Peer programs

So who have been our peers that last 12 years? To compare I am going to look at Big 5 programs within +/- 10 in the Sagarin rankings each year.



2001 SU 13th
Peers: Texas, Tenn, Neb, Oregon, Oklahoma, Colorado, FSU, MD, LSU, Wash St, Stanford, Illinois, UCLA, South Carolina, Michigan, Virginia Tech, Georgia, K St, UNC

2002 SU 77th
Peers: Zona, Stanford, Utah, UNC, Mich St

2003 SU 61st
Peers: South Carolina, Colorado, Northwestern, ASU, Louisville, UCLA, Stanford, PSU

2004 SU 62nd
Peers: Iowa St, Wash St, South Carolina, Pitt, Northwestern, Kansas, Bama, Mizzou, K St, Penn St, Mich St, Wake, Neb

4 year avg (Coach P years) 53.25
Top Peers: Stanford (3), South Carolina (3)

Current SU 77th
Peers: Stanford 7th, South Carolina 12th

We are in worse shape than both of those peers. Not a surprise that the last 9 years we have fallen.




2005 SU 114th
Peers: Miss St. Only team worse was Duke.

2006 SU 66th
Peers: K St, Purdue, Vandy, Kansas, UVA, Miss, NC St

2007 SU 113th
Peers: Duke, Baylor, Minn. Only Baylor and Minnesota were worse.

2008 SU 104th
Peers: Michigan, Iowa St. Teams worse Iowa St, Indiana, Wash, Wash St.

4 year avg (GRob years) 99.25

Current SU 77th
Peers: Baylor 4th, Duke 50th, Iowa St 76th, Kansas 104th, K St 32nd, Michigan 35th, Minn 59th, Miss 26th, Miss St 53rd, NC St 87th, Purdue 134th, Vandy 45th, UVA 86th

We are in worse shape than eight of those peers, better than two, and on par with three. Not a surprise that the last 5 years we have been mediocre.




2009 SU 83rd
Peers: UVA, NC St, Purdue, Duke, Baylor, Michigan, Louisville, Colorado

2010 SU 48th
Peers: MD, Illinois, Miami, UNC, Texas Tech, BC, PSU, Louisville, Clemson, Georgia

2011 SU 86th
Peers: Wash St, Kentucky, Oregon St, Minn, BC, Kansas

2012 SU 38th
Peers: ASU, PSU, UCLA, USC, Mich St, Texas Tech, Mizzou, Miss St, UNC, Zona, GA Tech, WV

4 year avg (Marrone years) 63.75
Top Peers: BC (2), UNC (2), Louisville (2), Texas Tech (2)

Current SU 77th
Peers: BC 74th, UNC 56th, Louisville 13th, Texas Tech 25th

We are worse than three of those peers, on par with one. Not a surprise as this year has been a poor one.




12 year avg 72.08
Top Peers: UNC (4), Penn St (4), Colorado (3), Kansas (3), K St (3), Louisville (3), Michigan (3), Michigan St (3), South Carolina (3), Stanford (3), UCLA (3), Wash St (3)

Current SU 77th
Peers: UNC 56th, Penn St 48th, Colorado 93rd, Kansas 104th, K St 32nd, Louisville 13th, Michigan 35th, Mich St 19th, South Carolina 12th, Stanford 7th, UCLA 17th, Wash St 47th

We are worse then ten of those teams, and better than two.




It was obvious that we were on a downward trend under Coach P, and he deserved to get fired. GRob then accelerated that into a downward spiral. How he survived to coach a 4th season is a mystery. Marrone did a good job of stabilizing the program and getting it headed in the right direction. However, as you can see above there have been schools in a similar boat who have not only stabilized but have been on an accelerated upward trend. Because of that you cannot say that Marrone did a good job. Decent sure, but he shouldn't be praised as a savior.  There are teams currently in a lot better shape that started as peers to SU when Marrone took over.

As a further example look at 2007-2009. That is GRob's last two years and Marrone's first year stuck with GRob kids. The SU avg rank was 100. That avg is similar to:

Washington St 109 avg, Current 47th
Indiana 98.3 avg, Current 49th
Iowa St 90.7 avg, Current 76th
Baylor 87.7 avg, Current 4th
Minnesota 87.3 avg, Current 59th
Washington 82 avg, Current 18th
Duke 81.3 avg, Current 50th

Yes we had the 2nd worst Big 5 avg from 2007-2009, but we have not made even close to the jump that Baylor or Washington have. And we still are in a similar spot as Duke, Indiana, ISU, Minn, and WSU. Marrone should get credit for improving things. The program is in better shape than when he took over. We certainly could have stayed down. But he shouldn't be praised as the savior of the program. Compared to our peers did he do better than Briles, Cutcliffe, Wilson, Rhoads, Kill, Sarkisian, or Leach? Or did he do a decent job which is similar to what most coaches would do?