2008 ACC Preview

We are just 11 short weeks away from the return of college football. A mere 77 days (75 until the Thursday kickoff). Over the next 11 weekends, I will be guiding you through the wilderness that is the summer offseason. We'll begin with a look at the ACC.

Atlantic Division

Clemson
For 3 straight years, Clemson has been on the precipice of an Atlantic Division title. For 3 straight years the Tigers have finished one game out of the money. In fact, in both 2005 and 2006, the Tigers actually defeated the eventual Atlantic (and ACC) champs (Florida State and Wake Forest). So is this the year Clemson finally gets over the hump? It better be or Mr. Bowden will have some serious explaining to do.

In 2007 the Tigers had the second most prolific off, and the best defense in ACC play. The offense returns all the key skill position players including quarterback Cullen Harper, who finished with a sterling pass efficiency rating of 140.97 (tops in the ACC and 22^nd in the country) and the ‘Thunder and Lightning’ running back duo of James Davis and CJ Spiller. The Clemson defense has been good and steady under 4^th year coordinator Vic Koenin, finishing between 10^th and 16^th in scoring and 9^th and 20^th in total defense each season, but has yet to emerge as an elite unit. Expect more of the same this season, where the Tigers are strong at every defensive position with the possible exception of linebacker. Leading tackler Nick Watkins and fellow senior Tramaine Billie are gone and Antonio Clay’s return is questionable as he is dealing with emotional issues. Still, good and steady should be enough to get things done in the ACC—the weakest of the BCS leagues.

The only possible hitches in the Tigers giddy up could be the offensive line, where only a single starter, center Thomas Austin, returns. If the line is unable to open holes for Davis and Spiller, and keep Harper upright against the better teams on the schedule, the dreams of a championship could once again be dashed in tragic fashion. The other thing to keep in mind is the Tigers penchant for some confounding losses under Bowden. In 2003 there was the 28-point loss at Wake Forest, in 2004 there was the loss at Duke, in 2005 there was another loss at Wake Forest, in 2006 it was a blown game against Maryland, and last season there was the inexplicable 3-point showing at Georgia Tech. With road conference games against Boston College, Florida State, Wake Forest, and Virginia, you can bet 2008 will include another head-scratcher.

Prediction: Clemson should roll through the home portion of their conference schedule, but expect them to drop 2 of the aforementioned road games. All told, the Tigers should get to Jacksonville, and stand a good chance at playing an important game in Miami in early January.

NC State
You’d think after last season I’d learn my lesson about picking NC State to do anything of note. After pegging them as a potential conference sleeper, the Pack went out and started 1-5, with the lone win coming against Wofford. Then something strange happened. The Wolfpack started turning the ball over occasionally instead of every other possession and even began snagging a few turnovers themselves. The result was a 4-game win streak that brought about expectations of a bowl bid before a dazzling display of ineptitude in season-ending losses to Wake Forest and Maryland (combined score of 75-18). As the table below illustrates, the Wolfpack were not a ‘good’ team in their closing 4-2 stretch, but they were much improved over their early season incarnation. So the good news is, the team improved throughout the season under first-year coach Tom O’Brien. However, despite that improvement, the Pack allowed more yards in conference play than every team (even Duke). Couple that with the fact that they gained fewer yards in conference play than all but 3 teams (Duke, Miami, and North Carolina), and you see they still have a ways to go.

Those below average units from 2007 will see a lot of new faces in 2008. Only 4 or 5 starters return on the offensive side of the ball, depending on who nabs the starting quarterback job. Returnees Daniel Evans and Harrison Beck posted pass efficiency ratings of 111.54 and 93.42 respectively, so the insertion of redshirt freshman Russell Wilson may not be a bad thing. Regardless of who lines up under center, expect O’Brien to try to win games on the ground with Jamelle Eugene and Andre Brown. On defense, the Pack lose 7 starters, including all 3 starting linebackers. However, for a unit that was 91^st in the nation in rushing yards allowed per game, this may not be a bad thing. The playmakers for the Pack defense reside on the line where both Willie Young (end) and Alan-Michael Cash (tackle) return. The pair combined for 1/3^rd of the Pack’s sacks (9 of 27) last season and will be vital to the defense this year.

Normally a team that was statistically better than only Duke and loses as many starters as NC State would be in for a long season. But the Wolfpack do have some trends in their favor going into 2008. Their turnover margin of -16 was among the worst (116^th) in the nation. It’s unlikely to be as horrendous this season. The Pack can also thank the scheduling gods for their fantastic conference home schedule. Boston College, Florida State, Wake Forest, and Miami all come to Raleigh. 2 seasons ago when they finished 3-9, the Pack defeated Boston College and Florida State at home, and lost a 2-point decision to the perhaps the best Wake Forest team in history. The final reason to be optimistic is the fact that the Pack play in the ACC. As Wake Forest has proven the past 2 seasons and Virginia showed last year, you don’t have to necessarily be good to win games. O’Brien’s style of playing games close to the vest and establishing the run could pay dividends in a weak league with few elite teams.

Prediction: The Pack’s home schedule is a godsend for a team with their issues. It’s reasonable to envision them winning 3 of 4 against the aforementioned quartet. NC State is not in the same stratosphere talent-wise as Clemson, so that game may as well be on the road. The Pack also draw Duke in one of their games against the Coastal Division, so at least one road contest is very winnable. The Pack are probably not one of the top-50 teams in the country, but the schedule, coupled with an improved turnover margin will have them contending, but not really contending in 2008. Outside the league a 2-2 record is realistic with South Carolina, South Florida, East Carolina, and William & Mary on the ledger. Look for the Pack to be bowl-eligible in O’Brien’s second season.

Florida State
Is this the year the Seminoles return to their former glory? We’ve been hearing for quite sometime that their return is imminent. No one seems to be pushing those views this year. Is that a good omen for the Seminoles? Will they rise just after everyone has stopped expecting it?

Despite their ‘struggles’ in the new decade, the Seminoles still have the best conference record in the 2000s by a healthy margin among the old 9-team ACC (8 games better than 2^nd place Georgia Tech). However, as the table below illustrates, that margin was acquired entirely in the first half of the new century. Since 2004, Florida State is tied for 2^nd with Clemson and Virginia with a very middling 18-14 conference record. Rumors of their demise have not been greatly exaggerated.

Florida State is an afterthought in the 2008 ACC season. At best playing second fiddle to Clemson, and at worst further tarnishing Papa Bowden’s legacy. However, the pieces and the schedule are in place to make Florida State a contender in the ACC and give the Noles a shot at 9 wins for the first time since 2004. Florida State was actually a pretty proficient team last season despite their 7-6 record. They were above average in conference play on both offense and defense (3^rd and 5^th respectively). Both units return 7 starters and should remain in the upper-echelon of the league. On offense a trio of seniors at the skill positions—quarterback Drew Weatherford, running back Antone Smith, and receiver Greg Carr—will not make Nole fans forget Chris Weinke, Warrick Dunn, or Peter Warrick, but should make the offense one of the league’s best. Defensively, the Noles should also remain among the ACC’s best even with the early season suspensions (which we’ll get to in a moment).

Prediction: The Noles leave the state of Florida exactly 3 times during the season. In conference play, Wake Forest, Boston College, Clemson, and Virginia Tech must all come to Tallahassee. Boston College and Virginia Tech, last year’s ACC Championship Game participants, lose a great deal of talent, and it’s very unlikely Wake Forest makes it 3 in a row over the Noles. That leaves Clemson as the toughest home conference game on the slate. The Tigers have won 3 straight in the series, but only one of those has come outside of Death Valley. Florida State has a great chance to sweep their ACC home games and position themselves in the Atlantic Division race. Outside the league, the Noles have taken the Clemson path of non-conference scheduling—2 Division IAA teams, an in-state rival, and a non-conference tilt with a former power. The two cupcakes come in the first two weeks when the Noles will be without as many as 10 returning players thanks to last year’s academic fraud scandal, which is great for Florida State athletics, but maybe not so much for the university’s academic integrity. The ‘neutral’ site game against Colorado is in Jacksonville, so the crowd will likely be heavily in the Noles favor. The final non-conference game is against Florida. The Gators are strapped to the nines, and the Noles have not beaten them since 2003, but the game is at home, and stranger things have happened in this rivalry. All together, the Noles are not ready to ascend to the top of the ACC, but a 3-1 non-conference record would put them on a collision course with a possible 9^th win in the bowl game.

Maryland
After taking the league by storm in 2001, and continuing to win games at a prolific clip through 2003, the Fridge and the Terps have fallen on relative hard times. 3 of the past 4 seasons have ended with the Terps below .500. They have only one winning ACC record in that same span, and their highest finish in scoring offense and total offense is 69^th and 56^th in the nation respectively. To put it mildly, Friedgen’s reputation as a coach and an offensive guru has taken a major hit. If there ever was a year for the Terps, and especially their offense to get back on track, this is it.

The Maryland offense returns 9 starters, including 4 offensive linemen. Whichever member of the Chris Turner, Jodan Steffy, or Josh Portis triumvirate wins the starting job should be well protected. The only real downside to the Maryland offensive attack is the loss of running back Keon Lattimore and Lance Ball, who combined for nearly 1600 yards and 25 touchdowns last season. Likely starter Da’Rel Scott had only 14 carries last season, but with the experience returning up front, there should be some holes for him to run through.

The other side of the ball was not without its blemishes last season either. The Terps finished a respectable 40^th in the nation in total defense in 2007, but those numbers are a bit deceiving. In ACC play, the Terps were ahead of only NC State and Duke in yards allowed. That unit returns only 5 starters, so it should once again be behind the curve.

Prediction: It’s highly likely that Friedgen will have his best offense at College Park since 2003. That should make up for the below average defense and keep the Terps competitive in most games. In conference play, three key swing games against teams of similar abilities (Wake Forest, NC State, and North Carolina) are at home. With a little luck the Terps could be undefeated against their non-conference opponents. They face Delaware, Middle Tennessee State, and Eastern Michigan in the cupcake division, but also play host to California in mid-September. The Golden Bears are a better team, but playing a game across the country is never easy. Maryland should get to at least 7 wins in the regular season and assure themselves of a finish above .500 for the 2^nd times in 3 seasons.

Wake Forest
20 wins over the past 2 seasons and a plethora of returning starters on both sides of the ball should have Deacon fans excited about the possibilities for a special season in 2008. Alas though, it pays to keep in mind how fortunate the Deacons have been the past two seasons. In that span, Wake Forest is 8-2 in close games (those decided by 8 points or less), their turnover margin is +22, and they have 13 non-offensive touchdowns in that span. Last season, corner back Alphonso Smith and linebacker Aaron Curry combined for more touchdowns (6) on interceptions that Kenny Moore and Kevin Marion on Riley Skinner passes (5). Like any extreme performance, the market is due for a correction. While the extent of the correction is indeterminate, it’s a safe bet that the Deacons will not have their defense and special teams score as many touchdowns next season.

But hope for a special season is not lost. The Deacon offense, while it loses the aforementioned receiving duo of Moore and Marion, plus tight end John Tereshnski, and 3 offensive linemen, including All-American center Steve Justice, does return quarterback Riley Skinner and running back Josh Adams. Skinner saw his interceptions jump from 5 as a freshman to 13 as a sophomore, but he also led the NCAA in completion percentage at 72.4%. The passing game will not be a big-play threat, but it should be able to consistently move the ball. Josh Adams on the other hand, could be the team’s big-play threat. Adams gained 953 yards as a freshman and scored 11 touchdowns. His electrifying run against Florida State helped the Deacons emerge victorious. Expect more of the same from the offense in 2008: a conservative attack that still manages to keep the chains moving.

The defense should once again be the real strength of the team. 9 starters return from last season’s unit, with the only losses linemen Jeremy Thompson and Zach Stukes. Thompson did lead the team in sacks last year (6.5), but the Robinson boys (Matt and Boo) should hold down the fort in his stead. The entire secondary and linebacking corps return. 6 of the 7 members are seniors. That may not bode well for 2009, but for 2008 Deacon fans wouldn’t have it any other way.

Prediction: If things break right, the Deacons could be back in Jacksonville. However, things have broken right for the Deacons that past 2 years. A realistic expectation is that things won’t break just right. Still, the conference home schedule is very advantageous (Clemson, Duke, Virginia, and Boston College come to Winston). I think a good chance exists that Wake sweeps all 4. However, the road schedule is just as daunting (Florida State, Maryland, Miami, and NC State). A realist would see only about 1 win in those 4 games. A .500 conference record seems likely and with 4 winnable non-conference games (Baylor, Ole Miss, Navy, and Vanderbilt), the Deacons should go bowling for an unprecedented 3^rd straight year.

Boston College
Jeff Jagodzinski rode Tom O’Brien’s players all the way to Jacksonville in 2007, before falling short against Virginia Tech. The table below lists the Eagles splits through their first 7 games (a 7-0 start) and their last 7 games (4-3 beginning with the comeback win over Virginia Tech). As you can see the Eagles were quite dominant in their opening 7-game run. In the second half of the year, the offense slowed a great deal (down 60 yards per game or roughly 13% less). The defense remained quite stout, but the ever fickle turnover margin reversed. The result was that a team that had outscored it’s opponents by almost 17 points per game, was actually outscored in the second half of the season. Still, an 11-win season is nothing to sneeze at. Now comes the hard part. The morning after. Matt Ryan. Gone. Andre Callendar. Gone. Kevin Challenger. Gone. Those 3 players accounted for over 92% of the team’s yardage in 2007. Receivers Brandon Robinson and Rich Gunnell return for new quarterback Chris Crane to throw to. However, the offense is sure to experience some growing pains with so much lost talent.

The Eagle defense, also suffers some extreme personnel losses. Only 4 starters return, and the biggest hit is in the secondary where safety Jamie Silva and corner DeJuan Tribble leave a tremendous void with their departure. The duo combined for 11 interceptions last season and were two of the best defensive backs in the ACC. The Eagles were second in the nation with 25 interceptions last season, and should see significant drop off in that area this year.

Prediction: It’s time to rebuild for Boston College. The bad part of it is there is little help from the home conference schedule. Clemson is likely the strongest team in the ACC. Virginia Tech and Georgia Tech, despite their flaws, are formidable foes from the Coastal Division. Even Maryland will pose a threat. The non-conference slate could also pose a problem. Rhode Island should be an easy win, but Central Florida was last year’s Conference USA champ, and Notre Dame can’t possibly be as bad as they were last season. Even the opener against Kent State (in Cleveland) should be cause for concern. Remember, 2 seasons ago the Eagles opened against Central Michigan and escaped Mount Pleasant with a 7-point win. The Eagles should finish in the Atlantic basement, and only a non-conference sweep would get them to bowl eligibility.

Coastal Division

Virginia Tech
Can the Hokies make it 5 straight 10-win seasons? With major personnel losses on both sides of the ball, it would be hard to make a compelling argument in favor of that. However, the Hokies do have a reasonable shot at yet another ACC Championship Game appearance.

Before we delve into what the Hokie offense will look like in 2008, let’s answer a question about the offense was 2007: Was it any good? While the Hokies were a respectable 53^rd in scoring offense, they were horrible in total offense (100^th in the nation). It stands to reason that a lot of their points were scored thanks to the 31 turnovers and numerous 3 and outs the defense forced. But if we look a little closer, we can see the Hokies were actually a middling offense, at least in the ACC. The Hokies gained only about 331 yards per game. However, that number is depressed by their struggles in the opener against East Carolina (278 yards), the beatdown in Baton Rouge (149 yards), their surprising ineptitude against William & Mary (287 yards), and the bowl loss to Kansas (306 yards). In ACC play, the Hokies actually gained about 354 yards per game (5^th in the league). Fortunately for them, after much debate, they will continue to play a schedule comprised of mostly ACC teams in 2008. To summarize, by national standards the Hokies were below average (though not as dismal as their national rank would lead one to believe), but by ACC standards, they were a shade above average. So what can we expect in 2008? For starters, the team loses their top 4 receivers, who accounted for 15 of the team’s 17 touchdown receptions and 73% of the team’s receiving yards. The Hokies also bid adieu to troubled running back Brandon Ore, who gained nearly 1000 yards last season. The good news is, despite his status as the team’s leading rusher, Ore averaged only 3.72 yards per rush. The Hokies also have 4 of their 5 starting offensive linemen back so Ore’s replacement(s) (probably freshmen Darren Evans and Josh Oglesby) should match his production. The quarterbacking duo of pocket passer Sean Glennon and running threat Tyrod Taylor also return to the Tech backfield. The passing game should sputter with the loss of so many receivers, but the stability of the offensive line should enable the running game to improve. The Tech offense may be a little worse than last season, but not appreciably so.

The other side of the ball is where the Hokies will feel the biggest pinch. 7 starters are gone including linebackers Xavier Adibi and Vince Hall. The defensive line also loses standout Chris Ellis who led the team with 8.5 sacks in 2007. The Hokies should slip from the elite status they attained last season (3^rd in scoring and 4^th in total defense), but behind Bud Foster (Australian for defense) should remain one of the top units in the ACC.

Prediction: The Coastal Division is there for the taking. Virginia Tech has lost 12 starters including their entire receiving corps. They also had a turnover margin of +11 in 2007 that is likely to regress. The other three contenders in the Coastal (North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and Miami) could each conceivably head to Jacksonville. However, Georgia Tech probably will not master Paul Johnson’s system in his first season, North Carolina was competitive last year, but they have a long way to go to reach the top of the division, and Miami has not developed a competent quarterback since Ken Dorsey left town. They are flawed, but they remain the likely champion of the Coastal Division.

Georgia Tech
If you’re on the lookout for a sleeper in the ACC this is team. The Yellow Jackets nabbed the best coach in the NCAA this offseason when they inked Navy’s Paul Johnson to replace Chan Gailey. The question is, will Johnson’s offense take hold immediately in Atlanta, or will it take time. For reference here’s how Navy has performed in regards to points per game since 2000. The seasons shaded blue are pre-Johnson, and the red years are Johnson’s tenure. The team improved substantially his first season with players who were not recruited run his option-style offense. In the 5 seasons following his initial term, the team remained above the points per game standard he set in his first season, topping out at nearly 40 points per game in 2007.

Johnson’s offense will have to make due with a host of new faces in 2008. After doing his best Reggie Ball impression in 2007, quarterback Taylor Bennett transferred to Louisiana Tech. That leaves athletic sophomore Josh Nesbitt as the likely starter. Nesbitt threw only 13 passes last season, so his abilities as a passer could be lacking, but there’s no question he poses a significant threat operating the triple option. 3 offensive linemen and the two leading receivers, Greg Smith Demaryius Thomas, return, but Jacket fans will see a lot of new faces to go along with the new schematic look of the offense.

The Jacket defense returns only 4 starters, but one of them is Vance Walker, perhaps the best defensive tackle in the nation. Walker led the Jackets with 8.5 sacks last season and was second on the team with 14 tackles for loss. Joining Walker on the line is senior defensive end Michael Johnson. He played sparingly last season, accumulating 4 sacks and blocking two kicks. As a starter this season, he could possibly reach double digits in sacks and make the Georgia Tech defensive line one of the best in the nation. Outside of the defensive line, the Jackets have some holes to fill in the linebacking corps and the secondary. The 4 leading tacklers from last season—linebackers Phillip Wheeler and Gary Guyton, and defensive backs Jamal Lewis and Avery Roberson, are all gone.

Prediction: Based on SDPI, the Jackets were about the 4^th best team in the ACC last season. Such a discrepancy in their performance and achievement makes them a good choice to surprise in a Coastal Division very much in flux. I don’t quite have the guts to predict a division title in Johnson’s first season, but one will come sooner rather than later. Outside the conference, the Jackets splay two SEC teams, Mississippi State and Georgia. The Georgia game is the only likely loss on the non-conference slate, so if they make a run in the ACC, a high win total is possible.

Miami
To say Miami has not been the same since Ken Dorsey, Willis McGahee, and Kellen Winslow left town is an understatement. The table below lists Miami’s nation rank in terms of scoring offense (points per game) and total offense (yards per game).

The Canes solid showing in points per game for the 2004 season belied their below average finish in terms of yards per game. There points fell closer in line with their yards over the next 3 seasons; bottoming out at 101^st in 2007. The good news for the Cane offense in 2008 is that there are a lot of new faces. A pair of freshman, Robert Marve and Jacory Harris, will vie for the starting quarterback position. The Miami passing attach posted a cumulative passer rating of 114.50 (91^st in the nation), so surpassing that number will not be out o the question. Joining those newbies in the backfield are Graig Cooper and Javarris James. Cooper and James combined to rush for over 1200 yards last season and will likely be the focal point of the offense, at least early on.

The team’s defense, long a strength in the mini-Renaissance under Butch Davis and Larry Coker, fell on hard times last season. The team finished respectable 33^rd in the nation in total defense, but part of that was playing in the offensively challenged ACC. In conference play, only 3 teams allowed more yards than the Canes—Maryland, Duke, and NC State. Like the offense, that unit will see a ton of new faces in 2008. Eric Moncur is the lone returning starter on the defensive line, and Colin McCarthy is the sole linebacker back. The secondary, at least comparably, has an abundance of talent returning with 3 starters back. The newbies on both sides of the ball will determine how high Miami can rise in the ACC standings.

Prediction: Despite their horrid finish last season, Miami does have some positive indicators heading into 2008. They were a tough luck 1-3 in one-score games and had a turnover margin that ranked 96^th in the nation (-6). Normally a team with all the issues Miami faces would be hard-pressed to return to qualify for a bowl game, much less contend for a division crown. But in the ACC, every team save Duke can dream of a bowl game in 2008, and about 2/3^rds of the conference can dream of a Championship Game appearance. Miami is no exception. Two likely losses stand out on the non-conference schedule—roadies at Florida and Texas A&M, but if Miami’s highly touted recruiting class comes to campus ready to contribute immediately, a season of contention is in the cards.

North Carolina
The first season of the Butch Davis era in Chapel Hill was one of missed opportunities. The Tar Heels lost 4 games by 4 points or fewer and 6 games by 7 points or less. Of course, on the other hand, 3 of Carolina’s 4 wins were by 6 points or less. On the whole, the Tar Heels were probably a little better than their 4-8 record but not much so. Is 2008, the year the Heels return to Mack Brown level glory?

It certainly could be. The Tar Heel offense returns 9 or 10 starters depending on how you are scoring at home. The two most important players are likely the backfield tandem of TJ Yates and Greg Little. Yates had a solid freshman season, posting a pass efficiency rating of 123.63 (72^nd among qualifying passers). If he can cut down on his interceptions (18 in 365 attempts), he could be one of the ACC’s premier passers in 2008. His backfield mate, Greg Little, is the ultimate X-factor. After playing much of the 2007 season at wide receiver, Little started the final two games at running back and gained 243 yards on the ground in those games. Of course, 154 of those yards came against Duke, so it remains to be seen if he can consistently pound the rock. He’ll have 4 returning starters on the offensive line leading the way, so a solid season is not a pipedream.

The Tar Heel defense also brings back some familiar faces. 8 starters return, but the Tar Heels will miss Hilee Taylor and his 10.5 sacks. Besides Taylor, the only other siginifant loss is linebacker and leading tackler Durell Mapp. Despite the absence of those two playmakers, the Tar Heels defense should improve upon their middle of the pack status (the Tar Heels allowed about 5 more yards over the course of an 8-game conference season than an average ACC team).

Prediction: Yet another team with reasonable aspirations at taking the Coastal Division. The Tar Heels get two of their fellow divisional contenders (Virginia Tech and Georgia Tech) at home. However, the Tar Heels are longer on potential that they are results. While a division title is certainly possible, I foresee more of a minor improvement, and the first bowl bid of the Butch Davis era.

Virginia
The Cavaliers certainly had a tight grip on the rabbit’s foot in 2007. After a bludgeoning at the hands of Wyoming that turned down the expectations cranked up the heat on Al Groh, the Cavs won 7 straight games. 5 of those wins were by a combined 11 points. On the season, the Cavs were 6-2 in one-score games. That exceptional record in close games nearly got the Cavs all the way to Jacksonville. To be fair, the Cavs did eventually get there, as they accepted a bowl big to the Gator Bowl, but alas the trip was about a month later than they would have liked. After buying himself some time with a 9-win season, Al Groh may once again feel the heat in 2008, as the Cavs suffer some major personnel losses and are sure to see their luck change.

The Cavalier offense, average by ACC standards (6^th in yards in conference play), was pretty bad nationally (101^st in total offense). Unfortunately, improvement is not likely in 2008. Quarterback Jameel Sewell, a below-average passer, but an effective runner (279 yards in 2008), will not return thanks to academic issues. That leaves Peter Lalich as the likely starter. Lalich appeared in 8 games, but threw only 61 passes, so he remains relatively inexperienced and the Cav passing attack will likely pose about the same threat in 2008, which is to say not much of one. Taking some of the load off of Lolich is the running back duo of Cedric Peerman and Mikell Simpson. Peerman and Simpson ran for over 1100 yards last and both averaged over 5 yards per carry. They will e hard-pressed to top those numbers as the entire interior of the offensive line (center and both guards) must be replaced.

Defense was where Virginia shined last season, especially when it came to tackling the opposing quarterback behind the line of scrimmage. The Cavs finished 5^th in the nation with 43 sacks. Unfortunately for the Cavs, the player with the most sacks, Chris Long (14), has exhausted his eligibility. Also gone from the defensive line is Jeffrey Fitzgerald, who garnered 7 sacks. Fitzgerald left, like Sewell, because of an academic issue. If the Cavs are unable to generate a serious pass rush, their secondary, which must replace 2 starters, will feel the pain. All told, the Cavs defense cannot expect to be at the same level as the 2007 unit.

Prediction: 2007 was the year for the Cavs to win the ACC. Unfortunately, like Boston College, Virginia Tech dashed their dreams of a conference title. Now its time to pay the piper in 2008. The offense, at best, will be only marginally better, while the defense will certainly be worse. Couple that with worse luck (the 6-2 mark in one-score games is unlikely to be repeated) and a non-conference game against Southern Cal, and the pieces are in place for the Cavs to endure their 2^nd losing season in 3 years.

Duke
The Blue Devils have not won an ACC game since they snuck up on Clemson late in the 2004 season. That’s a string of 25 games and counting. If 2008 features nothing else, it should include at least 1 ACC win, and be the year when the culture changed at Duke. Wake Forest has shown that if you get the right coach, have patience, and catch some breaks, you can do some pretty special things, The Blue Devils have shown they are finally committed to winning by hiring one of the best coaches on the market in David Cutcliffe.

Citcliffe’s forte at Tennessee and Ole Miss has been offense. He will have the opportunity to tutor a talented quarterback for at least 2 seasons in Thaddeus Lewis. Lewis rebounded from a spotty freshman season to post a passer rating of 125.67 (65^th in the nation). Lewis had a very good TD to INT ration of 21:10. However, he still needs to work on his accuracy as he completed just a shade over 55% of his passes. If Cutcliffe can pass some of his knowledge on to Lewis the Blue Devil offense could aspire for mediocrity.

If things break right, the defense could be much better as well. 9 players are back from a unit that did not finish as the worst in the ACC in conference play (damning with faint praise for sure). Still, 8 of the top 10 tacklers are back and thanks to some better luck (the Blue Devils forced only 18 turnover last year—good for 103^rd in the nation), the improvement is certainly likely.

Prediction: A chance for a strong start exists for Duke. The Blue Devils open the season against James Madison and then play host to Northwestern and Navy. The Blue Devils figure to be slight underdogs in those games, but Duke did beat Northwestern on the road last season and led Navy for the whole game in Annapolis before falling 46-43. Look for Duke to win at least 1 ACC game and triple (at worst) their total wins from 2007.

Predicted Records:

Sam the Man or Sam the Sham?

Know who led the nation in pass efficiency last year? Tim Tebow. Colt Brennan. Graham Harrell. Dennis Dixon. Matt Ryan. Nope. It was freshman Sam Bradford of Oklahoma. Freshman. Sam. Bradford. Slingin' Sam paced the nation with a quarterback rating of 176.5. Heading into his sophomore season, he may be the most important player in the Big 12 and perhaps in the nation. If he continues his stellar play, Oklahoma is not only the favorite to win the Big 12, but also stands a real chance at winning a MNC. How likely is it that Bradford continues to play at such a high level? Glad you asked.

Since 2002, 26 quarterbacks have posted a pass efficiency rating of at least 150 and returned to play the following season. They posted the following cumulative stat line in their 'big' season:
In the year following their 'big' year, those quarterbacks posted this cumulative stat line:
As you can see, those quarterbacks who returned regressed on average in every statistical category. Per 100 attempts, they completed about 2 fewer passes, threw about one less touchdown, and about 1/2 of 1 more interception. They also averaged about 3/4 of a yard less per pass attempt. Separately, those changes are not dramatic, but together they account for about an 8% drop (12.6 points) in quarterback rating. Of course, collectively, these 26 quarterbacks still had pretty good seasons. They simply were not as stellar as they had been.

Does this mean Bradford is doomed to regress? Of course not. Colt Brennan went from merely very good in 2005 (quarterback rating of 155.5) to otherworldly in 2006 (quarterback rating of 186). Bradford does not have as much room for improvement, but its not inconceivable for him to improve slightly. Still, the odds are stacked against him. Of those 26 quarterbacks, 21 had a worse quarterback rating in the year after their 'big' year. That's a pretty high recidivism rate (81%). Last year Bradford's efficiency helped the Sooners score the 6th most points in Big 12 play despite their 9th place finish in yards. If he's not as efficient this season, those points will be harder to come by and the Longhorns or Red Raiders could pass the Sooners in the standings.

Fibonacci Win Points

On a recent trip to the bookstore, I found a copy of Bill James' Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?. This particular work by the master sabrematrician had been out of print, so I was delighted to find it. In one of the book's later chapters, James attempts to rate pitchers by balancing their total wins against their winning percentages--a measure he calls Fibonacci Win Points. The formula for computing Fibonacci Win Points is fairly simple: wins X win% + games over .500. Using an example from the book, Lefty Grove had a career record of 300-141 (winning % of .680). 300 X .680 = 204. When Grove's games above .500 (300-141) are added to 204 we get 363. Groves career Fibonacci Win Points is 363, one of the highest numbers in history. James called his new statistic Fibonacci Win points because the formula he used to arrive at this number made the break even win % (the point at which wins equal Fibonacci Win Points) close to the Fibonacci number-- .618. In the interest of time, space, and your attention, I'll post a link to the wikipedia entry for Fibonacci and his number and say no more about it here. James' rationale for using .618 as the break even point is that a winning percentge of .618 for a baseball team means that team will very likely win their division (roughly 100 wins in a 162 game season). My first thought upon reading this chapter, was of course: How can I steal this idea and pass it off as my own? Read on to find the answer.

I decided to create a formula to rate college football coaches based on their career record. My formula differs from James' because I think the break even point for football coaches should be higher than it is for baseball pitchers. The simple nature of both games allow football teams to boast much higher winning percentages than baseball teams. The break even winning % I came up with, which I'll admit is somewhat arbitrary, is .750. If a teams wins 3 out of every 4 games (9-3 over 12 games), they will be in contention to win their conference. Thus my formula is a little more convuluted than James': wins X win% + games above .500 X 3/8. Here's the formula at work for Bob Stoops. Stoops has won 97 games and lost 22 as coach of the Oklahoma Sooners for a winning percentage of .815. 97 X .815 = 79.055. 97 - 22 = 75. 75 X 3/8 = 28.125. 79.055 + 28.125 = 107.18. Rounding, Stoops has 107 Fibonacci Win Points. This is more than his 97 actual wins because he has won at a rate greater than the break even clip of .750. I thought it would be interesting to calculate Fibonacci Win Points for many active and retired coaches and compare their numbers. I only looked at coaches who spent the majority of their careers in the business after 1950 since the game continues to evolve and is simply much different today than it was in the early part of the 20th century. Coaches are listed below and are categoriezed subjectiely. First some housekeeping notes: ties are counted as half wins and half losses and a coaches entire career (record at Division IAA and Division II schools) are included.

The Legends: If you know anything about college football, you've heard of these guys.

Bobby Bowden: 373-119-4 379 FWP
Joe Paterno: 372-125-3 372 FWP
Paul 'Bear' Bryant: 323-85-17 348 FWP
Tom Osborne: 255-49-3 292 FWP
The Man, the Myth. Dr. Tom never lost more than 3 games in any one season.
Bo Scembechler: 234-65-8 248 FWP
Proof that you don't have to win a national title to be a great coach.
Woody Hayes: 219-66-10 227 FWP
Ara Parseghian: 170-58-6 170 FWP

The Local Legends: Casual college football fans may not know all of these gentlemen, but their respective institutions treat them like royalty.

Lavell Edwards: 257-101-3 244 FWP
A legend in Provo, Utah.
Vince Dooley: 201-77-10 194 FWP
Georgia's on his mind.
John Vaught: 190-61-12 194 FWP
Darrell Royal: 184-60-5 186 FWP
Barry Switzer: 157-29-4 181 FWP
Frank Beamer: 209-108-4 177 FWP
Put the Hokies and Beamer Ball on the map.
Frank Kush: 173-57-1 174 FWP
Led Arizona State to 2 undefeated seasons (1970 and 1975). Later famously drafted John Elway as coach of the Baltimore Colts.
Chris Ault: 191-85-1 172 FWP
The Nevada head coach is the purveyor of the 'Pistol' offense and is already in the College Football Hall of Fame.
Bud Wilkinson: 145-29-4 165 FWP
He's the reason God made Oklahoma.
Don James: 178-76-3 164 FWP
Nicknamed the 'Dawg Father'.
Bobby Dodd: 165-64-8 158 FWP
Hayden Frye: 232-178-10 154 FWP
His teams at SMU inspired the name for the Ford Motor Company's new sports car, while his teams at Iowa enjoyed a psychological homefield advantage.
Don Nehlen: 202-128-8 153 FWP
May someday be passed by Rich Rodriguez as the most loved man in West Virginia.
Bob Devaney: 136-30-7 152 FWP
For a long time, Dr. Tom was in the Irishman's shadow.
Frank Broyles: 149-62-6 139 FWP
George Welsh: 189-132-4 134 FWP
Brought Virginia out of the wilderness.
John McKay: 127-40-8 131 FWP
Johnny Majors: 185-137-10 127 FWP
His first tenure at Pitt was great (33-13-1), while his second was awful (12-32).
Charles McClendon: 137-59-7 126 FWP
Fisher DeBerry: 169-109-1 125 FWP
Lloyd Carr: 122-40 123 FWP
Don Coryell: 104-19-2 120 FWP
Before his air show arrived in the NFL, he was busy dominating at San Diego State.
Bill Yeoman: 160-108-8 117 FWP
Paul Pasqualoni: 141-76-1 116 FWP
Maybe firing him wasn't the right move?
Danny Ford: 122-59-5 107 FWP
Ford is a god, literally, at Clemson. His stint at Arkansas (26-30-1 in 5 seasons) was not the encore he envisioned.
John Robinson: 132-77-4 105 FWP
I'm willing to forget his tenure at UNLV if you are.
Bob Pruett: 94-23 102 FWP
Barry Alvarez: 118-73-4 91 FWP
From the bottom of the Big 10 to the Rose Bowl.
Sonny Lubick: 129-93 88 FWP
Cooled off considerably his last few seasons, but on the whole did great things at Colorado State.
Bill McCartney: 93-55-5 74 FWP
Pat Hill: 85-55 63 FWP

Miracle Workers: These gentlemen tasted success where few have.

Dick Tomey: 175-129-7 120 FWP
He's won at Hawaii, Arizona, and now San Jose State.
Bill Snyder: 136-68-1 116 FWP
The patron saint of miracle workers. Kansas State had the worst winning percentage in all of college football when he arrived.
Dick Sheridan: 121-52-5 112 FWP
Bill Mallory: 168-129-4 111 FWP
Won big Miami (Ohio), Colorado, Northern Illinois, and Indiana.
Bill Dooley: 162-126-5 106 FWP
Won at 3 current ACC schools (North Carolina, Virginia Tech, and Wake Forest).
Mike Price: 154-145 83 FWP
Grant Teaff: 128-105-6 80 FWP
Joe Morrison: 101-72-7 72 FWP
Ask Steve Spurrier (21-16 in 3 seasons) and Lou Holtz (33-37 in 6 seasons) how hard it is to win at South Carolina where Morrison was 39-28-2 in 6 seasons.
Glen Mason: 123-121-1 63 FWP
Won 10 games at both Kansas and Minnesota.
June Jones: 76-41 62 FWP
Attempting another resuscitation effort.
Jim Grobe: 79-72-1 44 FWP
Made a winner out of Ohio and Wake Forest.
Rich Brooks: 114-146-4 39 FWP
Won at Oregon and Kentucky.
Rocky Long: 61-61 31 FWP
Mark Mangino: 37-36 19 FWP
Even before the miraculous 2007 season, Kansas was much improved under the Mangenius.
Greg Schiano: 36-46 14 FWP
Dan McCarney: 56-85 11 FWP
The administration stuck with McCarney despite 5 lean years (13-42) to end the 1990's. They were rewarded with with 5 bowl appearances in 6 years from 2000-2005.

Ramblin' Men: For these guys, the grass is/was always greener.

Lou Holtz: 249-132-7 208 FWP
Dennis Erickson: 158-68-1 144 FWP
Dennis Franchione: 173-97 139 FWP
Nick Saban: 99-48-1 86 FWP
Howard Schnellengerger: 141-119-3 85 FWP
His resemblence to Captain Kangaroo is uncanny.
Larry Smith: 143-126-7 84 FWP

Followed the Legend: The Gene Bartow's of college football.

Earle Bruce: 144-88-2 111 FWP
Fred Akers: 108-75-3 77 FWP
Frank Solich: 77-37 67 FWP
Ron Zook: 36-37 17 FWP

Oops. Maybe We Shouldn't Have Fired this Guy: The best revenge is living well.

RC Slocum: 123-47-2 117 FWP
Never had a losing season in 14 years at College Station. His immediate successor, Dennis Franchione, had 2 in 5 years.
Steve Logan: 69-58 42 FWP
Skip Holtz looks to have righted the Jolly Roger for now, but in the John Thompson era (2003-2004), the Pirates were known as E-Z-U (3-20 record).
David Cutcliffe: 44-29 32 FWP
How'd the Coach O era work out?

Active Elites: The best in the game right now.

Jim Tressel: 208-73-2 205 FWP
Steve Spurrier: 163-56-2 162 FWP
Some may quibble with this designation, but it's hard to overlook his body of work.
Phillip Fulmer: 147-45 151 FWP
Is he losing it?
Mack Brown: 189-99-1 158 FWP
Bob Stoops: 97-22 107 FWP
Tommy Tuberville: 105-53 89 FWP
Pete Carroll: 76-14 87 FWP
Dr. Tom won at about Carroll's clip for two and a half decades.
Urban Meyer: 70-16 77 FWP
Mark Richt: 72-19 77 FWP
Les Miles: 62-27 56 FWP
Rich Rodriguez: 60-26 55 FWP
Bobby Petrino: 41-9 46 FWP

Active Good Coaches: These guys aren't quite in the elite class yet, although they may arrive at that level in the future.

Dan Hawkins: 102-39-1 98 FWP
Gary Pinkel: 122-74-3 95 FWP
Mike Bellotti: 106-52 91 FWP
Houston Nutt: 110-71 81 FWP
Tommy Bowden: 87-46 72 FWP
Tom O'Brien: 80-52 59 FWP
Rick Neuheiel: 66-30 59 FWP
Mike Leach: 65-37 52 FWP
Butch Davis: 55-28 47 FWP
George O'Leary: 74-61 45 FWP
Ralph Friedgen: 56-31 45 FWP
31-8 in his first 3 seasons, but only 25-23 the past 4.
Tom Amstutz: 55-32 43 FWP
Shares many similarities with Friedgen. Caucasian, male, overweight, became head coach in 2001, 45-18 his first 5 seasons, 10-14 his last 2.
Jeff Tedford: 50-26 42 FWP

Up-and-Comers: That's what she said.

Brian Kelly: 148-54-2 144 FWP
Paul Johnson: 107-39 104 FWP
Best coach in the NC 2 A.

Mid-Major Ballers: Best of the Mids.

Gary Patterson: 62-25 58 FWP
Kept the program on track after Franchione and Tomlinson split. Is a BCS bid in the near future?
Chris Petersen: 23-3 28 FWP
Bronco Mendenhall: 28-10 27 FWP
A mini-dynasty is brewing in Provo.
Kyle Whittingham: 24-14 19 FWP
The Utes have been steady since he took over for Meyer.

From the Ground Up: These 2 guys have seen their programs emerge as Division IA teams:

Larry Blakeney: 136-68-1 116 FWP
Now that Paul Johnson and Brian Kelly are at BCS programs, he's the best coach you've never heard of.
Jim Leavitt: 79-47 62 FWP

Random Facts that Only I Possibly (Probably) Find Interesting

During his collegiate career at Oklahoma (2004-2007) Adrian Peterson put up the following stat line:

747 rush attempts
4045 yards
5.4 yards per rush

In his rookie year with the Minnesota Vikings, he put up these numbers:

238 rush attempts
1341 yards
5.6 yards per rush

Kicking Luck

Football teams exercise much less control over what their opponents are able to do than most fans realize. From recovering fumbles to illegal shifts, random chance exerts a profound influence on the outcome of a football game. Perhaps one of the most random events in football is a field goal attempt by the opposition. Outside of a blocked kick, the defense is virtually unable to influence whether the football passes between the goal posts. With that in mind, which teams were the luckiest and least lucky in terms of opponent's field goal accuracy in 2007?

To determine which teams had the best and worst luck, we need to find what the out how often the 'average' opposing kicker succeeded in converting a field goal attempt. In 2007, kickers who kicked against Division IA (or FBS) foes made 1814 of 2530 kicks, for a field goal percentage of 71.7%. I for one am surprised by the seemingly high percentage of successful field goal attempts. It should also be noted that some Division IAA (or FCS) kickers are included in this list as it is based on opponents of Division IA teams. Anyway, to calculate what I have dubbed Kicking Luck Points (KLP), simply multiply the average field goal percentage by the number of field goals a teams' opponents attempted. Subtract this number from the field goals their opponents made and multiply by 3 (the point value of a field goal attempt). This resulting number is the number of points the team allowed above or below the national average. Confused? Here is the formula in action:

In 2007, opponents of the UTEP Miners made 16 of 23 field goal attempts in games against the Miners. That's a field goal percentage of 69.6%, just a bit below the national average. We would have expected UTEP's opponents to make about 16.49 field goals. Subtracting 16.49 from 16 leaves us with -.49. Multiplying this number by 3 produces -1.47. That means UTEP allowed about one and a half fewer points over the course of the whole season than would be expected if they had perfectly average luck in opponent field goal percentage. 1.47 points over the course of a 12-game season is pretty negligible. I used UTEP as an example because their luck was about average. Now, here are the 10 best KLP teams from 2007.Northwestern enjoyed the best luck in opponent field goal accuracy of any team in 2007. Their 12 opponents connected on only 4 of 12 field goal attempts, resulting in the team allowing almost 14 fewer points than expected if their opponents had average kicking accuracy. And now the other side of the coin, the 10 worst KLP teams from 2007.California allowed about 15 points more over the course of their 13-game schedule than they would have if their opponents had made field goals at an average clip. The difference between the team with the best luck and the team with the worst luck was a little more than 29 points. 29 points over a short season can be pretty significant, especially depending on when those points occur.

What does this mean for 2008? That's a good question. Northwestern and California aren't likely to see such divergent luck in their opponents' field goal accuracy, but to proclaim that all the teams that enjoyed good luck will decline and vice-versa is pure folly. In addition, I did not adjust the kicking accuracy for distance or account for weather variables. In the end, KLP is just a fun stat that may not prove particularly useful in predicting future performance.

MAC Look-Ahead: SDPI

One of my favorite set of posts from last offseason was the conference recap using SDPI. SDPI is a statistic I borrowed from Eddie Epstein that he used in his book, Dominance, to rank pro football's all-time greatest teams. SDPI stands for Standard Deviation Power Index and looks at how teams performed relative to the league average (or conference average in this case) and standard deviation in terms of points scored and allowed. The more standard deviations a team is above the mean, the better they are, and vice-versa. Here is the link to last year's MAC post. As you can see, SDPI was a useful tool in predicting some of the rise and fall among the MAC's teams. In the interest of providing an even better offseason analysis, I will now be conducting another SDPI, this time for yardage. It is calculated in the same manner as the SDPI for points, but will obviously be measured against the conference mean and standard deviation for yards. Think of it this way: Points are the end result and yards are the means to that end. Thus, looking at both sets of data, we can get an even better idea about which teams are likely to improve or regress in 2008.

First off, I'd like to extend my middle finger to the MAC and their juvenile scheduling practices in 2007. If you didn't know, the MAC added Temple last season, boosting their membership to 13 teams. That wasn't the problem. The problem was that they decided to let some teams play 7 conference games, and others play 8. Not even every team in each division played the same number of games. The MAC decided to user inter-division games to determine which teams played in the MAC Championship Game. Those intra-division games? According to the MAC, those are pretty much glorified exhibitions. But the real reason the schedule irked me was because of the performance analysis aspect. Since each team did not play the same number of conference games, the numbers have to be averaged together. Instead of calculating SDPI by total points and total yardage, it is done based on averages. Thankfully, the MAC has gone to a complete 8-game schedule for everyone in 2008.

If you want the meat of the article, skip this next paragraph as it just gives an example of how the SDPIis calculated. The mean points scored for all MAC teams in conference play (Championship Game excluded) was 28.17 per game. The mean points allowed for all MAC teams in conference play (Championship Game excluded) was 28.07 points per game. The difference is due to rounding. The standard deviation for points scored was 7.42 per game. The standard deviation for points allowed was 5.31 per game. Bowling Green scored 33.875 points per game in MAC play and allowed 27.375. Their offensive SDPI was 0.77 = ([33.875-28.17]/7.42). Their defensive SDPI was 0.13 = ([28.07-27.375]/5.31). Their total SDPI for points (SDPIP) was 0.90 which ranked 4th in the conference. The mean yardage for all MAC teams in conference play (Championship Game excluded) was 394.75 yards per game. The mean yardage against all MAC teams in conference play (Championship Game excluded) was 393.05 yards per game. The difference is due to rounding. The standard deviation for yardage for was 60.20 per game. The standard deviation for yards allowed was 42.70 per game. Bowling Green gained 407.38 yards per game in conference play and allowed 405.75 per game. Their offensive SDPI was 0.21 = ([407.38-394.75]/60.20). Their defensive SDPI was -0.30 = ([393.05-405.75]/42.70). Their total SDPI for yards (SDPIY) was -0.09 which ranked 7th in the conference.

To refresh your memory, here are the 2007 MAC Standings.
Now here are the 2007 SDPI standings.

See why the MAC scheduling sucks? Miami of Ohio finished 5-2, technically a half game behind Bowling Green, yet still won the division thanks to a better record against divisional teams.

Best Offense: Central Michigan 1.98 (SDPIP) and 1.94 (SDPIY)
The offense didn't miss a beat wit the departure of Brian Kelly.

Worst Offense: Temple -1.44 (SDPIP) and -1.78 (SDPIY)
Held below 10 points 3 times in conference play.

Best Defense: Miami 1.79 (SDPIP) and 2.29 (SDPIY)
The Redhawks were outstanding in the regular season, allowing only 295 yards and 18.6 points per game to their MAC opponents. Central Michigan proceeded to shred them for 452 yards and 35 points in the MAC Championship Game.

Worst Defense: Toledo -1.87 (SDPIP) and -1.35 (SDPIY)
The second-best offense in the conference was wasted by a defense that couldn't stop anyone.

Schedule strength is not evaluated thanks to the MAC's decision to have some teams play 7 conference games, while others played 8, and to only count division games in the standings.

Looking ahead to next season, the prohibitive favorite should be...

East
Look to the Bottom of the Standings
In 2005, Ohio went 3-5 and finished in 4th place in the MAC East. Kent State was 0-8 in MAC play in 2005 ad dead last in the MAC East. In 2006, those teams finished 1st and 2nd respectively in the MAC East with a combined conference record of 12-4, with Ohio winning the division at 7-1. In 2006, Bowling Green finished 3-5 and tied for 3rd in the MAC East. Miami finished 2-6 and alone in 5th place. In 2007, both schools combined to finish 11-4 in MAC play and atop the standings. Look for a similar phenomenon to occur in 2008. Ohio (4-4) and Kent State (1-7) are two teams to look out for in 2008.

West
Central Michigan
What Brian Kelly hath begun, let not Butch Jones tear asunder. Jones did an admirable job replacing Kelly, leading the Chippewas to an 8-6 record, another MAC title, and a near upset of Purdue in the Motor City Bowl. The Chips once again dominated their MAC opponents, going 6-1 in the conference (7-1 if we count the MAC Championship Game) after a 7-1 season in 2006. However, there were some rough patches outside the league. Kansas beat them by 45, Purdue beat them by 23 in the first meeting, Clemson hung 70 on them, and Division IAA North Dakota State beat them by 30. The Chips have a host of positive indicators as they begin their quest to become the first 3-peat MAC Champions since Marshall completed a 4-year run in 2000. For one, the coaching staff is intact. Despite interviewing for the vacant West Virginia job, Butch Jones is back in the fold to begin his second season as head coach. Having a 3rd head coach in as many seasons would have made the 3-peat quest much more difficult. But perhaps most importantly, Dan LeFevour is back for his junior season. The poor man's Tim Tebow (+3600 yards and 27 TD's through the air and +1100 yards and 19 TD's on the ground) is back along with 8 other starters to lead an offense that should once again be the best in the conference. The defense which was rather porous in 2007 (9th in the MAC in yards allowed in conference play) returns 8 starters and merely needs to be competent to give the Chips a chance to win every week (against MAC foes). The Chips also get two of the better contenders in the MAC West (Western Michigan and Ball State) at home. However, aside from Eastern Michigan and Northern Illinois, any one of 4 teams (the aforementioned trio plus Toledo) could realistically be expected to walk away with the MAC West title.

The team(s) that will improve are...

Kent State, Northern Illinois, Ohio, and Western Michigan
Despite their 3-9 finish, solitary MAC win, and 7-game losing streak to end the season, Kent State has a real chance to gain bowl-eligibility and perhaps even get to the MAC Championship Game in 2008. The Golden Flashes, who had tough luck in just about every category in 2007, should see their fortunes improve in 2008. They were 1-4 in one-score games and had a turnover margin of -3 in conference play (8th in the MAC). Plus the starting quarterback, Julian Edelman, missed the last 4 games. Edelman should begin the 2008 in good health, and if he can remain that way, the Golden Flashes should rise in the standings. Like their conference brethren in Kent, Ohio, the Huskies of Northern Illinois managed only one conference win in 2007. That number should double, likely triple, and perhaps quadruple in 2008. Longtime head coach Joe Novak has departed and Jerry Kill has stepped in to take his place. Kill had a very successful run in Carbondale at Southern Illinois, where he made 5 postseason appearances in 7 seasons (5 straight to close his career). At Southern Illinois, his specialty was offense. The Salukis averaged at least 34 points per game every season save his first. Northern Illinois finished 9th in the MAC in yards per game in conference play, but they were even worse defensively finishing 12th in yards allowed per game. The deplorable defense gets all 11 starters back and should improve by default, while the offense should improve under Kill with the starting quarterback, running back, and top 5 receivers returning. The Huskies were also a tough luck 2-5 in one-score games (1-4 in conference play) and had a MAC-worst -10 turnover margin in conference play. Both of those facets of the team should also see a market correction and leave the Huskies as one of the nation's most improved teams in 2008. After a sensational 2006 campaign that saw them win the MAC East, the Ohio Bobcats fell back to the pack and finished in a tie for 4th place in 2007. A lot of things went right for the Bobcats in 2006. They were 3-0 in one-score games and finished 9-5 despite being outgained on the season. Based on how well they played, their 9-5 record was a bit of a mirage. The universe adjusted in 2007, and despite keeping their play at nearly the same level, the team stumbled to a 6-6 record (still good by recent Ohio standards). Though the defense regressed from one of the MAC's best to mid-level, the passing game experienced a significant uptick. After averaging only 5.5 yards per pass attempt in 2006, the Bobcats raised that number by almost 2 yards to 7.4 in 2007. While the player responsible for most of those passes, Brad Bower, is gone, his replacement, Theo Scott, received significant playing time in 5 of the team's 12 games last season so inserting him into the lineup this year won't be akin to throwing him to the wolves. On the whole, the offense gets 8 starters back, although the unit does lose running back Kalvin McRae. He of the 3 consecutive 1000-yard seasons. The defense gets 7 starters back and should improve upon last year's version. The Bobcats also had a turnover margin in MAC play of -5. Only 3 teams (Akron, Western Michigan, and Northern Illinois) were worse. Their turnover margin should be better this year as turnovers are highly variable. In the wide-open MAC East, Ohio has a decent shot of returning to the MAC Championship Game. Big things were expected of the Western Michigan Broncos in 2007. A lot of publications had them taking the MAC West. Unfortunately, a tough non-conference schedule (including top-10 teams in West Virginia and Missouri), a poor record in one-score games (1-3), and a poor turnover margin (-6 in MAC play) caused them to finish below .500 in conference play. The most gut-wrenching close loss can be viewed (in all it's grainy detail) below.
Going into 2008, the Broncos should challenge Central Michigan not only for the MAC West title, but also for the best offense in the conference. Quarterback Tim Hiller missed all of the 2006 season with an injury and struggled somewhat upon his return to the team in 2007. However, he closed with a bang (see below), and with his two-top receivers (Jamarko Simmons and tight end Branden Ledbetter) and starting running back (Brandon West) returning, the Broncos should be able to move the ball quite efficiently. The defense loses only one contributor in safety Anthony Gebhart, and should again be one of the league's best. The only fly in the proverbial ointment is that the Broncos must travel to Mt. Pleasant to take on the Chippewas of Central Michigan. Otherwise the Broncos would be the favorites to take the MAC West in 2008.

The team(s) that will decline are...

Ball State, Buffalo, Eastern Michigan, and Temple
2007 was a special season for the Ball State Cardinals. The prolific offense, led by quarterback Nate Davis, guided the team to 7 wins, their first bowl game since 1996, and a near epic upset of Nebraska in Lincoln. That game was the first real indication that the Husker defense had serious issues. For 2008, Davis and the other 10 starters return on offense, so they should crank out the points. The defense also gets 8 starters back so it appears Ball State should in for a big-time season in 2008. Were it not for the Cardinals' tremendous turnover margin in 2007, I'd be inclined to agree. Ball State was an astounding +12 in MAC games last season. They accumulated that tremendous margin in only 7 conference games, meaning the Cardinals averaged nearly two fewer turnovers per game than their conference opponents. How did they do this? Nate Davis simply did not throw interceptions. As a team, the Cardinals threw 6 on the year (Davis accounted for all of them). Only 3 teams in the NCAA threw fewer. Fresno State, Air Force, and Navy each threw 5. However, Navy attempted only 136 passes on the year, Air Force 214, and Fresno State 343. Ball State put the ball in the air 483 times. Davis is a great quarterback, but expecting him to repeat that extremely low interception percentage is folly. In 2006, Davis threw 8 interceptions in 245 attempts. That's a great ratio (3.3 per 100 passes), but much lower than his other-worldly 2007 numbers (1.3 per 100 passes). Despite the returning personnel, Ball State will not enjoy such an extreme turnover margin in 2008, and will not be able to win the extremely tough MAC West. Another team that enjoyed a special season in 2007 was the Buffalo Bulls. Since returning to Division IA football in 1999, the Bulls had won 12 games prior to the 2007 season (never winning more than 3 in any one season), while losing 79. The Bulls proceeded to go 5-7 and actually finished with a winning record (5-3) in the MAC under second-year head coach Turner Gill. Instead of acting as a stepping stone season, it appears the Bulls will fall back in 2008, in the hopes of taking another step forward in 2009. Why? For starters, while the team won more than they lost in MAC play, they were not technically a 'good' team. The Bulls were outgained by about 31 yards per game in conference play. Those are not numbers befitting a team that wins more than half their games. The Bulls were greatly aided by their turnover margin of +4 in conference play (3rd best in the MAC). With 10 starters back on offense and 8 back on defense, the Bulls will probably improve performance-wise, but they won't post a winning conference record. Eastern Michigan quadrupled their win total from 2006, posting a 4-8 record and finishing in a tie for 3rd in the MAC West. The Eagles closed the year with a huge road upset of eventual champion Central Michigan. The Eagles, like the Buffalo Bulls, were consistently outgained (on average by about 41 yards per game in MAC play), but thanks to their phenomenal turnover margin of +11 (2nd in MAC play), they were able to tread water. In 2008, that turnover margin should normalize and the Eagles will return to their rightful place at the bottom of the MAC West. Yet another perennial also-ran achieved moderate success in 2007, as the Temple Owls won 4 conference games despite an offense more inept than the cops in Hazard County. Temple averaged only 288 yards per game in conference play, the worst performance by a wide margin. The second worst team (Akron) averaged 346 yards per game. The Owls made up for it by playing very good defense (344 yards allowed per game in conference play--2nd best), winning the close ones (3-1 in one-score games), and winning the turnover battle (+2 in conference play). 3 of the Owls 4 conference wins were by a combined 12 points. In the one close game the Owls lost (22-17 to Connecticut), they should have won if not for a blown call that was also blown upon review.
While the Owls return a host of personnel on offense and defense, that appears to be a common refrain for every team in the MAC. Because of their good fortune last season, and because of the strength of the rest of the conference, Temple will have trouble matching last season's 4 MAC wins.