65. North Texas
86. New Mexico State
92. Middle Tennessee
97. Utah State
99. Troy
100. UL-Lafayette
111. Arkansas State
113. UL-Monroe
114. Idaho

60-79
<a href='http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2004/Preview/ProgramRankings_60_79.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2004/Pr...kings_60_79.htm</a>

80-99
<a href='http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2004/Preview/ProgramRankings_80_99.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2004/Pr...kings_80_99.htm</a>

100-117
<a href='http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2004/Preview/ProgramRankings_100_117.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2004/Pr...ngs_100_117.htm</a>

Using several factors in order to determine the strongest all-around programs in college football, here's the 2nd Annual CFN Three Year Program Analysis. To do this, eight factors are used from attendance and graduation, to big wins and bad losses.

The Scoring System

- Attendance. How much fan support is there? Obviously some stadiums are far bigger than others so this might not seem fair, but it's a good indication of fan support counting the average amount of the attendance for home dates from 2001 to 2003 and divided by 10,000 to get the score. For example, Colorado State averaged 29,551 fans per game over the last three seasons, so the program gets a score of 2.96.
Why this is important: Sure some stadiums are bigger than others and some teams get more support, but that's the point. It's a big deal to the bottom line of an athletic department, and the relevance of the football program to recruits and the national media, to get 100,000+ butts in the seats like Ohio State, Tennessee and a few others can. How can Eastern Michigan and its average of 11,800 fans per game compete when compared to Michigan and its average of 110,500 fans? Exactly.

- Graduation Rates. From the most recent batch of graduation rates available from the NCAA report released in 2003, the rate was divided by ten for a score. For example, Bowling Green's most recently released graduation rate for football players was 42%, so it gets a score of 4.2. When the football class graduation rate isn't available, the four-year rate is used. When that's unavailable, the overall male student-athlete rate is used. One important note, the NCAA looks at whole classes, so a team's graduation rate might not always be indicative of what the current coaching staff is responsible for.
Why this is important: After all, these are supposed to be student-athletes out there playing. This is a good indicator for how much emphasis a program places on academics rather than simply using the football players for their on-the-field talents.


- Wins over the last three years. The number of wins over Division-I teams a program has from 2001-2003 (wins over D-IAA teams aren't counted.)
Why this is important: At the end of the day, this is all that really matters to college football fans. Winning games makes everything else forgivable.

- Quality wins over the last three years. How many wins does a program have over Division-I teams that finished with winning records from 2001-2003?
Why this is important: This goes to show the consistency of programs when compared to the above-average. Programs that consistently win these games are always in the hunt for conference titles and big bowl games.

- Players drafted over the last three years. The number of players selected in the NFL Draft from 2001-2003 divided by two for the score.
Why this is important: The most controversial of the components last year, the scoring has been changed a bit for 2004 cutting the number of drafted players in half to get the score and lessen the overall importance. However, this is still a big deal. If a blue-chip recruit is trying to decide between two schools, he'll most likely go to the one with the better track record of sending its players to the next level. If a big-time program has a low score, that might mean less emphasis is put on player development and readiness for the NFL.

- Conference winning percentage over the last three years. From 2001-2003, what percentage of conference games has a team won? Conference championship games don't count in the conference winning percentages (those count in the total wins and, more often than not, in the Quality Win component.) Keep in mind that some programs switched leagues and that's taken into account. For the teams without a conference affiliation for a given year, the winning percentages were taken against all Division-I teams on their schedules.
Why this is important: All teams shoot for conference titles first and foremost. BCS bowl games and national titles are great, but those require a certain amount of good fortune. Take care of conference play and everything else will fall into place.

- Elite Wins. This is how many wins a program has from 2001-2003 over teams that finished a season with three losses or less. An extra .5 was added for an Elite Win on the road.
Why this is important: These are, more often than not, the types of wins that make good programs great, and are the ones the fans remember.

- Bad Losses. These are the number of losses a program has from 2001-2003 against teams that finished a season with four wins or less. This number is subtracted the overall score. An extra .5 was added to a bad loss at home.
Why this is important: Lose to a bad team and the win the week before gets quickly forgotten about. These are the losses that suck the life out of a team and a season.

Which two "bad losses" are they refering to for North Texas?

I know one bad loss for UNT is probably the loss to ULM back in 2001. Not real sure on the other.

14-9 to Arizona in 2002(was really a win). Zona finished 4-8. UNT had a "non-call" on a TD that was apparent to everyone in the stadium that wasn't wearing zebra stripes.

The UL-Monroe loss in 2001 and this loss in '02 are the only losses that UNT has (since Sun Belt play commenced in 2001) to teams that didn't finished the season with a winning record.