Here are some team ATS stats to chew on

[GoSooners]

If you're bored by the endless offseason posts of the old argument of which conference has the biggest penis, here are a few stats for this past season that you might be interested in. I've been accumulating the team ATS stats for the past 3 years since college football went to the 12 game schedule. Out of the 120 division 1 teams we bet on every season, you might be surprised at how small the percentage is of the teams who you would make a nice profit on if you followed them blindly. Of course I know that most of us don't follow teams blindly. But I've always been the kind of person who likes to pick out about 20 teams that I feel have a good chance at an above average ATS season. The pattern or traits that I'm going to mention help me in picking these teams. But they aren't set in stone. If there was a rock solid pattern to any of this we would all be rich. All I'm doing is going by the dumbed down basics to look for in a winning program. Here's the year by year stats that I've accumulated. I'm starting with the teams with 8 ATS wins or better. Out of the 120 division 1 teams:

2008

Number of teams with 8 ATS wins: 11
Teams with 9 ATS wins: 8
Teams with 10 ATS wins: 2

2007

Teams with 8 ATS wins: 5
Teams with 9 ATS wins: 3
Teams with 10 ATS wins: 1

2006

Teams with 8 ATS wins: 13
Teams with 9 ATS wins: 4
Teams with 10 ATS wins: 2


Here are a few traits of these winning teams. In the past returning QB's have played a big part in a teams ATS success. Especially when teams go on the road and try to cover a spread.. To a smaller degree I like to go by returning starters. There is definitely nothing scientific about this. I just like to see a team who is bringing back most of it's returning starters. And the number i usually start to feel comfortable with is at least 13 starters. I also like to see a team coming off at least a .500 season. Especially if they have a good second year coach. And speaking of coaches, I also like to include teams who have first or second year coaches. Especially ones that look like they are about to jumpstart an otherwise dormant program such as what we saw out of Georgia Tech or NCST last year. Here's a breakdown of these winning traits for the last three years:

2008 (Out of the 21 teams with 8 ATS wins or better)

Returning QB's: 15
At least 13 returning starters: 13
Coming off a .500 or better season: 13
First or second year coaches: 4

I found it interesting that if an 8 win or better team didn't have a returning QB they all had a new HC to jumpstart the program. There were only a couple exceptions to the rule. Utah State didn't fit into any of the traits above except returning starters. And they ended up going just 3-9 on the season. But they ended up 8-4 ATS. I don't even try to look for teams like this. They are very few and far between.


2007 (Out of 9 teams who went 8 wins or better ATS)

Returning QB's: 8
At least 13 starters back: 7
Coming off a .500 or better season: 7
First or second year coaches: 2

2007 was one of the strangest years that I've ever seen in college football. Only 9 teams with 8 wins or better ATS is remarkable. The wealth was spread very even that year. Which made it very hard to make a profit. But as you can see the teams who did go 8 wins or better fit the traits above very well. Cincinnati was a team i made some good money on that year. And they fit every trait above including having first year coach Kelly.

2006 (Out of the 19 teams who went 8 wins or better ATS)

Returning QB's: 13
At least 13 returning starters: 11
Teams coming off a .500 or better season: 10
Teams with first or second year coaches: 7

A very high number of first year coaches were successful that year. If anybody has a list of the new coaches for 2009 (1st or 2nd year) feel free to list them here. I'll be adding a few more tidbits to this thread later.

 

[Conan]

I think 2007 was a very strange year.

Wasn't that the year that literally every top 5 team kept losing at about a 2 per week clip? Being in the top 2 spots was like a game of musical chairs. Appy St. beat Michigan that year too. Michigan later came back and beat Florida in Florida. #2 ranked Cal went bust 1/2 way through the season. So did #2 Oregon when they lost Dixon later that year. #1 LSU blew it vs Arkansas, #1 USC lost to Stanford. #1 Ohio St. blew it vs Illinios. Everyone blew it. South Florida made it up to #2 at one point. Missouri lost twice to OK but finished with a better record @#4 to OK @#8 (3 losses.) The 2 winningest teams in CFB were Hawaii and Kansas. A 2-loss team won the NC. 10 teams in the top 25 lost 4 games. I'm sure that wasn't the half of it.

I hope I never have to see anything that chaotic ever again.
Statistically I would ignore it completely... also for the sake of sanity.

 

[CoachCB]

I'll be looking at some Big 12 teams who lost their 2008 QB, especially early. Texas Tech, Mizzou, K-State, who else? These teams may not be clicking the way they have been offensively the last few seasons and may be over-rated early in the season. What say you?

 

[russ1945]

GoSooners

Welcome back. Well you know three teams that fit your bill right off the bat - O.U., Texas, and Florida. O.U. and Florida had big ATS years in 2008. A couple of other teams that fit are Notre Dame, Miami Fl, Florida St, Kansas, Oklahoma St, Iowa, North Carolina, Virginia Tech. There are a few more.
I have long been a believer in returning QB's especially early on and on the road like you mentioned.
The coaching changes are not as easy to spot going into 2009 but Bill Snyder returning to Kansas St might bear some watching.
Interesting points and I am a firm believer in sticking with a system that works for you. Nice to have you back.

 

[GoSooners]

I'll be looking at some Big 12 teams who lost their 2008 QB, especially early. Texas Tech, Mizzou, K-State, who else? These teams may not be clicking the way they have been offensively the last few seasons and may be over-rated early in the season. What say you?

Coach...K-State is a tough call since they were already a bad team. But at this point I'm not sure what Snyder can do with this team to improve it. Something tells me they will be basically the same kind of team they were last season. Maybe a little better defense. But they'll have the same problem on offense that they had last season. No playmakers. As for Mizzou, I expect a slight dropoff. But it won't be that apparent when compared to the other teams in the Big 12 North. Daniel will be missed. They do supposedly have a hotshot QB in camp that will probably end up being their signal caller. But he has no experience. Mizzou will probably be better on defense. But anything would be an improvement over last season. Texas Tech will miss Harrell early on . And especially in road games, where Tech was surprisenly good last season. Except for at OU. But like Leach always does, he'll have his QB in sync by the end of the season. Which always bother me because OU plays Tech late in the season in Lubbock. A place that has been tough on OU the last few times they've gone down there. There will be a dropoff with Tech. But it won't be THAT much. Leach has built a pretty good program down there considering what he has had to work with.

 

[GoSooners]

Welcome back. Well you know three teams that fit your bill right off the bat - O.U., Texas, and Florida. O.U. and Florida had big ATS years in 2008. A couple of other teams that fit are Notre Dame, Miami Fl, Florida St, Kansas, Oklahoma St, Iowa, North Carolina, Virginia Tech. There are a few more.
I have long been a believer in returning QB's especially early on and on the road like you mentioned.
The coaching changes are not as easy to spot going into 2009 but Bill Snyder returning to Kansas St might bear some watching.
Interesting points and I am a firm believer in sticking with a system that works for you. Nice to have you back.

Russ...I'll be looking at the teams you mentioned. Florida has been on a pretty good ATS run the last two years going 8-3 and 10-1 ATS. But it's not easy to do it 3 years in a row. And it really doesn't have anything to do with straight up wins. A team who is 18-4 ATS may get a little too much respect with the lines next season. Even if they win the NC it doesn't always mean they'll be a good ATS bet. When LSU won the NC in 2007 they ended up only 3-9 ATS. I much prefer a team who is flying a little more under the radar. Although I do think Texas could have another big ATS year. Especially after getting snubbed by the BCS/Big 12 last season. Mack Daddy probably won't hesitate to make his team press a little more on offense and make sure they look very good in every game. Considering their easy schedule, they'll need to look good to move up or stay up in the BCS polls. After going 6-6 ATS last season after coming off a 10 win ATS season in 2007, I expect Kansas to be back in at least the 7 or 8 ATS win column. Maybe more with that offense. They'll should especially be good at home, where Mangino always like to impress.

 

[GoSooners]

I think 2007 was a very strange year.

Wasn't that the year that literally every top 5 team kept losing at about a 2 per week clip? Being in the top 2 spots was like a game of musical chairs. Appy St. beat Michigan that year too. Michigan later came back and beat Florida in Florida. #2 ranked Cal went bust 1/2 way through the season. So did #2 Oregon when they lost Dixon later that year. #1 LSU blew it vs Arkansas, #1 USC lost to Stanford. #1 Ohio St. blew it vs Illinios. Everyone blew it. South Florida made it up to #2 at one point. Missouri lost twice to OK but finished with a better record @#4 to OK @#8 (3 losses.) The 2 winningest teams in CFB were Hawaii and Kansas. A 2-loss team won the NC. 10 teams in the top 25 lost 4 games. I'm sure that wasn't the half of it.

I hope I never have to see anything that chaotic ever again.
Statistically I would ignore it completely... also for the sake of sanity.

Yeah, it would be a nightmare to see that kind of season again. Besides the only 9 teams that reached the 8 win or better mark, 55 teams were either 6 or 7 game winners. That's basically half the division one teams who were .500 ATS teams. Most of the good cappers I know got kicked in the teeth that year. There wasn't any pattern to anything. No teams or cappers could get on a roll and become consistent winners throughout the season. Even Dr. Bob had his worst year by far. And he is a pretty consistent numbers man. I still haven't pinpointed exactly why it happened. The NFL also had a weird betting season by it's standards in 2007. So maybe it was in the stars. I don't know about the NFL, but it seems like college football had an inordinate number of new coaches that season. That might have had al little to do with it. It was probably a rare combination of factors. But I don't see it happeneing again for awhile.

 

[russ1945]

GoSooners

I have been mulling over the possibility that OU may not "overexpose" Bradford this year.
1. He could have been taking home Staffords pay check so they owe it to him to keep him healthy and this may mean resting him more often than last year.
2. They have to bring someone along to take his place next year, etc. and they should/could be in a position to elect to let another QB play instead of running up scores to gain attention in the polls like they did LY. This years stength of schedule could get them there alone, if they are successful.
3. This relates to the first reason - an inexperienced line. This may or may not be a factor but this years OL has to prove what they can and can't do.
4. Running game - OU is 4 deep at running back and Bradford may not have to throw as much this year to get it done.
5. National Championship - When you get as close as they did last year it leaves a taste in your mouth. Other than completing his degree, the only reason Bradford would have come back is to pursue the NC. I don't think people outside of Oklahoma realize what an unassuming, humble guy Bradford is and that he would have traded that Heisman for the NC any day. I think the coaches as well as Bradford himself know that they can only get there with him being healthy.
I guess I am also saying that OU may not "overtly" run up any scores next season. I see them being an efficient offensive machine who could/should get more help from a healthy and well stocked defense this year. Their main concern will be "just win baby", although I am sure Stoops/Wilson will let the throttle out when it counts. The worst case scenario is for Bradford to be injured in a situation where he may not have been needed to have been playing at the time. In a sense, they owe him and it is their "responsibility" to prevent a needless injury that could prohibit or inhibit him from moving on and succeeeding at the next level.

 

[GoSooners]

I have been mulling over the possibility that OU may not "overexpose" Bradford this year.
1. He could have been taking home Staffords pay check so they owe it to him to keep him healthy and this may mean resting him more often than last year.
2. They have to bring someone along to take his place next year, etc. and they should/could be in a position to elect to let another QB play instead of running up scores to gain attention in the polls like they did LY. This years stength of schedule could get them there alone, if they are successful.
3. This relates to the first reason - an inexperienced line. This may or may not be a factor but this years OL has to prove what they can and can't do.
4. Running game - OU is 4 deep at running back and Bradford may not have to throw as much this year to get it done.
5. National Championship - When you get as close as they did last year it leaves a taste in your mouth. Other than completing his degree, the only reason Bradford would have come back is to pursue the NC. I don't think people outside of Oklahoma realize what an unassuming, humble guy Bradford is and that he would have traded that Heisman for the NC any day. I think the coaches as well as Bradford himself know that they can only get there with him being healthy.
I guess I am also saying that OU may not "overtly" run up any scores next season. I see them being an efficient offensive machine who could/should get more help from a healthy and well stocked defense this year. Their main concern will be "just win baby", although I am sure Stoops/Wilson will let the throttle out when it counts. The worst case scenario is for Bradford to be injured in a situation where he may not have been needed to have been playing at the time. In a sense, they owe him and it is their "responsibility" to prevent a needless injury that could prohibit or inhibit him from moving on and succeeeding at the next level.

Russ...I admit that OU's offensive line was a "little" overrated last season. But overrated can be an overused word. They were still a very good O-Line that outside of maybe USC, Florida and Texas, any team in the country would have happily traded in their lines for ours in a heartbeat. You just don't get to a level overnight like what we had last season. We had players like center Jon Cooper, who was one of the best O-Line playcallers that the Sooners have had in many years. And Duke Robinson was a devastating run blocker despite the less than great performances he turned in against Florida and in the Senior Bowl game. Remember, against Florida, the Sooners had them backed up and on their heels several times in that game. But mentally our O-Line didn't stay with it and keep the pressure on them. The Gators mental toughness from all of their tough SEC conference games paid off in the second half. That's what won them the game. They certainly weren't any more physical than OU. Especially against our O-Line.

Obviously the NFL isn't liking alot of what they see from the OU lineman enough to make them high draft picks. But OU's line was better than the sum of it's parts. Individually, none of these players were spectaular first round draft choices. But with what OU was trying to do with the no huddle offense, they fit the system very well. There's really no substitute for experience. These guys played long enough together to where they had the chemistry to be able to pull off the line together, block together and spot double teams from the defenses. It's really hard to teach this. You really have to learn it in gametime situations. Coopers offensive line calling will especially be missed. I'm surprised he didn't go a little higher in the draft. He was a good center with smarts, leadership and talent. His size might have been a problem with NFL scouts. I'm not sure.

As for the 2009 version of the O-Line I tell all of my OU friends the same thing. This group may be more talented than last years version. And they might be the most athletic group that Stoops has ever had. But the two big problems I have with the line this year is experience, and the fact that outside of the top 5 starters, OU is seriously hurting in the experience department. So despite being 10 deep, I would consider OU "thin" on the O-Line. It seems like everytime OU has had a deep experienced O-Line like what we had last season, we get through the season without any injuries. But the minute they say we have a great starting 5 but we're thin on the line, inevitably the injuries start creeping in. I hope it doesn't happen. But I would lay good money down right now that one or more of these starters will get hurt in camp before the season even starts. And this kills whatever team chemistry we might have had on the line. You see, somebody from this years starting 5 could have easily come in and replaced a Duke Robinson or Loadholt when they got dinged up or winded. But we really won't have that luxury this year. The talent levels takes a serious blow with every repalcement on the O-Line. And no BCS conference team can get by on 5 lineman alone throughout the entire season. So this is what concerns me. Along with those tough early non-conference games.

 

[russ1945]

I agree that the OL is a question mark and that if injuries occur that could have a negative impact on the offensive production. I also agree that I may be a little tougher than most about how good LY's OL was when the going got tough but that has mainly to do with rushing the ball. As pass blockers they excelled individually and as a group, the proof is in the pudding.
As far as the 2009 version goes they do have a few things going that I already like. If you go on the OU Athletic Site and watch interviews of any of the OL almost every word out of their mouths is "we". They have a mentality that they are a group and you will hear them mention the word "group" a lot. My sources say they know what is needed of them and I also hear that they are among the hardest workers in the weight room. I think (hope) that the specific weight training they are getting in the weight room will increase their strenth, flexibility, and help prevent injuries. They are all very complimentary of each other. They seem to know that they are the anonymous part of the puzzle but they seem to find their identity as a group rather than themselves individually. I think that could be called the Bradford effect.
That is the Stoops school of though for OL in my book. The coaching staff has issued a challenge to them and while we will not read about or hear about it the OL knows what is expected of them and I am sure they think about it every day. Their hunger as a group could just be an example for the more proven players and I am sure verbal recognition from the coaches will be sparse until next season begins. They will be pushed harder than everyone else and from their interviews I get the impression that they are aware of their expectations and have accepted the challenge. We will see.

 

[YourAllAmerican]

GS, would you by chance have available the number of teams in those seasons that fit the criteria -- a returning QB, a baker's dozen or more returning starters, coming off a .500 or better season and a first- or second-year head coach -- that fared poorly ATS? I'm curious whether having a new coach seems to be a factor that helps or one that hinders a team.

 

[GoSooners]

GS, would you by chance have available the number of teams in those seasons that fit the criteria -- a returning QB, a baker's dozen or more returning starters, coming off a .500 or better season and a first- or second-year head coach -- that fared poorly ATS? I'm curious whether having a new coach seems to be a factor that helps or one that hinders a team.

AA...I never looked at that aspect of it. But I might go back today and just look at the 2008 season and see who were the disappointments under this system. Like I said, this is only the basic criteria that I look for. There are certainly other aspects that contribute to having a better or worse season than expected like say new assistant coaches coming in to add a spark to a program. For example Muschamp coming to Texas. Or OC Chip Kelly and Sonny Dykes giving Oregon and Zona a boost in their second years. But including assistant coaches in all of this is pretty time consuming considering the turnover each year. But when I've looked at everything else I will start taking a look at these smaller criteria. You also have to consider that even if a team met all of these traits I listed, if they had an extra tough football schedule or incurred injuries during the season you can sometimes throw all of that out the window. So these are also things I look at. Kansas was a good example of a team getting ready to put in a great ATS performance in 2007. They had a rough season the year before with injuries and a tough schedule. But still manged a 6-6 season and 6-5 ATS. They also added DC Bill Young. One of the best DC's in the country. And they had a change of QB and went to a new spread no-huddle system. So I also tend to look for little changes like this. This year maybe a little tough because it seems like everybody is going to the no-huddle after seeing OU's and other teams success last season. But at any rate, I'll look at some of the teams that showed promise from '08 but maybe didn't perform like they should have, and see if I can spot a possible breakout ATS season....Are you still going to be doing your spreadsheet this season? I believe i still have it on my computer.. I took a peek at it at times last year to see if your numbers jibed with mine.

 

[YourAllAmerican]

I'm going to have the spreadsheet working again this year, with some automation to try and help keep it more accurate. It's been a pain to update the last couple of seasons, but I've learned a lot about back-end Web programming over the last couple of years and I'm putting some of that into practice.

One thing I want to add this year is the stripping of stats from non-D-I games from all reports. I think that gives a more accurate total. I've also been looking at methods of weighting stats vs weak D-I conferences and/or schools.

In fact I guess one of the first things to start loading into a database will be returning starter information. I imagine I'll start work on that before too much longer.

 

[GoSooners]

I'm going to have the spreadsheet working again this year, with some automation to try and help keep it more accurate. It's been a pain to update the last couple of seasons, but I've learned a lot about back-end Web programming over the last couple of years and I'm putting some of that into practice.

One thing I want to add this year is the stripping of stats from non-D-I games from all reports. I think that gives a more accurate total. I've also been looking at methods of weighting stats vs weak D-I conferences and/or schools.

In fact I guess one of the first things to start loading into a database will be returning starter information. I imagine I'll start work on that before too much longer.

AA...Here are a list of teams who qualified under the first 3 criteria that I mentioned here but didn't get to 8 wins. I didn't include the new coaches on this list. But I will have a seperate list of what the first and second year coaches did against the spread. Here are the teams and their final ATS records:

Georgia (3-8-1) They went 9-3 on the year. But as you know they were a little overrated at the beginning of the year so they didn't get many favorable lines. Plus they had some OL injuries that derailed them. Because they were so hyped I wouldn't have picked this team as one of my 8 ATS win busters.

Miss. State (4-8) A team with a bad coach on his way out the door. I would have never had a Croom coached team on my list.

Wisky (5-6) Again I have issues with this coach. I believe the farther out that Bielma and this team get away from the coaching of Alvarez the worse they are going to get. I could be wrong, but the coaching decisions they made in their bowl game plus the erratic way they played during the season makes me think they are a program going downhill a little.

Illinois (4-8) Zook is a very unimpressive coach. There is no way this team would have been on my list despite what they did the year before and with Juice Williams back.

Michigan State (6-5-1) This was one of my 20 watch teams. This team went 9-3 on the year and lost several very close games to the spread. So with a few breaks they could have reached the 8 win mark. I was wrong on my pick. But I think they were a solid choice. By the way they fit under all 4 of my criteria including a second year coach..

Northwestern (6-5) Another one of my 20 picks..Pretty much the same as MSU. They had some close spread losses or else they could have reached the 8 win mark. And they went 9-3 on the year. So I think they would have been a solid choice.

Purdue (5-7) With Joe Tiller departing I really didn't need to think about this one too long. They were a team on the downtick.

Indiana (3-9) Not even close to last season. But 2007 was a dream season for this team by their standards where everything went right. Expecting it to happen two years in a row was asking a lot for a program like this.

Texas Tech (6-6) One of my 20 picks..They went 11-1 so if you had told me that was going to happen at the beginning of the season I would have said 8 ATS wins no problem. But 5 of the 6 spreads that Tech lost were spreads of 21 point or more favorites. So it would have been tough for this team to reach the 8 mark with those large of numbers. That big early season road win against Kansas made this team less attrative with their future line. They lost their value with that win. But these kinds of things are hard to predict at the beginning of the season.

Mizzou (5-7) This was also one of my 20 watch teams. They went 9-3 SU for the season. And in most of their games my leans were for Mizzou to cover. But with their high top 5 rating at the beginning of the season, they were just a little too overhyped based on what they did the year before and in their bowl game vs Arkansas. This one I probably should have known better considering the personnel they had on defense. But I thought maybe they could dominate the North enough to get to 8 wins.

Kansas (6-6) After their 10-1 ATS 2007 dream season and a tougher schedule in '08 this one wass a no brainer to eliminate. Though they could be back to 8 wins or more in 2009.

Clemson (5-7) I liked this team. But they were borderline for me and didn't make the cut because of their combination of preseason hype and the fact that Bowden coached the team. So I knew they would probably fuk up sooner or later. And I knew if this Bowden team couldn't live up to the hype he would be gone at the end of the season. Turned out they couldn't wait that long...LOL

Wake Forest (5-7) I really like their coach, but I didn't have this team because of their OL losses. I didn't figure they could score enough points to live up to their hype and cover the spreads. Turns out i was dead right about this one.

Florida St (6-6) I didn't have this team because of their recent QB problems and a new OC. I'm not sure this team really qualifies under my system anyway since Drew Weatherford was benched for a good part of the season. So in reality they didn't have a returning starting QB.

Arizona State (4-6-1) I not only didn't have this team for 8 ATS wins, I also bet against them at the beginning of the year to even make it to 8.5 SU wins. So I was right on both marks there. Too many players lost off the OL and a mediocre QB, combined with the overhype from Erickson's first successful season. An easy one.


USF (4-7) I came close to picking this team. They were definitely on my radar. But the one big thing that turned me off about them was their success from the previous season had alot ot do with big + turnover margin. And I figured they would have to equal that to get to the 8 win mark.

UCONN (5-6) I had this team. And I really can't pinpoint what their problem was this year. They had a good team. In fact they had more draft picks go the NFL from this team than anybody else in their conference. I guess if it's any consolation they did lose 3 of their spreads by just 3 points or less. So a few breaks either way might have got them over the hump. I still think they were a solid pick.


Utah (7-5) Again, one of my top 20 teams. If you had told me they would go 12-0 I would have put a ton of money down for those 8 ATS wins or more. But their style of defensive football wasn't condusive to covering alot of spreads this season. Still they lost 3 spreads by 4 points or less. Including a tie on one of their lines..Close but no cigar.

East Carolina (4-8) This team really just barely qualified since their QB had something like just 5 starts last year. But this team became way overhyped after they beat struggling WV and VT teams at the beginning of the year. Not one of my plays.


Fresno (2-10) What a HUGE disappointment. I stay away from this team every year just because of the way Pat Hill puts them on a mental merry-go-round. After getting up for the big boys, they always find a way to blow it in the second half of the season against conference competetion.

Navy (6-5) They gave it a good run but couldn't quite get there. I didn't have them because I'm still not sure about their new coach. Something tells me the farther they get away from HC Johnson the worse they are going to get.

Central Michigan (5-6) Same thing with CMU. I don't like taking a team like this after a successful coach like Kelly has left the team. And so far Butch Jones has been very unimpressive.

Ohio (7-5) I came close to picking this team. But they barely qualified under most of my criteria. And Ohio under conservative coach Solich isn't exactly known as a powerhouse.They still almost made it to 8 wins. And you would have still made a small profit on them.

FAU (6-5-1) Again, I came close to picking this team. But the problem I had with them is the year before they had the highest + turnover margin in the country. And I knew since they were unanimous picks to win their conferrence that everybody would be gunning for them. They still didn't come far away despite their OL injuries.

ULM (6-5) With the exception of Troy, I basically hate taking Sunbelt teams in general because they are all so erratic. But they still came close.

WKU (3-6) Same xcuse as above. And what made them an even more iffy play was last year was the first year of a full division 1 schedule for this team. So I knew their chances were nil.

As you can see, you can eliminate many of these teams based on coaching, trying to repeat the hype of last season, or even the style of football they play. You've just got to use common sense when evaluating these teams.

 

[russ1945]

GoSooners

Here is a list of the new coaches:

Army - Rich Ellerson
Auburn - Gene Chizik
Ball State - Stan Parrish
Boston College - frank Spaniani
Bowling Green - Dave Clawson
E. Michigan - Ron English
Iowa St - Paul Rhoads
Kansas St - Bill Snyder*
Miami (Ohio) - Michael Haywood
Miss. State - Dan Mullen*
New Mexico - Mike Locksley
N. Mex. State - Dewayne Walker
Purdue - Danny Hope
S.D. State - Brady Hoke*
Syracuse - Doug Marrone
Tennessee - Land Kiffin
Toledo - Tim Beckman
Utah State - Gary Anderson
Washington - Steve Sarkisian*
Wyoming - Dave Christenson*

* - these are the coaches I think could have a positive effect on their new teams
I wonder how your system would work with second year coaches - that could be meaningful for teams like Michigan in 2009

 

[GoSooners]

Thanks Russ...I'll take a look at these coaches and see what I can come up with as far as positives and negatives.

 

[GoSooners]

Here is a list of first or second year coaches and what their teams did ATS in 2008. I've marked in parenthesis whether they were 1st or 2nd year coaches.

Bama (2) 9 ATS wins
Ole Miss (1) 8
Arkansas (1) 5
Michigan (1) 2
Michigan State (2) 6
Minnesota (2) 7
Indiana (2) 3
Texas A&M (1) 4
Baylor (1) 8
Nebraska (1) 6
Iowa State (2) 5
Boston College (2) 8
NCST (2) 9
North Carolina (2) 6
Miami (2) 5
Rice (2) 8
Tulane (2) 5
Southern Miss (1) 7
UAB (2) 5
Hawaii (1) 7
La Tech (2) 5
Idaho (2) 4
Army (2) 6
Navy (1) 6
Georgia Tech (1) 8
Duke (1) 6
ASU (2) 4
UCLA (1) 7
Stanford (2) 7
Wash. St. (1) 5
West Virginia (1) 4
Louisville (2) 5
Cincinnati (2) 6
Air Force (1) 7
Colorado St. (1) 6
Tulsa (2) 7
SMU (1) 4
Houston (1) 4

For the most part, the teams with second year coaches tended to do a little better. That is if they were decent reputable coaches in the first place. A few first year coaches did well too. But sometimes it's hard to tell if it was a carryover from the success of the last coach or something the new coach brought to the table. In the case of Houston Nutt at Ole Miss, Briles at Baylor, and Johnson at GT I know their success came because of a big coaching upgrade. In the case of teams like Navy or Hawaii, I believe the success of those first year coaches could be a direct result of the teams carryover form the previous successful coaches. So I would have to give those coaches another year before I would trust them. Out of the 29 teams above 13 of them had 7 ATS wins or more. Not bad. Especially when you can eliminate alot of these coaches based on the sheer work they had to do to get their teams back to playing competetive. Bobby Petrino at Arkansas and Rodriguez at Michigan and Sherman at Texas A&M would have been automatically eliminated by me based on the previous coaches failures or heavy graduation rates and bringing in new offensive systems in the tougher BCS conferences. Coaches tended to have a better chance at making it in their first year if they were in the lesser non BCS conferences. Nutt was an exception but he was a SEC coach coming from an SEC team to another. So he was well prepared to take the reins at Ole Miss. And Johnson at GT didn't exactly have heavy competetion this season in the ACC. But he might have it a little tougher next year with the improvement of their conference. Coaches that appear like they might have a marked improvement in their second seasons look like it could be Kevin Sumlin of Houston, Rodriguez of Michigan, June Jones of SMU, Fairchild of CSU (this guy was a little better than I first thought of him), and I think Petrino could improve his teams ATS wins, although I think he's a ways to go to being seriously competetive against the big boys in their league. But I still need to look at all of these teams to see what kind of graduation losses they had this year before I make up my mind on any of them.

 

[Conan]

Here is a list of the new coaches:

Army - Rich Ellerson
Auburn - Gene Chizik
Ball State - Stan Parrish
Boston College - frank Spaniani
Bowling Green - Dave Clawson
E. Michigan - Ron English
Iowa St - Paul Rhoads
Kansas St - Bill Snyder*
Miami (Ohio) - Michael Haywood
Miss. State - Dan Mullen*
New Mexico - Mike Locksley
N. Mex. State - Dewayne Walker
Purdue - Danny Hope
S.D. State - Brady Hoke*
Syracuse - Doug Marrone
Tennessee - Land Kiffin
Toledo - Tim Beckman
Utah State - Gary Anderson
Washington - Steve Sarkisian*
Wyoming - Dave Christenson*

* - these are the coaches I think could have a positive effect on their new teams
I wonder how your system would work with second year coaches - that could be meaningful for teams like Michigan in 2009

GS, I think Dave Christenson at Wyoming has instilled the right kind of mindset in the short time he's been there. He seems to be building a strong defense which is something entirely new at that school. I give his Cowboys very good chance at turning the corner soon.

Sark has also improved morale at Udub but he inherited a terribly thin roster and most of his linemen wouldn't start most anywhere.

Interesting to see Brady Hoke at SDSU. I don't know much about him but that program has made some awful moves in the past. Anything would be an improvement for a school that has been wasting its resources out the kazoo for years.

I'd also keep an eye out for DeWayne Walker at NM St. I am not up to snuff on his roster at this point but if his players have any kind of talent, they will field a formidable defense in no time. I think they may play some teams a lot closer than expected once he gets some traction over there.

 

[russ1945]

GoSooners

From my studies so far I kind of had a few teams circled to study some more because they are not public teams, I think they will improve, and I think they may still be under the radar.
1. So. Miss - I love Fedora and you know how much he meant to OSU and how much Gundy learned from him. In his first year they pull 7 times I can see that again or better. I think their defense will be a little better and the offense took hold in December when they swept the board ATS.
2. UCLA - I really don't like the HC but the kids do and that is all that matters. If they play their hearts out they always give you a chance. There again first year coach and too many other teams to consider in the PAC 10 to really focus in on them.
3. Washington St - again, a first year coach, new system, and once again a team that Won all games in Dec ATS. What does that tell you.
4. Minnesota - in two yrs the HC puts them at 7 wins ATS and he has 19 or so starters back in a conference where offense is at a premium. Their defense gave up 25 a game LY, if they can improve on defense they could improve ATS.
5. Michigan - I think this team has all that it takes to turn it around ATS and ouright BUT they may become a public team early and often. That scares me. Everyone will be watching to see if Coach Rod does his magic one more time. As much as I want them to succeed and to push Ohio St and Penn St I can see them getting way too much attention for the Boys to ignore. The flag at the top of the pole may be a red one.
6. Illinois - I know I don't like the HC either But I like the hell out of Juice and I think he was more weapons to work with this year, more like 2007. Remember when he throws less than 30 times they are hard to beat period and they will be getting some points next year. Under the radar, not a public team, good veteran QB - I like it.

 

[russ1945]

Coach

I'll be looking at some Big 12 teams who lost their 2008 QB, especially early. Texas Tech, Mizzou, K-State, who else? These teams may not be clicking the way they have been offensively the last few seasons and may be over-rated early in the season. What say you?

In my preliminary breakdown of Mizzou it became very apparent that they lost a lot. In terms of TD's alone they are losing players that accounted for at least 39 TD's. Now to put that in perspective their defense gave up 381 pts LY (almost 28 pts a game). They were 31st in rushing defense which sounds good until you find out they were 98th in total defense which may indicate why run if you can throw against them. It could get ugly and I do like their HC but he may have to pull more than a rabbit out of the proverbial hat to get through this season. As far as ATS that may be a different story but Mizzou ran it up on some people the last couple of years that may be in the pay back zone this season. I look for Illinois to lay it on them early in the year.
T-Tech will reload as usual at QB and K-St will not replace Freeman but who knows what Snyder has up his sleeve. I will say this, when you stop and think about it Okla. St has a QB who is as capable as just about anyone in the country and is only third best in the B12S. Go Figure. You think USC wouldn't like to have him? Hell if he played there he might be in the running for the Heisman. OSU scares the hell out of me. What a game that could turn out to be when they take on Georgia although Geo will have the advantage in the trenches.