A few weeks ago I analyzed the worst 10 win teams since 1995. Now I want to do the opposite or something like that. What were the beast teams with losing records during the same time span? Here are my best guesses. Under each team, 6 characteristics will be listed: their record, their point differential, their Pythagorean record, their record in close games, their record against teams with winning records, and their opponent’s winning percentage. Purdue 1995
Record: 4-6-1
Point Differential: +13
Pythag: 5.81-5.29
Close Games: 1-4-1
Winning Records: 1-5-1
Opp Win %: .593 (75-51-3)
1995 was Jim Colletto’s penultimate season in
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +43
Pythag: 6.69-4.31
Close Games: 0-3
Winning Records: 0-5
Opp Win %: .472 (58-65-2)
One of the close losses suffered by the West Virginia Mountaineers was to the aforementioned Purdue Boilermakers on Labor Day Weekend by a 26-24 score. Although
UCLA 1996
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +12
Pythag: 5.74-5.26
Close Games: 1-2
Winning Records: 1-5
Opp Win %: .609 (78-50)
The Bruins went 4-4 in the Pac 10 in 1996, but thanks to their non-conference schedule, finished out of the bowl picture. Two of their three non-conference games were road showdowns against
Alabama
Record: 4-7
Point Differential: -2
Pythag: 5.45-5.55
Close Games: 0-4
Winning Records: 2-5
Opp Win %: .609 (78-50)
The Crimson Tide began the year 4-3, but lost their final four contests to finish 4-7 in Mike Dubose’s inaugural season. Their last 4 games were against Louisiana Tech (9-2),
Colorado
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +5
Pythag: 5.61-5.39
Close Games: 2-3
Winning Records: 2-6
Opp Win %: .662 (88-45)
Central Florida
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +71
Pythag: 6.84-416
Close Games: 0-4
Winning Records: 1-4
Opp Win %: .590 (69-48)
In just their second season of Division IA football,
LSU 1998
Record: 4-7
Point Differential: +58
Pythag: 6.71-4.29
Close Games: 0-5
Winning Records: 2-7
Opp Win %: .621 (82-50)
Fresh off a 9-3 season that culminated with an Independence Bowl win over Notre Dame, great things were expected for the LSU Tigers. LSU began the season 3-0, but would only win one of their final 8 contests. Lady Luck was not on their side. 5 of their 7 losses were by a combined 19 points. Their schedule was also very difficult as they faced 5 teams with at least 9 wins. Unlike most of the other teams on this list, LSU did not improve the following year. They fell even farther to 3-8 and Gerry DiNardo was given his walking papers.
Oklahoma
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +7
Pythag: 5.65-5.35
Close Games: 0-3
Winning Records: 1-5
Opp Win %: .545 (72-60)
Coming off an 8-4 season and an appearance in the Alamo Bowl the Pokes looked to be in fine shape under head coach Bob Simmons. Entering his fourth season, Simmons had improved the Cowboys record each season during his tenure. Coupled with returning quarterback Tony Lindsay who had taken the helm the previous season as a freshman and the Cowboys looked to be well on their way to a successful season. However, a 2-4 start doomed the Pokes to a losing season. The main difference in their booming 1997 campaign and the disappointing 1998 season was the schedule. In 1997 they avoided Big 12 North heavyweights
Auburn 1999
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: -3
Pythag: 5.42-5.58
Close Games: 2-2
Winning Records: 2-6
Opp Win %: .639 (76-43)
In 1998, the Auburn Tigers had almost as many coaches (2) as wins (3). 1999 marked the maiden voyage of former
Notre Dame 1999
Record: 5-7
Point Differential: +17
Pythag: 6.36-5.64
Close Games: 3-4
Winning Records: 1-6
Opp Win %: .601 (86-57)
1999 was a year of streaks for the Fighting Irish. After opening the season with a blowout of
Arizona 2000
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +17
Pythag: 5.95-5.05
Close Games: 1-3
Winning Records: 0-4
Opp Win %: .570 (73-55)
After beginning the season 5-1, the Wildcats lost their final 5 games. Three of those games were against
Colorado 2000
Record: 3-8
Point Differential: -32
Pythag: 4.73-6.27
Close Games: 1-6
Winning Records: 1-6
Opp Win %: .626 (82-49)
Utah 2000
Record: 4-7
Point Differential: +27
Pythag: 6.29-4.71
Close Games: 0-4
Winning Records: 1-2
Opp Win %: .465 (59-68)
Before
Arizona State 2001
Record: 4-7
Point Differential: +13
Pythag: 5.73-5.27
Close Games: 0-1
Winning Records: 0-5
Opp Win %: .551 (70-57)
Oregon State 2001
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +28
Pythag: 6.17-4.83
Close Games: 1-3
Winning Records: 1-4
Opp Win %: .576 (78-50)
After their 11-1 2000 season that included a thrashing of Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl, the Beavers were saddled with great expectations. Sports Illustrated even ranked them number 1 in their preview issue. It took only one week for those dreams to be dashed. In the first game of the season, the Beavers were ambushed in
Illinois 2002
Record: 5-7
Point Differential: +39
Pythag: 6.84-5.16
Close Games: 2-3
Winning Records: 2-5
Opp Win %: .555 (86-69)
After a surprise Big 10 championship in 2001, Ron Turner’s Illini fell on some hard luck in 2002. If you’ll remember, the 2001 incarnation if the Illini was on the worst 10-win teams of the last decade list, so this year’s version really wasn’t dramatically worse, just a lot less lucky. The Illini began the season 1-5 before rebounding to win 4 of their last 6 to finish strong. However, the bottom fell out in 2003 as the Illini slumped to 1-11.
Alabama 2003
Record: 4-9
Point Differential: -2
Pythag: 6.45-6.55
Close Games: 0-6
Winning Records: 2-9
Opp Win %: .679 (114-54)
The Crimson Tide had an unbelievable difficult schedule in 2003. They played 11 teams with winning records, and amazingly almost have the teams they played (6) won at least 10 games. The Tide were also agonizingly close in most of their losses as well, going 0-6 in close games.
Arkansas 2004
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +58
Pythag: 6.75-4.25
Close Games: 1-3
Winning Records: 0-6
Opp Win %: .617 (79-49)
The Hogs suffered their first losing season under head coach Houston Nutt. They were certainly capable of playing with the big boys, at least at home. They lost by 2 to
Kansas 2004
Record: 4-7
Point Differential: +27
Pythag: 6.20-4.80
Close Games: 1-5
Winning Records: 1-6
Opp Win %: .598 (79-53)
Despite the fact that they finished 4-7, 2004 was still a historic year for the Jayhawks. They beat in-state rival
NC State 2004
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +46
Pythag: 6.73-4.276
Close Games: 2-4
Winning Records: 1-5
Opp Win %: .564 (66-51)
The first year of the post-Phillip Rivers era resulted in Chuck Amato’s first losing season as a head coach. The Pack went from scoring over 37 points per game to a mere 24 per game. Aside from the narrow victory over Virginia Tech, the Pack could not break through against good teams either, posting a 1-5 record against winning teams. Despite an even poorer performance from the offense in 2005, the pack improved to 7-5.
Arkansas 2005
Record: 4-7
Point Differential: +12
Pythag: 5.78-5.22
Close Games: 0-4
Winning Records: 0-6
Opp Win %: .630 (75-44)
The Hogs make the list two seasons in a row. In the last two years
Connecticut 2005
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +61
Pythag: 7.11-3.89
Close Games: 1-1
Winning Records: 0-4
Opp Win %: .478 (55-60)
After a successful initial season in the Big East in 2004, the Huskies nearly fell to the bottom of the league in 2005. Like
Pittsburgh 2005
Record: 5-6
Point Differential: +24
Pythag: 6.11-4.89
Close Games: 0-3
Winning Records: 0-5
Opp Win %: .552 (64-52)
2005 was a banner year for
Washington State 2005
Record: 4-7
Point Differential: +22
Pythag: 5.90-5.10
Close Games: 1-5
Winning Records: 1-5
Opp Win %: .598 (70-47)
Hard luck does not begin to describe the Cougars season in 2005. Not only did they finish 1-5 in close games, those 5 losses occurred in a span of 6 weeks. Despite the best efforts of Jerome Harrison (1900 rushing yards)
Here’s the tail of the tape. Below is the best of each team in each category (or worst in terms of close games which indicate a fair amount of luck).
Point Differential: +71;
Pythag: 7.11-3.89; Connecticut 2005
Close Games: 0-6; Alabama 2003
Winning Record: 2-9; Alabama 2003
Opp Win%: .679 (114-54); Alabama 2003
So who is the best of the losing teams? I have to say
5 comments:
I ranked Central Florida in 97 has having the 240th best schedule of losing teams over the last 11 years. You've got to be kidding even listing them.
I suspect your method of ranking teams is higly dubious. :)
Let's see. Central Florida beat Eastern Michigan (a team who's beaten opponents went 9-35), Idaho (who's beaten opponents went 22-36, including 2 division II teams and a division I-AA team), Kent State (who's beaten opponents went 9-24), Samford (who's beaten opponents went 21-55 with 6 I-AA teams and 1 division II teams). The only decent win was over a MAC team (9-22 against non-conference I-A teams) who despite an impressive win over Purdue still managed to lose two game by 20 or more points. One of those losses were to a 5-6 Ball State team by 32 points. Ball State's 5 wins were against teams that finished 18-38, including a I-AA team. Maybe they should be on your list.
If you can't find over 100 teams with a losing record better than 97 Central Florida then you haven't looked.
I'd make the argument that playing 7 road games with stops at Ole Miss (8-4), Auburn (10-3), Mississippi State (7-4), and the national champion (Nebraska) is a pretty decent schedule. Central Florida acquitted themselves nicely in every game except for the Auburn one. Their wins beside Toledo were not great, but their losses were for the most part closely contested against BCS schools save for two. I didn't say they were the best by any means, just that they were one of the top 25 or so.
what about the 2005 purdue team lots of talent and picked to possibly when the big ten untill tillers dumb ass tried to start running the ball. They would fall behind then start passing the ball to late to catch up. If he would have stuck to what has worked you would have saw a much better team and result. I blame it all on tiller not sticking with what has gotten them up towards the top in the big ten. But the defense was supposed to be the best they ever had returning all or almost all starters from a big ten leading defense.
Post a Comment