Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Introduction

Introduction

2020 STATISTICAL SECTION CONTENTS 1 Introduction Introduction 2 Head Coaching Changes 3 Best of Three-Season ATS Roles So, as we head into the 2020 College Football season, people write stories Best, Worst 3-Season about who might win the national championship. There are 130 teams at the 4 D-1 FBS level, but everybody knows that the eventual national champion will ATS Follow-Up be either Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Ohio State, Georgia, Oklahoma or Au- 6 Interception Analyses burn, right? Okay, maybe Notre Dame, Penn State and Oregon should be in the mix. Michigan? Ha. Are they still in the league? It’s more than just a little 7 ATS Margin Increases ridiculous that people get so worked up about a sport in which fewer than 8 Turnover Margin Change and 10% of the teams involved have a realistic chance to compete for the na- tional championship. But this is why we like to wager on the games instead of ATS Analyses worrying about who’ll win some dopey game in January after they’ve played 9 Fumble Recovery Leader Analysis only one playoff game off a 35-day layoff sometime around New Year’s Day.

College football handicapping has its quirks. In any given year, the gap be- 2017-19 CF tween the #1 scoring offense and the #20 scoring offense will be close to two Offensive Medianss touchdowns. Don’t take my word for it. Check it out in the table below! Rushing Attempts 37.9 In the NFL, the gap between #1 and #20 in scoring is typically a little smaller: between 9 and 12 points. But in the pros, there are only 12 more teams af- Rushing Yards 166 ter the #20 scoring Rushing Yards/carry 4.4 Year #1 Scoring Off PPG #20 Scoring Off PPG Diff offense. In College Pass completions 2019 LSU 48.4 Ohio 34.3 14.1 Football, there are 18.8 2018 Oklahoma 48.4 Boise St. 35.4 13.0 110 more teams be- Pass Attempts 31.7 hind the #20 scor- 2017 UCF 48.2 Georgia 35.4 12.8 ing offense! With Pass Yds/Att (YPA) 7.4 2016 Western KY 45.5 Navy 37.9 7.6 a wider talent gap, Passing Yards 233 2015 Baylor 48.1 Arizona 37.4 10.7 there are class fac- 2014 Baylor 48.2 Toledo 36.6 11.6 tors involved in Pass comp. % (season) 59.6% 2013 Baylor 52.4 UCLA 36.9 15.5 many match-ups. Total Yards 399 2012 La. Tech 51.5 Texas Tech 37.5 14.0 When a team like Western Kentucky, First Downs 20.9 2011 Houston 49.3 Alabama 34.8 14.5 from Conference Offensive plays 2010 Oregon 49.0 Troy 34.1 14.9 71.7 USA, leads the na- tion in scoring (2016), it doesn’t mean that it can step up and score its usu- TD Passes (season) 20 al amount of points when it plays against an opponent from a higher-class Interceptions (season) 10 conference. In fact, when Western Kentucky led the nation in scoring, they scored more than two touchdowns less than their average when losing to the running joke of the SEC, Vanderbilt (30 points), and five touchdowns less BUY than their average against Alabama (10 points), who allowed only 13.0 ppg ON that season and played in the National Championship Game. In 2011, when Houston ranked #1 in scoring, guess who won the National Championship? It was the team with the #20 scoring rank, which averaged nearly 15 points A per game fewer than Houston -- Alabama! The Tide beat LSU 21-0 in the title M game that season, in which their defense allowed a mere 8.3 ppg (to LSU’s A second-best 11.3 ppg allowed). Z O As you move along through various points of the season, it’s always im- N portant to be mindful and aware of the caliber of opponent that a team’s . statistics have been compiled against. Early in 2019, Miami-OH gave up 601 yards and 76 points to Ohio State. Before that, they’d lost and failed to cover C the spread losing by 24 and 22 points at Iowa and Cincinnati. But guess who O won the MAC Championship? Miami-OH! That’s college football for you! A M team can lose a game by 71 points and still win a championship in the same season! – Bobby Smith Sports betting bestseller at amazon.com! 1 2020 BOBBYSMITH.COM | COLLEGE COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2020 College Football Head Coaching Changes

New Season Team Yr Last Replaced Reason Yr Last Year ATS Year 2020 Appalachian St. Shawn Clark 1 2019 Eliah Drinkwitz Left $ 1 10 4 0 2020 Arkansas Sam Pittman 1 2019 Chad Morris Fired 2 5 7 0 2020 Baylor Dave Aranda 1 2019 Left $ 3 9 5 0 2020 Boston College Jeff Hafley 1 2019 Fired 7 7 5 0 2020 Colorado Karl Dorell 1 2019 Mel Tucker Left $ 1 5 7 0 2020 Colorado St. Steve Addazio 1 2019 Mike Bobo Fired 5 6 5 0 2020 Florida Atl 1 2019 Lane Kiffin Left $ 3 10 4 0 2020 Florida St. Mike Norvell 1 2019 Willie Taggart Fired 2 5 8 0 2020 Fresno St. Kalen DeBoer 1 2019 Retired 3 3 8 1 2020 Hawaii 1 2019 Nick Rolovich Left $ 4 7 7 0 2020 Memphis Ryan Silverfield 1 2019 Mike Norvell Left $ 4 6 6 1 2020 Michigan St. Mel Tucker 1 2019 Mark Dantonio Retired 13 4 9 0 2020 Mississippi Lane Kiffin 1 2019 Matt Luke Fired 3 8 3 1 2020 Mississippi St. Mike Leach 1 2019 Joe Moorhead Fired 2 4 8 0 2020 Missouri Eliah Drinkwitz 1 2019 Barry Odom Fired 4 4 8 0 2020 New Mexico Danny Gonzalez 1 2019 Bob Davie Fired 8 3 8 1 2020 Old Dominion Ricky Rahne 1 2019 Bobby Wilder Fired 11 4 8 0 2020 Rutgers Greg Schiano 1 2019 Chris Ash Fired 4 4 8 0 2020 San Diego St. 1 2019 Rocky Long Retired 9 8 5 0 2020 South Florida 1 2019 Charlie Strong Fired 3 5 7 0 2020 Tex San Antonio Jeff Traylor 1 2019 Frank Wilson Fired 4 6 5 0 2020 UNLV 1 2019 Tony Sanchez Fired 5 6 6 0 2020 Washington 1 2019 Chris Petersen Retired 6 8 5 0 2020 Washington St. Nick Rolovich 1 2019 Mike Leach Left $ 12 4 8 0

There will be 24 new head coaches at the FBS level this Colorado after only one season! And Tucker didn’t even season. The most common reason for a new head coach’s accomplish anything at Colorado! entry is that the prior guy got fired. That is the case in 13 Yes, we all missed our calling. We all should have been of the 24 instances. Four of the new head coaches re- football coaches. They get paid a lot of money for ac- place recent retirees. complishing trivial things, or not! Here are all your Year Seven of them replace head coaches who left for more One guys heading into 2020, listed along with whom they money at another school. Two of the flat-leavers – Eliah replace, how long the other guy had been there and his Drinkwitz and Mel Tucker – left Appalachian State and final-season ATS record. – Bobby Smith

COLLEGE | 2020 BOBBYSMITHSPORTS.COM 2 COLLEGE FOOTBALL The Best of Three-Season ATS Category Roles The following information is presented as a public service, for those interest- ed in knowing who the BEST performers in the four College Football Site and BEST OF 2016-18 Role pointspread categories have been over the last three seasons. But any- (with 2019 follow-up) one who chooses to wager the way of these particular BEST OF 2017-19 HOME DOG, ATS W L T AvLin ATS% 2019 ATS ATS % three-season trends should Auburn 4 0 0 4.5 100.0% 1 1 0 50.0% not blame me if they fail to HOME DOG, ATS W L T AvLin ATS% Fresno St. 6 0 0 10.7 100.0% 0 0 1 0.0% show a profit in the process, Tulane 6 0 0 8.8 100.0% UAB 4 0 0 5.0 100.0% - - - - as I have often warned Florida Int 5 1 1 8.9 83.3% Texas 7 1 0 5.7 87.5% 1 1 0 50.0% against this practice. Texas 5 1 0 7.3 83.3% Duke 5 1 0 7.5 83.3% 1 1 0 50.0% Arizona St. 7 2 0 7.7 77.8% Buffalo 6 2 0 9.3 75.0% 2 0 0 100.0% From the Zone Blitz of 2019, Boston College 7 2 0 8.1 77.8% Tulane 6 2 1 9.0 75.0% 1 0 0 100.0% there were four groups of Kansas St. 7 2 0 9.3 77.8% Arizona St. 8 3 0 6.8 72.7% 2 0 0 100.0% “Three-Season Best ATS.” Charlotte 9 3 0 9.0 75.0% Iowa St. 7 3 1 9.1 70.0% 1 0 0 100.0% They were Home Under- Kentucky 5 2 0 7.3 71.4% California 9 4 0 7.9 69.2% 1 1 0 50.0% dogs, Home Favorites, Nevada 5 2 0 9.0 71.4% TOTAL 62 16 2 -- 79.5% 10 4 1 71.4% Road Underdogs and Road Temple 5 2 0 8.9 71.4% Favorites (see tables at Purdue 7 3 0 7.8 70.0% left). As groups, they’d cov- TOTAL 68 20 1 77.3% HOME FAVORITE, ATS W L T AvLine ATS% 2019 ATS ATS % ered the spread in a range UAB 7 1 0 -18.8 87.5% 4 2 0 66.7% from 68.5% all the way up HOME FAVORITE, ATS W L T AvLine ATS% Utah St. 8 2 1 -19.1 80.0% 1 3 0 0.0% to 79.5% in the three sea- UAB 11 3 0 -17.9 78.6% Central Florida 12 6 1 -19.1 66.7% 3 3 0 50.0% sons 2016 through 2018. Buffalo 10 3 0 -15.7 76.9% Middle Tenn 8 4 0 -15.1 66.7% 1 1 0 50.0% However, in 2019, two of Utah 12 5 1 -16.5 70.6% Virginia Tech 10 5 0 -17.5 66.7% 1 4 0 20.0% the four groups showed a Middle Tenn 7 3 0 -12.5 70.0% Oklahoma 13 7 0 -24.6 65.0% 2 4 0 33.3% flat-bet net loss, and an- West Virginia 7 3 1 -18.7 70.0% Georgia Tech 9 5 0 -11.2 64.3% 0 2 0 0.0% other merely broke even. Tulane 9 4 0 -12.4 69.2% Utah 9 5 1 -13.2 64.3% 5 3 0 62.5% The 79.5% ATS Home Un- Florida Atl 13 6 0 -12.0 68.4% TOTAL 76 35 3 68.5% 17 22 0 43.6% -- derdogs from the prior three Houston 8 4 0 -14.0 66.7% seasons were the lone Wake Forest 8 4 0 -15.5 66.7% ROAD UNDERDOG, ATS W L T AvLine ATS% 2019 ATS ATS % group that remained profit- Mississippi St. 10 5 0 -18.1 66.7% Northwestern 8 0 0 10.5 100.0% 3 2 0 60.0% able, at 71.4%. But you’ll Clemson 15 8 1 -29.3 65.2% Utah 5 0 0 9.9 100.0% - - - - notice that this was the TOTAL 110 48 3 69.6% Eastern Michigan 12 2 0 10.4 85.7% 3 1 0 75.0% smallest of the four groups, Air Force 7 2 1 9.9 77.8% 1 1 0 50.0% by far. The ten teams com- ROAD UNDERDOG, ATS W L T AvLine ATS% prising the Home Underdog Purdue 7 2 0 13.2 77.8% 3 0 1 100.0% Purdue 6 1 1 13.4 85.7% group showed up in the role BYU 10 3 0 11.6 76.9% 2 0 0 100.0% Eastern Michigan 12 2 0 8.5 85.7% only 15 times in 2019! Wake Forest 10 3 0 12.9 76.9% 0 1 0 0.0% Appalachian St. 5 1 0 9.7 83.3% Louisiana Tech 8 3 0 10.9 72.7% 1 2 0 33.3% Meanwhile, Home Fa- Northwestern 8 2 0 9.9 80.0% South Carolina 8 3 1 10.8 72.7% 1 2 0 33.3% vorites and Road Favor- South Carolina 8 2 0 11.9 80.0% Temple 8 3 0 10.0 72.7% 1 1 0 50.0% ites went from 68.5% and Western KY 10 3 0 11.9 76.9% Texas Tech 8 3 0 9.4 72.7% 1 2 0 33.3% 71.5% to 43.6% and 50.0%. Boston College 6 2 1 15.3 75.0% Ohio 7 3 0 8.5 70.0% 2 1 0 66.7% Road Underdogs, the larg- Idaho 6 2 0 17.4 75.0% Syracuse 9 4 0 13.6 69.2% 1 4 0 20.0% est group, had combined to BYU 8 3 0 12.3 72.7% Kansas St. 8 4 0 10.6 66.7% 3 1 0 75.0% be a scintillating 75.3% ATS California 10 4 0 11.3 71.4% Kentucky 8 4 0 14.1 66.7% 1 2 0 33.3% from 2016-18 but checked Air Force 7 3 1 9.9 70.0% Nebraska 8 4 0 11.9 66.7% 0 1 0 0.0% in at the ol’ break-even point Arizona St. 7 3 1 8.8 70.0% TOTAL 131 43 2 -- 75.3% 23 21 1 52.3% of 52.3% last season. Baylor 7 3 1 15.0 70.0% Fresno St. 7 3 0 11.9 70.0% In the 2018 Zone Blitz, it had ROAD FAVORITE, ATS W L T AvLine ATS% 2019 ATS ATS % Iowa St. 7 3 0 8.8 70.0% been demonstrated previ- Louisiana Tech 7 3 0 10.3 70.0% Temple 6 0 1 -10.3 100.0% 1 2 0 33.3% ously that only one of the Nebraska 7 3 0 12.3 70.0% Iowa 6 1 1 -8.5 85.7% 1 2 0 33.3% four groups had remained TOTAL 128 43 5 74.9% Fresno St. 5 1 2 -10.8 83.3% 0 2 0 0.0% profitable that season af- Miami OH 5 1 0 -7.6 83.3% - - - - ter they’d posted dominant ROAD FAVORITE, ATS W L T AvLine ATS% Wisconsin 9 2 0 -12.3 81.8% 3 1 0 75.0% performance against the Utah St. 5 1 0 -9.67 83.3% Central Florida 8 2 0 -13.2 80.0% 2 4 0 33.3% spread from 2015 through Louisiana-Laf. 4 1 0 -11.10 80.0% Boston College 5 2 0 -5.4 71.4% 1 0 0 100.0% 2017. On that occasion, Georgia 12 3 0 -12.23 80.0% Buffalo 5 2 0 -8.1 71.4% 1 3 0 25.0% it was Road Underdogs Wisconsin 9 3 0 -13.08 75.0% Georgia 9 4 0 -9.1 69.2% 5 0 0 100.0% that remained profitable Clemson 11 4 0 -18.43 73.3% Boise St. 10 5 0 -13.6 66.7% 2 3 0 40.0% at a healthy winning rate Boston College 5 2 0 -4.29 71.4% Clemson 10 5 0 -13.4 66.7% 4 1 0 80.0% of 61.4%, after the same Iowa 5 2 1 -6.19 71.4% Memphis 6 3 0 -10.1 66.7% 4 2 0 66.7% group had combined for Iowa St. 5 2 0 -8.64 71.4% Toledo 6 3 1 -11.9 66.7% 0 3 0 0.0% 75.2% ATS over the course Temple 5 2 1 -9.13 71.4% Notre Dame 7 4 0 -7.9 63.6% 2 2 0 50.0% of the prior three seasons. Penn St. 7 4 0 -16.7 63.6% - - - - Troy 7 3 0 -8.75 70.0% Stanford 7 4 1 -5.5 63.6% 0 2 0 0.0% At right is the latest three- Colorado St. 4 2 0 -6.00 66.7% Troy 7 4 0 -10.9 63.6% 2 1 0 66.7% season Bests. Some will Oregon 6 3 0 -10.11 66.7% TOTAL 118 47 6 -- 71.5% 28 28 0 50.0% continue to be strong. Other Memphis 8 4 0 -11.88 66.7% will not. The ever-changing Utah 8 4 1 -7.62 66.7% For the WORST three-season College Football pointspread role per- match-ups and lines will Boise St. 9 5 0 -12.04 64.3% formers, see the “Trend Bending” section on the home page of the eventually determine their San Diego St. 7 4 0 -9.50 63.6% Web site, www.sportsreporter.com! fates. -- Bobby Smith TOTAL 110 45 3 71.0% 3 2020 BOBBYSMITH.COM | COLLEGE COLLEGE FOOTBALL 3-Year Best and Worst ATS Follow-Up Exercise This little exercise is similar to what was displayed on the wrong. They lost money. But they didn’t lose as much as previous page. The difference is that it takes into account they had from 2016-18, and seven of the sixteen were the Best Three-Season Overall ATS teams regardless of actually profitable as the group’s win rate increased by where the games were played and whether teams teams 12.4 percentage points. were home or away. (Also, it tracks the Worst Three-Sea- The group of eight Best Three-Season ATS teams would son Overall ATS Teams). have netted a combined gain of about +$2,900 had they If the sixteen teams on the Worst list below had lost performed at their prior three-season rate. Instead, they money in proportion to their losing totals for the prior netted a mere +$420 with a ATS drop of 12.0 percentage three-season period, then they would have been down points. Yes, a profit, but nothing like before. about -$7,000 instead of the actual -$2,140. Don’t get me (continued on next page)

2019 CF 3-Year 2016-18 3-yr. 3-yr 2019 2019 2019 2019 W L T Follow- ATS% ATS Team (Worst) Net $ W L T Up % Net $ Connecticut 9 26 0 25.7% -$1,960 5 7 0 41.7% -$270 Louisville 11 26 1 29.7% -$1,760 7 5 0 58.3% $150 East Carolina 10 25 0 28.6% -$1,750 6 5 0 54.5% $50 Bowling Green 11 24 0 31.4% -$1,540 3 9 0 25.0% -$690 Hawaii 11 24 2 31.4% -$1,540 7 7 0 50.0% -$70 Mississippi 12 24 0 33.3% -$1,440 8 3 1 72.7% $470 Oregon 13 24 1 35.1% -$1,340 8 6 0 57.1% $140 Tennessee 13 24 0 35.1% -$1,340 7 6 0 53.8% $40 Arizona 13 23 0 36.1% -$1,230 3 8 0 27.3% -$580 UCLA 13 23 1 36.1% -$1,230 5 7 0 41.7% -$270 New Mexico 14 23 0 37.8% -$1,130 3 8 1 27.3% -$580 UTEP 13 22 0 37.1% -$1,120 3 9 0 25.0% -$690 TCU 16 24 0 40.0% -$1,040 7 6 0 53.8% $40 Southern Cal 15 23 1 39.5% -$1,030 4 8 0 33.3% -$480 Cincinnati 14 22 0 38.9% -$1,020 9 5 0 64.3% $350 Illinois 14 22 0 38.9% -$1,020 8 5 0 61.5% $250 TOTAL 202 379 6 34.8% $-21,490 93 104 2 47.2% -$2,140

2019 CF 3-Year 2016-18 3-yr. 3-yr 2019 2019 2019 2019 W L T Follow- ATS% ATS Team (Best) Net $ W L T Up % Net $ Fresno St. 27 10 2 73.0% +$1,600 3 9 0 27.3% -$580 Central Florida 25 12 2 67.6% +$1,180 6 7 0 46.2% -$170 Temple 26 13 1 66.7% +$1,170 8 5 0 61.5% $250 Eastern Michigan 24 12 2 66.7% +$1,080 7 6 0 53.8% $40 UAB (2 seasons) 19 8 0 70.4% +$1,020 8 6 0 57.1% $140 Clemson 27 16 1 62.8% +$940 11 4 0 73.3% $660 Iowa St. 23 13 1 63.9% +$870 6 7 0 46.2% -$170 Georgia 26 16 0 61.9% +$840 8 5 0 61.5% $250 TOTAL 197 100 9 66.3% +$8,700 57 48 1 54.3% $420

COLLEGE | 2020 BOBBYSMITHSPORTS.COM 4 2020 CF 3-Year 2017-19 3-yr. 3-yr 2020 2020 2020 2020 W L T Follow- ATS% ATS Team (Worst) Net $ W L T Up % Net $ Bowling Green 10 25 0 28.6% -$1,750 ______UTEP 10 25 0 28.6% -$1,750 ______New Mexico 11 24 1 31.4% -$1,540 ______Florida St. 13 24 0 35.1% -$1,340 ______Hawaii 13 24 2 35.1% -$1,340 ______Louisville 13 24 0 35.1% -$1,340 ______Connecticut 12 23 0 34.3% -$1,330 ______Southern Cal 14 24 1 36.8% -$1,240 ______Old Dominion 13 23 0 36.1% -$1,230 ______Western Michigan 13 23 1 36.1% -$1,230 ______Tennessee 14 23 0 37.8% -$1,130 ______Louisiana-Mon. 13 22 1 37.1% -$1,120 ______UCLA 14 22 1 38.9% -$1,020 ______East Carolina 13 21 0 38.2% -$1,010 ______Massachusetts 13 21 0 38.2% -$1,010 ______Texas St. 13 20 2 39.4% -$900 ______Tex San Antonio 14 18 1 43.8% -$580 ______3-YEAR TOTAL 202 379 6 34.8% $-21,490 ______

2019 CF 3-Year 2017-19 3-yr. 3-yr 2019 2019 2019 2019 W L T Follow- ATS% ATS Team (Best) Net $ W L T Up % Net $ Clemson 29 14 1 67.4% $1,360 ______Georgia 27 15 0 64.3% $1,050 ______UAB 27 14 0 65.9% $1,160 ______Buffalo 26 13 0 66.7% $1,170 ______Appalachian St. 25 14 1 64.1% $960 ______LSU 25 14 2 64.1% $960 ______Utah 25 14 2 64.1% $960 ______3-YEAR TOTAL 184 98 6 67.4% $7,620 ______

College football teams turn over lots of player person- games the last three seasons, if you weren’t on them a nel from season to season. Coaching staffs change at an lot in that span, and you’re just learning that fact? Very alarmingly increasing rate compared to what it once was. often, the ship has already sailed and you’ll be chasing Strengths can become weaknesses while weaknesses be- a less attractive item while some other commodities out come strengths. Things change, including power ratings. there will be performing as well as that team once did. You see, knowing a team’s most recent three-year record It happens every late Summer and Autumn. How will it against the pointspread would be a very useful resource go in 2019 for the Worst and Best of 2017-19? You can if three-year ATS percentages were meant to repeat. But track it all with the help of the charts on this page. Some they’re not. Sometimes, the Best and Worst three-season of the usual suspects are on each list, along with new performances are followed up with a single-season result faces in the crowd. Five of the 17 teams on the Three- that tallies in the opposite direction of the three-season Year Worst list have Year One coaching staffs. We’ll see trend. Look at Fresno State in 2019 (previous page). A 73% if they can make a difference and infuse those moribund ATS winner from the prior three seasons went 3-9 ATS! programs with some value, but don’t automatically as- What good is it to know that a team has covered 68% of its sume it will happen right away. -- Bobby Smith 5 2020 BOBBYSMITH.COM | COLLEGE COLLEGE FOOTBALL Interception Analyses, Prior Season Last season’s Sports Reporter Zone OFFENSIVE INTERCEPTION RATES DEFENSIVE INTERCEPTION RATES Blitz showed both Fresno State and (2019 National Median: 1 in 40.7) (2019 National Median: 1 in 38.4) Utah State (and two other teams) as BEST BEST being in the Top 12 nationally in both O Int PASS OFF Att Pct Ypa TD INT PASS DEF Att Pct Ypa TD INT D Int Offensive and Defensive Interception Rate Rate Rates. Such a trait has landed many an Kent St. 355 67 8.0 24 2 177.5 SnJose St. 340 61.2 7.5 16 16 21.3 eventual non-profitable college football Ga Sthern 155 51.6 6.2 9 1 155.0 Florida Atl 481 58.4 6.9 23 22 21.9 team on the radar of regression. Here’s Ohio St. 406 66.7 9.1 48 3 135.3 TCU 360 55.3 6.7 22 16 22.5 what our August report said about these Oregon St. 420 61.9 7.3 30 4 105.0 Clemson 433 53.3 6.0 14 19 22.8 teams prior to the regular season that UL-Laf. 413 64.9 8.0 27 4 103.3 Alabama 410 56.1 5.9 15 17 24.1 played out: Arizona St. 383 60.8 8.4 21 4 95.8 Florida 390 60.3 6.7 14 16 24.4 LSU 567 75.1 10.6 61 7 81.0 SanDieg St. 448 59.2 6.2 10 18 24.9 “Fresno State and Utah State had Utah 321 72.6 9.9 20 4 80.3 Tennessee 375 57.6 6.7 14 15 25.0 such impressive 2018 campaigns Rice 320 56.3 6.2 13 4 80.0 Oregon 506 58.7 6.1 18 20 25.3 that it seems foolish to expect severe Oregon 446 66.8 8.1 35 6 74.3 Minnesota 357 56 6.7 14 14 25.5 bounce-downs in 2019. But they are Wisconsin 351 70.1 8.0 18 5 70.2 Ball St. 391 58.6 7.5 11 15 26.1 nevertheless prime candidates for N Dame 416 60.8 7.9 37 6 69.3 Ohio St. 393 50.9 5.6 9 15 26.2 regression. Fresno State lost a quar- Georgia 415 61.4 7.5 26 6 69.2 BYU 399 63.7 7.4 22 15 26.6 terback who was great at ball secu- Alabama 406 70.7 11.0 49 6 67.7 So Florida 325 62.5 7.0 15 12 27.1 rity, and Utah State lost practically So Carolna 466 57.5 5.7 12 7 66.6 La. Tech 463 60 6.8 14 17 27.2 its entire coaching staff! Both had Texas Tech 531 64.4 7.3 24 8 66.4 Cincinnati 452 51.5 6.9 17 16 28.3 over-the-top Turnover Margins and Auburn 397 57.7 6.8 20 6 66.2 Baylor 485 60.2 6.3 15 17 28.5 special teams contributions...” SanDieg St. 397 63.7 6.6 15 6 66.2 Navy 343 56.6 7.9 19 12 28.6 Utah State had been 10-3 ATS the prior Florida Intl 389 57.3 7.1 14 6 64.8 Texas Tech 403 61.3 9.2 21 14 28.8 season. They went 7-6 ATS in 2019 – Florida Atl 502 62.5 7.9 30 8 62.8 Illinois 355 58.3 7.8 21 12 29.6 Coastal Car 327 69.7 8.2 25 11 29.7 not horrible. Slightly profitable, actually. SnJose St. 498 61.2 8.1 24 8 62.3 But hang with me here. Fresno State, off WORST WORST a 10-4 ATS performance in 2018, pro- O Int D Int PASS OFF Att Pct Ypa TD INT PASS DEF Att Pct Ypa TD INT ceeded to be 3-8-1 ATS and drove its Rate Rate head coach into retirement. UAB 338 56.8 8.3 20 20 16.9 NC State 412 64.3 7.4 24 4 103.0 The other two teams that made both Army 126 46.8 8.5 6 7 18.0 New Mex 412 62.6 9.4 34 4 103.0 lists were Georgia Southern and Kan- Rutgers 278 55.4 6.0 7 15 18.5 No Texas 374 61.5 7.1 14 4 93.5 sas. GSU went from 9-4 ATS to 5-7-1 Northwstrn 312 50 4.5 6 15 20.8 Ohio 418 59.8 7.4 21 5 83.6 ATS, while Kansas went from 7-5 ATS Air Force 126 54 12.7 14 6 21.0 No Illinois 332 58.7 7.5 18 4 83.0 to 5-6-1 ATS. Validation! Texas St. 441 63 6.6 17 20 22.1 UCLA 405 66.4 9.2 32 5 81.0 New Mex 331 49.2 7.1 13 15 22.1 Iowa State 441 63.3 6.8 22 6 73.5 This year’s Interception Analyses lands Bwl Green 337 56.1 5.6 9 15 22.5 NewMex St. 362 60.8 7.3 21 5 72.4 five teams on the radar of regression Charlotte 321 60.7 8.6 24 14 22.9 Tulsa 339 56.3 7.4 14 5 67.8 due to appearing on both “Best” lists: Umass 392 55.6 5.2 15 16 24.5 UTEP 334 65.3 8.2 27 5 66.8 Ohio State, Alabama, Oregon, Florida Uconn 382 59.7 6.8 14 15 25.5 Florida St. 504 61.1 7.1 19 8 63.0 Atlantic and San Jose State. Throw So Alabma 282 52.8 6.8 14 11 25.6 Kansas 376 63.8 8.0 22 6 62.7 out Ohio State and Alabama, because So Miss 438 66.4 8.6 20 17 25.8 Georgia 501 56.9 5.6 16 8 62.6 as perennial national powers that have Navy 104 52.9 11.9 10 4 26.0 Akron 305 65.9 7.9 23 5 61.0 consistently reloaded successfully, they Houston 314 56.1 7.8 19 12 26.2 Oklahoma 427 60.2 7.3 27 7 61.0 always have a strong chance to be im- Ga. Tech 269 46.1 6.0 14 10 26.9 California 484 63.8 7.1 16 8 60.5 pervious to the pitfalls of normal pro- Duke 378 56.3 5.7 18 14 27.0 UAB 420 51.7 6.1 22 7 60.0 grams who can’t recruit as well and, Arkansas 407 49.6 5.7 14 15 27.1 Rice 348 64.4 8.3 18 6 58.0 therefore, become one-season won- Tennessee 360 55.6 8.0 19 13 27.7 Louisville 405 60.0 7.5 31 7 57.9 ders. You could also lump Oregon into Kansas 390 60.3 7.1 25 14 27.9 Rutgers 343 60.9 8.1 25 6 57.2 that class. After all, it’s been only nine years since the Ducks played for the national championship. That leaves FAU and San Jose State as my top two regression candidates based on this type of analysis. The “Worst” list, candidates to improve upon bad seasons, includes two programs nobody should expect much from. Rutgers and New Mexico have been down for too long. Each has a first-season head coach, but there is much work to be done in both places. UAB is a different story. The Blazers competed for the C-USA East title last season despite throwing 20 INTs, a pick every 16.9 attempts. They have a good defense, which nevertheless somehow managed to not get many INTs while everyone else in the conference was picking their passers. – Bobby Smith

COLLEGE | 2020 BOBBYSMITHSPORTS.COM 6 COLLEGE FOOTBALL ATS MARGIN INCREASES Last year’s Sports Reporter Zone Blitz list of the 30 top ATS Margin 2018-2019 Increases -- generally of +5.0 point or more -- included teams like Team 2018 2019 ATS Mar Vanderbilt, UTEP and Toledo, who all went the way of the trend Change toward negativity and each finished 3-9 ATS. There was also Old Dominion, Army, Syracuse and Washington State, who all went Ohio St. -2.6 16.8 +19.4 4-8 ATS. Kansas had experienced a jump of +13.2 in ATS Margin and we signed off on the page by saying, “Good luck trying to go Louisville -17.6 0.1 +17.8 7-5 ATS again, Les Miles!” The Jayhawks went 5-7 ATS and also lost a home game early in the season to Coastal Carolina, a Sun Navy -5.6 9.1 +14.7 Belt also ran playing FBS-level football for only its third season.

Florida Atl -5.1 8.2 +13.4 But the list had enough other teams on it to push the overall mark to close to 50% ATS, 188-185. That was a flat-bet money-losing North Carolina -4.6 6.9 +11.5 proposition, of course. Flat-betting the other way – in other words, going against all of them -- would have lost more money. Central Michigan -5.6 5.3 +10.9 Here are the bullet-point guidelines we provide every season about how teams can avoid serious regression -- or improve -- fol- Colorado St. -7.7 3.1 +10.8 lowing a big spike in ATS Margin: San Diego St. -7.5 3.3 +10.7 • Continuity of coaching staff, or new coaching staff does not make major system changes. Wisconsin -5.4 4.8 +10.2 • High percentage of productive junior and senior starters that Oregon St. -3.3 6.1 +9.4 have been starters in prior seasons. Louisiana Tech -3.9 5.4 +9.3 • High number of quality injury absences from the prior season, now returning for significant action. Houston -5.1 3.6 +8.7 • Outstanding special teams return and block units, and outstand- Oregon -2.6 5.7 +8.3 ing turnover ratio.

Illinois -3.6 4.6 +8.2 Vanderbilt and Army were two of the four teams specifically cited In the Zone Blitz as most likely to recede in 2019. The other two Western Michigan -8.0 -0.1 +7.8 were Ball State and Miami-OH, who were both profitable at 7-5 ATS and 8-6 ATS. Baylor -1.5 5.9 +7.4 This year’s list of 27 college football teams that posted ATS Margin increases of +5.0 points or more is presented in the table at left. Florida St. -9.8 -2.8 +7.0 As this season’s three most likely to recede, I’ll take: Kansas St. 0.4 7.2 +6.8 Florida Atlantic: Head coach Lane Kiffin bolted to Ole Miss. The turnover count from last season was over-the-top good, as you’ll Mississippi -4.0 2.7 +6.6 see on some other pages in this section. New head coaches tak- ing over turnover-fueled successes tend to disappoint. First-sea- Virginia Tech -4.4 2.2 +6.5 son head coach Willie Taggart has already had awful Year Ones at South Florida and Florida State. Connecticut -8.7 -2.3 +6.3 San Diego State: “Aztecs’ new looking Ball St. -1.2 5.0 +6.3 for playmakers,” said a headline in the spring. Good luck finding some! This was one of the run-heaviest programs around next to East Carolina -3.8 2.1 +6.0 the academy teams. The defense won’t be protected as well as it has been. Memphis -1.6 3.8 +5.5 Washington: The last time the Huskies entered a season with so Washington -2.5 2.7 +5.3 little experience was 2004, when their combined for an 8-24 TD-INT on a 1-10 team. It won’t be that bad, Tennessee -3.3 1.9 +5.2 but first-season head coach Jimmy Lake seems to be in a tough spo, installing new systems without the benefit of a spring prac- New Mexico St. -9.3 -4.1 +5.1 tice. -- Bobby Smith

7 2020 BOBBYSMITH.COM | COLLEGE COLLEGE FOOTBALL Turnover Margin Change & ATS Analyses 2019 offered more proof that large TO changes tend to bounce the other way and lose money.

Forty of the 45 teams on the list at right, TO TO Prior ATS Team Next ATS experienced a negative Turnover Margin Year Ch Year Ch change the season after posting one of 2018 7-5-0 +33 Kansas 2019 -28 5-7-0 the largest positive TO Margin changes. 2018 7-5-0 +27 San Jose St. 2019 +9 7-5-0 Last year’s top eight TO Margin increases 2018 10-3-0 +25 Syracuse 2019 -4 4-8-0 from 2017-18 went from having a collec- 2018 10-3-0 +22 Georgia Southern 2019 -14 6-6-0 tive 61-40 ATS mark (60.3%) to 42-54 ATS (45.6%). The lone team to experi- 2018 7-5-0 +19 Rice 2019 -1 6-6-0 ence a positive TO Margin change, San 2018 8-5-1 +17 Middle Tenn 2019 -2 6-5-0 Jose State, was one of only two teams 2018 8-5-0 +17 Ohio 2019 -17 5-8-0 among the eight to show a flat-bet profit 2018 4-9-0 +16 North Texas 2019 -11 3-9-0 in 2019. Here are the top Turnover Mar- 2017 8-5-1 +22 Boise St. 2018 -2 7-5-1 gin increases from 2018-19. You won’t be 2017 9-4-0 +21 Purdue 2018 -9 6-6-0 surprised if a handful of them fail to show 2017 8-5-0 +21 Wyoming 2018 -20 5-7-0 a profit vs. the spread in 2020: 2017 9-5-0 +18 Akron 2018 -15 5-7-0 2017 10-4-0 +18 Florida Atl 2018 -20 4-8-0 2018 2019 + TO 2017 11-2-1 +17 Fresno St. 2018 +4 10-4-0 Largest + Change Ch TO TO 2017 8-3-1 +16 Central Florida 2018 -3 9-4-0 Florida Atl -7 21 +28 2017 8-5-0 +16 Southern Miss 2018 +4 6-5-0 San Diego St. -3 19 +22 2017 3-9-0 +15 Bowling Green 2018 -7 4-8-0 Baylor -9 11 +20 2017 6-6-1 +15 Texas Tech 2018 -1 6-6-0 Oregon St. -10 10 +20 2016 5-7-0 +21 Charlotte 2017 -17 6-6-0 Utah St. -17 -2 +15 2016 8-5-0 +21 Wake Forest 2017 0 8-4-1 2016 8-5-0 +21 Central Florida 2017 +16 8-3-1 East Carolina -14 1 +15 2016 3-9-0 +20 Cincinnati 2017 -6 4-8-1 Meanwhile, the largest negative Turnover 2016 10-4-0 +17 Western Michigan 2017 -10 5-7-0 Margin decreases from the prior season 2016 9-4-0 +17 Idaho 2017 -9 8-4-0 are candidates to bounce back and be 2016 6-5-2 +17 Nebraska 2017 -12 4-8-0 profitable the next. Last year, the worst 2016 6-7-0 +16 Kansas St. 2017 -3 6-7-0 TO Margin changers were Florida Atlan- 2016 9-4-0 +15 Miami OH 2017 -2 3-9-0 tic and Wyoming, both -20 from the year 2016 6-7-0 +15 Hawaii 2017 +9 1-10-1 before when they were 4-8 ATS and 5-7 2015 5-8-0 +24 West Virginia 2016 -5 5-7-1 ATS, respectively. But in 2019, FAU went 10-4 ATS and won its conference cham- 2015 9-4-0 +23 Navy 2016 -17 8-5-1 pionship; Wyoming went 8-5 ATS! Two 2015 5-8-0 +22 Connecticut 2016 -17 2-10-0 more terrific examples of why we do this. 2015 8-4-1 +21 Georgia St. 2016 -4 7-5-0 2015 5-7-1 +21 Oklahoma St. 2016 -2 7-5-1 FAU, with their season high TO Margin 2015 8-5-1 +18 San Diego St. 2016 -8 7-6-1 Change of +28, now makes the list of 2015 7-6-1 +17 Iowa 2016 -5 6-7-0 potential pitfalls on the other end of the spectrum (as seen in the table above. 2014 7-5-0 +23 Georgia 2015 -12 6-6-0 The top three Turnover Margin Change 2014 9-2-1 +20 TCU 2015 -18 6-6-0 teams, FAU, San Diego State, Baylor, 2014 11-2-0 +19 Louisiana Tech 2015 -15 6-6-0 all replace head coaches and many as- 2014 7-5-0 +19 Memphis 2015 -3 6-5-1 sistants for 2020. The largest negative 2014 6-4-0 +18 Florida Int 2015 -8 4-6-1 swingers from last season – Ohio, North- 2013 10-3-0 +29 Houston 2014 -17 7-5-1 western and Kansas – have coaching 2013 11-3 +24 Florida State 2014 -23 3-11-0 staffs remaining mostly intact. 2013 8-5-0 +22 Buffalo 2014 -18 5-6-0 2013 9-4-0 +21 Tulane 2014 -8 4-8-0 2018 2019 - TO Largest - Change 2013 8-5-0 +20 Oklahoma State 2014 -23 6-7-0 TO TO Ch The 45 teams on this list combined to be 252-291 (46.4% ATS) the season after Ohio 13 -4 -17 posting large postive Turnover Margin changes vs. the season before. This repre- Northwestern 7 -10 -17 sents a drastic change in profitability from that prior season, when the same teams Kansas 16 -12 -28 had combined to be 344-225 ATS (60.5% ATS). -- Bobby Smith

COLLEGE | 2020 BOBBYSMITHSPORTS.COM 8 COLLEGE FOOTBALL Plays Fumble Yards PPRC Name G Opponent Fumbles Def Yards/ Per per Rank Fumbles Recovered Recovery % Rk Per Play Rec Game Fum 1 Notre Dame 13 33 19 57.6% 18 4.7 320 47 2 Mississippi State 13 25 14 56.0% 73 6.3 399 59 3 Illinois 13 23 16 69.6% 77 5.6 409 59 4 Arizona State 13 26 15 57.7% 67 5.5 393 62 5 Tulsa 12 14 13 92.9% 70 5.7 395 64 6 UAB 14 28 13 46.4% 8 4.7 302 69 7 Auburn 13 23 13 56.5% 28 4.8 337 70

A Stumble After Recovering Many Fumbles? When I look at this table of the defenses that recovered Although there is an offensive transition to made to the the most fumbles in college football last season, several Air Raid, getting transfer QB K.J. Costello, who was play- things stand out. One of them is that Mississippi State ing in a quick-release, short-pass system at Stanford, games will probably be hurdling over many a wagering should make it less of a problem. Leach’s teams have Total in 2020. been too productive offensively to doubt that he can’t get The Bulldogs’ defense was, on balance, fair to good dur- it done in the SEC, especially as the odd duck in a confer- ing the tenure of its previous head coach ence where defenses haven’t faced the style much. But (2009-2017). The team had a run-first offense paired with it’s very likely that the defense is on its way to becoming a defense that allowed in the range of 5.4 to 5.6 yards per the second coming of Washington State, which allowed play for eight of his nine seasons. In 2016, it allowed 6.2 between 5.9 and 6.6 yards per play in half of Leach’s yards per play but it was quickly corrected and within two eight seasons. seasons, with the help of a senior-laden, NFL quality de- Meanwhile, you’d have to be concerned about the ability fensive line, it ranked #1 in total defensive giving up the of some other collegiate defenses to get results as good fewest yards per play in the nation, 4.1. Joe Moorhead – as they got last season after those results were aided a first-time FBS-level head coach with a strong offensive by high fumble recovery counts. At least Notre Dame al- coordinator background -- was the Year One head coach lowed only 4.7 yards per play with a Top 20-ranked unit lucky enough to have inherited that defense in 2018. on its way to recovering a way-too-high 19 fumbles from But in 2019, what often happens to a “new face” top de- a way-too-high 33 drops by the other team. Illinois and fense occurred. Mississippi State’s D had its worst sea- Arizona State did what defensive-minded head coaches son in many years, allowing 6.3 yards per play. For pur- and are known for – giving up poses of comparison, the defenses of UNLV, Hawaii and yardage in the 400 per game range, but jarring the ball Rutgers allowed fewer yards per play than Mississippi loose and thwarting many opposing drives. Both units re- State’s. Moorhead and staff were canned after only two turn a lot of players, so they may be okay. But Tulsa? seasons and now Mike Leach is the school’s third head Ridiculous. The other side dropped the ball only 14 times coach in the last four. If we can call Moorhead “offen- – less than half the fumbles forced by Notre Dame – but sive-minded,” then we can describe Leach as someone the Golden Hurricane recovered 13 of them. The school whose brain waves are pinning the needle to the far right retained head coach Philip Montgomery because they on the offensive side of the meter. He is a 75% pass- lost a lot of close games against opponents with good re- ing guy at quick tempo. For Leach, defense is an after- cords. This is what I call “The Mike Brown Method,” which thought, something he leaves to coordinators who will kept Marvin Lewis hanging around longer than necessary never be able to recruit as well as they’d like to because with the Cincinnati Bengals and delayed their future prog- players understand that bad stats will be attached to them ress. Montgomery probably should have been canned no matter how well they play. In a Leach defense, lesser following the team’s back-to-back 2-10 and 3-9 seasons athletes tend to play more plays due to the offensive style in 2017-18. Instead, here he is, still, in 2020, off 4-8 2019, whereby many first downs, and runs out of bounds by optimistic despite many more losses and a 2019 fumble receivers, stop the clock. stat that masks defensive issues. – Bobby Smith 9 2020 BOBBYSMITH.COM | COLLEGE Notes:

COLLEGE | 2020 BOBBYSMITHSPORTS.COM 10

Top View