by Bill Connelly
Yesterday [1], we took a look at the teams ranked No. 11-25 on the Projected F/+ countdown. Today, we move to the Top 10 -- the toppermost of the poppermost.
It is with a perverse sense of pleasure that we steal the following disclaimer from the weekly DVOA rankings [2]:
To save people some time, we remind everyone to put their angry troll hatred into the official zlionsfan angry troll hatred Mad Libs form:
<team> is clearly ranked <too high/too low> because <reason unrelated to F/+>. <subjective ranking system> is way better than this. <unrelated team-supporting or -denigrating comment, preferably with poor spelling and/or chat-acceptable spelling>
Ah, that felt good.
A reminder: These rankings are based on projected strength, not projected results. Yesterday, we revealed that Tennessee was ranked 20th in Projected F/+. However, they will find it nearly impossible to better No. 21 Nebraska's record, as they face a whopping six more projected Top 25 teams than the Huskers. Similarly, Boise State will likely finish with a much better record than most teams ranked ahead of them, because their schedule is more maneuverable. They are a potentially legitimate national title contender despite ranking just 14th.
2009 Record (Conference): 9-4 (5-3 SEC)
2009 Ranks: 13th F/+ | 17th FEI | 13th S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 39th F/+ | 45th FEI | 30th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 12th F/+ | 11th FEI | 12th S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 23rd
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 9th
Top 25 Opponents: 6 (3 home, 2 away, 1 neutral)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Talent and athleticism in droves. LSU ranks fourth in five-year recruiting. While they have had issues with youth and execution in the past couple of seasons, the ceiling is always tremendously high with this squad, to the extent that they have won two national titles in the last seven seasons and can semi-legitimately be called "underachieving [3]."
2. The bones of a great defense. The Bayou Bengals must replace seven starters on defense, but all of the main predictors -- long-term success, strong recruiting -- point to a small drop-off at worst. LSU should be sturdy up the middle, with tackle Lazarius Levingston, middle linebacker Kelvin Sheppard and safeties Brandon Taylor and Jai Eugene anchoring the defense. Plus, they could have the best cornerbacks in the SEC. The experience is not heavy, but the talent is.
Two Red Flags
1. The offense needs a spark. Considering the five-star talent the LSU offense has had at its disposal recently, the fact that they have finished 34th and 39th in Offensive F/+ the last two years is almost inexcusable. Former four-star quarterback Jordan Jefferson runs the show, and he has three five-star receivers at his disposal. With Jefferson entering his junior season, they better start making their way back toward the Top 20 soon.
2. The running game especially needs some help. LSU's Rushing S&P+ ranked fourth in 2007, the year they won the national title. It fell to 14th in 2008, then 42nd in 2009. Whoever replaces Charles Scott as their starting running back -- be it Stevan Ridley or somebody else -- will need to improve on Scott's injury-plagued 2009 performance.
2009 Record (Conference): 10-3 (8-1 Pac-10)
2009 Ranks: 8th F/+ | 9th FEI | 10th S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 8th F/+ | 7th FEI | 11th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 21st F/+ | 22nd FEI | 18th S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 4th
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 17th
Top 25 Opponents: 2 (both road)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Recent offensive history is on their side. In the last four years, Oregon's offense has ranked 16th, third, 12th, and eighth in Offensive F/+. They have finished no lower than seventh in Rushing S&P+ and no worse than fifth in Standard Downs Rushing S&P+. They had what one would call a less-than-impressive offseason. Jeremiah Masoli was kicked off the team after multiple arrests, LaMichael James was suspended for one game, and four receivers were suspended or booted -- but the system works, and it appears Chip Kelly still has enough pieces to make the ball move down the field.
2. The defense has improved. The Ducks are known for their offensive proficiency, but their defense ranked has ranked no worse than 31st in the last three seasons. Eight starters return from last year's 21st-ranked defense. Linebackers Casey Matthews and Spencer Paysinger are outstanding, and a secondary that was a bit too young to be consistent a year ago is suddenly experienced and potentially outstanding. Safety John Boyett picked off three passes and led the Ducks in tackles as a freshman last year.
Two Red Flags
1. Recruiting is not yet elite. Oregon made waves in its most recent recruiting class, nabbing blue-chip running back Lache Seastrunk. They have slowly begun to increase the caliber of the athlete they attract, but they still rank only 25th in five-year recruiting. Clearly they have succeeded without a team full of blue-chippers, but strong recruiting gives you a good margin for error. After an offseason full of said error, Oregon is about to find out how their depth stacks up, especially on offense.
2. Not the best offseason. They are still the Pac-10 favorites, but Oregon's program took hit after hit this offseason. If the Fulmer Cup standings [4] were a projection factor (and honestly, why shouldn't they be?), Oregon's overall projections would have dipped after Jeremiah Masoli stole frat boys' laptops and got caught with marijuana, LaMichael James was arrested for potential domestic assault, receivers Tyrece Gaines and Diante Jackson were deemed ineligible due to academic issues, and two other receivers (Jamere Holland and Garrett Embry) were booted from the team altogether. Chip Kelly is always very assertive in the way he handles these issues, but the issues probably need to stop while the Ducks can still field an offense.
2009 Record (Conference): 11-2 (6-2 Big Ten)
2009 Ranks: 7th F/+ | 12th FEI | 6th S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 21st F/+ | 30th FEI | 17th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 8th F/+ | 6th FEI | 10th S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 14th
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 8th
Top 25 Opponents: 3 (all away)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Point differential. Penn State has to replace their quarterback and four of their six leading tacklers, but last year's results point out what was a rather large gap between the Nittany Lions and opponents on their schedule. They outscored opponents by a healthy 16.6 points per game and just one of their 11 wins came by single digits -- their soggy, 19-17 win over LSU in the Capital One Bowl. Darryl Clark's leadership will be missed, and PSU will have to maneuver through the season with three new starting linebackers, but they've got things headed in the right direction once again. This Paterno kid is quite the up-and-comer in the coaching ranks.
2. Recent history has been kind. From 2000-04, Penn State went just 26-33. It looked like the wheels had come off the Joe Paterno bandwagon. He was beginning to lose his wins race with Bobby Bowden and recruiting was not up to par. That changed quickly and drastically. The Lons from the Nittany Valley have won 51 games in the last five seasons and rank sixth in Program F/+ and 18th in five-year recruiting. Three former blue-chip quarterbacks are vying to replace Clark at quarterback, and the defensive front seven has a wealth of former star recruits from which to choose.
Two Red Flags
1. That really was a lot to lose on defense. While the PSU secondary is in fine shape, having lost only two part-time starting cornerbacks, the front seven was hit pretty hard by graduation. Penn State is Linebacker U., of course, so maybe players like Nate Stupar or Michael Mauti will perform as well as the departed trio of Josh Hull, Navorro Bowman, and Sean Lee. But it's never a given, and at the very least, there might be a year of transition before the defense is truly clicking again.
2. They were quite lucky last year. PSU only had a +6 turnover margin last year, but they recovered a whopping 69 percent of the fumbles that took place in their games. That figure was not only highest in the country last year, but it was the fourth-highest in the last five years. Recovering only 50 percent of the fumbles would have resulted in a loss of up to six extra turnovers. Those bounces are not likely to go PSU's way a second straight season.
2009 Record (Conference): 12-1 (8-0 Mountain West)
2009 Ranks: 3rd F/+ | 8th FEI | 3rd S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 19th F/+ | 33rd FEI | 4th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 6th F/+ | 9th FEI | 4th S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 11th
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 7th
Top 25 Opponents: 0
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Gary Patterson knows 'D'. Yes, they lost to Boise State in last year's Fiesta Bowl, ceding not only the game but also this season's preseason hype to the Broncos in the process. But while Boise State has a solid chance of going undefeated and threatening to crack into the national title game, TCU's odds of going undefeated are even greater. In fact, they have the highest odds in the country. There are two main reasons for this: (1) a pillow-soft schedule (one that could potentially keep them out of the national title game), and (2) defense. The Horned Frogs have finished atop the Defensive F/+ rankings twice in the last four seasons, and they finished sixth last year. They have to replace leading tackler Daryl Washington, pass-rushing assassin Jerry Hughes, and both starting cornerbacks, but they have more than proven their staying power on the defensive side of the ball.
2. Who needs close wins? As mentioned with Boise State yesterday and Penn State above, it is possible to win games without looking tremendously impressive. That is not the path that TCU has taken in going 23-3 in the last two seasons. The Horned Frogs went 4-2 in games decided by seven points or fewer in that time and have won 19 games by double digits. After a tough win over Air Force last year, TCU won their final seven regular season games by an average of 47-10, taking out strong teams like BYU (in Provo) and Utah in the process. Somewhere along the way, TCU learned how to play offense (they improved from 85th in Offensive F/+ in 2007, to 47th in 2008, to 19th last year), and now they return nine starters and a ton of explosiveness on that side of the ball.
Two Red Flags
1. Recruiting, obviously. TCU's schedule features only two games against major-conference opponents -- Oregon State and Baylor. Regardless, this is not a team that is simply going to demolish opponents based on pure talent and athleticism. TCU ranks just 63rd in five-year recruiting, and though they have clearly won big recently, this does suggest that their margin for error may not be as strong as their dominant scores suggest.
2. Recent offensive history. Yes, TCU has been on an upswing offensively, but they have yet to demonstrate the sustained success we need to see before assuming they will be good year in and year out. The 2010 offense might hold steady -- seven returning starters are seniors -- but things might take a turn for the worse in 2011 when this batch of seniors departs.
2009 Record (Conference): 10-3 (6-2 ACC)
2009 Ranks: 4th F/+ | 3rd FEI | 4th S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 7th F/+ | 12th FEI | 2nd S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 15th F/+ | 14th FEI | 16th S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 3rd
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 10th
Top 25 Opponents: 3 (2 away, 1 neutral)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Did anybody notice how good this offense was last year? Because of their conservative nature and somewhat plodding pace, even a really good Virginia Tech offense is not going to rank high in terms of how most people gauge successful offenses -- points, yards per game, etc. But in per-play and per-drive metrics, the Hokies' offense was one of the best in the country last season. They ranked third in both Rushing and Passing S&P+, and third in Standard Downs S&P+. The play calling was impeccable, Tyrod Taylor grew into the role of game manager (13 touchdowns to just five interceptions), and redshirt freshman running back Ryan Williams not only filled in well for injured starter Darren Evans, he also surpassed him. Williams rushed for 1,655 yards and 21 touchdowns in an astounding debut. Combined with three explosive receivers -- Jarrett Boykin, Danny Coale, and Dyrell Roberts combined for 92 catches and 1,839 yards -- this offense had it all. Now they return eight starters, including all of their skill position players and 2008 starter Evans.
2. Blowout wins? By Tech? Really?. The Hokies have racked up double-digit victory totals in each of the last six seasons, and they have done so despite some rather unimpressive point margins. They were plus-14.8 in 2006, plus-12.6 in 2007, and just plus-5.4 in 2008. Last season's offensive success, combined with slight defensive improvement, resulted in a plus-16.2 margin, their best since 2005. They won seven games by at least 13 points and proved that they are once again on an upward trajectory.
Two Red Flags
1. Again with the recent history. Yes, Tech's offense erupted last year. And yes, the backfield is loaded once again. But after finishing 39th, 40th, and 59th in Offensive F/+ from 2006-08, it should go without saying that, like TCU, they have to prove that they can continue the success.
2. A questionable defense? This is a tentative red flag, but it is red nonetheless. Ever so slightly, the Hokies' defense has trended downward in recent years. After finishing in the top five in Defensive F/+ in both 2006 and 2007, they finished 17th in 2008 and 15th in 2009. Combine that with the fact that only four defensive starters return, including just one on the defensive line, and we might see the worst Virginia Tech defense in recent memory this season. If the offense continues to improve, it might not be a big deal -- even a bad Tech defense is likely still pretty good, and the offense can possibly compensate for any slippage. But until some new, young stars emerge, we might be looking at a step backwards here.
2009 Record (Conference): 8-5 (5-3 Big 12)
2009 Ranks: 10th F/+ | 21st FEI | 7th S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 54th F/+ | 51st FEI | 56th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 2nd F/+ | 4th FEI | 3rd S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 22nd
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 3rd
Top 25 Opponents: 2 (1 home, 1 neutral)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. This is still the OU defense. Oklahoma must replace six starters from one of the top defenses in the country last year. Tackle Gerald McCoy was a top five pick in April's draft, linebackers Ryan Reynolds and Keenan Clayton were long-time contributors, and cornerbacks Dominique Franks and Brian Jackson will be missed. But few programs have so consistently built top-flight defenses -- they have finished no worse than 12th in Defensive F/+ since 2006 -- and they are simply preparing to reload with the next batch of youngsters with potential. Get used to names like linebacker Ronnell Lewis, cornerback Demontre Hurst and tackle Jemarkus McFarland. Add to the equation stalwarts like ends Jeremy Beal and Frank Alexander and safety Quinton Carter, and you've got yet another fantastic defense.
2. This is still OU. It was probably not hard for opposing fans to take a bit of delight in the Sooners' five-loss season in 2009. The Sooners had their worst record since 1999, Bob Stoops' first season. But despite a nearly unprecedented string of bad injury luck (Sam Bradford and Jermaine Gresham combined to play seven quarters all season, and the Sooners could barely find enough warm bodies to field a complete offensive line at times) and close losses (four losses by a touchdown or less), this was still a stout team. They ranked tenth in Overall F/+, with losses to the fifth-, 12th-, 18th-, 22nd- and 23rd-ranked teams, all away from home. They were very close to the type of season we have come to expect from Oklahoma, and it is not hard to imagine them rounding right back into form in 2010.
Two Red Flags
1. Where did the running game go? OU's running game was a shadow of its former self last year. While the patchwork offensive line did manage to protect Landry Jones for the most part after Sam Bradford went down, holes were just nonexistent for DeMarco Murray and Chris Brown. After ranking sixth in Rushing S&P+ in 2008, the Sooners fell all the way to 88th in 2009. In theory, there should be more stability on the line this year, and Murray is another year removed from a spate of injuries, but even significant improvement in 2010 might not give them an elite running game.
2. The offense could have been even worse last year. Oklahoma recovered 55% of the fumbles in their games last year, and their Success Rate+ ranked just 73rd. Big plays bailed them out on many occasions, but as far as they fell in 2009, the fall was close to being much worse.
2009 Record (Conference): 13-1 (8-0 Big 12)
2009 Ranks: 5th F/+ | 6th FEI | 5th S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 13th F/+ | 15th FEI | 13th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 10th F/+ | 10th FEI | 9th S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 5th
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 5th
Top 25 Opponents: 3 (2 away, 1 neutral)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. If the formula is Recent History Recruiting ... well ... Texas ranks fourth in five-year recruiting and eighth in Program F/+. Despite the losses of Colt McCoy, Jordan Shipley, Sergio Kindle, Earl Thomas, and others, this is one of the healthiest programs in the country, and their latest couple of batches of hand-picked recruits ("We'll take you, and you, and you ...") are likely to produce the same number of stars as any other. First up in a trip to the big-time: sophomore quarterback Garrett Gilbert, sophomore running back Tre' Newton, sophomore defensive end Alex Okafor, maybe even a true freshman or two.
2. They actually didn't get many bounces last year. And we're not talking about Colt McCoy getting bounced off an Alabama tackler and injuring his arm in the national title game. When the ball hit the ground, chances are that Texas wasn't falling on it. They recovered just 41% of the fumbles that took place in their games, and that alone could likely mean a two to four turnover shift in turnover margin.
Two Red Flags
1. Disproportionality. What is disproportionality? It is when an offense succeeds on passing downs at a disproportionately high level compared to their success on standard downs. Last summer, I spoke about Texas' disproportional success and how it likely signaled regression in 2009. Texas slid a bit -- from fifth to 13th in Offensive F/+ -- but upon further review, it turns out that the bigger slide comes when you're disproportionately successful and lose your quarterback the next season. It is a strong enough factor that it made the final projections equation. Texas still had more success than is maintainable on passing downs (they ranked second in Passing Downs S&P+ in each of the last two years, while ranking 24th and 16th in Standard Downs S&P+, respectively). The odds of Garrett Gilbert immediately pulling as many rabbits out of his hat as McCoy (especially without Jordan Shipley) are not great.
2. Talent out the door. Nobody is going to question the long-term health of Mack Brown's program. But the last time Texas made the national title game and lost quite a few starters (2005), they took a step backwards for a couple of seasons before threatening for titles again. For Texas, "a step backwards" means simply going 10-3, but ten wins does not a top five finish make, and the Longhorns might slip up in road trips to Lubbock or Lincoln instead of making it through another regular season unscathed.
2009 Record (Conference): 11-2 (7-1 Big Ten)
2009 Ranks: 6th F/+ | 4th FEI | 9th S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 28th F/+ | 24th FEI | 26th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 5th F/+ | 3rd FEI | 7th S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/+ Rank: 7th
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/+ Rank: 4th
Top 25 Opponents: 4 (2 home, 2 away)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Recent history loves the Buckeyes' defense. In the last four seasons, the Ohio State defense has ranked seventh, fourth, eighth and fifth in Defensive F/+. Every year it seems they are losing a hefty batch of defensive starters, and every year they either hold steady or improve. Jim Tressel and his main defensive assistants -- Jim Heacock and Luke Fickell -- clearly know what they're doing. The Buckeyes have to replace three starters on the defensive line and will need former star recruits like sophomore tackles John Simon and Garrett Goebel and junior end Nathan Williams to step forward. Odds are, they will do just that.
2. The right players return. Losing five defensive starters can sometimes be hard to overcome, but only one of the five departed seniors was drafted before the seventh round of the NFL Draft. For a team that recruits like the Buckeyes (five-year recruiting rank: tenth), that loss can be overcome. All-conference linebackers Ross Homan and Brian Rolle return, as do three outstanding senior defensive backs -- cornerbacks Chimdi Chekwa and Devon Torrence and safety Jermale Hines.
Two Red Flags
1. Is offensive improvement in the works? After ranking fifth in Offensive F/+ with Troy Smith running the show in 2006, the Buckeyes have ranked 26th, 22nd and 28th the last three seasons. That is certainly respectable, and it will win you a lot of games when your defense is as good as Ohio State's. But if you are wanting to win the national title, it likely needs to be a little better than that. Nine offensive starters return, and it seemed Terrelle Pryor was possibly starting to figure things out late in the season (14-for-17 passing against Iowa, 266 yards passing and 72 yards rushing against Oregon in the Rose Bowl). But can he take the Vince Young-esque leap from his sophomore to junior seasons? Ohio State will be very good regardless, but if Pryor leads a Top 10 offense, it will be difficult to keep them out of the national title game.
2. Turnover margin was a little too good. Very good defenses force more turnovers. Of this there is no doubt. And Ohio State recovered 52% of all fumbles last year, which is an extremely normal total. But their turnover margin of was still a bit too high to duplicate. They were plus-3 in an overtime win over Iowa, plus-4 in an 11-point win over Michigan, and plus-2 in a four-point win over Navy. Both of their losses were tight ones, but a lot of their wins were too, and if they're not winning the turnover battle, they could slip up at least a couple of times.
2009 Record (Conference): 13-1 (8-0 SEC)
2009 Ranks: 2nd F/ | 2nd FEI | 2nd S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 6th F/ | 9th FEI | 6th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 7th F/ | 16th FEI | 2nd S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/ Rank: 2nd
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/ Rank: 1st
Top 25 Opponents: 5 (2 home, 2 away, 1 neutral)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Talent, recent history, et cetera, et cetera. Any time you have to replace a player for whom you are building a statue [5], it is easy to assume you are going to suffer through at least a temporary step backwards. And in Tim Tebow's absence, maybe Florida will do just that. But the main components of the F/+ Projections -- recent history and recruiting -- obviously and significantly favor the Gators. They rank first in Program F/+ and first in five-year recruiting, and really, the only surprise is that they don't rank first here too. Only 11 starters return from last year's squad, but almost all of the new starters will be former four- and five-star signees. There could always be a temporary step backwards, but it will be very temporary.
2. The Gators were ... unlucky? Florida went 13-1 last season, winning twelve games by double digits, and the numbers suggest they should have been even more dominant. They recovered just 25 percent of all fumbles last year, the second lowest total in the last five seasons. They lost 11 of their own 17 fumbles and pounced on only three of their opponents' 19. Because Tebow threw only five picks, the Gators still ended up plus-7 in turnover margin, but with a normal amount of luck, that margin could have been in the teens. While new quarterback John Brantley might be more interception-prone, if the bounces even out, Florida will have an even healthier turnover margin than they did last season.
Two Red Flags
1. So much defensive talent lost. Using the Draft Points equation discussed here [6], Florida lost 86 draft points last season, easily the most in the country. (Second-most: Oklahoma's 68; third-most: Alabama's 49.) Fifty of those points came on the defensive side of the ball. Cornerback Joe Haden was a top ten pick, ends Jermaine Cunningham and Carlos Dunlap were selected back-to-back in the second round, and two other players went before the fourth round. That's half of the starting defense! The blue-chip talent Urban Meyer has at his disposal is just staggering, but perhaps expecting these new players to immediately figure everything out is a bit unfair. The Gators lost a ton of talent after the 2006 national title season, and it took them a year to get their bearings -- they fell from a Defensive F/+ rank of third in 2006, to 53rd in 2007, then back to second in 2008. A similar bounce this season would not be completely surprising.
2. So much offensive talent lost. In comparison to the defense, Florida's 36 draft points lost on offense seems downright manageable. Still, the losses of lineman Maurkice Pouncey, Tebow, and tight end Aaron Hernandez to the upper half of the draft is certainly a hit. All three are likely being replaced by four- and five-star players, but again, a temporary step backwards would not be unheard of.
2009 Record (Conference): 14-0 (8-0 SEC)
2009 Ranks: 1st F/ | 1st FEI | 1st S&P+
2009 Offensive Ranks: 4th F/ | 6th FEI | 5th S&P+
2009 Defensive Ranks: 1st F/ | 1st FEI | 1st S&P+
Proj. 2010 Offensive F/ Rank: 1st
Proj. 2010 Defensive F/ Rank: 2nd
Top 25 Opponents: 7 (3 home, 4 away)
Two Signs for Optimism
1. Defense was solid in all the right ways. Below, we will discuss the impact losing nine defensive starters could have on Alabama this seasons. Here, though, we will focus on the fact that the Crimson Tide's defense ranked first in Standard Downs S&P+ last year. On offense, I often refer to standard downs as "play-calling downs," since teams are able to run or pass and execute the gameplan they intended. If that is the case, then Alabama's defense was the best in the country at executing their gameplan as well. The level of coaching provided by Nick Saban and his staff is as high as anywhere, and even if this inexperienced unit takes a step backwards, that step likely won't be a large one.
2. The offense could be ridiculous. Despite the fact that they have a Heisman winner in the backfield, it is almost easy to forget about the Alabama offense. Their defense was just that good last season, ranking first in both FEI and S&P+. But this year it is the offense projected to rank first. It's certainly not hard to see why: eight starters return, including almost all skill position players. Heisman winner Mark Ingram and his almost-as-capable backup Trent Richardson grace the backfield again, receiver Julio Jones returns, and underrated signal caller Greg McElroy is back as well. There is solid depth on the line, and the Tide lost only nine draft points as a whole from this unit. As with teams like Ohio State or Virginia Tech, they could compensate for defensive regression with offensive improvement. This is just a scary, scary team.
Two Red Flags
1. Two is a lonely number. No matter how well you have recruited (five-year recruiting rank: third), having to replace nine starters is still a tall task. The defense lost 49 draft points this April, most notably linebacker Rolando McClain, cornerbacks Kareem Jackson and Javier Arenas, and mountainous tackle Terrence Cody. They were so good and experienced last year that their backup cornerback (Marquis Johnson) was also drafted. Recent blue-chippers like linebackers Nico Johnson and Jerrell Harris and cornerbacks Dre Kirkpatrick and B.J. Scott will have to step up. Chances are, they will eventually. But they face a tricky early trip to Fayetteville to take on the loaded Arkansas offense (two weeks after facing Penn State at home), and it will be interesting to see how quickly the new guys get up to speed.
2. Standard downs weren't perfect. It is nit-picking here, but while Alabama's offense ranked in the top five in Offensive F/+, they ranked just 13th in both Standard Downs S&P+ and Rushing S&P+. That is obviously still good, but for them to end up with the top offense in the country, they will have to improve on that, especially if the defense is struggling out of the gates. Young defenses can react poorly to bad momentum, and it will be up to the Alabama offense to steady the game and keep putting points on the board. They will probably do it, but improvement is still necessary.
In list form, here is a recap of the Projected F/+ Top 25.
1. Alabama
2. Florida
3. Ohio State
4. Texas
5. Oklahoma
6. Virginia Tech
7. TCU
8. Penn State
9. Oregon
10. LSU
11. USC
12. Clemson
13. Miami
14. Boise State
15. Iowa
16. Texas Tech
17. Wisconsin
18. Arkansas
19. Georgia
20. Tennessee
21. Nebraska
22. Pittsburgh
23. South Carolina
24. North Carolina
25. Ole Miss
On a per-conference basis, we are looking at eight SEC teams (a ninth, Auburn, is not far behind), four from the Big 12, ACC, and Big Ten, two from the Pac-10, and one each from the Big East, Mountain West and WAC. When teams' actual schedules take effect, obviously projections shake out a little differently. We will likely have a little more teaser information released in the coming days, but full 2010 predictions will come on July 1, when the college portion of Football Outsiders Almanac 2010 is available for download.
Links:
[1] http://www.footballoutsiders.com/fei-ratings/2010/college-football-outsiders-2010-preseason-top-25
[2] http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings
[3] http://www.trackemtigers.com/2010/6/21/1500408/the-best-coaching-jobs-in-the-sec
[4] http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2010/6/2/1497903/fulmer-cup-the-big-board-continues
[5] http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2010/06/florida-to-build-statues-honoring-tim-tebow-danny-wuerffel-steve-spurrier/1
[6] http://www.footballoutsiders.com/varsity-numbers/2010/teams-they-leave-behind