Improved APR under CPR

[sdillon500]

ESPN's Big XII blog has an article up today about the APR scores in the Big XII. I know there's been some discussion about ISU's overall four-year APR (it's bad), but Ubben also broke the rankings down by coach, and how the coaches ranked according to their single-year rankings. (last year's score in parentheses.)

1. Gary Pinkel, Missouri -- 975 (977)

2. Bo Pelini, Nebraska -- 970 (934)

3. Bob Stoops, Oklahoma -- 966 (954)

4. Art Briles, Baylor -- 964 (985)

5. Dan Hawkins, Colorado -- 958 (929)

6. Turner Gill, Kansas -- 948 (first year)

7. Paul Rhoads, Iowa State -- 946 (889)

8. Mike Sherman, Texas A&M -- 942 (902)

8. Bill Snyder, Kansas State -- 942 (908)

10. Tommy Tuberville, Texas Tech -- 940 (915)

11. Mack Brown, Texas -- 924 (959)

12. Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State -- 913 (944)

So while the four-year APR score for ISU is still pretty ugly, it looks like it was mainly due to the Mac-Chizik-Rhoads transition.

 

[tazclone]

ESPN's Big XII blog has an article up today about the APR scores in the Big XII. I know there's been some discussion about ISU's overall four-year APR (it's bad), but Ubben also broke the rankings down by coach, and how the coaches ranked according to their single-year rankings. (last year's score in parentheses.)

1. Gary Pinkel, Missouri -- 975 (977)

2. Bo Pelini, Nebraska -- 970 (934)

3. Bob Stoops, Oklahoma -- 966 (954)

4. Art Briles, Baylor -- 964 (985)

5. Dan Hawkins, Colorado -- 958 (929)

6. Turner Gill, Kansas -- 948 (first year)

7. Paul Rhoads, Iowa State -- 946 (889)

8. Mike Sherman, Texas A&M -- 942 (902)

8. Bill Snyder, Kansas State -- 942 (908)

10. Tommy Tuberville, Texas Tech -- 940 (915)

11. Mack Brown, Texas -- 924 (959)

12. Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State -- 913 (944)

So while the four-year APR score for ISU is still pretty ugly, it looks like it was mainly due to the Mac-Chizik-Rhoads transition.

Am I missing something? Last years score is worse than our 4 year average. That means that we are actually fallling

 

[synapticwave]

Am I missing something? Last years score is worse than our 4 year average. That means that we are actually fallling

I think last year's score means it's our 4-year average from last year, versus our 4 year average from this year.

 

[sdillon500]

I think last year's score means it's our 4-year average from last year, versus our 4 year average from this year.

Kind of. The score in parentheses is the one year APR score from 08-09 (889). The 946 is the score from 09-10. That 57 point improvement is the best in the Big XII.

 

[tazclone]

Kind of. The score in parentheses is the one year APR score from 08-09 (889). The 946 is the score from 09-10. That 57 point improvement is the best in the Big XII.

Now that makes sense.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

The score in parentheses is last year's four year average, the first score is each coaches score for ONLY this year.

Or at least that is how it makes sense to me.

 

[Sloup]

I did some digging to find out what these numbers actually mean instead of being content with "Don't go below 925."

APR is calculated once every year. The NCAA says that there are two factors most associated with the graduation of student-athletes: eligibility and retention. Every student-athlete gets one point for being academically eligible and one point for staying at their respective university every semester. (Side note: I never found out what happens if somebody leaves a team, but stays at their school to finish their degree. Does that count as retention or not?) Then, once a year for each team, they combine every team member's accrued points and divide it by the maximum possible points, resulting in a number between 0 and 1. They then multiply the number by 1000 for reading purposes.

What this boils down to is that in the 2008-2009 school year, Iowa State's Football team got 88.9% of these points, then in 2009-2010, the football team got 94.6% of the points.

The important number, however, is the 4 year average. The individual years are kind of like a progress report that tells us more specifically how the team is doing academically on an annual basis. It's also important to realize that, although maybe not completely, Paul Rhoads inherited the 889 score from Chizik, then came back with a vengeance in his first year.

One thing that bugs me is that it seems relatively simple to calculate this number, but it takes a full year to report it. Oh well.