Final 2011 Power Rankings: Army, Maryland, Ole Miss, Troy At Nos. 105-108

Three of the four programs occupying spots 105-108 on the countdown were bowl teams in 2010, but unable to replicate their success in 2011. The first appearances from BCS conferences ACC and SEC are up in the latest round on the 2011 Power Rankings countdown. Ole Miss and Maryland went a combined 1-15 in conference play, and woeful 4-20 overall. Fifty percent of their wins came against members of the Championship Subdivision.

Army and Troy both had promise for ’11, but various issues relegated each to 3-9.

Offense: 16.1 PPG (No. 116); 281.3 YPG (No. 114); 129.6 rushing YPG (No. 83); 151.7 passing YPG (No. 107); 76 percent red zone conversion rate (No. 94); 33 percent third down conversion rate (No. 110); 33 sacks allowed (No. 101)

Defense: 32.1 PPG allowed (No. 96); 419.3 YPG allowed (No. 90); 224.9 rushing YPG allowed (No. 112); 194.4 passing YPG allowed (No. 22); 79 percent opponent red zone conversion rate (No. 40); 41.1 percent opponent third down conversion rate (No. 74); 13 sacks (No. 110)

Special Teams: 43.6 yards/punt (No. 24); 15.6 PR yards/attempt (No. 3); 9.1 PR yards allowed/attempt (No. 76); 9-11 FGM-FGA; 20-22 PATs; 20.5 KR yards/attempt (No. 83); 20.9 KR yards allowed/attmpet (No. 48)

Turnover Differential: -8

Time of Possession: 28:52 (No. 85)

Penalties: 80/692 yards (No. 85)

The lofty expectations Ole Miss had just two seasons ago seem light years away. The Rebels plummeted to the cellar of the SEC quickly, and will begin anew under Hugh Freeze. Houston Nutt was dismissed following a disastrous 2-10 campaign, in which the Rebels became the punching bag for the rest of the conference.

One of the areas in which Ole Miss wasn’t near the bottom of the FBS was punt returns. Racking up nearly 16 yards per return would have been quite the boon for the Rebel offense. The only problem was the defense forced punts enough to only get 14 opportunities. By comparison, SEC West rival LSU had 39 chances.

Offense: 23.1 PPG (No. 87); 379.7 YPG (No. 67); 169.3 rushing YPG (No. 42); 210.3 passing YPG (No. 75); 70 percent red zone efficiency (No. 111); 35.8 percent third down conversion efficiency (No. 101); 17 sacks allowed (No. 37)

Defense: 34.3 PPG allowed (No. 102); 457.2 YPG allowed (No. 108); 219.8 rushing YPG allowed (No. 111); 237.4 passing YPG allowed (No. 75); 81 percent opponent red zone conversion (No. 55); 53.8 percent opponent third down efficiency (No. 119); 26 sacks (No. 41)

Special Teams: 39.2 yards/punt (No. 52); 5.3 yards/PR (No. 99); 6.2 yards/PR allowed (No. 35); 12-20 FGM-FGA; 29-31 PATs; 19.9 yards/KR (No. 99); 25.9 yards/KR allowed (No. 119)

Turnover Differential: +4

Time of Possession: 25:16 (No. 119)

Penalties: 49/434 yards (No. 5)

Maryland’s last outing of the 2011 season was indicative of the entire campaign. What began with so much promise imploded in a fashion so astounding, you had to wonder if it was really happening. Did the Terrapins actually give up a 27-point first half lead over roughly 19 minutes to NC State.

Yes, they did. Just like they went from 9-4 in 2010 to 2-10 in 2011. Randy Edsall’s debut campaign was no walk in College Park, and the offseason has continued the tumult.

The wholesale changes made were evident from Week 1, which was also the week of UM’s sole FBS win. Offensive coordinator Gary Crowton had reigning Freshman All-American Danny O’Brien throwing more screens, and tossing in situations James Franklin had previously opted for different calls. O’Brien struggled to adjust to the new playbook, and was benched for CJ Brown. UM failed to gain an offensive identity, which exacerbated some significant defensive inadequacies.

The Terrapins were porous at best. The two most telling statistics were UM’s 25:16 time of possession, and nearly 54 percent opponent third down conversion rate. Combine those with a rather impressive 27 turnovers gained, and it’s evident UM was only getting stops when forcing turnovers. From Oct. 15 to season’s end, the Terrapins gave up no fewer than 28 points per game (the basement figure) and 56 twice (the ceiling).

Offense: 22.4 PPG (No. 94); 380 YPG (No. 65); 88.7 rushing YPG (No. 117); 291.3 passing YPG (No. 17); 67 percent red zone efficiency (No. 119); 38.8 percent third down efficiency (No. 78); 20 sacks allowed (No. 49)

Defense: 33.7 PPG allowed (No. 101); 465 YPG allowed (No. 113); 203.6 rushing YPG (No. 105); 261.4 passing YPG (No. 101); 79 percent opponent red zone efficiency (No. 40); 42.7 percent opponent third down efficiency (No. 85); 19 sacks (No. 86)

Special Teams: 36.6 yards/punt (No. 47); 7.7 yards/PR (No. 73); 11.5 yards allowed/PR (No. 101); 8-14 FGM-FGA; 29-34 PATs; 19.7 yards/KR (No. 101); 20.4 yards allowed/KR (No. 38)

Turnover Differential: -12

Time of Possession: 26:20 (No. 116)

Penalties: 80/636 (No. 85)

It appeared the most challenging portion of pre-season Sun Belt Conference favorite Troy’s schedule was opening with BCS conference opponents Clemson and Arkansas. And indeed, the Tigers pulled away big in the second half, while Arkansas weathered the Trojans’ best efforts. But getting into competition against teams from the non-AQ, Troy evened its record 2-2. So far, so good seemingly.

Things went sour from there, though. Troy went on a five-game losing skid that eliminated it from bowl contention, and closed out with losses of seven in its final eight. Some were head-scratchers, such as a 28-point drubbing at home vs. Louisiana-Monroe. A problem that persisted in 2010 and carried over to 2011 at an even greater extent was defensive inefficiency.

Ten of Troy’s 12 opponents broke the 30-point barrier. Only one of those contests was a win. The Trojans were also anemic on the road, going winless away from the friendly confines of Veterans Memorial Stadium. That will never do a team any favors, particularly when playing more games on the road than at home.

105. ARMY

Offense: 24.8 PPG (No. 76); 396.9 YPG (No. 49); 346.5 rushing YPG (No. 1); 50.4 passing YPG (No. 120); 78 percent red zone conversion rate (No. 78); 45.6 third down conversion rate (No. 26); 11 sacks allowed (No. 11)

Defense: 28.3 PPG allowed (No. 71); 359.3 YPG allowed (No. 43); 194.9 rushing YPG allowed (No. 100); 164.3 passing YPG allowed (No. 5); 88 percent opponent red zone efficiency (No. 100); 48.9 percent opponent third down efficiency (No. 108); 18 sacks (No. 91)

Special Teams: 35 yards/punt (No. 95); 3.7 yards/PR (No. 113); 10.3 yards allowed/PR (No. 86); 3-6 FGM-FGA; 33-38 PATs; 18.7 yards/KR (No. 113); 20.7 yards allowed/KR (No. 45)

Turnover Differential: -9

Time of Possession: 33:28 (No. 8)

Penalties: 49/436 yards (No. 6)

West Point finished 2010 on the high note of defeating SMU in the Military Bowl, thereby earning the Cadets’ first winning season in 1997. With a quarterback whose adeptness at running the option is only superseded by his awesome name, Trent Steelman, the Black Knights were seemingly in position for another postseason run.

Alas, some heartbreaking losses kept the Cadets from building on the previous season’s success. West Point dropped single point decisions to Navy, Miami, San Diego State and Air Force. In the latter contest, Army led at halftime but saw the advantage slip away. The SDSU loss was equally frustrating for the Cadets. Army held the Aztec offense largely in check while gaining over 400 rushing yards of its own, yet failed to convert yards into points.

Special teams proved especially vexing for Army. In the major categories, the Cadets were routinely in the bottom third of the nation.