Savvy projections of returning production

silver and white rollout qb generic

To prepare for the 2019 season, the Savvy system uses over 10,000 cells of data in four major reviews and two lesser ones to analyze teams during the off-season.

Today, we are looking at the returning effective production that each team has from last season.

I’ve funneled the data into a 1-through-5 value system with “5” being the best and, of course, “1” being the worst.

And, instead of listing dozens of columns of data or all of the data groups that Savvy analyzes, I’ve simply shown the data that I believe most readers want—- the scrimmage elements— rushing, passing, rush defense, and pass defense.   I compiled other rating elements into one pot rather than bore readers with superfluous analyses.

This preview is not intended to give us a preseason ranking but rather to get an idea of whether each team should be expected to do better, worse, or about the same as last year.  For example:  Penn State, Oklahoma State, San Jose State, and Oregon State all rate “about average” [3] for returning talent yet if we were choosing we would likely choose the first two over the last two.  Even so, we can see that all four teams have enough returning production to expect similar or better results than last year, irrespective of coach and quarterback ratings.

Savvy 2019          
Returning Production Projections          
5 = strongest
Net of
Scrimmage groups only      
1 = weakest all groups RUSH offense PASS offense RUSH defense PASS defense
Akron 3 1 4 2 2
Alabama 5 3 4 4 5
App State 3 5 3 2 4
Arizona 4 4 4 4 3
Arizona St. 3 4 1 4 5
Arkansas 3 3 3 1 1
Arkansas St. 3 1 1 3 5
Army 2 5 2 1 1
Auburn 3 4 1 4 5
Ball St. 3 3 2 3 3
Baylor 4 4 4 4 3
Boise St. 3 5 1 4 4
Boston Col 3 4 3 3 4
Bowling Green 3 3 4 3 1
Buffalo 2 5 1 1 2
BYU 3 1 3 1 2
C Michigan 2 2 3 4 3
California 3 2 3 4 4
Charlotte 3 4 2 3 2
Cincinnati 4 5 3 2 4
Clemson 5 5 4 4 5
Coastal Car 2 2 2 2 3
Colorado 4 1 4 5 4
Colorado St. 2 1 3 1 1
Connecticut 2 3 1 3 2
Duke 3 4 4 2 2
E Carolina 3 1 5 2 2
E Michigan 3 1 2 3 4
Florida 4 5 4 4 5
Florida Atl. 3 4 4 1 2
Florida Intl. 4 3 4 3 4
Florida St. 3 1 1 5 5
Fresno St. 3 4 1 4 4
Georgia 4 5 4 1 2
Georgia So. 3 5 2 2 4
Georgia St. 3 3 3 1 1
Georgia Tech 2 4 1 1 1
Hawaii 4 3 5 5 4
Houston 4 4 4 3 3
Illinois 3 4 2 3 3
Indiana 4 4 5 2 3
Iowa 4 4 4 4 5
Iowa St. 4 4 4 4 4
Kansas 2 3 1 1 2
Kansas St. 3 4 2 4 4
Kent St. 3 3 4 3 2
Kentucky 3 5 3 1 1
LA Lafayette 2 4 1 3 3
LA Monroe 4 2 3 3 3
LA Tech 3 3 3 4 5
Liberty 4 4 5 4 5
Louisville 3 2 3 1 1
LSU 5 3 4 5 5
Marshall 3 3 3 4 4
Maryland 3 4 2 2 1
Massachusetts 2 1 1 1 1
Memphis 3 4 3 5 4
Miami Fl 4 4 2 4 5
Miami Oh 2 1 1 2 2
Michigan 4 3 4 3 4
Michigan St. 3 2 1 4 4
Middle Tenn 3 3 1 5 4
Minnesota 3 4 3 3 3
Mississippi 2 3 2 1 1
Mississippi St. 3 3 1 3 4
Missouri 3 4 1 3 3
N Carolina 4 3 4 2 3
N Carolina St. 3 1 2 4 4
N Illinois 4 4 3 5 4
N Texas 4 4 4 1 3
Navy 1 5 1 1 1
Nebraska 4 3 4 2 3
Nevada 3 4 2 3 2
New Mexico 2 1 3 1 2
New Mexico St. 4 3 5 4 3
Northwestern 3 4 1 4 4
Notre Dame 4 3 3 5 5
Ohio 3 3 3 1 3
Ohio St. 5 5 4 5 5
Oklahoma 4 5 2 4 4
Oklahoma St. 3 3 2 3 2
Old Dominion 3 1 5 1 1
Oregon 5 4 4 3 4
Oregon St. 3 3 3 3 1
Penn St. 3 1 1 4 2
Pittsburgh 3 1 3 3 3
Purdue 3 4 1 4 3
Rice 3 1 2 2 4
Rutgers 2 3 3 1 1
S Alabama 2 3 1 2 3
S Carolina 4 3 5 3 2
S Miss 3 1 4 2 3
San Diego St. 3 4 3 4 4
San Jose St. 3 1 3 3 1
SMU 3 1 2 4 3
Stanford 4 1 5 4 5
Syracuse 3 3 2 5 5
TCU 4 3 4 2 3
Temple 4 1 4 4 4
Tennessee 4 3 3 3 4
Texas 4 4 3 1 3
Texas A&M 4 2 4 1 2
Texas St. 3 1 5 1 1
Texas Tech 4 2 5 2 4
Toledo 3 4 4 1 3
Troy 4 5 3 3 4
Tulane 2 4 1 4 3
Tulsa 3 3 3 2 2
UAB 2 5 2 1 1
UCF 3 5 2 4 4
UCLA 4 3 2 3 4
UNLV 3 2 3 2 3
USC 4 1 4 2 1
USF 4 4 4 3 3
Utah 4 2 4 3 4
Utah St. 4 5 4 4 5
UTEP 2 3 3 1 1
UTSA 3 1 2 4 4
Va Tech 5 2 4 5 4
Vanderbilt 3 4 1 3 4
Virginia 3 3 4 1 3
Washington 3 2 1 3 4
Washington St. 3 1 2 4 4
Wisconsin 2 4 2 1 1
Wyoming 3 2 2 2 2

 

 

 

 

……………………………………