My Off Season Thread - 2014

[russ1945]

In the off season I always like to focus on the preseason AP top 25 and final AP top 25. When a new season rolls around public perception is largely based on what the “experts” predict. Well let’s take a look at how they did in this regard the past season.

6 teams that were forecast to be in the top 10 when the season began did not finish in the top 10. Stanford finished #11 and Ohio St #12 so they almost made it. But Georgia and Florida wound up not being ranked and Texas A& M wound up 18[SUP]th[/SUP] and Louisville 15[SUP]th[/SUP]. They were replaced by the following:

Florida St was ranked #11 in the preseason poll and wound up #1. Auburn was not ranked in the preseason poll and would up #2. Michigan St was not ranked in the preseason poll and wound up #3. MIzzou was not ranked in the preseason poll and wound up #5. Oklahoma was ranked #16 in the preseason poll and wound up #6. UCF was not ranked in the preseason poll and wound up #10.

In all 9 teams that were ranked in the preseason top 25 fell from the rankings. Georgia, Florida, Texas, Michigan, Nebraska, Boise St, TCU, Northwestern, and Oregon St. They were replaced by Auburn, Michigan St, Mizzou, UCF, Baylor, Arizona St, Duke, Vandy, and Washington.

Combined the 9 teams that fell from the rankings finished 47-66-1 ATS (42%).

Combined the 9 teams that replaced them in the rankings finished 70-35-3 ATS (67%).

So that confirms my conclusion from last year’s off season thread that teams that fall from the AP preseason top 25 are bet against teams and teams that replace them are bet on teams.

Combined the AP final top 25 finished 194-132-8 ATS (60%). Again this confirms my conviction that top ranked teams are worth following. Again, the problem is separating the real things from the imposters.

Obviously the Final top 25 list speaks for itself. The problem is the preseason top 25 list and eliminating as soon as possible the teams that are destined to fall and by the same token trying to find the teams most likely to replace them.

This is something to chew on in the off season and is a good place to start when beginning a new season. The AP top 25 list will not be released until August. Phil Steele will predict the AP top 25 as early as April so we can start with that list. In the mean time there is plenty of time to kick this around and to reexamine how the 2013 season evolved. BOL

 

[russ1945]

Here is the AP preseason top 25:

1. Alabama 2. Ohio St 3. Oregon 4. Stanford 5. Georgia 6. South Carolina 7. Texas A&M 8. Clemson 9. Louisville 10. Florida 11. Florida St 12. LSU 13. Okla State 14. Notre Dame 15. Texas 16. Oklahoma 17. Michigan 18. Nebraska 19. Boise St 20. TCU 21. UCLA 22. NW 23. Wisconsin 24. USC 25. Oregon St

Tracing back on the AP poll Oregon St and Boise St were the first to fall and was replaced by Baylor and Washington.
Week3 – Texas and USC fell and were replaced by Miami Fl and Ole Miss
Week 4 - TCU and Nebraska fell and were replaced by Arizona St and Texas Tech
Week 5 – Arizona St fell and was replaced by Fresno St
Week 6 – Notre Dame and Wisconsin fell and were replaced by Arizona St and Maryland
Week 7 – Arizona St, Ole Miss and Maryland fell and were replaced by Missouri, Virginia Tech, and N. Illinois
Week 8 – Michigan and NW fell and were replaced by Auburn and Wisconsin
Week 9 – Georgia, Washington and Florida fell and were replaced by Nebraska, Washington, and UCF
Week 10 – Virginia Tech and Nebraska fell and were replaced by Arizona st and Michigan St
Week 11 – Michigan fell and was replaced by Notre Dame
Week 12 – Notre Dame and Texas Tech fell and were replaced by Georgia and Texas
Week 13 – Texas, Miami Fl, and Georgia fell and were replaced by Duke, Ole Miss, and USC
Week 14 – Ole Miss fell and was replaced by Notre Dame
Week 15 – USC and Notre Dame fell and were replaced by Georgia and Texas
Week 16 – Texas fell and was replaced by Notre Dame
Final Rankings – Georgia, N. Illinois, and Fresno St fell and were replaced with Vandy, Nebraska, and USC.



So in the final top 5 Auburn did not even enter the top 25 until week 8, Michigan St until week 10, and Missouri until week 7. In my estimation some of the traditional powers like Georgia, Texas, and Notre Dame tend to get special treatment when it comes to ranking, at least the benefit of the doubt.

In defense of the SEC they were initially ceded with 6 teams in the preseason top 25 and all were ranked #12 or less. In the end they wound up with 7 teams in the final top 25 with 3 in the top 5 and 4 in the top 12. However Georgia and Florida disappeared and Vandy, Auburn, and Missouri rose to the occasion. It should be noted that two that made it were Missouri and Texas A&M, the 2 teams who left the Big 12 and were written off as also rans. Turns out they run and pass lol.

UCF and Duke deserve special credit. I will be back in a few days with a breakdown on the strength of schedule for the top 25 teams.

 

[russ1945]

Found an article in the USA TODAY by Paul Myerberg that ties in with what I have posted on this thread to date. He is predicting the top 25 teams for 2014….already. Here they are:

1. Florida St 2. Oregon 3. Alabama 4. Ohio St 5. Auburn 6. Michigan St 7. Stanford 8. Oklahoma 9. LSU 10. UCLA 11. Baylor 12. Missouri 13. Arizona St 14. Wisconsin 15. Notre Dame 16. Nebraska 17. Georgia 18. Washington 19. Clemson 20. South Carolina 21. UCF 22. Kansas St 23. Texas 24. N. Carolina 25. BYU

Barely missed the cut: Arizona, Boise St, Duke, Florida, Iowa, La-Laf, Louisville, Marshall, Miam Fl, Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma St, Pitt, TCU, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, USC, Utah St, and Virginia Tech.

So only 6 teams would not repeat in 2014 – Duke, Louisville, Oklahoma St, Texas A&M, and Vandy would be replaced by Nebraska, Georgia, Kansas St, Texas, N. Carolina, and BYU according to this reference.

A lot will happen between now and week 1 of the 2014 season. This is simply the first of many projected rankings that will come out between now and then. We have the whole off season to chew on this bone but I thought it was worth noting that some are already going out on a limb.

 

[russ1945]

I have discussed my average rankings from time to time. The average ranking is determined by adding a given teams scoring offense ranking with their scoring defense ranking and dividing that total by 2 to get the average ranking. I have found this very useful in comparing relative strengths in a given matchup. These numbers become more relevant as the season progresses and at the end of the season the average ranking together with the point differential (average margin of victory/loss) seem to go hand in hand.

I will take a look at the top 25 and we can evaluate how improvements are related to success. In many cases this relates to success in straight up records but often relate to ATS success also. Of course this depends on how the odds makers perceive a team will do from one year to the next.

Florida St only improved their average ranking by 9 but increased their pt diff by +24.66 ppg. Not hard to see how they wound up #1. Their strength of schedule ranked #67.

Auburn improved their average ranking by 58.5 which is incredible and an obvious tribute to the coaching ability of Gus Malzahn. They also increased their pt diff by +24.46 ppg. Not hard to see how they wound up in the NC game (oh yes there was a kick return involved also lol). Their strength of schedule ranked #3. That makes everything even more impressive.

Michigan St improved their average ranking by 25 and their pt diff by +12.28 ppg. Their strength of schedule ranked #75.

S. Carolina improved their average ranking by 6 and their pt diff dropped by -0.2 ppg. This is not a bad thing if your ranking from the prior year were good and in this case they were. The 2012 team was very comparable to the 2011 team and showed consistency and remained top notch. Their strength of schedule ranked #23.

Missouri improved their average ranking by 50 and increased their pt diff by +12.28 ppg. Not hard to see how they made a major impact on the SEC and the national polls. A remarkable achievement. Their strength of schedule ranked #18.

Oklahoma had a drop in their average rankings of -3.5 and their pt diff dropped-5.38 pts a game. OU went through a QB metamorphosis and closed the season with an amazing performance across the board against Alabama. Like S Carolina the fluctuation was minimal but they maintained their stature and showed big time improvement in their last two games. Their strength of schedule ranked #33.

Alabama had a drop in their average ranking of -2 and in their pt diff of -3.47 ppg. Like S Carolina and OU they remain at the top of the heap and their season turned on a special teams play. Again, they are statistically always at or near the top statistically and have been the most consistent team in the country over the past 3 seasons in my opinion. Their strength of schedule ranked #52.

Clemson improved their average ranking by 10.5 and the pt diff by + 0.59 ppg. Again a consistent top notch team. Their loss to Florida St hurt them in the polls but they redeemed themselves in the bowl game against Ohio St. Their strength of schedule ranked #54.

Oregon improved their average ranking by 5.5 and their pt diff dropped by -3.83 ppg. Injuries definitely hurt them this year. Again a top notch team whose 2012 performance was very similar to their 2011 performance. Their strength of schedule ranked #73.

UCF improved their average ranking by 4.5 and their pt diff by + 0.53 ppg. Sleeper, I don’t think so. They finished 10-4 in 2012 and 12-1 in 2013. In 2012 they lost to Ohio St, Missouri, and Tulsa 2 times. This year’s schedule was a easier and they lost a close game with S.
Carolina. They deserved all the recognition they got in 2013 and were a team nobody wanted to play I assure you. Their strength of schedule ranked #95 .

Stanford increased their average ranking by 14 and their pt diff by +2.3 ppg. They have become a perennial power but the Pac 12 was just tougher this year. Still 11-3 is nothing to sneeze at. Their strength of schedule ranked #8.

Ohio St increased their average ranking by 10 and their pt diff by +8.56 ppg. Still competitive but their strength of schedule was ranked #62 so that needs to be taken into consideration. Their strength of schedule ranked #73.

Baylor increased their average ranking by 41 and their pt diff by +22.99 ppg. Incredible improvement and they just reload at QB every year. It has to be the system and Briles is the brains behind that. Their strength of schedule was ranked #50.

LSU increased their average ranking by 11 and their pt diff by +0.47 ppg. They finished 10-3. I think they have the best tandem in college football in OC Cam Cameron and DC John Chavis. I expected a little more offense out of them but Mettenberger got hurt etc. Look for more scoring in 2014 in Cameron’s 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] year as OC. Their strength of schedule was #57.

Louisville improved their average ranking by 28.5 and their pt diff by +15.83 ppg. They had high expectations coming off of an 11-2 record in 2012 under HC Charlie Strong. They went 12-1 in 2013 falling to UCF. Now Strong is gone but Petrino is no slouch. Bridgewater was the key and replacing him could be next to impossible. Their strength of schedule was #117 (worst in the top 25) which leads me to believe that Strong is going to have to deal with tougher teams and on a week to week basis. I would rather be in Petrino’s shoes than Strong’s going into 2014.

UCLA increased their average ranking by 14.5 and their pt diff by by +4.54 ppg. Mora seems to have brought improvement and consistency to this team. Their strength of schedule was #24.

Oklahoma St improved their average ranking by 21.5 and their pt differential by +2.25 ppg. An early loss to W Virginia was offset by a win over Baylor but they wound up dropping their final two games to Oklahoma and to Missouri although both were closely contested. Their strength of schedule was #37.

Texas A&M dropped their average ranking by -33.5 and their pt diff by -10.25 ppgyet they still finished the season 9-4. Manziel’s presence probably kept this team in the hunt but it is apparent this years team was not as good as the 2012 team. Their strength of schedule was #13 and that could have been a factor also.

USC increased their average ranking by 3 and their pt diff dropped by -0.85 ppg. This program has suffered through the past few seasons and with Kiffen’s oust and the controversy with Orgeron and Sarkisian’s hiring this team is looking for stability. Still a 10-4 season with al things considered says more about the players than the program itself. Their strength of schedule was #25 on top of everything else.

Notre Dame dropped their average ranking by -13 and their pt diff by -11.62 ppg. At 9-4 they faced the #19 toughest schedule and they sorely missed Golson and their AA LB from 2012. They still managed to beat Michigan St and USC. It will be interesting to see how Golson affects this team in 2014.

Arizona St dropped their average ranking by 5.5 and their pt diff increased by 0.68 ppg. But in Rich Rod’s 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] year they went from 8-5 in 2012 to 10-4 in 2013. There are some good things going on in Tuscon and they are one of the reasons that the Pac 12 is regaining some respect. Their strength of schedule was #36.

Wisconsin increased their average ranking by 18 and their pt diff by 6.81ppg in Gary Anderson’s first year as HC as the Badgers went from 8-6 in 2012 to 9-4 in 2013. Their strength of schedule was #61.

Duke increased their average ranking by 21.5 and their pt diff by 9.87 ppg. Under HC David Cutcliffe they improved from 6-7 in 2012 to 10-4 in 2013 and were one of the surprise teams of the 2013 season. Their strength of schedule was #60.

Vanderbilt dropped their average ranking by 13.5 and their pt diff by -5.58. They finished 9-4 in 2012 and 9-4 again in 2013. So they are becoming a factor in the SEC and their consistency under Cutcliffe is obvious. Their strent=gth of schedule was #79.

Washington improved their average ranking by 39 and their pt diff by 15.1. They finished 7-6 in 2012 and 9-4 in 2013. Sark is gone but Washington but Chris Peterson could bring even more improvement in time. Their strength of schedule was #31.

 

[indiana]

Russ........thank you for your time and efforts this past season, much appreciated..........the daily and weekly write ups were outstanding..........enjoy the off season.............indy

 

[russ1945]

Russ........thank you for your time and efforts this past season, much appreciated..........the daily and weekly write ups were outstanding..........enjoy the off season.............indy

You gotta do something right. BOL

 

[russ1945]

How about the teams who were picked for the preseason top 25 and did not stick. Consider this:

Boise St dropped their average ranking by -4.5 and their pt diff by -2.8 ppg. Their strength of schedule was #102. 2012 (11-2) 2013 (8-5)

Florida dropped their average ranking by -25 and their pt diff by -16.13 ppg. Their strength of schedule was #11. 2012 (11-2) 2013 (4-8)

Georgia dropped their average ranking by -32 and their pt diff by -10.76 ppg. Their strength of schedule was #2. 2012 (12-2) 2013 (8-5)

Michigan dropped their average ranking by -19.5 and their pt diff by -5.85 ppg. Their strength of schedule was #17.2012 (8-5) 2013 (7-6)

Nebraska dropped their average ranking by -6.5 and their pt diff by -1.75 ppg. Their strength of schedule was #74. 2012 (10-4) 2013 (9-4)

Northwestern dropped their average ranking by -39 and their pt diff by -9.95 ppg. Their strength of schedule was #19. 2012 (10-3) 2013 (5-7)

Oregon St dropped their average ranking by -29.5 and their pt diff by -9.85 ppg. Their strength of schedule was #53. 2012 (9-4) 2013 (7-6)

TCU dropped their average ranking by -23.5 and their pt diff by -6.45 ppg. Their strength of schedule was ranked #32. 2012 (7-6) 2013 (4-8)

Texas dropped their average ranking by -13 and their pt diff by -3.16 ppg. Their strength of schedule was ranked #27. 2012 (9-4) 2013 (8-5)

 

[russ1945]

leaders in avg ranking change plus and minus
plus		increase	increase	2013	2013
		avg	pt diff	ats	ats
team		ranking	ppg	win	loss
auburn		58.55	24.46	12	2
n. Texas		54	20.91	10	3
tulane		51.5	20.4	9	4
missouri	50	18.67	11	2
houston	44.5	14.98	10	3
marshall	44	21.36	9	5
f.a.u.		43	14.43	9	3
baylor		41	22.99	9	4
colorado st	38	15.48	10	4
e. Carolina	36.5	14.82	7	6
buffalo		36	13.15	8	5
b. Green		33.5	11.48	10	4
minus		decrease	decrease	2013	2013
		avg	pt diff	ats	ats
team		ranking	ppg	win	loss
tulsa		-65	-23.65	3	9
purdue		-50.5	-24.02	3	8
san jose st	-48	-16.53	6	6
la monroe	-48	-15.57	5	7
kent st		-44.5	-15.69	4	8
w michigan	-43	-17.86	4	8
s.d. State	-39.5	-12.48	7	5
northwestern	-39	-9.65	3	9
iowa st		-39	-13.04	6	6
air force	-35	-15.13	3	9
n.c. State	-32.5	-11.25	4	8
georgia		-32	-10.76	3	9
nevada		-31	-11.7	6	6

 

[russ1945]

Well that is plenty for now. Hopefully you can see why I chart all this stuff. There is plenty to chew on. If you have any input or any questions just post them and I will respond. Just wanted to get these numbers on here while the past season is still fresh in everyone's minds. BOL

 

[russ1945]

I am not a recruiting nut but I do acknowledge that recruiting is key in revitalizing and maintaining a football program. Coaches come and go and that affects recruiting. Bowl outcomes have swayed some recruits to rethink their commitments. It is a very complicated and constantly evolving process and hard to keep up with.

I just glanced at rivals.com. I was struck by a few things and maybe someone out there can clear them up for me and others. Take Washington who is coming off a 9-4 season and going through a coaching change. That coaching change may be for the better but right now Washington is #93 on Rivals.com. Cal from the Pac 12 with a ranking of #59 and Colorado is #62. USC is ranked #24. Their new HC Peterson is leaving Boise St who is currently ranked #91 by Rivals.com. Boise has had a recent history of developing players as opposed to focusing on high profile recruits. Their success is proven by the number of players they have sent to the NFL in recent years. It will be interesting to see if Peterson can do the same at Washington, get the most out of what he has to work with. The Pac 12 is talent laden and moving to the Pac 12 is a step up for Peterson. Sankey and Seferian-Jenkins are leaving early for the NFL draft s and there are other holes to fill. It may take Peterson a little while to do his thing and it will be interesting to see if their recruiting rankings improve. It will be interesting to see if all this will affect Boise St, Washington, and USC and how all these new coaches make the transitions.

TCU has not done so well since moving to the Big 12. They went 7-6 in 2012 and 4-8 in 2013. HC Patterson has had trouble making the move up in class. There have been many distractions with his program and some key injuries but all in all TCU is not living up to expectations and perhaps those expectations were too high. TCU is currently ranked #73 in the Rivals.com rankings and lowly Kansas is just ahead of them at #72. So they have the worst recruiting ranking of any Big 12 team at this point and time. Hard to believe that TCU was ranked #20 in the AP top 25 beginning the 2013 season. The SEC is raiding the state of Texas now and that does not help. Even Texas Tech is doing well in recruiting ranked at #38 and with a HC who seems destined for good things. Not sure TCU is going to turn it around in the near future and Patterson is no longer a sought after HC. Anybody have a hold on the situation at TCU?

North Carolina under 3rd year HC Larry Fedora is currently ranked #21 by Rivals.com. The Tar Heels went 8-4 in 2012 and 7-6 in 2013. They have won their last two bowl games also. They only had 13 returning starters in 2013. They are currently ranked ahead of Oregon, USC, Michigan, Wisconisn, Oklahoma St, Stanford, S. Carolina, and Michigan State in recruiting. Those guys are due to start turning things around. Anyone have any inside info on the Tar Heels.

Tennessee is currently ranked #3 by Rivals.com. and were ranked #21 in 2013. Butch Jones seems to be doing better at recruiting than he has on the field going 5-7 in 2013 which duplicates what they did the year before he got there. Is the clock already ticking in Knoxville? Hard to follow guys like Kiffin right. Lol

Who would have thought that 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] year Kentucky coach Mark Stoops would have his team ranked higher in recruiting than his brother Bob. Currently Kentucky is ranked #12 and Oklahoma #18.

 

[GoSooners]

Russ, don't let TCU's 2014 recruiting rankings fool you. This year is far from over as far as recruiting goes. TCU is right up there in the top half of the Big 12 in recruiting. And has been for the past 4 years or so. With an average ranking of right around 40 for the last 4 years. Better than Baylor, KSU, ISU, Kansas. And not far off from Texas Tech and WV. TCU has failed to make a splash in the Big 12 for the last 2 years because of an incredible run of bad luck with injuries, suspensions etc. Just look at what happened this past season. They lost their two best defensive players (future NFLers) before the season even started. Plus dealing with QB issues, which has been a major problem for them. After being away from the game for a year, Pachall was finally starting to get a little mojo going in his last 3 games. But by then it was too late. Plus they had the most brutal schedule in the Big 12 this past season. I believe Patterson hired a new offensive coordinator this year, so that could be the thing they needed to give them a spark on offense. Even if you don't agree with me on this team, here's one thing you can take away from them. They never had any quit in them or had given up on the season despite their record. Which should tell you a little something about this team and the way they are coached. A few breaks here or there and I think they could have a breakout season. I think it would be a mistake to see them too short when you go to evaluate the conference next year. They can play with anybody in the Big 12. They played some very close games against OU, TT, KSU and Baylor. And a few breaks here or there and they could have gone 7-5 or 8-4. If Patterson get a few problems ironed out on offense, you know they'll be pretty good, because they'll always have a good defense as long as he's there. TCU was actually #30 in recruiting in 2013. One spot ahead of Baylor at #31.

 

[russ1945]

Like I said recruiting is not my forte but it appears that although the recruiting season is not over that their current ranking at #73 is off their norm. If you stop and think about it what would you do if you were an in state recruit. Texas has needs and a new HC to finally replace Mack. Texas A&M has Sumlin and the SEC. Baylor is catching everyone's attention and Briles is as hot a coach as there is right now. Texas Tech has the best young coach in the country, and ex-alum/player, who the players love and relate to. And then there is sour puss pacing up and down the TCU sideline.

I find it hard to believe that Patterson did not know there were problems there even before they caught the public eye. Yes they were able to catch someone with the guard down before they entered the Big 12 but now it is week after week of higher caliber competition than he or his players were used to facing. They had Andy Dalton then also. Things have changed and not necessarily gotten better at TCU. Being ranked #20 in the preseason showed that many felt like you. Yes there are reasons but more like excuses in my book. Patterson is facing HC's who are as good or better than him. GBE had them with the 32nd toughest schedule. Texas was #25, Oklahoma #33, Okla St #37. That toughness is coming from in conference competition. They beat SE Louisiana, SMU and Kansas and Iowa St. They played Oklahoma when they were having problems and played Baylor the week following the loss to Oklahoma St. I am not much for excuses. I see where you are coming from but as far as TCU is concerned they still have it to do.

 

[russ1945]

Looking at TCU's 2104 schedule. They don't leave town until game 5 at Baylor. They have 3 home games and a cross town trip to play SMU. They play Oklahoma at home in game 4, followed by Baylor, Oklahoma St, and Texas Tech. Tough row to hoe. Thing is if they do not recruit well in 2014 and have another losing season or even go 6-6 their recruiting may get worse in 2015. They have to get the ball rolling and soon. Not saying they can't, just saying. If they were to lose to Minnesota in game 2 it will not bode well for the Horned Frogs.

 

[GoSooners]

I know what your saying about Patterson. If i was an offensive player i would be about as excited playing for him as I would Mark Dantonio. But he will always be able to get the good defensive players. Plus no matter how much he struggled this past season, he's already working with a #27, #37, and #30th ranked classes the last 3 years. I'm sure there has been plenty of redshiritng going on down there. Plus they had a pretty young defense last year. So they should improve on that side of the ball barring injuries. I have no idea what kind of win/loss record TCU will have in 2014. But next season instead of playing on the road against Texas Tech, KSU, OU and OSU they get all of those teams at home. Plus about 80% of the teams that finish 4-8 ATS the year before, end up with a 6-6 ATS or better record the next season. So I expect improvement on the record we all care about here the most.

 

[russ1945]

I know what your saying about Patterson. If i was an offensive player i would be about as excited playing for him as I would Mark Dantonio. But he will always be able to get the good defensive players. Plus no matter how much he struggled this past season, he's already working with a #27, #37, and #30th ranked classes the last 3 years. I'm sure there has been plenty of redshiritng going on down there. Plus they had a pretty young defense last year. So they should improve on that side of the ball barring injuries. I have no idea what kind of win/loss record TCU will have in 2014. But next season instead of playing on the road against Texas Tech, KSU, OU and OSU they get all of those teams at home. Plus about 80% of the teams that finish 4-8 ATS the year before, end up with a 6-6 ATS or better record the next season. So I expect improvement on the record we all care about here the most.

Now that is a horse of a different color, ATS. It would not take much to improve in that department.

 

[russ1945]

Quarterback is the key position in modern college football. In 2014 43 of the top 100 QB’s of 2013 either graduate or are leaving early for the NFL draft. This is based on total passing yards per game. Gone are team leaders like A.J. McCarron of Alabama, Johnny Manziel of Texas A&M, Tajh Boyd of Clemson, Aaron Bortles of UCF, Aaron Murray of Georgia, Keith Price of Washington, Stephen Morris of Miami Fl, Logan Thomas of Virginia Tech, Jordan Lynch of Northern Illinois, D J Denker of Arizona, Connor Shaw of South Carolina, Zack Mettenberger of LSU, and Clint Chelf of Oklahoma St just to name a few. Those were key players who made their offenses click.

Top returnees are Sean Mannion of Oregon St (ranked #2 in 2013), Connor Halliday of Washington St (#3), Bryce Petty of Baylor (#6), Shane Carden of E. Carolina (#8), Jared Goff of California (#12), and a guy named Jameis Winston of Florida St (#13). Others include Taylor Kelly of Arizona St (#25), Bo Wallace of Ole Miss (#26), Brett Hundley of UCLA (#37), Taysom Hill of BYU (#43). Braxton Miller of Ohio St returns but it might surprise you that he was ranked #83 but right behind him was Nick Marshall of Auburn at #89. Not ranked but one to watch if this year’s bowl game is any indication is Trevor Knight of Oklahoma. He and others are not ranked because you must play in 75% of their teams games in order to make the list.

Many QB’s also lead the list for total offense. Jordan Lynch for instance was ranked #57 in passing but ranked #5 in total offense. This type of QB is often more valuable to their teams because of their abilities as a dual threat. Some QB’s who are returning and fit that mold are Marcus Mariotta of Oregon, Rakeem Cato of Marshall and Taysom Hill of BYU.

With Manziel in 2012 and Winston in 2013 freshmen (redshirts) have emerged almost from nowhere to lead their teams to unpredicted successes. 2014 may bring on a new QB to emerge along those same lines. One QB I expect to emerge big time is Maty Mauk of Missouri. Watch out for LSU as Cam Cameron is liable to pull one out of the hat much as Gus Malzahn has done recently.

I think QB’s dominated in 2013 and this year’s bowl games proved that. 2014 will be the same I am sure and many of those listed above who return will play major roles in their team’s success again this year. Would have been nice to have had Manziel go 4 years and see what kind of records he would have compiled but it was obvious he was leaving for the Big Show right from the start of this past season.
Many excellent college QB’s don’t make it in the NFL but that should never deflect from their performances at the college level. Tim Tebow comes to mind and the same may be true of Johnny Manziel when all is said and done.

 

[russ1945]

philsteele.com is monitoring the HC changes and the OC & DC changes. They are also monitoring the NFL draft early entries. They seem to be updating on a daily basis so you might check them out periodically for updates.

 

[russ1945]

Turnovers, hard to predict, but definitely a positive factor as far as success on the field goes. If you look at the final NCAA statistics the Turnover Margin stats tell a story if you look closely.

5 teams tied to #48 in TO Margin so looking at the top 52 teams it might be shocking to reveal that 4 of them did not make it to a bowl game. 48 out of the 52 played in bowls, that blows my mind. One the other hand Nebraska and San Diego St both made it to a bowl game tied and ranked #117, as did Texas Tech ranked #121. That is out of a total of 123 teams.

16 teams ranked in the top 48 also made the final AP top 25. 7 of the top 25 in the final top 25 were also in the top 10 in the TO Margin rankings (Louisville #2, Florida St #3, Okie St #3, Missouri #5, Baylor #8, South Carolina #8/tied, #10 Michigan St.

So it is hard to predict TO’s and who will be leaders in that category but it is obvious that the leaders in that category are destined for bigger and better things. BOL

 

[cloverleaf]

Hell of a lot of assistant coaches moving. Russ, do you have a handle/list on these changes?

I always keep up with SEC moves....not so much the national picture.

 

[russ1945]

Hell of a lot of assistant coaches moving. Russ, do you have a handle/list on these changes?

I always keep up with SEC moves....not so much the national picture.

go to philsteele.com - Steele is monitoring asst's as well as HC's on his blog