NCAA – 2017 CoachRank Adjusted Rankings – Trendwatch

The totals for CoachRank only tell part of the story. You can get a clearer view of the big picture by examining some of the trends associated with the individual season scores that are averaged together to get the total CoachRank score.

The following are some of those trends, sorted by conference. Note that only programs with coaches in place for at least three seasons are included in this.

Also, keep in mind the context for some of the schools listed here. Yes, Florida State is listed in the “Going Down” section, but that’s primarily due to having an unbelievable 2014 season that would be almost impossible to replicate. The same goes for some schools like Texas A&M and Virginia, who have strong odds of heading back up again for 2017 and beyond.

“Going Up” = Teams whose Season Scores have gone up in successive years between 2014-2016.
“Going Down” = Teams whose Season Scores have gone down in successive years between 2014-2016.

AAC

Going Up
Going Down – East Carolina, South Florida, Tulsa, UCF

ACC

Going Up –
Going Down – Florida State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

America East

Going Up –
Going Down – New Hampshire, UMBC

Atlantic 10

Going Up – Saint Joseph’s
Going Down – La Salle, UMass, VCU

Atlantic Sun

Going Up – Stetson
Going Down – North Florida

Big 12

Going Up – TCU
Going Down – Texas

Big Sky

Going Up – Eastern Washington, Sacramento State
Going Down – Montana

Big South

Going Up – Longwood
Going Down – UNC Asheville, Winthrop

Big Ten

Going Up – Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
Going Down – Iowa

Big West

Going Up – Long Beach State, UC Davis
Going Down – Cal Poly, Cal State Fullerton

Colonial

Going Up – College of Charleston, Elon
Going Down –

Conference USA

Going Up – Florida Atlantic
Going Down –

Horizon

Going Up – Illinois-Chicago, Northern Kentucky
Going Down –

Ivy

Going Up – Columbia
Going Down – Dartmouth

MAAC

Going Up – Quinnipiac
Going Down – Fairfield, Niagara, Rider

MAC

Going Up – Central Michigan, Kent State
Going Down – Buffalo

Mountain West

Going Up – Fresno State, UNLV
Going Down – Colorado College, San Diego State

NEC

Going Up – Saint Francis (PA)
Going Down –

Ohio Valley

Going Up – Austin Peay, Tennessee Tech
Going Down – Jacksonville State, Morehead State, Southeast Missouri State, Tennessee-Martin

Pac-12

Going Up – Oregon State, Stanford, USC, Utah
Going Down – Oregon, Washington

SEC

Going Up – Auburn
Going Down – Texas A&M

Southern

Going Up –
Going Down – Mercer, Western Carolina

Southland

Going Up – Abilene Christian, Central Arkansas
Going Down –

Summit

Going Up – Oral Roberts
Going Down –

Sun Belt

Going Up – Arkansas-Little Rock
Going Down – Georgia Southern, Texas State

SWAC

Going Up – Alabama State
Going Down – Howard, Prairie View A&M

WAC

Going Up – Cal State Bakersfield
Going Down – New Mexico State

WCC

Going Up – Santa Clara
Going Down – Portland

2 thoughts on “NCAA – 2017 CoachRank Adjusted Rankings – Trendwatch

  1. Jules

    Chris: I wonder if you realize that Chris Thomas, the RPI guru, predicted on Portland’s pilotnation.net board that UP would finish the 2017 season ranked #23 by the RPI, ascending up from #117 for 2016, directly contradicting your “going down” rating.

    Here’s his rationale:
    “After reviewing a bunch of possible statistical ways to project teams’ RPIs for the next year, the best one I could come up with is based strictly on the longevity of the current coach and the average of teams’ RPIs over some prior number of years. It’s a very rough way to do it, and there always will be outliers, but it’s the best I could find on average, after trying a bunch of possibilities. For a team with the current coach having been head coach for 9 or more years, which applies to the Pilots, the projected rating I came up with is the team’s average rating over the last 8 years. If a head coach has been in place for 4 to 8 years, then the projected rating is the team’s average over the last 6 years. If the head coach has been there for 3 or fewer years, then the projected rating is the average over the last 2 years. I looked at all the teams and did a rating for each team based on how long the current coach has been head coach and what the team’s average rating has been over the appropriate time frame. Then I ranked the teams according to their ratings. That’s how the Pilots came in at #23.”

    No offense to you, but Thomas tends to know what he’s talking about.

    Reply
    1. Chris Henderson Post author

      Didn’t see that but I don’t really agree (as you’ll see with my WCC projections).

      I think the general assumption which is backed up by stats is that if a coach has been in place for a long time, they’ve obviously done something to warrant staying their position for a long time (see North Carolina, Santa Clara, etc.). However, Portland is something of an outlier, as I’m not sure there are many schools that have had such a long period of success as the Pilots have had under Garrett Smith followed by a serious downturn. If you look at Portland by pretty much any other measure (returning talent, recruiting class, comparative strength with WCC rivals, etc.), they do not look like a Top 25 team.

      In terms of Portland being listed in the “going down” section, that’s probably poorly worded on my part. All that means is that Garrett Smith (and Portland’s) CoachRank number declined in two successive seasons, from 2014 to 2015 and 2015 to 2016, with it not intending to be an arbiter of success going forward.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *