PRESENTED BY 669248957_logo

The big 2014 Colorado State football preview: Holes to fill and reason for optimism

Ron Chenoy-USA TODAY Sports

Colorado State must replace its two best players and rebuild on both lines. But Jim McElwain has recruited well, and his Rams both return an exciting roster and face an easy schedule in 2014. A second straight bowl bid is probably in the cards.

SB Nation 2014 College Football Countdown

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. "We're going to be pretty good, and that's kind of exciting"

It's been a confusing couple of decades for Colorado State football. When Sonny Lubick took over for Earle Bruce in 1993, the Rams had never been ranked and had attended only two bowls in their history. Lubick vaulted them to 10-2 and a No. 16 finish in 1994, then had them ranked for part of every season from 1997 to 2003. After long being an afterthought, Colorado State became a steady and powerful mid-major presence.

Photo credit: Troy Babbitt-USA TODAY Sports

But after a disappointing 2003 season -- CSU began the season ranked 23rd but fell out of the polls immediately and limped to 7-6 -- the fortunes of the program changed quickly. Lubick went just 17-30 in his last four seasons and retired. Steve Fairchild took over, bumped CSU back to 7-6 with a bowl win in 2008, then went 9-27. The only clear reminder that the magical decade of 1994-03 had even happened was the playing field itself, named after Lubick at the end of that run.

In 2012, former Nick Saban assistant Jim McElwain took over in Fort Collins, inheriting a program that was good at producing an explosive player or two but couldn't maintain enough talent at once. And as with Fairchild, it didn't take him long to break through. After a 4-8 debut, McElwain's Rams went 8-6 in 2013, finishing 4-1 and taking down Washington State in a thrilling New Mexico Bowl to kick off bowl season.

So now what? Fairchild indeed built optimism early in his tenure, but things fell apart quickly. Can McElwain give CSU a level of sustained success the Rams haven't found since his current Rams were about 10 years old? He thinks so.

Colorado State rode an explosive running game and fantastic run defense last year, but both lines are getting rebuilt. The running backs who accounted for 2,567 yards and 35 touchdowns combined are gone. But an exciting quarterback and a deep, swarming back seven on defense give CSU reason for confidence.

2013 Schedule & Results

Record: 8-6 | Adj. Record: 8-6 | Final F/+ Rk: 66
Date Opponent Opp. F/+ Rk Score W-L Adj. Score Adj. W-L 5-gm Adj. Avg.
1-Sep Colorado 95 27-41 L 15.4 - 32.6 L
7-Sep at Tulsa 94 27-30 L 14.2 - 30.5 L
14-Sep Cal Poly N/A 34-17 W 34.2 - 25.9 W
21-Sep at Alabama 2 6-31 L 22.5 - 24.3 L
28-Sep UTEP 119 59-42 W 41.1 - 38.1 W -4.8
12-Oct San Jose State 74 27-34 L 33.1 - 36.7 L -2.1
19-Oct at Wyoming 102 52-22 W 34.0 - 24.8 W 3.0
26-Oct at Hawaii 82 35-28 W 22.0 - 22.2 L 1.3
2-Nov Boise State 45 30-42 L 34.2 - 34.0 W 1.7
9-Nov Nevada 88 38-17 W 35.0 - 24.1 W 3.3
16-Nov at New Mexico 110 66-42 W 37.9 - 37.9 W 4.0
23-Nov at Utah State 32 0-13 L 5.6 - 11.5 L 1.0
30-Nov Air Force 113 58-13 W 36.2 - 17.2 W 4.8
21-Dec vs. Washington State 53 48-45 W 33.1 - 27.1 W 6.0
Category Offense Rk Defense Rk Spec. Tms. Rk
F/+ -3.7% 76 +0.8% 60 +0.3% 61
Points Per Game 36.2 22 29.8 82
Adj. Points Per Game 28.5 65 27.6 64

2. The proverbial light bulb

For two straight years now, Colorado State has finished strong. The Rams won four of six to finish the 2012 season and build a bit of hype for 2013, but a 2-4 start last season dampened most expectations. CSU didn't wait quite as long to find fourth gear, however.

Adj. Points per game (first 6 games): Opponent 31.4, CSU 26.8 (minus-4.6)
Adj. Points per game (last 8 games): CSU 29.8, Opponent 24.9 (plus-4.9)

Junior college transfer Kapri Bibbs rushed for 429 yards through the first six games of the year, but beginning with the October 19 trip to Wyoming, he erupted. He had 29 carries for 201 yards against Wyoming, 33 for 137 against Hawaii, 30 for 312 against Nevada, 38 for 291 against New Mexico. He got dinged up late in the year and got shut down by Boise State, but he still averaged 164 yards per game over the final eight games of the season. Despite a toe injury, Bibbs rushed for 169 yards in the bowl win, and despite only one FBS season, he declared for the NFL Draft following the season.

Late-season improvement is often sustainable if the reasons for the improvement return the following year. Bibbs was a large reason for the surge, and both he and his two backups are gone. But as you see above, defensive improvement was actually the biggest reason for the improvement. The Rams defense returns solid depth, but some of the biggest stars on that side of the ball are gone, too.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
Raw Category Rk Opp. Adj. Category Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS IsoPPP 1.18 42 IsoPPP+ 99.0 67
EFFICIENCY Succ. Rt. 44.9% 47 Succ. Rt. + 94.6 80
FIELD POSITION Def. Avg. FP 30.9 91 Def. FP+ 95.4 103
FINISHING DRIVES Pts. Per Trip in 40 5.1 5 Redzone S&P+ 110.2 28
TURNOVERS EXPECTED 22.5 ACTUAL 20 -2.5
Category Yards/
Game Rk
S&P+ Rk Success
Rt. Rk
PPP+ Rk
OVERALL 24 76 81 65
RUSHING 27 64 70 62
PASSING 30 85 87 54
Standard Downs 64 83 40
Passing Downs 95 77 121
Q1 Rk 78 1st Down Rk 76
Q2 Rk 69 2nd Down Rk 61
Q3 Rk 90 3rd Down Rk 75
Q4 Rk 32

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2014 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Rivals Comp Att Yards TD INT Comp
Rate
Sacks Sack Rate Yards/
Att.
Garrett Grayson 6'2, 220 Sr. 3 stars (5.6) 297 478 3696 23 11 62.1% 21 4.2% 7.2
Nick Stevens 6'3, 190 So. 2 stars (5.3)
Coleman Key 6'4, 215 Fr. 3 stars (5.5)







3. Things change

A year ago in last year's CSU preview, I talked up quarterback Conner Smith, then a sophomore. Smith had filled in for the injured Garrett Grayson and M.J. McPeek in 2012 and held his own, averaging 7.5 yards per pass attempt. In terms of on-field production, it appeared that he had perhaps surpassed Grayson. But then Grayson caught up in spring ball and passed him in fall practice. Grayson played a pretty exciting, off-the-cuff style of ball and held onto the starting job all fall, and Smith quietly transferred after the season.

Grayson_medium

Garret Grayson/Photo credit: Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports

Heading into his senior season, Grayson is the unquestioned leader of the offense. He's a fun player, elusive and adept at making plays on the move, but in 2014 he'll be asked to make quite a few more plays. His receiving corps is seasoned and rather exciting, but the running game is starting from scratch, and he'll be protected by a green line. Grayson built some hype with his bowl performance (31-for-50 for 369 yards, two touchdowns, an interception, and six non-sack carries for 32 yards), but he'll probably have to improve just to match last year's numbers.

Running Back

Player Pos. Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Rivals Rushes Yards TD Yards/
Carry
Hlt Yds/
Carry
Opp.
Rate
Kapri Bibbs RB 281 1741 31 6.2 6.8 40.2%
Chris Nwoke RB 101 398 2 3.9 4.3 31.7%
Donnell Alexander RB 71 428 2 6.0 4.4 52.1%
Garrett Grayson QB 6'2, 220 Sr. 3 stars (5.6) 47 247 2 5.3 3.2 51.1%
Joe Hansley WR 5'10, 180 Jr. NR 11 61 0 5.5 3.2 63.6%
Davon Riddick CB 6 10 0 1.7 0.0%
Eric Williams RB 5'9, 200 So. NR 5 3 0 0.6 0.0%
Jasen Oden RB 6'1, 208 Jr. NR
Bryce Peters RB 5'11, 205 RSFr. 3 stars (5.5)
Deron Thompson RB 5'10, 170 Fr. 3 stars (5.5)
Trey Smith RB 6'0, 176 Fr. 2 stars (5.4)
Johnathan Lewis RB 5'11, 175 Fr. 2 stars (5.4)

4. A complete reset in the running game

Colorado State running backs rushed 458 times last season, but those responsible for 453 of those carries are gone. Kapri Bibbs declared for the draft, Chris Nwoke graduated, and Donnell Alexander recently announced that he was transferring.

The quality of Colorado's recruiting will be tested dramatically in 2014.

Colorado State offensive linemen had combined for 163 career starts at the end of the season; those responsible for 132 of those starts are gone. All four were seniors, and all four were multi-year starters, including center Weston Richburg.

McElwain appears to have recruited well at both running back and offensive line, but the quality of the recruiting will be tested dramatically in 2014. Three-star redshirt freshman Bryce Peters figures to be the primary running back this fall, along with converted defensive back Jasen Oden and a bevy of well-touted incoming freshmen. The line will feature more upperclassmen; all-conference senior tackle Ty Sambrailo returns (although he is out for the spring with an injury), and seniors Mason Myers and Mason Hathaway should play a role, along with juniors Jordan Finley, Sam Carlson, and Kevin O'Brien. Still, youngsters like Jake Bennett, Trae Moxley, and Fred Zerblis will also be involved, and it's really difficult to assume anything other than a drop-off in the run game.

Receiving Corps

Player Pos. Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Rivals Targets Catches Yards Catch Rate Target
Rate
%SD Yds/
Target
NEY Real Yds/
Target
RYPR
Rashard Higgins WR 6'2, 180 So. 2 stars (5.4) 100 68 837 68.0% 21.9% 59.6% 8.4 36 7.9 84.5
Joe Hansley WR 5'10, 180 Jr. NR 81 53 614 65.4% 17.7% 66.7% 7.6 -23 7.5 62.0
Crockett Gillmore TE 68 47 577 69.1% 14.9% 49.3% 8.5 28 8.6 58.3
Kivon Cartwright TE 6'4, 245 Sr. 2 stars (5.2) 54 27 462 50.0% 11.8% 68.0% 8.6 88 8.0 46.6
Charles Lovett WR 5'8, 182 Sr. 2 stars (5.4) 36 26 396 72.2% 7.9% 55.9% 11.0 98 9.8 40.0
Jordon Vaden WR 6'3, 185 So. 2 stars (5.3) 36 22 255 61.1% 7.9% 61.8% 7.1 -19 6.0 25.7
Donnell Alexander RB 26 21 178 80.8% 5.7% 42.9% 6.8 -50 6.4 18.0
Thomas Coffman WR 24 15 251 62.5% 5.3% 70.0% 10.5 67 9.3 25.3
Kapri Bibbs RB 11 7 58 63.6% 2.4% 60.0% 5.3 -27 4.5 5.9
Chris Nwoke RB 10 6 73 60.0% 2.2% 100.0% 7.3 -2 5.1 7.4
Robert Ruiz WR 5'9, 170 So. NR 3 1 11 33.3% 0.7% 0.0% 3.7 -7 2.4 1.1
Willie Udofia DB 2 1 2 50.0% 0.4% 0.0% 1.0 -12 0.4 0.2
Elroy Masters, Jr. WR 6'2, 208 RSFr. 3 stars (5.5)
Sammie Long WR 6'3, 180 RSFr. 2 stars (5.2)
Steven Walker TE 6'2, 240 Jr. 2 stars (5.4)
Christian Montes TE 6'4, 255 Jr. 2 stars (5.4)
Deionte Gaines WR 5'8, 170 Fr. 3 stars (5.6)
John Freismuth WR 6'4, 201 Fr. 2 stars (5.4)

5. A shift toward the pass?

Colorado State operated from a quarterback-friendly system in 2013, throwing slightly more than the national average on standard downs (usually to possession options like Rashard Higgins, Joe Hansley, and tight end Kivon Cartwright) and running slightly more than average on passing downs. This is a good way to steal easy yards, and it both put Grayson in position to succeed and gave Bibbs open opportunities against defenses expecting the pass.

One has to figure we'll see either the same thing in 2014 or if there will be an even more pronounced difference. Higgins, Hansley, and Cartwright all return, as does big-play threat Charles Lovett. The receiving corps is as experienced as the running backs are inexperienced, and to prevent Grayson from facing second-and-8 after second-and-8, it's conceivable that CSU will pass even more frequently on standard downs.

Offensive Line

Category Adj.
Line Yds
Std.
Downs
LY/carry
Pass.
Downs
LY/carry
Opp.
Rate
Power
Success
Rate
Stuff
Rate
Adj.
Sack Rate
Std.
Downs
Sack Rt.
Pass.
Downs
Sack Rt.
Team 101 3.18 3.38 40.9% 73.1% 16.4% 121.1 4.0% 4.3%
Rank 65 27 48 48 38 20 44 46 26
Player Pos. Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Rivals Career Starts Honors/Notes
Weston Richburg C 50 1st All-MWC
Ty Sambrailo LT 6'5, 310 Sr. 2 stars (5.1) 30 2nd All-MWC
Jordan Gragert RG 37
Jared Biard RT 24
Brandon Haynes LG 21
Mason Hathaway RT 6'5, 294 Sr. 3 stars (5.6) 1
Sam Carlson LT 6'4, 280 Jr. 2 stars (5.4) 0
Nick Callender LT 6'5, 315 So. NR 0
Mason Myers LG 6'3, 300 Sr. 3 stars (5.5) 0
Kevin O'Brien OL 6'3, 290 Jr. NR 0
Fred Zerblis C 6'3, 295 So. 2 stars (5.4) 0
Tomas Rivera RG 6'6, 310 So. 2 stars (5.2) 0
Blake Nowland OL 6'6, 309 RSFr. 3 stars (5.5)
Jake Bennett OL 6'3, 265 RSFr. 2 stars (5.4)
Trae Moxley OL 6'5, 270 RSFr. 2 stars (5.4)
Zack Golditch OL 6'6, 260 RSFr. 2 stars (5.3)
Jordan Finley OL 6'3, 265 Jr. 2 stars (5.4)

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
Raw Category Rk Opp. Adj. Category Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS IsoPPP 1.26 106 IsoPPP+ 90.0 113
EFFICIENCY Succ. Rt. 38.9% 30 Succ. Rt. + 105.8 38
FIELD POSITION Off. Avg. FP 28.7 96 Off. FP+ 94.5 112
FINISHING DRIVES Pts. Per Trip in 40 4.1 60 Redzone S&P+ 102.3 48
TURNOVERS EXPECTED 28.1 ACTUAL 22.0 -6.1
Category Yards/
Game Rk
S&P+ Rk Success
Rt. Rk
PPP+ Rk
OVERALL 81 59 38 69
RUSHING 30 18 15 28
PASSING 116 101 85 104
Standard Downs 74 39 117
Passing Downs 45 38 62
Q1 Rk 51 1st Down Rk 74
Q2 Rk 69 2nd Down Rk 51
Q3 Rk 82 3rd Down Rk 80
Q4 Rk 66

6. Break-don't-bend

The bend-don't-break defense is popular at the college level. Live to play another down, sacrifice short gains in the name of preventing big ones, and perhaps you'll eventually force a mistake from the offense (or the offense will simply make a mistake of its own volition). It has worked for a lot of defenses, especially those that don't have blue-chip athleticism across the board.

Colorado State went the other way in 2013, the Michigan State way. Hammer the line of scrimmage, allow nothing easy, force passing downs, and take your chances on the big plays. If you can pull it off, it is the most satisfying, effective way to play defense, as efficiency means more in college football than we probably even realize. But it's hard to pull it off.

CSU didn't have Michigan State's secondary, and it cost the Rams quite often. But the Rams made a lot of plays near the line of scrimmage. They had one of the nation's best mid-major run defenses and a linebacking corps that went well beyond star pass rusher Shaquil Barrett (who was last seen making seemingly every play down the stretch against Washington State). They swarmed and attacked and forced passing downs; they also improved from 106th to 60th in Def. F/+. Co-coordinators Marty English and Al Simmons figured out which buttons to press in 2013. Now we get to see if they can do it again with a new cast of characters up front.

Defensive Line

Category Adj.
Line Yds
Std.
Downs
LY/carry
Pass.
Downs
LY/carry
Opp.
Rate
Power
Success
Rate
Stuff
Rate
Adj.
Sack Rate
Std.
Downs
Sack Rt.
Pass.
Downs
Sack Rt.
Team 113.6 2.56 3.09 33.9% 62.0% 19.7% 107.8 5.4% 6.7%
Rank 23 19 42 17 33 54 47 45 65
Name Pos Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Rivals GP Tackles % of Team TFL Sacks Int PBU FF FR
Eli Edwards DE 14 22.0 2.7% 4.5 1.0 0 1 0 0
Terry Jackson DT 6'1, 275 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 12 19.5 2.4% 5.5 1.0 0 0 0 0
Curtis Wilson DT 14 18.0 2.2% 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0
Calvin Tonga NT 12 16.0 2.0% 2.5 0.0 0 0 0 0
Joe Kawulok DE 6'6, 250 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 13 13.0 1.6% 3.5 3.5 0 0 1 0
LaRyan King NT 6'1, 285 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 14 8.0 1.0% 1.0 1.0 0 0 0 0
Josh Lovingood DL 6'4, 250 So. 2 stars (5.3) 3 5.5 0.7% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Austin Berk DE 6'5, 225 So. 3 stars (5.5) 5 2.5 0.3% 1.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Justin Hansen NT 6'5, 310 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 8 2.0 0.2% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Johnny Schupp DL 6'5, 260 So. NR
Martavius Foster DE 6'3, 260 Jr. 2 stars (5.4)
Silvester Hayes DE 6'3, 210 Fr. 3 stars (5.5)






7. Rebuilding a thin line

How much of CSU's run success was because of the line, and how much was because of the linebacking corps? The answer to those questions will determine a lot of the Rams' defensive success in 2014. Virtually every linebacker returns this year (everybody but Barrett, that is), including a tackling machine in Max Morgan, dynamic run defender Aaron Davis, and pass rusher Cory James. But up front, starting end Eli Edwards is gone, as are two of the top three tackles. The Rams have a potential ace pass rusher in Joe Kawulok, who made 3.5 sacks among his 13.0 tackles in 2013, but the line has thinned out quite a bit. The linebacking corps will be asked to carry an even larger load this fall.

Linebackers

Name Pos Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Rivals GP Tackles % of Team TFL Sacks Int PBU FF FR
Max Morgan MLB 6'1, 225 Sr. 3 stars (5.5) 14 102.5 12.7% 2.0 0.0 1 6 1 1
Aaron Davis WLB 6'0, 220 Sr. 2 stars (5.2) 14 91.5 11.4% 7.0 0.0 0 3 3 1
Shaquil Barrett BUCK 14 59.0 7.3% 20.5 12.0 1 2 4 0
Cory James SLB 6'0, 240 Jr. 2 stars (5.4) 13 44.0 5.5% 12.0 8.0 0 1 2 0
Nu'uvali Fa'apito WLB 6'0, 221 Jr. 2 stars (5.4) 10 15.0 1.9% 0.5 0.0 0 0 1 0
Steven Michel SLB 6'1, 225 Jr. 2 stars (5.2) 12 13.0 1.6% 1.5 1.0 0 0 1 0
Deonte Clyburn WLB 6'1, 217 So. 2 stars (5.3) 13 9.0 1.1% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Danny Nwosu BUCK 6'2, 233 So. NR 14 8.5 1.1% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Ken Hulbert MLB 5'11, 215 Sr. NR 13 8.5 1.1% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Nolan Peralta MLB 6'3, 230 So. NR 10 3.0 0.4% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Bryan Ohene BUCK 6'1, 215 So. 2 stars (5.2) 4 2.0 0.2% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0
Kevin Davis LB 6'3, 230 Jr. 3 stars (5.6)
Kiel Robinson LB 6'2, 205 RSFr. 2 stars (5.4)
Evan Colorito LB 6'4, 230 RSFr. 2 stars (5.3)
Josh Watson LB 6'2, 231 Fr. 2 stars (5.4)






8. Best mid-major linebacking corps?

It's strange to lose a guy who made 20.5 tackles for loss and 12 sacks and forced fumbles and still say that the linebacking corps is going to be great, but ... CSU's linebacking corps is going to be great. The Rams are not only wonderfully experienced (three seniors and three juniors among their top eight returnees), but as mentioned above, they return some studs even without Barrett. If the line can just establish a certain level of competence -- not becoming a strength, but not becoming a weakness -- this unit will swallow up plays near the line of scrimmage just like it did last year.

CSU's linebacking corps is going to be great.

Even if the run defense regresses a bit because of the line, the biggest concern for the defense will probably still be the secondary. CSU had a strong pass rush and aggressive defensive backs (corners Bernard Blake, Shaq Bell, and DeAndre Elliott combined for three picks, 27 break-ups, and 12 tackles for loss), and they made life difficult for opposing passers. But if you beat them, you beat them. The big plays the Rams allowed were bigger than most. It will be interesting to see what happens now that Bell is gone; he was the Rams' strongest defender near the line, but he was certainly prone to breakdowns as well. Without him, it's possible that CSU's pass defense gets a little more stable with a little less upside. But there are still play-makers here. It'll come down to the plays they allow.

Secondary

Name Pos Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Rivals GP Tackles % of Team TFL Sacks Int PBU FF FR
Kevin Pierre-Louis SS 6'1, 212 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 13 55.0 6.8% 1 0 1 3 2 0
Bernard Blake CB 6'0, 180 Sr. 2 stars (5.4) 14 53.0 6.6% 4.5 0 1 12 1 0
Shaq Bell CB 14 49.5 6.2% 7.5 0.5 1 5 0 0
Trent Matthews FS 6'3, 210 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 14 49.5 6.2% 2.5 1 4 3 0 0
Jasen Oden RB 14 31.5 3.9% 1 0 0 2 1 0
DeAndre Elliott CB 6'1, 185 Jr. 2 stars (5.4) 13 26.5 3.3% 0 0 1 10 0 1
Tyree Simmons CB 5'11, 170 So. 2 stars (5.4) 14 26.0 3.2% 2 1 0 4 0 0
Jake Schlager S 6'0, 195 So. 2 stars (5.3) 14 16.0 2.0% 0 0 0 1 1 0
Nick Januska FS 6'2, 210 Jr. NR 11 11.0 1.4% 0 0 0 1 0 0
Josh Bowman S 6'0, 185 So. 2 stars (5.2)
Justin Sweet DB 5'10, 181 RSFr. 2 stars (5.4)
Preston Hodges DB 5'11, 196 Jr. 3 stars (5.5)
Marcus Wilson DB 5'10, 180 Fr. 3 stars (5.5)
Kevin Nutt DB 5'10, 186 Fr. 2 stars (5.4)






Special Teams

Punter Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Punts Avg TB FC I20 FC/I20
Ratio
Hayden Hunt 6'1, 196 So. 68 41.9 4 12 14 38.2%
Kicker Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Kickoffs Avg TB OOB TB%
Jared Roberts 6'1, 205 Sr. 94 60.4 31 4 33.0%
Place-Kicker Ht, Wt 2014
Year
PAT FG
(0-39)
Pct FG
(40+)
Pct
Jared Roberts 6'1, 205 Sr. 58-58 13-15 86.7% 8-9 88.9%
Returner Pos. Ht, Wt 2014
Year
Returns Avg. TD
Thomas Coffman KR 34 23.4 0
Tyree Simmons KR 5'11, 170 So. 3 24.0 0
Tyree Simmons PR 5'11, 170 So. 11 14.2 0
Joe Hansley PR 5'10, 180 Jr. 8 19.9 1
Category Rk
Special Teams F/+ 62
Field Goal Efficiency 16
Punt Return Efficiency 55
Kick Return Efficiency 56
Punt Efficiency 111
Kickoff Efficiency 68
Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency 80

9. Sew up that punt coverage

CSU's offense ranked 80th in Success Rate+ but 103rd in the field position it created for the defense. CSU's defense ranked 38th in Success Rate+ but 112th in the field position it created for the offense.

In other words, special teams gave away a lot of the gains CSU made on offense and defense. The Rams' return game wasn't bad (especially on punts), and place-kicker Jared Roberts was fantastic in making eight of nine field goals over 40 yards. But kick coverage was mediocre, and punt coverage was absolutely atrocious. Punter Hayden Hunt averaged a respectable 42 yards per kick but fewer than one in five punts were fair caught, and opponents averaged a solid 9.7 yards per return. This added up, and it tilted the field in opponents' favor even when CSU was doing well. If the CSU offense is going to struggle to run the ball, special teams will need to fill in the gaps.

2014 Schedule & Projection Factors

2014 Schedule
Date Opponent Proj. Rk
29-Aug vs. Colorado 96
6-Sep at Boise State 18
13-Sep UC Davis NR
27-Sep at Boston College 80
4-Oct Tulsa 64
11-Oct at Nevada 62
18-Oct Utah State 69
25-Oct Wyoming 100
1-Nov at San Jose State 82
8-Nov Hawaii 93
22-Nov New Mexico 116
29-Nov at Air Force 105
Five-Year F/+ Rk -18.0% (112)
Two-Year Recruiting Rk 77
TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin* 2 / 5.5
TO Luck/Game -1.3
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.) 12 (5, 7)

10. A "pretty good" team might win nine games

It appears Jim McElwain is pretty happy with how his squad is coming together this spring, and it's not hard to see why. He's got a quarterback who made a name for himself at the end of the season, he's got most of his receiving corps returning, he's got an incredible set of linebackers, he's got a good place-kicker, and he's got a secondary that at least makes as many plays as it allows (but does need to allow fewer big plays).

Photo credit: Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports

What's scary about Colorado State, however, is that the holes that do exist are huge. The Rams have no running back experience and lost both four starters on the offensive line and three on the defensive line. Plus, as good as the linebackers appear to be, it's never a good thing to lose a 20-TFL guy.

Recruiting has been strong and balanced: there are former three-star recruits in every unit on the team, and there are quite a few at defensive back and on the defensive line. McElwain appears to be building strong depth here, and that's exciting for the future. But it's still uncertain whether the Rams can avoid at least a temporary drop-off in 2014.

That said, a "pretty good" team could do some damage against this schedule. CSU plays only four teams projected better than 80th, and two of those teams (Tulsa and Utah State) come to Fort Collins. Even if the Rams aren't as good as they were last year -- certainly a distinct possibility -- a second-straight bowl should be in the cards. Considering CSU hasn't pulled off back-to-back postseason bids since 2002-03, that should be enough for now.

More from SBNation.com

Latest News

In This Article

Teams
Players
X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join SBNation.com

You must be a member of SBNation.com to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at SBNation.com. You should read them.

Join SBNation.com

You must be a member of SBNation.com to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at SBNation.com. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.