2019 Adjusted Pythagorean Record: Conference USA

Two weeks ago we looked at how Conference USA teams fared in terms of yards per play. This week, we turn our attention to how the season played out in terms of the Adjusted Pythagorean Record, or APR. For an in-depth look at APR, click here. If you didn’t feel like clicking, here is the Reader’s Digest version. APR looks at how well a team scores and prevents touchdowns. Non-offensive touchdowns, field goals, extra points, and safeties are excluded. The ratio of offensive touchdowns to touchdowns allowed is converted into a winning percentage. Pretty simple actually.

Once again, here are the 2019 Conference USA standings.

And here are the APR standings with conference rank in offensive touchdowns, touchdowns allowed, and APR in parentheses. This includes conference games only with the championship game excluded.

Finally, Conference USA teams are sorted by the difference between their actual number of wins and their expected number of wins according to APR.

I use a game and a half as a line of demarcation to determine whether or not a team significantly over or under-performed relative to their APR and by that standard, Marshall was the only team that significantly exceeded their APR and Middle Tennessee was the only team that significantly under-performed relative to their APR. Marshall exceeded their expected record thanks to a 3-0 mark in one-score conference games. No real mystery there. And two weeks ago, we discussed a few reasons the Blue Raiders failed to follow up their division title with another postseason appearance. So let’s move to other matters.

From the Penthouse to the Outhouse
Much was expected from North Texas in 2019. The Mean Green were coming off back-to-back nine win seasons and three consecutive bowl appearances. They returned a senior quarterback who was already the leading passer in school history as well as their head coach, who nearly took the open Kansas State job. It wasn’t just Mean Green season ticket holders that expected big things either. North Texas was the preseason consensus to represent the West division of Conference USA in the league championship game. Alas, the Mean Green were not able to meet those expectations. They finished 4-8, their worst record yet under Seth Littrell. In the process, they became the 24th team since 2005 to finish with a losing regular season record despite being the preseason consensus division or conference favorite. I know that’s a mouthful, but by looking at those teams from the past, we can get an idea of what to expect from North Texas in 2020.

Instead of calculating how much each preseason consensus favorite that finished with a losing record improved or declined the next season and tallying up the results, I decided to divide the previous 23 teams into Power Five/BCS and Group of Five/non-BCS buckets. College football is a hierarchical sport. If a Power Five team like Southern Cal finishes with a losing record despite lofty preseason expectations (which they did in 2018) it is inherently different than if it happens to North Texas. Since North Texas is mid-major program, we’ll start by looking at other mid-major teams. Since 2005 (excluding North Texas in 2019), fifteen mid-majors have finished with a losing record despite being the preseason consensus favorite in their conference or division. Their results the next season are pretty mixed.

On average, the teams improved by a little less than one win in conference play and a little more than one win overall (regular season win totals only). However, that is the average. When it comes to actually improving, less than half improved in either conference or overall wins. In fact, just as many declined in overall wins as improved. When we look at major conference teams, the results are better, but the sample size is quite small (eight teams).

These teams improved by nearly two wins in conference play and more than two wins overall. Declining the next season was almost out of the question, with Kansas the lone team to continue to decline after their losing season. It makes intuitive sense that major conference programs could return to their previous heights faster than mid-major ones. There is an established food chain in college football, particularly at the top. These teams have more money and infrastructure as well as better recruits than their mid-major peers. Meanwhile, with a few exceptions, like Boise, Idaho, there is more parity at the lower rungs of FBS. The difference between North Texas and UAB or Southern Miss or Louisiana Tech is much less than the difference between Clemson and Louisville or NC State. The Mean Green have a much smaller margin of error than the Tigers. That being said, I still think North Texas is poised for a rebound in 2020. They probably shouldn’t be the division favorite again, but a return to the postseason should be expected. In addition, the lost 2019 campaign may allow them to hang onto their coach for a year or two longer than they otherwise would have.

A Run by Dayton or San Diego State to the Final Four Would Have Been Unprecedented

I know there is no NCAA tournament this year, but I did all this research a few weeks back under the assumption that Dayton and San Diego State were likely to be top two seeds when the bracket was revealed. Since it appears we are living in the first few chapters of The Stand, I may never get another chance to post this. And if the tournament does return next year, well, I may be able to edit this post slightly and rehash it again. Enjoy.

A run by Dayton or San Diego State to the Final Four would have been unprecedented. I say that not because Dayton has not made the national semifinals since 1967 nor because San Diego State has never advanced past the Sweet 16. No, I say that because both Dayton and San Diego State entered the 2020 college basketball season unranked in the initial AP Poll. Since the tournament expanded to 64 teams in 1985, that has been a great way to identify top two seeds that will not make the Final Four.

There have been 280 top two seeds since the tournament expanded to a 64 teams (35 tournaments, with four regions apiece, and two top seeds in each region). Those top two seeds (roughly analogous to the top eight teams in the nation as determined by the selection committee) have won 27 of the 35 tournaments. However, none of those 27 champs were unranked in the preseason AP Poll. in fact, teams that were unranked in the preseason AP Poll and later received a top two seed have never even made the Final Four! Those top two seeds that were unranked in the preseason AP Poll are also more likely to lose in the tournament's first weekend. We'll dub these early exits 'Flame Outs'. For the one seed, this would involve losing to the sixteen seed in the first round or the eight/nine winner in the second round. For the two seed, this would mean losing to the fifteen seed in the first round or the seven/ten winner in round two.

35 teams have been either one or two seeds despite not being ranked in the preseason AP Poll. Here is how they have performed in the tournament.

More than half of the top two seeds that were not ranked in the preseason poll have not made it to the second weekend of the NCAA tournament and less than a quarter have advanced to the Regional Final (one win away from the Final Four) with Oregon in 2016 being the most recent top two seed to advance that far. In fact, these teams are two and a half times more likely to flame out than win three tournament games!

Top two seeds that were not ranked in the preseason AP Poll have struggled in the NCAA tournament. But what about those that were ranked in the preseason poll, but have still managed to exceed expectations? 65 teams have earned top two seeds after opening the season in the AP top 25, but outside the top ten. Here is how they have performed.

They have still been more likely to flame out than reach the Final Four, but at least one fifth of these teams have managed to make it to the national semifinals.

So how about preseason top ten teams that earned top two seeds? This is where the bulk of NCAA tournament success can be found.

These teams make the Final Four more than twice as often as they flame out and account for 26 of the 35 total champs since the tournament expanded.

Finally, let's look at the biggest upsets by seeding in NCAA tournament history. A fifteen seed has beaten a two seed eight times and a sixteen seed has beaten a one once. In those nine massive tournament upsets, the losing top seed was not ranked in the preseason AP Poll three times and ranked outside the top ten in the preseason poll seven times!

History is not destiny, but Dayton and San Diego State were probably more likely to lose in the second round than make it to the Final Four.

Thanks for reading. Stay safe and be kind everyone and check back next Thursday when we return to our regularly scheduled programming and examine the APR for Conference USA.

2019 Yards Per Play: Conference USA

After six weeks of Power 5 college football, we return to our G5 roots. This week, we examine Conference USA.

Here are the Conference USA standings.

So we know what each team achieved, but how did they perform? To answer that, here are the Yards Per Play (YPP), Yards Per Play Allowed (YPA) and Net Yards Per Play (Net) numbers for each Conference USA team. This includes conference play only, with the championship game not included. The teams are sorted by division by Net YPP with conference rank in parentheses.

College football teams play either eight or nine conference games. Consequently, their record in such a small sample may not be indicative of their quality of play. A few fortuitous bounces here or there can be the difference between another ho-hum campaign or a special season. Randomness and other factors outside of our perception play a role in determining the standings. It would be fantastic if college football teams played 100 or even 1000 games. Then we could have a better idea about which teams were really the best. Alas, players would miss too much class time, their bodies would be battered beyond recognition, and I would never leave the couch. As it is, we have to make do with the handful of games teams do play. In those games, we can learn a lot from a team’s YPP. Since 2005, I have collected YPP data for every conference. I use conference games only because teams play such divergent non-conference schedules and the teams within a conference tend to be of similar quality. By running a regression analysis between a team’s Net YPP (the difference between their Yards Per Play and Yards Per Play Allowed) and their conference winning percentage, we can see if Net YPP is a decent predictor of a team’s record. Spoiler alert. It is. For the statistically inclined, the correlation coefficient between a team’s Net YPP in conference play and their conference record is around .66. Since Net YPP is a solid predictor of a team’s conference record, we can use it to identify which teams had a significant disparity between their conference record as predicted by Net YPP and their actual conference record. I used a difference of .200 between predicted and actual winning percentage as the threshold for ‘significant’. Why .200? It is a little arbitrary, but .200 corresponds to a difference of 1.6 games over an eight game conference schedule and 1.8 games over a nine game one. Over or under-performing by more than a game and a half in a small sample seems significant to me. In the 2019 season, which teams in Conference USA met this threshold? Here are Conference USA teams sorted by performance over what would be expected from their Net YPP numbers.

Louisiana Tech significantly exceeded their expected record based on YPP while Middle Tennessee and North Texas saw their records fail to match their per play standards. Louisiana Tech was not lucky in close games (1-1 in one-score league games), but did have the second best in-conference turnover margin (+8) in the league. However, the real reason for the disconnect between Louisiana Tech’s record and per play efficiency was the two games they lost. After beginning the season 8-1 (5-0 in Conference USA), the Bulldogs suspended a handful of players, including starting quarterback J’Mar Smith prior to their road trip to Marshall. The Bulldogs scored just ten points in a loss to the Herd, and with Smith missing the following game against UAB, managed just fourteen points in another defeat. Those losses, ceded the division to UAB. Smith returned for the season finale and the Bulldogs blew out UTSA. In the six conference games Louisiana Tech played at full strength, they outscored their opponents by exactly 100 points while averaging 41 points per game. In the two games they played shorthanded, they managed just 24 total points. Their per play differential was similarly striking.

While the Bulldogs did not have the profile of an undefeated team in their six full strength games, they were much better than the middling team they appeared to be when all their conference games were included. As for the colorful Blue Raiders and Mean Green, it’s much easier to see why they underperformed. Middle Tennessee (0-3) and North Texas (1-3) went a combined 1-6 in one-score conference games. A little better luck here or there, and both would have been back in the postseason. 

Extreme Turnover Margins 
Florida Atlantic enjoyed arguably their best season in school history in 2019. The Owls dropped their first two games in blowout fashion to a playoff participant and perhaps the best mid-major program in recent history. They then proceeded to win eleven of their final twelve games, with each victory coming by at least ten points. They capped their season by dominating the best post-death penalty SMU team in their bowl game. On the strength of that victory, they finished just outside the final polls, narrowly missing out on the first AP ranking in school history as well as nearly becoming the first ranked Conference USA team in a half-decade. Befitting a successful season by a G5 program, the Owls did lose their coach, but they appear set up to contend for another conference crown in 2020. Or are they?

While the Owls had a solid YPP margin against their league foes in 2019 (+1.18), it actually ranked second behind UAB (+1.46). Part of this is due to schedule strength as UAB benefited from playing the four worst teams by YPP in conference play (Rice, UTSA, Old Dominion, and UTEP) as well as a short-handed Louisiana Tech. Still, Florida Atlantic’s YPP margin is well below the one posted by their last championship team in 2017 (+1.68) and that team failed to qualify for a bowl game the next season! However, the real reason Florida Atlantic fans may want to curb their enthusiasm just a bit is because of the team’s historic turnover margin in 2019. In eight conference games (excluding their title game beatdown of UAB), the Owls had a turnover margin of +16. They are just the eighth team since 2005 to have an in-conference turnover margin of at least +2 per game. Here are the other seven along with how their conference record changed the following year.

Six of the other seven teams saw their conference record decline by at least one game and the average decline was about 1.4 wins. Each team managed to finish with a winning conference record the next season, but they were not as dominant. The Owls will have plenty of competition in the East division next season, with Charlotte, Marshall, and Western Kentucky looking to build on solid seasons, Middle Tennessee looking to rebound, and Florida International looking to stick it to their in-state rival. Old Dominion is the only program in the division without a realistic shot at contending. If the Owls are able to repeat as division champs in 2020, Willie Taggart will have earned all the money Florida State is still paying him.

2019 Adjusted Pythagorean Record: Big 12

Last week we looked at how Big 12 teams fared in terms of yards per play. This week, we turn our attention to how the season played out in terms of the Adjusted Pythagorean Record, or APR. For an in-depth look at APR, click here. If you didn’t feel like clicking, here is the Reader’s Digest version. APR looks at how well a team scores and prevents touchdowns. Non-offensive touchdowns, field goals, extra points, and safeties are excluded. The ratio of offensive touchdowns to touchdowns allowed is converted into a winning percentage. Pretty simple actually.

Once again, here are the 2019 Big 12 standings.

And here are the APR standings with conference rank in offensive touchdowns, touchdowns allowed, and APR in parentheses. This includes conference games only with the championship game excluded.

Finally, Big 12 teams are sorted by the difference between their actual number of wins and their expected number of wins according to APR.

I use a game and a half as a line of demarcation to determine whether or not a team significantly over or under-performed relative to their APR and by that standard, no team saw their record differ significantly from their APR.

Mike Leach: Pretty Good Coach
That’s not a controversial statement. Definitely not click bait at all. Sure, as some Leach skeptics and cynics will point out, he has never won a conference title. However, Lubbock and Pullman are hardly locales with the resources, infrastructure, and recruiting advantages to win a one. Anyway, with Leach having left Lubbock a decade ago, I thought now would be a good time to compare his ten years at Texas Tech with the ten years following his ignominious firing.

Mike Leach coached the Texas Tech Red Raiders for ten seasons (2000-2009). Since his firing for player abuse, mainly against one particularly well-connected player, three men have coached Texas Tech. In chronological order, they were a former SEC coach with an undefeated season on his resume, a former Texas Tech and NFL quarterback who later became a sought-after college offensive coordinator and NFL head coach, and a coach that guided Utah State to their second ranked finish in fifty years. In other words, the men who followed him were all competent football coaches. Texas Tech was not captained by Mike Locksley or Chris Ash. That makes the success, or lack thereof, in the post-Leach era all the more amazing.

Let’s get things started with the basic won/loss record for the ten years with Leach and the ten years after Leach.

Under Leach, the Red Raiders won nearly twice as often as they lost. Under his three replacements, the Red Raiders won slightly fewer games than they lost. But I can hear the Leach counter arguments now: His teams feasted on non-conference patsies. Look at the Big 12 record. As you wish.

Under Leach, the Red Raiders never won a division title, but after a 3-5 conference record in his first season, they never finished below .500 in Big 12 play during the remainder of his tenure. In fact after beginning his Big 12 career 16-16, his last six teams averaged more than five conference wins per season (31-17). Contrast that with the three gentlemen that have succeeded him. I didn’t realize this until I was pulling the numbers, but Texas Tech has not finished with a winning Big 12 record since Leach was fired! In the last ten seasons, the only current Big 12 teams that have not finished with a winning conference record are Texas Tech and Kansas! You can make the argument that finishing with a winning record is somewhat tougher in the modern Big 12 since the league plays nine conference games and a true round-robin schedule. However, while divisional play and an eight-game league season theoretically made it easier to finish with a .500 record, keep in mind Leach coached Texas Tech during the time period that Oklahoma and Texas won two combined national titles and played for three others. During his time in Lubbock, he did avoid the ascendance of Baylor, but having the Longhorns and Sooners, not to mention the Aggies and Cowboys, as division rivals did not provide the Red Raiders an easy path to bowl eligibility.

Before we sign off for this week, let’s look at AP top 25 finishes for the Red Raiders under Leach and in the ten seasons since his departure.

Under Leach, the Red Raiders finished ranked during half of his tenure, with a peak finish of twelfth in 2008. Unsurprisingly, with the team topping out at 8-5 in both 2012 and 2013, the Red Raiders have not finished in the final polls since he left. In fact, Leach is responsible for nearly half of Texas Tech’s all-time ranked finishes (eleven total).

I don’t think Red Raider and college football fans in general appreciate what Mike Leach did at Texas Tech. Once a coach makes a college football outpost successful for several years, the natural assumption is the momentum will continue unabated without them. Texas Tech is a perfect counterexample to that line of thinking. A cursory look at his record does not do the Mike Leach era justice, but a closer examination shows just how much he accomplished at a difficult job.