Here are the 2025 AAC 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 AAC team. This includes conference play only, with the championship game not included. The teams are sorted by Net YPP with conference rank in parentheses.
Army, Rice, and if we round up, Navy, all exceeded their expected record based on YPP. Perhaps not coincidentally, they also all run a form of the option. Determining if option teams seem to consistently exceed their per play numbers may be an offseason project if I have the time. At the other end of the spectrum, Tulsa (once again, if we round) and South Florida significantly underachieved relative to their YPP numbers. For the overachievers, close game success helps explain Navy's success. The Midshipmen were 3-0 in one-score conference games. However, close game performance does not explain how Army and Rice were able to overachieve. Army (2-3) and Rice (1-2) both finished with losing one-score conference records. For Army, the overachievement is baked into their style of play. Plays of three or four yards keep them on schedule and they are ultra aggressive on fourth down (attempted 39 conversions in AAC play). They also converted a high percentage of those fourth down attempts (67% in AAC play) to keep drives going and reduce the number of possessions in a game. For Rice, you have to look a bit further into the numbers to understand their overachievement. The Owls were not good over their first three conference games as they were outgained by about 0.70 yards per play. They finished 1-2 in those games, a record not extremely out of line from their performance. Over their final five games, the Owls were outgained by an incredible 3.35 yards per play as the offense struggled to move the ball and the defensive was continually shredded. To put that per play differential in context, it was a full yard worse than their cumulative per play margin. The Owls were outscored by 146 points in those five games, but managed to win the only close one they played (versus UAB). For the underachievers, Tulsa finished 1-2 in one-score conference games and also had an in-conference turnover margin of -7. While the Golden Hurricane finished 1-7 in AAC play for the second consecutive season, they were much better in their first season under Tre Lamb. Finally, South Florida was arguably the best team in the AAC in 2025 and probably would have given a better performance in the College Football Playoff than Tulane. The Bulls won their six AAC games by a combined 201 points, but lost both one-score conference games they played by a field goal each. Had they beaten either Memphis or Navy, the Bulls likely would have played for the conference title and a CFP bid.
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 2025 season, which teams in the AAC met this threshold? Here are AAC teams sorted by performance over what would be expected from their Net YPP numbers.
Pipeline to Power
2025 was a pretty successful season for the AAC (or American if that is your preferred nomenclature). Three schools finished ranked, one made the CFP, and the league won several games against power conference teams. Power conference schools noticed and snapped up four AAC coaches in the latest round of the coaching carousel. Three of those coaches even nabbed SEC jobs. This got me wondering which mid-major schools and conferences have produced the most 'graduates' to power jobs? To answer this question, I looked at all coaching hires in the BCS/CPF era and tabulated where power conference teams have poached their coaches from. Power conference teams sometimes promote from within or hire hotshot assistants, but when they poach directly from mid-major FBS conferences, the AAC comes out on top despite only coming into existence in 2013.
You may be surprised to see the MAC finishing tied for first with the AAC, but that is more emblematic of a bygone era (more on that in a moment). Two conferences that no longer exist bring up the rear (WAC and Big West) as well as the dwindling hodgepodge of teams that play as an Independent. For the purposes of this exercise, I considered Wake Forest's hire of Jake Dickert prior to the 2025 season to be an Independent hire as the Pac-12 did not really exist in 2024 and 2025. With the league reconstituting in 2026, any subsequent hires from its membership will be considered Pac-12 hires.
I mentioned the MAC's status at the top of the list as emblematic of a bygone era. The reason for this is simple, only one MAC coach (Lance Leipold) has moved on to a power conference job since 2018. if we look at coaching graduates in the CFP era only, the AAC's dominance shines through.
The league has double the graduates of any other mid-major conference and accounts for 40% of mid-major coaches taking power conference jobs. This trend continues to hold true if we look at post-Covid (NIL and transfer portal) era hires.
Once again, the AAC has more than double the graduates of any other mid-major conference and 44% of the total instances of mid-major coaches taking power conference jobs. Were I an FCS, D2, D3, or NAIA coach, I would think twice about taking a head coaching job in Conference USA or the MAC. Those head coaches have tended to toil in obscurity and not be considered for power conference jobs. As I mentioned, Leipold was the last MAC coach to get a power conference job and Jeff Brohm (2017) was the last Conference USA coach to move up to a power conference.
Finally, which mid-major schools have produced the most graduates to power conferences?
Boise State has sent the most head coaches directly to power conference jobs (with varying levels of success) while five schools are tied for second. I'll note that Houston will not be able to add to this list as they are now in a power conference (Big 12). 14 schools have sent two head coaches directly to power conference jobs and for completions sake, they are listed alphabetically in the table below.
The AAC has been the preeminent mid-major (formerly Group of Five and now Group of Six) conference since it appeared on the scene in 2013. The 2026 coaching carousel proved its coaches are highly esteemed by the decision makers at power conference schools. While this may prove detrimental in the short term at the four AAC schools that lost head coaches, it may also make for an exciting and unpredictable 2026 conference race with a potential power vacuum at the top of the league.
No comments:
Post a Comment