Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Does Football Help Bowling Green's Athletic Department Financially?

When Bowling Green State University announced that head football coach Mike Jinks was being relieved of his coaching duties, Director of Athletics Bob Moosbrugger stated that, "[w]e need football to be successful to help our entire athletics department and University."

So what is the financial impact of the Bowling Green football program on the athletics department?  Using data from the Membership Financial Reporting System that was posted by The Chronicle of Higher Education and from additional data that I have collected, I looked at the football programs revenues, expenses, and excess/deficiencies, the athletic department's excess/deficiencies, and finally the student fees distributed to the athletic department for the academic years 2012 to 2016.  The table below reports the financial data.  Financial data is here. (Note:  FY2013 = 2012 academic year)



Football
Football
Football
Athletic Dept.
Athletic Dept.
Season
Revenue
Expenses
Revenue-Expenses
Student Fees
Revenue-Expenses
2012
$3,801,729
$5,732,183
-$1,930,454
$12,408,393
-----
2013
$3,321,370
$5,894,344
-$2,572,974
$12,718,603
$162,699
2014
$2,718,523
$5,681,208
-$2,962,685
$12,600,000
$1,896
2015
$3,925,810
$6,687,220
-$2,761,410
$12,528,362
-$883,526
2016
$2,689,908
$6,348,904
-$3,658,996
$12,653,646
$1,549,720

As you can see, football is not a financial driver of the athletic department as the football program has a deficiency for each of the last five seasons that data is available.  In terms of overall athletic department excess or deficiencies, the Bowling Green athletic department looks like it aims to break even.  Finally, the biggest financial driver of the athletic department are student fees, which are over $12 million each year.

Tuesday, October 16, 2018

Bowling Green Fires Head Coach Mike Jinks

Bowling Green State University has fired head football coach Mike Jinks.  So let's take a look at the Bowling Green Falcons using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model from the data provided from www.cfbstats.com.

Coach Jinks was hired as of December 8, 2015, so I am looking at the 2016, 2017 and up to his last game of the 2018 season.  Below is the total production rank, offensive production rank, defensive production rank, the worst rank and the average production rank for each season that head coach Mike Jinks was at the helm of the Bowling Green State University Falcons football team.  As you can see, Bowling Green has been towards the bottom of the "league" for the entire time.  For those interested, more details of the Bowling Green program is presented below.


2016
At the end of head coach Jinks' first season at the helm of the Falcons football program, Bowling Green had a 4-8 win/loss record, making them bowl ineligible.  The Falcons played against an "average" strength of schedule (SOS) as compared to the "league" average SOS, meaning that Bowling Green had an SOS plus or minus one standard deviation of the "league" average SOS.  The Falcon's best win was over #87 ranked Kent State (42-7) and their worst loss was to #78 ranked Eastern Michigan by a score of (25-28).  Bowling Green had the #121 ranked team in total production with the #103 ranked offense and the #118 ranked defense from the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.

2017
At the end of coach Jinks' second season as the Falcon's head coach, Bowling Green was again bowl ineligible, now with a 2-10 win/loss record.  Bowling Green again played against an "average" strength of schedule (SOS) as compared to the "league" average SOS.  The Falcons best win was over #64 ranked Miami (OH) (37-29) and their worst loss was to FCS South Dakota by a score of (27-35).  Bowling Green had the #120 ranked team in total production with the #102 ranked offense and the #125 ranked defense from the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.

2018
At the time of coach Jinks' firing, the Falcons were 1-6, while playing against a "tougher" strength of schedule (SOS) as compared to the "league" average SOS, meaning that Bowling Green had an SOS between one and two standard deviations below the "league" average SOS.  The Falcon's only win was over FCS Eastern Kentucky (42-35) and their worst loss was to #71 currently ranked Toledo by a score of (36-52).  Bowling Green has the #124 ranked team in total production with the #58 ranked offense and the #129 ranked defense from the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.

Monday, October 15, 2018

2018 NCAA FBS Top 25 Ranking for Week 7

With week #7 of NCAA FBS games finished, below is the latest Top 25 rankings using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model from the data provided from www.cfbstats.com.  According to the Complex Invasion College Football production model, The University of Alabama Crimson Tide are still the most productive team in all of the Football Bowl Subdivision.

Here are the details of the Complex Invasion College Football production model.

Rank Team
1 Alabama
2 Oklahoma
3 Ohio State
4 Clemson
5 Memphis
6 UCF
7 Auburn
8 Cincinnati
9 Appalachian State
10 North Texas
11 Georgia
12 Michigan
13 Miami (Florida)
14 Fresno State
15 Penn State
16 Florida
17 Utah State
18 Mississippi State
19 Washington State
20 Houston
21 UAB
22 Maryland
23 Washington
24 Kentucky
25 Oregon

Previous 2018 Top 25 Rankings
2018 NCAA FBS Top 25 Rankings for Week #1
2018 NCAA FBS Top 25 Rankings for Week #2
2018 NCAA FBS Top 25 Rankings for Week #3
2018 NCAA FBS Top 25 Rankings for Week #4 
2018 NCAA FBS Top 25 Rankings for Week #5
2018 NCAA FBS Top 25 Rankings for Week #6

Friday, October 12, 2018

Doug Meacham Fired as Offensive Coordinator at Kansas

University of Kansas Offensive Coordinator Doug Meacham has been fired.  To me this is a curious decision as Kansas is actually better this year on offense than this time last year.  Let's look at the number using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model from the data provided from www.cfbstats.com.

2017
At the end of week #6 for the 2017 season, Kansas ranked as the #84 most productive offense in all of the FBS after scoring 148 points to this point.  Of interest, at this time, Kansas had the #108 ranked defense, which is much worse than their offense.   By the end of the season, Kansas would fall to the #125 offense (6th worst) after being shut out twice and only scoring 76 points in the last seven games.  Their defense was #126 (5th worst) in all of the FBS.

2018
At the time Meacham was let go, Kansas is ranked #62 most productive offense (which is above average) in the FBS.  Kansas has scored 166 points, but has also played one more game than last year.  On the other side of the ball, Kansas is ranked #100 most productive defense, so maybe the offense is not the only problem.

Thursday, October 11, 2018

Appalachian State

Two days ago, Dan Wolken tweeted: 
I disagree. Appalachian State is an excellent football team, as we saw on Tuesday night when they played Arkansas State.  Using the using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model that is detailed here, let's take a look at the Appalachian State football team in the FBS during head coach Scott Scatterfield's tenure as head coach.

2014
The Mountaineers finished their first regular season in the FBS at 7-5 overall.  Appalachian State played against a "much easier" strength of schedule (SOS) as compared to the "league" average SOS; meaning that their SOS was greater than two standard deviations higher than the average SOS for the "league".  The Mountaineers best regular season game was a victory (37-32) over #50 ranked Arkansas State and their worst loss was to FCS Liberty by a score of (48-55).  Overall, the Mountaineers had the #34 ranked team with the #55 ranked offense and the #25 ranked defense from the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.

2015
Appalachian State finished the regular season overall at 10-2 (bowl eligible) and defeated #74 ranked Ohio (31-29) in their first bowl game to finish overall 11-2.  Appalachian State played against an "easier" strength of schedule (SOS) as compared to the "league" average SOS.  The Mountaineers best game again was their victory over #25 ranked Georgia Southern (31-13) and their worst loss was to #77 ranked Arkansas State (27-40).  Mountaineers had the #1 ranked team in total production; yes the model stated that this was the best team in all of the FBS!!  The Mountaineers had the #17 ranked offense and the #7 ranked defense from the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.

2016
At the end of the regular season the Mountaineers were 9-3 (and were bowl eligible) and defeated  #19 ranked Toledo (31-28) to finish 10-3 overall, while playing against an "average" strength of schedule (SOS) as compared to the "league" average SOS.  The Mountaineers best win was over #22 ranked Old Dominion (31-7) and their worst loss was to #65 ranked Tennessee by a score of (13-20).  Appalachian State had the #17 ranked team in total production with the #53 ranked offense and the #10 ranked defense from the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.

2017
The Mountaineers were 8-4 (and bowl eligible) again defeating #39 ranked Toledo in their post-season bowl game, while playing against an "easier" strength of schedule (SOS) as compared to the "league" average SOS.  The Mountaineers best win was over #65 ranked New Mexico State (45-31) and their worst loss was to #107 ranked Louisiana-Monroe by a score of (45-52).  Appalachian State had the #14 ranked team in total production with the #29 ranked offense and the #12 ranked defense  from the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model.

Finally:
I agree! They are currently #20 at the end of last week:  NCAA FBS Week #6 Top 25 Productive TeamsThis is an excellent football team.

Wednesday, October 10, 2018

2018 Connecticut's Aweful Defense

Recently, there has been speculation that Connecticut might have the worst scoring defense since WWI.  I cannot comment on their performance since World War I, but I can examine the Huskies defense from the start of the season through week #6 since 2011, when I first started looking at FBS performance weekly using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model that is detailed here.

In the table below I report two numbers:  the worst defenses difference in performance compared to the best defense through that season's week #6 (Overall) and the difference between the worst defenses' performance and the second to worst team's defensive performance through that season's week #6 (Next Worst).

Season Team
Overall
Next Worst
2011 Kansas
-152.632
-3.753
2012 Massachusetts
-213.481
-2.472
2013 New Mexico State
-265.320
-19.773
2014 UNLV
-181.704
-1.941
2015 UTEP
-229.388
-1.178
2016 Charlotte
-254.605
-22.784
2017 Connecticut
-265.607
-12.381
2018 Connecticut
-269.982
-24.846

As you can see above through week #6 of the season, Connecticut has the worst Overall defense as compared to the best defense for each season since 2011 (slightly ahead of their prior seasons performance) and also the worst defense as compared to the next worst defense for each season since 2011.  Admittedly, one of the problems of the analysis above, is that each season is different, and it might not be accurate to compare one season with another season.

Is there a way to overcome this problem?  I propose the following:  let's use the defensive performances through week #6 for the last eight years (time period that I have weekly data) and apply the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model over the entire time period.  The impact that each action on the field will be weighted the same for all defenses over those eight years and as such, I can compare any teams defense during this time period against any other defense during this time period since I am using the same measure for all the teams.

So, I gathered the data, ran the regression and calculated each team's defensive production.  I ranked the defenses from worst to best, and I found that the 2018 Connecticut Huskies have the worst defense through week #6 since 2011.  In fact, its not even close.  This year's Huskies are over 16% worst than the next worst defense during the 2011-2018 time period through six weeks.  In other words, find the second to worst defense, Connecticut is over 16% worse than that through six weeks.

Tuesday, October 9, 2018

2018 NCAA FBS Defense: Mike Stoops and Oklahoma

On Monday Oklahoma fired their defensive coordinator.  So I got to thinking using the Complex Invasion College Football Production Model that is detailed here, what does Oklahoma's defense look like in terms of their productivity ranking?

According to the NCAA Complex Invasion College Football Production Model, Oklahoma currently has the #97 defense in the FBS, which is actually ahead of Oklahoma State's defensive ranking (#112).  From the prior week, Oklahoma's defensive ranking dropped from #51 (above average) to below average.  That is more of a problem, since until the Texas game, Oklahoma has played teams that are all below average in overall performance.  Thus the first real test for Oklahoma's defense resulted in a loss.

But this is not new for Oklahoma.  Since Mike Stoops arrived at Oklahoma, the Sooners' have had only two seasons where their final defensive ranking was above average - 2013 and 2015.  Other than that, the Sooners' have been below average in terms of defense.  In fact, the Sooners' finished the 2017 season lower ranked in defensive productivity than they currently are ranked.


While the defense is currently below average, the real concern is that is it really below the current rankings of the teams that are in the running for the FBS Playoffs:  Georgia (#3);  Washington (#4); West Virginia (#6); Alabama (#10); Clemson (#11); Notre Dame (#15); UCF (#25).  Notice that Ohio State is not on this list as they are currently ranked above Oklahoma, but are below average.

On the bright side, Oklahoma currently has a top 10 offense, so hopefully the Sooners' can outscore their opponents.