Half (-16/2): -8.0
12. Big East Top Half (-43/5): -8.6
13. MAC Top Half (-138/14): -9.9
14. Conference-USA Top Half (-118/11): -10.7
15. WAC Top Half (-140/12): -11.7
16. SEC Bottom Half (-84/7): -12.0
17. ACC Bottom Half (-150/11): -13.6
18. MAC Bottom Half (-252/16): -15.8
19. Sun Belt Top Half (-193/10): -19.3
20. Pac-10 Bottom Half (-109/5): -21.8
21. Independents Bottom Half (-135/6): -22.5
22. Conference-USA Bottom Half (-273/12): -22.8
23. Sun Belt Bottom Half (-275/12): -22.9
24. WAC Bottom Half (-200/7): -28.6
Final Results
1. SEC Top Half (7-168): 19
2. Big XII Top Half (7-168): 22
3. Pac-10 Top Half (7-168): 27
4. ACC Top Half (7-168): 29
5. Big Ten Top Half (7-168): 35
6. MWC Top Half (7-168): 43
7. Big East Top Half (7-168): 44
8. Conference-USA Top Half (7-168): 58
9. WAC Top Half (7-168): 60
10. Independents Top Half (7-168): 66
11. MAC Top Half (7-168): 78
12. Big East Bottom Half (7-168): 80
13. ACC Bottom Half (7-168): 86
14. Sun Belt Top Half (7-168): 95
15. MWC Bottom Half (7-168): 102
16. SEC Bottom Half (7-168): 104
17. Big XII Bottom Half (7-168): 107
18. Big Ten Bottom Half (7-168): 119
19. WAC Bottom Half (7-168): 129
20. Pac-10 Bottom Half (7-168): 132
20. Sun Belt Bottom Half (7-168): 132
22. MAC Bottom Half (7-168): 139
23. Conference-USA Bottom Half (7-168): 151
24. Independents Bottom Half (7-168): 157
Awards
ACC
Coach of the Year: Paul Johnson - Georgia Tech
In his first year as head coach in Atlanta, Johnson led the Yellow Jackets to a 5-3 conference record and 9-3 record overall, coming just four points away from representing the Coastal Division in the ACC Championship Game. Virginia Tech upended the Jackets 20-17 early in the season to win the tie-breaker. Johnson installed the option offense and the Jackets have the 2nd ranked rush offense at season’s end to show for it, averaging 282.3 yards on the ground per game. Their rush offense was ranked 24th in the country in the 2007-2008 season. They have a ways to go with the newly installed offense, but have soundly progressed this year and from a year ago, as Tech finished the ‘07-‘08 season at a mediocre 7-6 and unranked. With a win in the Chic-fil-A bowl against LSU, Johnson would lead his club to ten wins and a top fifteen ranking in just his first season with the club.
Runner-up: Jeff Jagodzinski - Boston College
One would have to look beyond BC’s record in order to observe the excellent job Jagodzinski and his staff have done this season. This was a club that went to the ACC Championship Game last year as well, but lost a guy by the name of Matt Ryan to the NFL. Ryan led the Golden Eagles to the 6th ranked pass offense in the country a year ago and 33rd in total offense. With the loss of Ryan, Boston College has dropped to 99th in pass offense and 94th in total offense. So, how have they done it? Defense Not many hear about BC’s defense, as it’s often overshadowed by the likes of USC, Florida, Alabama, and even Virginia Tech, but BC is currently ranked 2nd in the country in rush defense, 23rd in pass efficiency defense, 19th in total defense, and 20th in scoring defense. The Eagles have not often won pretty this year, but at games’ end, they’ve found ways to win 9 of 12 games and take part in their second consecutive ACC Title Game.
Player of the Year: Jonathan Dwyer (RB) - Georgia Tech
Heading into the Chic-fil-A Bowl, the sophomore (yes, sophomore) tailback for the Yellow Jackets has carried the ball 190 times for 1,328 yards (7.0 p/carry), 12 rushing touchdowns, 5 receptions, 143 yards (28.6 p/reception), and 1 receiving touchdown. Outside of the loss to Virginia Tech, where Dwyer was less than stellar, he played big in key games, rushing for 108 yards (6.0 p/) and a touchdown in a 19-16 win over Boston College, 109 yards (5.2 p/) in a 21-17 victory over Clemson, 145 yards (11.2 p/) and 2 touchdowns in a 31-28 win over Florida State, 128 yards (12.8 p/) and 2 scores in a 41-23 win over Miami, and 144 yards (7.2 p/) and 2 touchdowns against inner-state rival Georgia, as the Yellow Jackets beat the ‘Dawgs 45-42. Even in a disappointing 28-7 loss to North Carolina, Dwyer did all he could, rushing for 157 yards (7.1 p/) and scoring the Jackets’ lone touchdown.
Runner-up: Hakeem Nicks (WR) - North Carolina
Not many outside of Chapel Hill and the ACC may be familiar with this name, but as anyone who has played against him will note, the man is explosive with the ball in his hands. Nicks caught 60 passes this year for 1,005 yards (16.8 p/), and 9 touchdowns, along with 5 rush attempts for 34 yards (6.8 p/) and another score. If one tracked the Tar Heels at all this year, they’d realize that as Nicks went, the offense followed. In a key 45-24 win over Boston College on October 25th, Nicks caught 8 passes for 139 yards (17.4 p/), 3 touchdowns, and he also ran the ball 3 times for 31 yards (10.3 p/) and another touchdown. The junior receiver was also responsible for 133 yards and 141 yards receiving in close wins over Miami (Florida) and Notre Dame.
Newcomer of the Year: Darren Evans (RB) - Virginia Tech
The Virginia Tech Hokies’ offense was pedestrian this year and that’s being kind. The dual threat sophomore quarterback, Tyrod Taylor, was banged up off and on throughout the season. Tech lost their top six receiving threats from a year ago to the NFL, graduation, and injury. The bright spot of Tech’s offense this season? Freshman tailback Darren Evans, who carried the ball 259 times for 1,112 yards (4.3 p/), 10 touchdowns, along with 15 catches for 112 yards (7.5 p/). As the season wore on, Evans found himself to be more of an integral focus to the offense. In Virginia Tech’s first 8 games, Evans carried the ball 117 times for 519 yards, an average of 14.6 rushes and 64.9 yards a game on the ground. In Tech’s final 5 games, he carried the ball 129 times for 523 yards, an average of 25.8 carries and 104.6 yards a contest. Over this five game span, Evans rushed for 100+ yards in three games, including the ACC Championship against Boston College, where the freshman controlled the clock with 31 rushes and eclipsed the 100-yard mark with 114 yards on the afternoon. His best game of the season came in a Thursday night game against Maryland on November 6th, when Evans rushed the ball 32 times for 253 yards (7.9 p/) and a touchdown.
Surprise of the Year: North Carolina
The Heels went from 3-9 a year ago, in Butch Davis’ debut season in Chapel Hill, to 8-4 this year and a game away from heading to the ACC Championship.
Disappointment of the Year: Clemson
The Tigers finished the season strong a year ago and with so much talent returning, especially in the backfield, with James Davis and C.J. Spiller, anything short of an ACC Title would be seen as a disappointment. The Tigers were a pre-season Top 10 ranked team and started off with a 34-10 defeat at the hands of Alabama. Clemson will likely goto a bowl game, but unranked, carrying a 7-5 record, and with a new head coach, as Tommy Bowden was fired at the mid-season point.
Big East
Coach of the Year: Brian Kelly - Cincinnati
In just his second his second season as head coach for the Bearcats, Brian Kelly has led his club to a Big East championship and will be sending them to their first BCS bowl game in school history. Not only that, but with their 29-24 win this past Saturday against Hawaii, Cincinnati improved to 11-2 on the season, the eleven victories being an all-time school record and their #12 ranking at this current juncture being a record for the school as well. With all these records being set and in only his second season with the team, it’s no wonder Kelly is such a hot name on the coaching market right now.
Runner-up: Greg Schiano - Rutgers
Sure, when comparing this season to the last three, Rutgers may have had a down season this year, but to finish where they did at 7-5, Schiano had to work a few miracles. Why is this? Rutgers started the year at 1-5, losing to: Fresno State by 17, North Carolina by 32, Navy by 2, West Virginia by 7, and Cincinnati by 3. Their lone win in that time frame came against I-AA
Morgan State. Not only did it not appear likely that Rutgers would go bowling at season’s end, things looked so bleak, some had to wonder if Schiano would be around next year. But, however he did it, Schiano rallied his kids en route to a 6-0 finish to their regular season, including three wins over bowl-bound clubs: Connecticut, Pittsburgh, and South Florida. They outscored these three teams 115-60 (average of 38.3 - 20.0). Overall, in their final six regular season games, the Scarlet Knights outscored their opponents by a combined score of 243 to 94 (average of 40.5 - 15.7). In their first six games, Schiano’s team was outscored 128 to 105 (21.3 - 17.5), and this includes the outlying 38-0 blow-out win by Rutgers over I-AA Morgan State. Excluding that game from the picture, the Scarlet Knights were outscored in their other five games by the combined score of 128 to 67 (average of 25.6 - 13.4). With a date on December 29th at the Papajohns.com bowl with 6-6 North Carolina State, Rutgers has a golden opportunity to finish the year 7-0 and 8-5 overall.
Player of the Year: Donald Brown (RB) - Connecticut
Much like Shonn Greene of Iowa, if Donald Brown played for a Texas, Oklahoma, or Alabama, he’d be one of the front-runners for the Heisman Trophy. On the season, Brown carried the ball 338 times for 1,822 yards (5.4 avg.), and 17 touchdowns, to go with 21 catches for 125 yards (6.0 p/). Like Greene, Brown was Mr. Consistency in the backfield for his club. He rushed for 100+ yards in 10 of 12 games, the two exceptions being against West Virginia and South Florida, where the Junior tailback ran for 82 and 96 yards. Brown accounted for 100+ total yards of offense in 11 of 12 games, the lone exception being against West Virginia, when he came just 17 yards shy of doing so. The stud tailback also scored at least one touchdown in 10 of 12 games this season, the exceptions being against Rutgers and South Florida. Brown was the steady hand in the Huskies’ offense this year. Against 8-4 North Carolina, he ran for 161 yards and a touchdown on 33 carries. Versus 7-5 Rutgers, he ran for 107 yards on 27 carries. He burst through the Cincinnati Bearcats’ defense for 150 yards and 2 scores on 29 carries. In UConn’s final regular season game against Pittsburgh, Brown rushed for 189 yards and a score on 34 carries. His best game of the year came on September 13th against Virginia, when Brown rushed for 206 yards and 3 scores on 20 rush attempts. He also caught 5 passes for 32 more yards. What makes Brown’s numbers even more impressive is the fact that UConn had no pass game this year. At least Iowa quarterback, Ricky Stanzi completed over 58% of his pass attempts for more than 1,800 yards, almost a 2:1 touchdown to interception ratio and a quarterback rating of 135.3. Brown wasn’t that fortunate. Connecticut quarterback, Tyler Lorenzen, was 75-156 passing this year (48.1%) for just 820 yards, 2 touchdowns compared to 8 interceptions, and ended the regular season with an 86.2 quarterback rating. With those anemic numbers, it’s quite something for Brown to have dominated like he did this year.
Runner-up: LeSean McCoy (RB) - Pittsburgh
In just his sophomore season, McCoy played a big factor in Pittsburgh’s turnaround from a year ago. The tailback accounted for 284 rush attempts for 1,403 yards (4.9 p/), and 21 touchdowns, to go along with 31 catches for 299 yards (9.6 p/). He scored at least one touchdown in 11 of 12 games, the 34-24 win over Syracuse being the only exception. His worst outing came in a 41-7 thrashing of Louisville on November 8th, when the sophomore carried the ball 17 times for 39 yards (2.3 p/) and a touchdown. His best performance came three weeks later against West Virginia, as he played a key role in burning off precious seconds in the Panthers’ 19-15 win over the Mountaineers. McCoy carried the ball 33 times for 183 yards (5.5 p/), and 2 touchdowns. He
also caught 2 passes for 17 yards. In a 19-15 game, McCoy was responsible for 200 yards from the line of scrimmage and had a long run of only 16 yards, which means he played a critical role in the T.O.P. (Time of possession) battle.
Newcomer of the Year: Victor Anderson (RB) - Louisville
Anderson was one of Louisville’s few bright spots this year, as the Cardinals finished the season at 5-7. The freshman carried the ball 183 times for 1,047 yards (5.7 p/), and 8 touchdowns. Add to that his 18 receptions for 101 yards (5.6 p/) and another score. Anderson eclipsed the 100-yard mark five times this year, scored at least one touchdown in 6 games, and rushed for 60+ yards in 10 of 12 contests. The only two games where the young tailback didn’t eclipse 60 yards rushing were in the first and last games of the season. The Cardinals may not have been certain on how much they wanted to utilize the freshman in the early going, which meant fewer carries for him in their opening bout with Kentucky. In the last game, Rutgers opened up a 49-0 lead at the half on the Cardinals, which meant that the running game and the starters were abandoned rather early in the evening for Louisville. The freshman undoubtedly had his best game of the season on September 17th, leading his club to a 38-29 win over Kansas State. In that game, Anderson carried the ball 18 times out of the backfield for 176 yards (9.8 p/), and 3 touchdowns.
Surprise of the Year: Pittsburgh
The Panthers had problems getting over the dreaded 5-6 win hump under head coach Dave Wanstedt. Before the start of the season, his name was actually mentioned as potentially being on the hot seat. Hot seat, no more, as Wanstedt led the Panthers to a 9-3 regular season and a New Year’s Eve Sun Bowl bid against Oregon State.
Disappointment of the Year: West Virginia
It’s amazing to think that just last year, West Virginia was one victory against Pittsburgh away from going to the National Championship game. Head coach Rich Rodriguez parted ways with the club, Steve Slaton got drafted by the Houston Texans, and as a result, West Virginia’s offense just wasn’t the same this year. In the previous three years with Pat White at quarterback, the Mountaineers eclipsed the 40-point mark with regularity. They did that just once this season and that was in a season-opening win against I-AA Villanova. The Mountaineers actually scored 15 points or less on four separate occasions this season and scored 30+ points on an equal number of occasions, en route to an 8-4 senior campaign season for Mr. White and company. Like Clemson in the ACC, West Virginia would be seen as a disappointment if they came anything short of winning their conference title. They finished third in the conference and will be facing off against 8-4 North Carolina of the ACC in the Meineke Car Care Bowl on December 27th.
Big Ten
Coach of the Year: Joe Paterno - Penn State
The 119-year old Paterno has led his Nittany Lions to an 11-1 season, an improvement of 2.5 games currently from last year’s 9-4 record. PSU will be representing the Big Ten in Pasadena at the Rose Bowl and were just two points away from potentially earning a spot in the BCS National Championship Game, with their only loss coming on a last second field goal by Iowa. Penn State has improved in most every major category this year from last, improving from 29th to 15th in rush offense, 75th to 37th in pass offense, 55th to 15th in total offense, 45th to 11th in
scoring offense, 41st to 6th in pass efficiency defense, 11th to 5th in total defense, and 7th to 6th in scoring defense. The only such category where they regressed was in rush defense, falling from 7th in the country to 9th.
Runner-up: Tim Brewster - Minnesota
The Gophers didn’t finish the regular season as they may have wanted, losing their final four games, finalized by a 55-0 shut-out loss at the hands of Iowa, but overall, improved mightily from the 1-11 team a year ago. The GO-phers went from 0-8 in the Big Ten conference and 1-11 overall to 3-5 and 7-5 this season. That’s an enormous improvement of six games and likely a bowl invite. While their defensive statistics may not look impressive, as they finished the regular season ranked 70th in rush defense (146.83 p/gm), 60th in pass efficiency defense (125.44), 73rd in total defense (378.42 p/gm), and 49th in scoring defense (23.33), these numbers are a drastic improvement from 2007's club. Last year, Minn-uh--SOH-ta ranked 114th in rush defense (229.33 p/gm), 116th in pass efficiency defense (150.06), 119th in total defense (518.67 p/gm), and 109th in scoring defense (36.67 p/gm). Working the math, Brewster’s club allowed 82.5 fewer rushing yards per game this year than last, 140.25 total yards per game, and 13.34 points.
Player of the Year: Shonn Greene (RB) - Iowa
All I can say is, if Greene played on a team ranked in the top 15, he’d be in the running for the Heisman Trophy. It’s a shame that due to Iowa’s 8-4 record, he hasn’t received much notice. On the season, Greene has run the ball 278 times for 1,729 yards (6.2 p/), and 17 touchdowns, along with 8 receptions for 49 yards (6.1 p/). Greene galloped for 100+ yards in all 12 games this season, with his low output being 113 total yards (115 on the ground) in the Hawkeyes’ 45-9 trouncing of Indiana. The stud running back also scored at least one touchdown in 11 of 12 games, the lone exception being in Iowa’s 16-13 loss to Michigan State. Mr. Greene’s most impressive performance came on October 18th against Wisconsin in Iowa City, as he carried the ball 25 times for 217 yards (8.7 p/) and 4 touchdowns, in Iowa’s dismantling of the Badgers.
Runner-up: Javon Ringer (RB) - Michigan State
Ringer has received the more press between the two Big Ten running backs, but was far less consistent than Iowa’s tailback. Ringer carried the ball 370 times during the regular season for 1,590 yards (4.3 p/), and 21 touchdowns. He also caught 25 passes for 160 yards (6.4 p/). In all three Spartans’ losses, Ringer ran for under 100 yards, combining to go for 190 yards in the three games (63.3 p/gm). His worst outing came against Penn State, in Michigan State’s 49-18 loss to the Nittany Lions (it wasn’t even that close...). Ringer ran the ball 17 times for 42 yards (2.5 p/) and 1 score in the game. He had some explosive outings, but against lesser opponents, as he ran for 282 yards against Florida Atlantic and 201 more yards versus the Notre Dame Fightless Irish.
Newcomer of the Year: Terrelle Pryor (QB) - Ohio State
The freshman Buckeye phenom made some typical rookie mistakes, but also showcased his immense potential on several occasions throughout the season. On the year, he completed 95 of 152 pass attempts (62.5%) for 1,245 yards (13.1 ypc and 8.2 ypa), a 152.09 rating, 12 touchdowns and 4 interceptions. He also ran the ball 124 times for 553 yards (4.5 p/) and 6 more scores. On October 25th against Penn State, Pryor threw for a season high 226 yards, but had arguably his worst game of the season. He completed 16 of 25 passes (64.0%), for 226 yards (14.1 ypc and 9.0 ypa), an interception, and a quarterback rating of 131.94. He was also shut-out
in the running game, running the ball 9 times for 6 yards (0.7 p/). His best quarterback rating came on November 11th at Northwestern, as the freshman completed 9 of 14 passes (64.3%) for 197 yards (21.9 ypc and 14.1 ypa), 3 touchdowns and a 253.20 rating. Added to that were 6 carries for 33 yards (5.5 p/)
Surprise of the Year: Minnesota
The GO-phers improved by 3 games in Big Ten play alone and 6 games overall, from 0-8 and 1-11 to 3-5 and 7-5. At one point, they were 7-1 this season, before a late season slump.
Disappointment of the Year: Purdue
Head Coach Joe Tiller has rebuilt the Purdue program from the bottom up, in a similar manner to Bill Snyder at Kansas State. It’s a shame that Tiller will be leaving on such a sour note, as the Boilermakers finished the season at a very disappointing 4-8.
Big XII
Coach of the Year: Mike Gundy - Oklahoma State
Gundy led the Cowboys from a 4-4 Big XII record and 7-6 record overall last year to 5-3 and 9-3 this season. The Cowboys are ranked in the top ten in rush offense (8th, 1st in the Big XII), total offense (7th), and scoring offense (8th).
Runner-up: Mike Leach - Texas Tech
Leach has run a successful program in Lubbock for quite some time, but until this year, had yet to get over that two or three loss hump. They may play well against their no-name non-conference opponents and Big XII schools not named Oklahoma or Texas, but had problems stripping away the Big XII South dominance from either of those two schools. It was a different story this year, as Leach guided the Red Raiders to a 7-1 conference record and 11-1 record overall, with the only blemish being against Oklahoma. He was able to defeat the Texas Longhorns and every other team on the schedule. Leach is now a hot commodity and it’ll be interesting to see if he sticks around in Lubbock for another season, especially with offensive talents like Michael Crabtree and Graham Harrell potentially leaving school early for the NFL Draft.
Player of the Year: Colt McCoy (QB) - Texas
I have all the respect in the world for Sam Bradford, Oklahoma’s quarterback, but I have to give the slight edge to McCoy. His numbers are video game-like. On the year, McCoy completed 291 of 375 passes (77.6%, no, that’s not a typo) for 3,445 yards (11.8 ypc and 9.2 ypa), 32 touchdown passes, 7 interceptions and a quarterback rating of 179.20. He also ran the ball 128 times for 576 yards (4.5 p/) and 10 additional touchdowns. McCoy completed at least 69% of his passes in 11 of 12 games this year, the lone exception being in the Longhorns’ 39-33 loss to Texas Tech, where he completed 58.8% of his throws. He threw for 300+ yards in 5 of 12 ball games, 250+ yards in 10 of 12 contests, and threw at least 2 touchdown passes in 11 of 12 games, Oklahoma being the exception. His best quarterback rating came against 9-3 Rice, in the ‘Horns 52-10 dismantling of the Owls, where McCoy completed 19 of 23 pass attempts (82.6%) for 329 yards (17.3 ypc and 14.3 ypa), 4 touchdowns and a rating of 260.15. He completed 80+% of his passes against 11-1 Oklahoma (28-35 for 80.0%), 9-3 Oklahoma State (38-45 for 84.4%) and 9-3 Missouri (29-32 for 90.6%). Like I said, video game-like.
Runner-up: Sam Bradford (QB) - Oklahoma
Sophomore Sam Bradford completed 302 of 442 passes (68.3%) this year for 4,464 yards, 48 touchdowns, 6 interceptions (8:1 ratio), and a quarterback rating of 186.29. To this, he also added 5 rushing touchdowns. With such gaudy numbers, it’s difficult to find a starting place with Mr. Bradford. The Sooner quarterback threw for 300+ yards in 11 of 13 games and 250+ in 12 of 13 (a 57-2 win over Chattanooga being the exception). Bradford threw 2 or more touchdown passes in every single game played thus far, 3 or more touchdown tosses in 10 of 13, 4 or more in 8 of 13, and 5 or more in 4 of 13 games. Including rushing touchdowns, Bradford accounted for 5 or more scores in nearly half his games (6 of 13) and his high for a game on the season was 6 against Washington. Bradford completed 70.0%+ of his passes in 7 of 13 games and completed 66.7% of them in 11 of 13 games this year. His best game came on September 13th in the Sooners 55-14 romp of the 0-12 Washington Huskies, as Bradford completed 18 of 21 pass attempts (for a season high 85.7%) for 304 yards (16.9 ypc and 14.5 ypa), 5 passing touchdowns, and a rating of 285.88. He also ran the ball in himself one time for number six on the afternoon.
Newcomer of the Year: Robert Griffin (QB) - Baylor
Not many outside of the Big XII Conference have heard of this guy, as he plays for the 4-8 Baylor Bears, but he is explosive and makes good decisions. Griffin completed 160 of 267 passes (59.9%) for 2,091 yards (13.1 ypc and 7.8 ypa), 15 touchdown passes, 3 interceptions and a 142.00 quarterback rating. He also ran the ball 162 times for 626 yards (3.9 p/) and 11 touchdowns. Throwing wise, Griffin’s best game came late, on October 11th against Iowa State, in the Bears’ 38-10 win over the Cyclones. Griffin complete 21 of 24 passes (87.5%) for 278 yards (13.2 ypc and 11.6 ypa), 2 touchdowns and 1 pick. He also added a touchdown on the ground in the game. While Griffin seemed to struggle throwing the ball against the top tier Big XII teams, he was very effective running against these same teams. He ran for 102 yards and 2 scores against Oklahoma, a season-high 121 yards and a touchdown against Nebraska, 101 yards and a score on the ground versus Texas, and 99 yards and 2 scores in the Bears’ heart-breaking 35-28 loss to Texas Tech.
Surprise of the Year: Oklahoma State
Under Mike Gundy, the Cowboys had been a fairly mediocre Big XII program, good for 6-7 wins a season and a possible bowl bid. To finish the regular season at 9-3, with their only losses being to three clubs with a combined three losses to this point (Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech), and likely a top 20 finish, was a significant improvement for Gundy and OSU.
Disappointment of the Year: Missouri
Like West Virginia last year, Missouri came one win away from heading to the BCS title game, but as the #1 ranked team, were manhandled by Oklahoma in the Big XII Title game. Returning to the team this year were: quarterback Chase Daniel, receiver/return man Jeremy Maclin, tight end Coffman, and tailback Washington. Things were only to get better for Gary Pinkel and the Tigers this season. But, as has often been the case with Missouri, they failed to beat quality competition. They fell early to up-and-coming Oklahoma State, were then crushed by Texas, lost to rival Kansas in their regular season finale, and then manhandled yet again by Oklahoma in the Big XII Championship game. The season may get worse yet, as Pinkel has to get his kids focused for the December 29th Alamo Bowl against Northwestern. That may be easier said than
done for a team that had championship aspirations coming into the season.
Pac-10
Coach of the Year: Pete Carroll - USC
Who else could be given this award in the Pac-10? For the most part, USC dominated again in the conference, en route to an 11-1 record and yet another appearance in the Rose Bowl. Carroll leads the defensive unit and may have had his best defense yet, as the Trojans finished the regular season 1st in all the country in: pass efficiency defense (81.46), total defense (206.08 ypg), and scoring defense (7.75 ppg). Their weakest statistic on the defensive side of the ball? Rush defense, where the Trojans finished 5th in all the country, averaging to allow 83.25 yards a game on the ground.
Runner-up: Mike Stoops - Arizona
There were some whispers before the season started that Mike Stoops had to lead his Wildcats to a bowl bid if he wanted to maintain his job in Tucson. Stoops need not worry following a 7-5 season that saw his club beat California, come close in games against USC, Oregon, and Oregon State (lost by a combined 19 points against the three teams), and finish the regular season in grand fashion with a 31-10 win over inner-state rival Arizona State. The team will get an opportunity for win number eight when they face the 10-2 BYU Cougars from the Mountain West Conference in the Las Vegas Bowl on December 20th.
Player of the Year: Jacquizz Rodgers (RB) - Oregon State
The freshman phenom was underutilized early in the season and too banged up to play in most or all of the Beavers’ final two games, against Arizona and Oregon, but still managed to put up rather gaudy numbers for Mike Riley’s club. On the season, Rodgers ran the ball 259 times for 1,253 yards (4.8 p/) and 11 touchdowns. He also caught 29 passes for 247 yards (8.5 p/) and 1 more score. In the biggest upset of the first half of the season, as Oregon State beat heavily favored USC on a Thursday night game, Rodgers had his best game of the season on the stellar Trojan defense, carrying the ball 37 times for 186 yards (5.0 p/) and 2 touchdowns. He also added to that 27 receiving yards on 2 catches (13.5 p/). He also topped the 100-yard mark in victories over 7-5 Hawaii (110 and 2 touchdowns) and 7-4 California (144 and a score). His worst game came on August 28th at Stanford, when the freshman carried the ball 14 times for 54 yards (3.9 p/) in the Beavers’ disappointing 36-28 loss to the Cardinal.
Runner-up: Mark Sanchez (QB) - USC
He didn’t receive as much publicity as recent Trojan quarterbacks (and Heisman winners) Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart, but Mark Sanchez had himself a very efficient season. On the year, the USC quarterback completed 213 of 331 pass attempts (64.4%) for 2,794 yards, 30 touchdown passes, and 10 interceptions for a quarterback rating of 159.12. He also ran the ball into the end zone twice on the season. Because of the Trojans’ stellar defense, other than in the Oregon State game, which had Sanchez’s club down by three touchdowns at halftime, Sanchez wasn’t forced to throw the ball more than needed. This could be seen in his statistics, as Sanchez went over the 300-yard mark just once on the season, but he also threw at least one touchdown pass in every single game and at least two in 10 of 12 contests. Sanchez was able to complete 70.0% or more of his passes in 4 of 12 games and at least 60.0% in 9 of 12. His only big hiccup during the season came on October 11th against Arizona State. USC beat the Sun Devils 28-0 that day, but Sanchez was not a reason for that, as he completed just 13 of 26 passes (50.0%) for 179 yards, 1 touchdown, and 3 interceptions. His quarterback rating for the day was a season-low 97.45. Sanchez’s best game was a week following his struggles against Arizona State in the Trojans’ 69-0 drubbing of Washington State. The junior quarterback completed 15 of 20 passes (75.0%) for 253 yards and 5 touchdowns for a quarterback rating of 263.76.
Newcomer of the Year: Jacquizz Rodgers (RB) - Oregon State
Surprise of the Year: Arizona
The Arizona Wildcats have made slight improvements the past few years under Mike Stoops, but had yet to goto a bowl game during his tenure. That all changed this year, as Arizona racked up victories against the lower half of the Pac-10 Conference, along with an upset win over 8-4 California en route to a 7-5 record and bid to the Las Vegas Bowl.
Disappointment of the Year: Arizona State
Not many outside Tempe seem to remember this, but the Sun Devils were a pre-season top 15 ranked team this year, coming off a 10-win season a year ago. The season altered immensely on September 13th against UNLV, as the Sun Devils lost 23-20 to the Rebels to goto 2-1 on the season. This would be the first of six consecutive losses for the Sun Devils, from which they’d never recover. The former pre-season top 15 club finished the year 5-7 and bowl ineligible.
SEC
Coach of the Year: Nick Saban - Alabama
He may not be the most popular guy among fans or the press or the most personable, but one thing is for certain, Nick Saban can coach a college football team. In Saban’s first year with the club just a year ago, ‘Bama got off to a solid start, but at 6-2, lost their remaining four games of the regular season to finish at 6-6. A lot would be discovered in Alabama’s first game of the season, as they had to square off against a pre-season top 10 ranked team in the Clemson Tigers. The game was never close, as Saban’s club dominated from start to finish in a 34-10 victory. Throughout the course of the year, while Alabama may not have been as flashy as the likes of Florida, Oklahoma, or Texas Tech, they got the job done, especially on the defensive side of the ball. For the season, Alabama ranked 4th in all the country in rush defense (78.85 ypg), 3rd in total defense (256.92 ypg), and 6th in scoring defense (13.00 ppg). Their offensive numbers weren’t gaudy, but for the most part, got the job done, as they finished the season ranked 23rd in rush offense (196.46 ypg) and 30th in scoring offense (31.15 ppg). While Alabama won just six games in their regular season a year ago, they won five alone against bowl-bound teams this year en route to a 12-0 regular season, before losing 31-20 to Florida in the SEC Championship game. They beat the already mentioned Clemson Tigers, along with pre-season number one Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, and LSU. It’s amazing how much progress these kids have shown in just two years under Saban and he’s not even doing this with the blue-chip talent he’s recruited these past two years. The Tide will only get better.
Runner-up: Houston Nutt - Mississippi
Record wise, Minnesota and Mississippi had two of the largest, if not the two largest improvements in the country. The Gophers went from 0-8 in the Big Ten and 1-11 overall to 3-5 and 7-5. Mississippi’s overall record may not have improved quite as much, but it may be all the
more impressive due to their conference record, quality wins, and hard-fought losses. Like the Gophers, Ole Miss put up a large goose egg in the conference win column a year ago, finishing the season at 0-8 in the SEC and 3-9 overall, with their three wins being: a 23-21 win over Memphis, a 24-0 victory over Louisiana Tech, and a 38-31 win over I-AA Northwestern State. Their only four losses this year came by a combined 19 points to teams with a 32-16 record (.667): Falling to 7-5 Wake Forest 30-28, to 6-6 Vanderbilt by 6, 23-17, falling short to Steve Spurrier’s 7-5 South Carolina Gamecocks 31-24, and finally, being defeated by 12-0 Alabama by the final score of 24-20. Meanwhile, they were the only team (thus far) to defeat the Florida Gators, as the Rebels won in the Swamp 31-30. They also beat bowl eligible Memphis by 17 points, 41-24, and beat up the defending national champion LSU Tigers 31-13. The team made huge progressions from a year ago both in their offensive and defensive numbers, improving: from 84th to 30th in rush offense (131.50 ypg to 183.42), 66th to 58th in pass offense (213.75 ypg to 215.25), 91st to 38th in total offense (345.25 ypg to 398.67), 104th to 31st in scoring offense (20.08 ppg to 30.83), 101st to 5th in rush defense (199.08 ypg to 85.00), 76th to 43rd in pass efficiency defense (130.33 to 118.65), 88th to 16th in total defense (423.42 ypg to 294.83), and finally, from 70th to 15th in scoring defense (28.50 ppg to 17.75). The most astounding number is the improvement in run defense, going from the bottom 20 in all the country to the top 5, allowing 114.08 fewer yards per game. That, to say the least, is quite the incredible statistic.
Player of the Year: Tim Tebow (QB) - Florida
Tim Tebow may not have put up quite as impressive passing numbers as Sam Bradord, Graham Harrell or Colt McCoy. He may not have led his team in rushing as Colt McCoy did, but Tebow did all he could to lead his Florida Gators to a 12-1 season and a well-deserved bid in the BCS National Championship game. He did put up some pretty good numbers along the way too, the most impressive of which would have to be his touchdown to interception ratio. Tebow threw 28 touchdown passes this year to go with only 2 interceptions (14:2 ratio). Overall, he completed 174 or 268 pass attempts (64.9%) for 2,515 yards, 28 touchdowns, 2 picks, and a quarterback rating of 176.74. He also ran the ball 154 times for 564 yards (3.7 p/) and 12 more scores. This was how steady Tebow was in throwing the football. His low rating on the season was 140.29, that coming in a 26-3 win against Miami (Florida). He completed 60.0+% of his passes in 11 of 13 games, threw at least one touchdown pass in all 13 battles, and at least two touchdown tosses in 11 of 13 contests. Tebow’s best game against a I-A team this year was in Athens against the Georgia Bulldogs on November 1st. The junior quarterback led his Gators to a 49-10 (49-3 really) trouncing of the Bulldogs, when Tebow completed 10 of 13 tosses (76.9%) for 154 yards, 2 touchdowns and a rating of 227.20. He also ran the ball 12 times for 39 yards (3.3 p/) and 3 more scores. Statistically, his best overall passing game came on November 22nd against Division I-AA Citadel, when the Heisman Trophy candidate completed 9 of 11 passes (81.8%) for 201 yards (22.3 ypc and 18.3 ypa), 3 touchdowns (1 every 3 completions and 1 every 3.7 attempts) and a rating of 325.3.
Runner-up: Knowshon Moreno (RB) - Georgia
Moreno has been, without a doubt, the most dynamic Georgia tailback since Herschel Walker. The one area they had so mightily struggled with on offense under Mark Richt was at the tailback position, until Moreno came along. This year, he carried the ball a total of 227 times for 1,338 yards (5.9 p/) and 16 touchdowns. He also caught 27 passes from Matt Stafford for 329 yards (12.2 p/) and another score. Moreno’s problem this year was a lack of consistency in the
marquee games, as he struggled in losses to Florida and Alabama, carrying the ball a combined 25 times for 99 yards (3.8 p/) and 1 touchdown. Other than those two games, however, Moreno was pretty solid. He garnered a total of 198 yards (168 rushing) and 3 scores against 8-4 Central Michigan early in the season. He galloped for a total of 92 yards (79 rushing) in Georgia’s close win over South Carolina. He ran all over Arizona State for 149 yards, Vanderbilt for 172 yards, and LSU for 163 yards. Even in the Bulldogs’ 45-42 loss late in the season to in-state rival Georgia Tech, Moreno did his part, as he carried the ball 17 times for 94 yards (5.5 p/) and 1 touchdown.
Newcomer of the Year: A.J. Green (WR) - Georgia
Not many have heard of him, at it seems Moreno receives most the spotlight from the national press when it comes to the Bulldogs. Added to that, Green has to compete with the likes of Tim Tebow in the SEC for national attention, which is difficult to do as well. But, with just 49 receiving yards in their upcoming bowl game, Green will eclipse the 1,000 yard mark for the season, as only a freshman. Thus far, he has caught 55 passes on the year for 951 yards (17.7 p/) and 8 touchdowns. He’s also run the ball 3 times for 55 yards (18.3), so if one were to work the math, Green has actually gone over the 1,000 yard mark in total yards for the year, at 1,006. Green has been fairly steady this year, even in defeats, as his worst game came on September 6th in the Bulldogs’ 56-17 win over Central Michigan, where the young receiver caught 3 passes for 40 yards (13.3 p/). But, he went for 88 yards and a score in Georgia’s loss to Alabama, 91 yards in their defeat at the hands of Florida, and 64 yards and a touchdown in their nail-biting loss to Georgia Tech. His best game of the year came in Tempe, Arizona, in Georgia’s convincing 27-10 win over Arizona State, as Green caught 8 passes for 159 yards (19.9 p/) and a touchdown. He also carried the ball once for five yards (5.0 p/). If Moreno sticks around another year, he and Green will create quite the lethal combination in Athens.
Surprise of the Year: Mississippi
To go from winless in the SEC to 5-3, with wins over Florida and LSU, is quite surprising indeed. Head Coach Houston Nutt is on the right track in Oxford.
Disappointment of the Year: Tennessee/Auburn
Flip a coin on who is the more disappointing of the two. Auburn was pre-ranked higher than Tennessee, but the Vols lost to UCLA and Wyoming this year. UCLA may be a big name school, but are 4-7 heading into their contest with USC (make that 4-8) and Wyoming is a 4-8 school out of the Mountain West Conference, who just fired their head coach. Both schools finished the season 5-7 and will have to watch all the bowl games from the sideline this year, with head coaches Phillip Fulmer and Tommy Tuberville off to look for new jobs.
Independents
Coach of the Year: Ken Niumatalolo - Navy
I don’t need to really go into this, do I? To sum up why I picked Niumatalolo as Coach of the Year amongst the Independents, at 8-4, Navy is the only above .500 team among the four independents. There you have it. Case closed.
Runner-up: Charlie Weiss - Notre Dame
This goes to show you how the quantity of independents has dwindled over the years. There are just four independents currently and one of those, Western Kentucky, will soon be joining the Sun Belt conference, so it’ll be down to Army, Navy, and Notre Dame. The problem is that Army is currently 3-8 heading into their game with Navy and Western Kentucky is 2-9. So, who else is there to choose from, really? One bit of credit I will give Weiss is the fact Notre Dame went a paltry 3-9 a year ago and have improved by three games to 6-6 this season. If there were a fifth team in the conference, however, I can’t imagine Weiss being honored as even the runner-up for coach of the year.
Player of the Year: Collin Mooney (FB) - Army
That’s right, the fullback of a 3-9 team won Player of the Year among the Independents. Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Clausen would win the honor according to most sports writers, but I’m sorry, I can’t reward the Irish quarterback for a year in which he led his team to a 6-6 record and had close to a 1:1 touchdown to interception ratio (20 and 17). So, I’m going with the 247 pound senior fullback for the Black Knights. On the season, Mooney carried the ball 231 times for 1,339 yards (5.8 p/), and 8 touchdowns, to go along with 9 catches for 59 yards (6.6 p/). Against six bowl teams this year (Buffalo, Rice, Rutgers, Louisiana Tech, Air Force, and Navy), Mooney rushed for 100+ yards in three of those meetings. Overall in those six games, he carried the ball a total of 118 times for 694 yards (5.9 p/) and 4 touchdowns. He had his best showing on November 8th in a 38-31 loss to Rice, as Mooney rushed for 207 yards on 26 carries (8.0 p/) and 2 scores.
Runner-up: Golden Tate (WR) - Notre Dame
The sophomore receiver for the Irish caught 52 passes for 903 yards (17.4 p/) and 7 scores, to go along with 5 rush attempts for 37 yards (7.4 avg.) and 1 touchdown. The young wide out was fairly consistent for the Irish this year, as he topped the 100-yard mark in 4 of 12 games and eclipsed the 60-yard mark in 8 of 12. He caught a touchdown pass in 6 of 12 outings and scored a touchdown in 7 of 12. His best game came in a 24-23 loss to Syracuse on November 22nd, when the sophomore caught 7 passes for 146 yards (20.9 p/) and 2 touchdowns. With 97 or more receiving yards in the Hawaii Bowl, Tate will pass the 1,000-yard mark on the season. With 60 or more total yards, he will eclipse that goal for the year.
Newcomer of the Year: Michael Floyd (WR) - Notre Dame
The freshman accumulated the following stats for the Irish this season: 46 receptions for 702 yards (15.3 avg) and 7 touchdowns. The impressive part about these numbers is the fact Floyd didn’t play much in Notre Dame’s first two games and he didn’t play at all, due to injury, in their final three. So, his numbers are largely reflective of his performance in 7 games. He was very consistent in those seven outings also. He racked up the following totals in those games: 86 yards receiving and 1 touchdown against Michigan State, 100 yards against Purdue, 115 yards and one
score versus Stanford, 93 and 1 against 8-4 North Carolina, 107 yards and 1 touchdown against the lowly Washington Huskies, 100 yards and two scores versus Dave Wanstedt’s Pittsburgh Panthers, and 69 yards against Boston College. Floyd combined to go for 670 yards in just those 7 outings, for an average of 95.7 yards receiving.
Surprise of the Year: Navy
The Midshipmen aren’t really a surprise as much as nobody else in the “conference” finished the regular season above the .500 mark. Notre Dame (6-6), Army (3-9), and Western Kentucky (2-10) were a combined 11-25 (.306). Perhaps the “Surprise of the Year” should be how pitiful those three teams were.
Disappointment of the Year: Notre Dame
Unlike in years past when Notre Dame could gloat about having the toughest schedule in the country, they can do no such thing this season. They finished 6-6 this year while facing six bowl eligible teams and finishing 1-5 against such opponents. That lone victory was a 27-21 win against 7-4 Navy. Overall, their six victories have come against schools with a combined record of 21-49 (.300). All twelve opponents have a combined record of 68-72 (.486). In the end, the Irish may have improved upon last year’s dismal 3-9 record, but did so with a very mediocre schedule.
MAC
Coach of the Year: Brady Hoke - Ball State
While Coach Hoke may not have ended the regular season the way he wanted, as he saw his team give the MAC Title game away to Buffalo, the coach and his team should still be commended for their performance this year. Heading into the MAC Championship, the Ball State Cardinals were 12-0, with wins over the following bowl-bound teams: Navy (by 12), Northern Illinois (by 31), Central Michigan (by 7), and Western Michigan (by 23). Even while playing one of the weaker schedules in Division I-A, taking a team to a 12-0 record is a great accomplishment.
Runner-up: Turner Gill - Buffalo
Speaking of great accomplishments, that would be quite the understatement in describing how Head Coach Turner Gill has turned around the Buffalo Bulls. Many unfamiliar with the program may look at their 8-5 record, shrug their shoulders, and say, “Yeah, so what?” Buffalo has been a Division I-A football team for eight years. Before Turner Gill arrived on the scene for the 2006-2007 season, Buffalo had won just 8 games in five years as a I-A squad. Gill has led his Bulls to 15 wins in just three years, including the club’s first ever MAC Championship and first bowl game, as they’ll be facing Connecticut in the International Bowl on January 3rd in Toronto. Before Gill arrive, Buffalo was to the college football scene what the Detroit Lions are to the NFL. In just three short seasons, Gill and his team have exceeded all expectations, as they went from a 2-10 record in his first year to 8-5 and a MAC Championship in his third.
Player of the Year: Nate Davis (QB) - Ball State
The junior quarterback for the 12-1 Ball State Cardinals completed 249 of 372 passes (66.9%) for 3,446 yards on the season, 26 touchdowns and 7 picks for a quarterback rating of 164.04. He also ran the ball 57 times for 277 yards (4.9 p/) and 4 scores. Davis, outside of the aberration that was the MAC Championship, was a steady performer this year for the once 12-0 Cardinals. He eclipsed the 250-yard mark throwing in 8 of 13 games this season, threw at least one touchdown pass in all but one of the Cards’ 13 duals, threw 2+ touchdowns in 7 of 13 games, and completed at least 60.0% of his passes in all but two of the Cardinals’ battles. His best game came on November 5th, in the Cardinals’ 45-14 win over the 6-6 Northern Illinois Huskies. The junior completed 18 of 22 passes in the game (81.8%) for 300 yards, and 4 touchdowns, for a rating of 256.36. He also ran the ball 5 times for 10 additional yards (2.0 p/), and a touchdown.
Runner-up: MiQuale Lewis (RB) - Ball State
It certainly says something about a team and an offense to award both the Player of the Year and runner-up honors to players of the same team in a conference. If junior offensive studs Nate Davis and MiQuale Lewis stick around for their senior seasons, Ball State will be even more dominant next year on the offensive side of the ball than they were this season. On the year, Lewis carried the ball 306 times for 1,701 yards (5.6 p/), and 22 touchdowns. He also caught 34 passes for 311 yards (9.1 p/), to give the junior tailback a total of 2,012 yards from scrimmage this season. He was consistent too. The running back eclipsed the 100-yard mark on the ground in 11 of 13 games, with the only two exceptions being a 75-yard effort against I-AA Northeastern (Lewis averaged 8.6 yards per carry in the game) and 75 rushing yards against Eastern Michigan (an average of 7.5 yards a carry). He rushed for 150+ yards in 5 of 13 contests, scored at least one touchdown in 11 of 13 games, and 2 or more in 7 of 13. Lewis had arguably his best game on November 11th in his Cardinals’ 31-16 win over Miami (Ohio), when he rushed for 165 yards on 26 carries (6.3 p/), and 2 touchdowns. He also caught 2 passes for 51 yards (25.5 p/) to give the junior running back a total of 216 yards on the afternoon.
Newcomer of the Year: Morgan Williams (RB) - Toledo
While Toledo finished a very disappointing 3-9 on the season, freshman running back Morgan Williams was not a reason for that. He saw limited playing time in five of the Rockets’ twelve games and still finished the year with 169 rushes for 1,010 yards (6.0 p/) and 6 touchdowns. In addition to that, he caught 13 passes for 76 yards (5.8 p/). Williams didn’t start seeing solid playing time on a consistent basis until the mid to latter part of the season. In five games where he carried the ball less than 10 times, he totaled 36 rushes for 156 yards (4.3 p/), averaging 7.2 carries and 31.2 yards in those contests. In the seven games where he had 10+ rush attempts, Williams carried the ball 133 times for 854 yards (6.4 p/), which averaged out to 19 carries in those seven games for 122 yards. His worst showing was in the Rockets’ 31-0 shut-out loss to Ball State on October 4th, where Williams averaged just 1.2 yards per carry on 10 rush attempts. His best game came toward the end of the season, on November 21st, against Miami (Ohio), in Toledo’s 42-14 drubbing of the Red Hawks. The freshman tailback ran the ball 28 times for 330 yards (11.8 p/) and 3 touchdowns. Toledo may have been down and out this year, but found themselves a running back that will be giving MAC coaches fits for a long time.
Surprise of the Year: Ball State/Buffalo
I had contemplated giving the award to Ball State, as they started the year an unprecedented 12-0, but Buffalo deserves plenty of props as well. Before Turner Gill arrived on the scene, the Bulls were a combined 5-41 (.109) in their previous four seasons. Under Gill, they’re 15-22 (.405) in three years.
Disappointment of the Year: Toledo
While Toledo has slowly regressed to mediocrity in the MAC, we could always count on two things from the Rockets: 1) competitiveness in the conference and 2) lots of points. Toledo’s only three wins this year came against clubs with a combined 8-28 (.222) record (3-9 Eastern Michigan, 3-9 Michigan, and 2-10 Miami (Ohio)). Add to that the fact that the Rockets scored 17 points or less in 7 of their 12 regular season games, while allowing 31 or more points in an equal number of bouts, and that spells a very disappointing year for the Toledo Rockets.
MWC
Coach of the Year: Kyle Whittingham - Utah
It’s difficult to run a perfect record in any conference, whether that be the Big XII or Mountain West, so for Whittingham and his staff to keep their kids focused for all 12 games of the regular season en route to a perfect 12-0 record and a likely BCS bowl game appearance, is quite an accomplishment. This is a 3.5 game improvement upon last year’s 9-4 record. The Utes were 5-0 against bowl eligibles this year, beating: Air Force (8-4) by 7, Oregon State (8-4) by 3, Colorado State (6-6) by 33, TCU (10-2) by 3, and BYU (10-2) by 24. They currently rank 17th in scoring offense, 22nd in pass efficiency defense, 18th in total defense, and 13th in scoring defense.
Runner-up: Gary Patterson - TCU
TCU may be one of the better 2-loss teams around, as their only two defeats came at the hands of unbeaten Utah (12-0) by a 13-10 score and 11-1 Oklahoma by 25 points. They were solid defensively last year during their 8-5 campaign, but struggled offensively, ranking between 46th and 70th in the major offensive categories. This year, they’ve improved mightily on the offensive end and have even improved on their defensive numbers from a year ago, which is saying something, considering the fact that TCU ranked 11th in run defense, 11th in pass efficiency defense, 15th in total defense, and 10th in scoring defense in the 2007-2008 season. This year, the Horned Frogs are 1st in rush defense (only 48.56 ypg), 4th in pass efficiency defense (96.61, whatever that means), 2nd in total defense (215.08 ypg), and 2nd in scoring defense (10.92 ppg). Add to that, they’re ranked in the top 30 in three offensive categories: 13th in rush offense (215.67 ypg), 29th in total offense (417.08 ypg), and 20th in scoring offense (35.00 ppg). Take away the two ten-point outputs in their losses to Utah and Oklahoma, TCU scored 400 points in their ten victories, for an average of 40 points a contest. Rumor has it that TCU may wind up facing 12-0 Boise State in the Poinsettia Bowl. If Boise doesn’t receive a BCS bowl invite, I hope that rumor comes to life.
Player of the Year: Brian Johnson (QB) - Utah
This senior quarterback was/is the leader in the 12-0 Utah Utes’ offense. He completed 241 of 353 pass attempts (68.3%) for 2,636 yards (10.9 ypc and 7.5 ypa), 24 touchdowns, 9 interceptions and a quarterback rating of 148.33. He was efficient for most the season, his worst game coming in a 40-7 blow-out against Wyoming late in the season, where Johnson completed 10 of 19 passes (52.6%) for 110 yards, 1 touchdown, 1 interception and a rating of 118.63. He saved his best for last, when the then 11-0 Utes took on the 10-1 BYU Cougars in their regular season finales. Johnson went 30 for 36 throwing the football (83.3%) for 303 yards, 4 touchdowns, and a rating of 190.70.
Runner-up: Austin Collie (WR) - BYU
Collie’s name may not be too commonplace amongst casual fans’ football conversations, but is quite the typical name thrown around by Mountain West Conference head coaches and defenses alike. The Cougars’ receiver caught 95 passes during the regular season for 1,419 yards (14.9 p/), and 15 touchdowns. He also ran the ball 5 times for 79 yards (8.2 p/). If there were a model of consistency in receiving numbers this year, Collie would be that model. He garnered 100+ yards in receptions in 10 of 12 games this year. The only two exceptions were of him totaling 74 and 80 yards in receptions. Against UCLA? 110 yards and 2 scores. TCU? 116 yards. Air Force? 130 yards and 2 touchdowns. Utah? 104 yards. His best game of the season came in a 45-42 win over 6-6 Colorado State, where Collie caught 9 passes for 156 yards (17.3 p/) and 3 touchdowns.
Newcomer of the Year: Ryan Lindley (QB) - San Diego State
It’s difficult sometimes to carry anything positive into the off-season coming off a 2-10 year, but freshman quarterback Ryan Lindley may be that rarity for the San Diego State Aztecs. Lindley was 242 for 427 throwing the football this year (56.7%) for 2,653 yards (11.0 ypc and 6.2 ypa), 16 touchdowns, 9 interceptions and a quarterback rating of 117.01. He was very unsteady in the early going, as he struggled against Notre Dame and San Jose State, completing just 39 of 88 passes (44.3%) for 414 yards, 1 touchdown and 1 pick. He picked it up later in the season, though. Against the final three bowl eligible teams Lindley and the Aztecs faced (Colorado State, BYU, and Utah), Lindley was a combined 67-109 (61.5%) for 563 yards (187.7 ypg), 4 touchdowns and 4 interceptions. His best game of the year came on a September 27th win against Idaho, where the freshman quarterback completed 24 of 38 passes (63.2%) for 433 yards (18.0 ypc and 11.4 ypa), 4 touchdowns, 1 interception and a rating of 188.35.
Surprise of the Year: Utah
Any time a team finishes the season undefeated, that will come as a surprise. Utah, along with TCU, BYU, and Air Force, have been one of the steadiest teams in the Mountain West Conference in recent years, but even the most die-hard of Utah fans won’t say with a straight face that they saw this coming.
Disappointment of the Year: New Mexico
New Mexico could have been added to that list of consistent MWC schools, but fell flat on their face this year en route to a 4-8 record. One win was an aberration, as the Lobos beat 6-5 Arizona early in the season 36-28, but their other three wins came against opponents with a combined record of 9-27 (.250): New Mexico State (3-9), Wyoming (4-8), and San Diego State (2-10).
Conference-USA
Coach of the Year: David Bailiff - Rice
Like the before-mentioned Minnesota and Mississippi squads, Rice improved their overall record a great deal this season from last. In the 2007-2008 season, Rice was 3-5 in Conference-USA play and 3-9 overall. Those numbers improved by 4 and 6 wins, as the Rice Owls went 7-1 in C-USA play this year and 9-3 overall. Their only three losses were to: Vanderbilt (6-6), Texas (11-1), and Tulsa (10-2). Bailiff also helped improve the Owls’ offense significantly, as Rice went from 51st in total offense (404.00 ypg) to 10th (472.25) and from 40th in scoring offense to 8th (41.58 ppg). If it weren’t for 10-2 Tulsa and the Golden Hurricane’s big win over Rice, Bailiff and the Owls would be meeting with East Carolina tomorrow for a chance at the Conference-USA title.
Runner-up: Skip Holtz - East Carolina
Holtz and the Pirates started their season as one of the hottest teams in all the country. Their first two games saw them defeat then 17th ranked Virginia Tech and 8th ranked West Virginia. After a tight win against Tulane in their third game, ECU ran into the injury bug and lost their next three games to even their record at 3-3. The term “injury bug” doesn’t really do the team any justice, as the Pirates started 44 different players this year, largely due to injuries. Somehow, even with all the injuries, Holtz led his team to a 6-1 record the rest of the way through, including a 27-24 win over then 10-2 Tulsa in the Conference-USA Championship game. At 9-4, the Pirates will be seeking their 10th win of the season on January 2nd in the AutoZone Liberty Bowl against Kentucky.
Player of the Year: Case Keenum (QB) - Houston
The sophomore quarterback for 7-5 Houston completed 375 out of 556 pass attempts (67.4%) for 4,768 yards (second only to Graham Harrell of Texas Tech), 43 touchdowns and 10 interceptions, for a quarterback rating of 161.41. Keenum also ran the ball 70 times for 237 yards (3.4 p/) and 4 more scores. The main reason I’m giving Keenum the award over Rice quarterback, Chase Clement, is his consistency. Keenum passed the 300-yard mark in every game this season and the 400-yard mark in 5 of 12 contests. He completed at least 60.0% of his pass attempts in 8 of 12 games and completed 70.0% of them in 5 of 12. The most stunning stat of all was his consistency in throwing touchdown passes. The sophomore stud threw at least 2 touchdown passes in all 12 games this year, threw at least 3 touchdown tosses in 9 of 12, and he threw 4+ touchdowns in 6 of 12 battles. His best game came on November 15th, in a 70-30 victory over Conference-USA runner-up Tulsa, when Keenum completed 24 of 37 passes (64.9%) for 402 yards and 6 touchdowns, for a quarterback rating of 209.64. He also ran the ball 4 times for 43 yards (10.8 p/), and a touchdown.
Runner-up: Chase Clement (QB) - Rice
The senior quarterback for Rice had an explosive season himself, just not quite as steady as Case Keenum of Houston. On the year, Clement completed 296 of 446 pass attempts (66.4%) for 3,812 yards, 41 touchdowns and 7 picks, for a rating of 165.36. He also ran the ball 142 times for 621 yards (4.4 p/) and 11 scores. Clement passed for more than 250 yards in 11 of 12 games on the season, threw at least one touchdown pass in all 12 contests, and threw 2+ touchdown passes in 9 of 12 games. His best game came in a 77-20 victory by the Owls over the North Texas Mean Green on September 27th, when Clement completed 22 of 28 pass attempts (78.6%) for 298 yards and 5 touchdown passes, for a quarterback rating of 226.90. He also ran the ball 10 times for 69 yards (6.9 p/) and two more scores.
Newcomer of the Year: Bryce Beall (RB) - Houston
With sophomore quarterback Case Keenum and this freshman do-everything back, Houston will have an explosive offense for years to come. On the year, Beall ran the ball 176 times for 1,112 yards (6.3 p/) and 12 touchdowns. The young back also caught 30 passes for 404 yards and 4 more touchdowns. To show how impressive and explosive this back is, check out the following numbers. Beall didn’t play much in Houston’s first three games of the season, as he ran the ball just 19 times for 124 yards (average of 6.3 for 41.3 yards) and caught only 2 passes for 23 passes (average of 0.7 for 7.7 yards). In the Cougars’ final nine regular season games, Beall carried the ball 157 times for 988 yards (average of 17.4 carries for 109.8 yards) and caught 28 passes for 481 yards (average of 3.1 for 53.4 yards). In Houston’s final nine games, Beall averaged 163.2 yards from scrimmage per game, including five 100-yard games rushing. Beall’s best game came on November 11th in his club’s 42-37 win over UTEP, as he ran the ball 19 times for 167 yards (8.8 p/) and a touchdown. The freshman also caught 8 passes for 96 yards (12.0 p/) and another score, for a total of 263 yards from the line of scrimmage.
Surprise of the Year: Rice
Improving by six games in any conference is remarkable. Rice reversed their record from 3-9 to 9-3 this year.
Disappointment of the Year: Central Florida
It wasn’t too long ago, last year as a matter of fact, when George O’Leary’s Central Florida Golden Knights were Conference-USA Champions. But, that, as it would seem, was quite some time ago, as this year, UCF finished the season 4-8, with their only wins coming against: SMU (1-11), Marshall (4-8), Memphis (6-6), and I-AA South Carolina State. Rumor has it that O’Leary is attempting to persuade Detroit Lions’ starting tailback, Kevin Smith, to come back to school for another year. The rookie tailback led the country in rushing last year as just a junior for UCF, where he galloped for 2,567 yards and 29 touchdowns, coming just 61 yards shy of breaking Barry Sanders’ all-time record for rushing yards in a single season.
WAC
Coach of the Year: Chris Petersen - Boise State
Petersen led the Boise State Broncos to another 12-0 season and even though they won’t be in a BCS bowl game, they will have a tough 13th game, as they’ll have to face-off against 10-2 TCU in the Poinsettia Bowl. The Broncos were impressive statistically both offensively and defensively, as they finished: 12th in pass offense (294.08 ypg), 13th in total offense (456.75 ypg), 12th in scoring offense (39.42 ppg), 15th in rush defense (104.92 ypg), 3rd in pass efficiency defense (94.28), 16th in total defense (294.50 ypg), and 3rd in scoring defense (12.25 ppg). Add to that the fact that Boise State went 8-0 against bowl eligible teams this year (Bowling Green, Oregon, Louisiana Tech, Southern Mississippi, Hawaii, San Jose State, Nevada, and Fresno State) and 6-0 against bowl-bound squads (Oregon, Louisiana Tech, Southern Mississippi, Hawaii, Nevada, and Fresno State). These eight teams were a combined 55-41 (.561) and were outscored by the Broncos 281 - 116 (average of 35.1 - 14.5). Only two teams came within seven points of BSU this year, the 9-3 Oregon Ducks, who lost 37-32 to the Broncos at Autzen Stadium, and Nevada fell 41-34 to Boise State. With a win against the Horned Frogs on December 23rd, Boise State will have completed their second unbeaten season in the past three years.
Runner-up: Derek Dooley - Louisiana Tech
Derek Dooley took the 5-7 Louisiana Tech Bulldogs from the 2007-2008 season and will be taking them bowling on December 28th at the Independence Bowl in Shreveport, Louisiana against Northern Illinois. Tech finished their regular season at 7-5, including two wins against bowl eligible competition, as they beat 7-5 Fresno State 38-35 and 6-6 San Jose State by the final score of 21-0. They also came within five points of beating Nevada, falling to the Wolfpack 35-31. The improvements were centered on the ground game, both offensively and defensively, as the Bulldogs finished their regular season ranked 26th in rush offense (195.00 ypg) and 11th in rush defense (99.75 ypg).
Player of the Year: Colin Kaepernick (QB) - Nevada
Like the dual-threat quarterback? Then this is your man. The sophomore quarterback completed 184 of 336 passes (54.8%) this year for 2,479 yards, 19 touchdowns, 5 picks and a 132.42 quarterback rating. He also rushed the ball 150 times for 1,115 yards (7.4 p/) and 16 more touchdowns. Kaepernick was either hurting defenses with his legs, his arm, or sometimes both. His worst all-around game came in a 41-34 loss to unbeaten Boise State, where the quarterback completed just 19 of 50 pass attempts (38.0%) for 241 yards, a touchdown and a rating of 85.09. He also gained 70 yards on 16 rushes (4.4 p/). His best numbers came in a 49-27 win on the road against 5-7 UNLV, where the sophomore stud completed 11 of 16 passes (68.8%) for 176 yards, a couple of touchdowns and a 202.40 rating. He also ran the ball 18 times for 240 yards (13.3 p/) and 3 more touchdowns. WAC coaches and defensive coordinators are going to be celebrating in another couple years, when Kaepernick moves on to the next level.
Runner-up: Kellen Moore (QB) - Boise State
The freshman quarterback, who led BSU to a 12-0 regular season, was consistent from game 1 through game 12. He completed 259 of 370 passes (70.0%) for 3,264 yards, 25 touchdowns, 9 interceptions and a quarterback rating of 161.54. Moore’s numbers are somewhat symbolic of the team’s overall performance, as he was steady. Against bowl eligible opponents, his worst quarterback rating was that of 127.74 against San Jose State, where his Broncos beat the Spartans by the final score of 33-16. He had an impressive showing in Autzen Stadium in BSU’s 37-32 win over the Oregon Ducks. Moore competed 25 of 37 pass attempts (67.6%) for 386 yards, 3 touchdowns, an interception and a rating of 176.55. He also had ratings of 180 or above against 7-5 conference foes Fresno State and Louisiana Tech (180.40 and 185.36).
Newcomer of the Year: Kellen Moore (QB) - Boise State
Surprise of the Year: Louisiana Tech
Head Coach Derek Dooley improved his club from 5-7 to a bowl eligible 7-5, with major improvements being displayed in the run game, both offensively and defensively.
Disappointment of the Year: Fresno State
The year got off to a fairly good start for Pat Hill’s Bulldogs, as they beat Rutgers of the Big East by 17, lost a 3-point heart-breaker to Wisconsin of the Big Ten, before defeating both Toledo and UCLA to start the season 3-1. But, Fresno went 4-4 the rest of the way through, as they went 1-4 the rest of the season against bowl eligibles. Their lone win in that time frame came against 6-6 San Jose State.
Sun Belt
Coach of the Year: Larry Blakeney - Troy
In the 2008-2009 season, the Troy Trojans were the only Sun Belt Conference team to finish the season at above the .500 mark, at 8-4. The record is a bit misleading, as three of their losses came against major conference opponents: Ohio State (10-2), Oklahoma State (9-3), and defending National Champion LSU (7-5). These three teams combined for a 26-10 (.722) record. Their only other loss was a one-point fluke defeat at the hands of Louisiana-Monroe. In their eight victories, three against bowl eligible competition, Troy outscored their opponents 304 to 93 (average of 38.0 to 11.6). Troy was also solid statistically in all the major categories: 36th in rush offense (175.50 ypg), 32nd in pass offense (245.92 ypg), 26th in total offense (421.42 ypg), 23rd in scoring offense (33.25 ppg), 54th in rush defense (139.17 ypg), 17th in pass efficiency defense (104.03), 30th in total defense (319.58 ypg), and 31st in scoring defense (20.58 ppg). Blakeney will be taking his Trojans to New Orleans, Louisiana for a December 21st date with Southern Mississippi, where Troy will attempt to win their 9th game of the season.
Runner-up: Steve Roberts - Arkansas State
Outside of Troy, there really wasn’t much to choose from, as after Troy, Florida Atlantic, Louisiana-Lafayette, and Arkansas State all finished the season 6-6. While the Indians won’t be bowling this year, they are bowl eligible, which is a step into the right direction, and came close in several other contests. In their losses to the bowl eligible schools Southern Mississippi, Memphis, and Louisiana-Lafayette, along with the 5-7 Florida International Golden Panthers, Arkansas State lost by a combined 25 points (6.3 point average). ASU was also able to defeat Howard Schnellenberger’s 6-6 Florida Atlantic squad, 28-14. Building off the 21st ranked rush offense (203.33 ypg), 36th ranked total offense (398.83 ypg), 28th ranked rush defense (125.17 ypg), 36th ranked pass efficiency defense (115.02), 47th ranked total defense (336.50 ypg), and 52nd ranked scoring defense (23.75 ppg), Arkansas State have a lot to build off of going into next season.
Player of the Year: Michael Desormeaux (QB) - Louisiana-Lafayette
The dual-threat senior quarterback for the Rajun’ Cajuns will be sorely missed in Lafayette, Louisiana. On the year, the senior completed 155 of 247 passes (62.8%) for 1,876 yards, 13 touchdowns and 11 picks, for a rating of 135.00. He also carried the ball 128 times for 1,035 yards (8.1 p/) and five more scores. Desormeaux threw for at least one touchdown pass in 7 of 11 games, completed 60.0%+ of his passes in 7 of 11 contests, threw for 200 or more yards in 5 of 11 battles, and ran for 100 or more yards in 5 games, as well. His two best games of the season came in wins against Kent State and North Texas. On September 20th in Lafayette’s 44-27 win over the Kent State Golden Flashes, Desormeaux completed 15 of 22 pass attempts (68.2%) for 253 yards, a touchdown, and a quarterback rating of 179.78. He also ran the ball 17 times for 150 yards (8.8 p/) and another score. On October 11th, in Louisiana-Lafayette’s 59-30 win over the North Texas Mean Green, the senior quarterback completed 14 of 20 passes (70.0%) for 217 yards, 3 touchdowns and 1 interception, for a rating of 200.64. He also ran the ball 15 times for 123 yards (8.2 p/) and a touchdown.
Runner-up: Core Leonard (QB) - Arkansas State
On the year, Leonard completed 166 of 306 pass attempts (54.2%) for 2,347 yards, 16 touchdowns and 8 interceptions, for a rating of 130.70. He also ran the ball 157 times for 516 yards (3.3 p/) and four scores. Leonard eclipsed the 200-yard mark passing in 6 of 12 games and threw at least one touchdown pass in 8 of 12. His best showing was on November 22nd against bowl-bound Florida Atlantic, as Leonard led his club past the Burrowing Owls 38-14. He completed 19 of 27 passes (70.4%) for 282 yards, 3 touchdowns and 1 pick, for a rating of 186.74. The young quarterback also ran the ball 14 times for 33 additional yards (2.4 p/).
Newcomer of the Year: T.Y. Hilton (WR) - Florida International
Want to know the definition of explosive in the Sun Belt Conference? Watch freshman receiver T.Y. Hilton. On the season, the freshman phenom caught 41 passes for 1,013 yards (24.7 p/) and 7 touchdowns. He also ran the ball 14 times for 43 yards (3.1 p/) and two more scores. Hilton had 60+ receiving yards in 8 of 11 games played in his freshman year and caught at least one touchdown pass in 5 of 11. His best game had to of been his November 8th performance against Arkansas State, in the Golden Panthers’ 22-21 upset win over the Indians. In the game, Hilton caught 6 passes for 199 yards (33.2 p/).
Surprise of the Year: Florida International
Going into the final game of the regular season a year ago, Florida International had lost 23 consecutive games. Including the 38-19 victory over North Texas in the 2007 regular season finale, FIU is 6-7 since that time, following their 5-7 season this year. The Golden Panthers were 5-4 this year if one were to exclude their three opening contests against major conference bowl-bound opponents. They lost to: 7-5 Kansas, 8-4 Iowa, and 7-5 South Florida to start their season, followed by a 5-4 record the rest of the way through.
Disappointment of the Year: North Texas
Remember when North Texas used to be a lock from the Sun Belt Conference in the New Orleans Bowl? They were known as the Running Back University of the mid-major schools. That is no longer the case, following a 1-11 season, where the Mean Green were anything but nasty, particularly on defense. North Texas allowed at least 33 points in every single game this year, 40 or more in 10 of 12, and 50 or more in 4 of 12. They ranked 106th in the country in rush defense (207.08 ypg), 118th in pass efficiency defense (164.87), 119th (dead last, excluding Western Kentucky) in total defense (482.58 ypg), and 119th in scoring defense (47.58 ppg). Add to that the fact that the school once known for their powerful ground game ranked 84th in all the nation in rush offense (127.33 ypg) and 102nd in scoring offense (20.00 ppg).
National
Coach of the Year: Nick Saban - Alabama (12-1)
Runner-up: Kyle Whittingham - Utah (12-0)
Player of the Year: Colt McCoy (QB - Texas)
Runner-up: Sam Bradford (QB - Oklahoma)
Newcomer of the Year: Jacquizz Rodgers (RB - Oregon State)
Runner-up: Bryce Beall (RB - Houston)
Surprise of the Year: Buffalo (8-5 and MAC Champions)
Runner-up: Mississippi (8-4)
Disappointment of the Year: Auburn (5-7)
Runner-up: Missouri (9-4)
posted by Craig @ 9:40 PM
0 comments
