College Football

2013 Central Michigan football's 10 things to know: A wildcard of wildcards

CMU was one of the worst bowl teams in recent memory last year, but if raw experience can cure an awful defense, the Chippewas could play a power role in this year's MAC. Schedule, roster breakdown, projections and more below.

By Bill Connelly@SBN_BillC Mar 18, 2013, 10:00am EDT

Confused? Check out the glossary here.

1. CMU really wasn't very good last year

Our F/+ rankings archive goes back to 2005. According to their F/+ rating, here are the 10 worst teams to participate in a bowl game in the last eight seasons:

1. 2011 Wyoming (-19.4%, 8-5)
2. 2005 Arkansas State (-17.6%, 6-6)
3. 2012 Air Force (-17.4%, 6-7)
4. 2009 Wyoming (-17.4%, 7-6)
5. 2007 Memphis (-17.0%, 7-6)
6. 2008 Hawaii (-16.6%, 7-7)
7. 2012 Navy (-16.5%, 8-5)
8. 2010 UTEP (-15.9%, 6-7)
9. 2012 Central Michigan (-15.7%, 7-6)
10. 2010 Miami (Ohio) (-15.5%, 10-4)

CMU's F/+ rating was the same as the 2012 Memphis team (4-8) and slightly worse than that of teams like 2007 SMU (1-11), 2012 UTEP (3-9) and 2008 UAB (4-8). The Chippewas ranked 73rd in Off. F/+ and 109th in Def. F/+, were below average in most offensive categories, and were dreadful in most defensive categories. All of their losses were by at least 11 points, and three were by at least 18. But they somehow squeaked by Iowa with nine points in the final 45 seconds, they held off a late comeback from Eastern Michigan, they took care of business against three awful teams (SE Missouri State, Akron and UMass), and they somehow eked out bowl eligibility. If you're looking for a pretty classic "there are too many bowls" example, you had your fill last year -- CMU, Navy and Air Force were all pretty bad football teams.

That said, CMU did, in fact, win its bowl game (Air Force and Navy got romped), and the Chippewas were quite young. If the bowl win gives the program any sort of momentum to go with its experience, the quality of last year's team might not matter.

2. That might not mean much

There were certainly some impact seniors on last year's squad: quarterback Ryan Radcliff, receiver Cody Wilson, four two- or three-year starters on the offensive line, end Caesar Rodriguez, safety Jahleel Addae. But a vast majority of last year's playmakers return to fill in this year's two-deep. The top three rushers return, as do four of the top five pass targets, all defensive tackles, all linebackers, and three of the top four defensive backs. Plus, some freshmen on offense and redshirt freshmen on defense could provide a bit of an athletic boost.

There are plenty of issues to be remedied as CMU moves forward, of course. The Chippewas will need to settle in on a quarterback, rebuild the offensive line, and figure out how to improve that hot mess of a defense. But even if the team wasn't as good as its record last year, this is still an interesting group, capable of showing some relatively impressive improvement in 2013. Head coach Dan Enos got himself a new contract following CMU's Little Caesars Pizza Bowl win over Western Kentucky, and while there is reason to be skeptical of that (check out the chart below: on paper, CMU really hasn't improved, even a little bit, in the last two years after the expected first-year regression under Enos), his program has a decent amount of potential.

Enos has taken the long way to rebuilding CMU -- minimal transfers or JUCO signees, in other words -- but Year 4 will tell us a lot about his program's future.

2012 Schedule & Results

Record: 7-6 \| Adj. Record: 3-10 \| Final F/+ Rk: 95
Date	Opponent	Score	W-L	Adj. Score	Adj. W-L
30-Aug	SE Missouri State	38-27	W	30.3 - 50.6	L
8-Sep	Michigan State	7-41	L	26.7 - 43.7	L
22-Sep	at Iowa	32-31	W	32.1 - 53.0	L
29-Sep	at Northern Illinois	24-55	L	36.2 - 32.2	W
6-Oct	at Toledo	35-50	L	21.5 - 26.2	L
12-Oct	Navy	13-31	L	20.3 - 26.1	L
20-Oct	Ball State	30-41	L	33.2 - 30.4	W
27-Oct	Akron	35-14	W	30.5 - 31.8	L
3-Nov	Western Michigan	31-42	L	37.6 - 39.8	L
10-Nov	at Eastern Michigan	34-31	W	24.2 - 34.9	L
17-Nov	Miami (Ohio)	30-16	W	28.2 - 28.9	L
23-Nov	at Massachusetts	42-21	W	30.1 - 34.9	L
26-Dec	vs. Western Kentucky	24-21	W	33.9 - 25.3	W

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
Points Per Game	28.8	64	32.4	95
Adj. Points Per Game	29.6	56	35.2	113

Offense

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	64	73	74	77
RUSHING	74	75	55	87
PASSING	51	82	92	72
Standard Downs		76	72	81
Passing Downs		80	83	77
Redzone		93	79	105

Q1 Rk	99	1st Down Rk	55
Q2 Rk	87	2nd Down Rk	70
Q3 Rk	55	3rd Down Rk	105
Q4 Rk	43

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2013 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player

Ht, Wt

2013
Year

Rivals

Comp

Att

Yards

Comp
Rate

INT

Sacks

Sack Rate

Yards/
Att.

Ryan Radcliff

242

407

3,158

59.5%

3.1%

7.3

Cody Kater

6'3, 220

Jr.

*** (5.6)

50.0%

0.0%

3.0

Alex Niznak

6'3, 227

So.

** (5.4)

Cooper Rush

6'3, 216

RSFr.

** (5.4)

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	Rivals	Rushes	Yards	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Carry	TD	Adj. POE
Zurlon Tipton	RB	6'1, 219	Sr.	** (5.2)	252	1,492	5.9	5.7	19	+12.4
Saylor Lavallii	RB	5'9, 213	So.	** (5.2)	57	263	4.6	4.3	2	-1.8
Anthony Garland	RB	6'1, 218	Jr.	** (5.2)	44	189	4.3	3.8	1	-5.1
Ryan Radcliff	QB				16	52	3.3	2.7	0	-2.7
Cody Wilson	WR-F				5	32	6.4	2.7	0	+0.8
Tim Phillips	RB	5'7, 174	Sr.	** (5.0)	5	18	3.6	0.8	0	-0.8

3. Zurlon Tipton is entering Year 19 at Mount Pleasant

I guess when you come across a man named Zurlon, you notice him from Day 1. That makes it feel like he's been around a while. In 2012, however, Tipton made a name for himself (get it?) on the field as well; in a conference full of good running backs, Tipton was one of the best. He got reasonable help from his line, but he showed the ability to create for himself, too. Tipton has a good combination of short-yardage power and explosiveness in the open field. And he is backed up by a couple more reasonably capable backs.

The biggest story for CMU this year will probably be who wins the starting quarterback job following three-year starter Ryan Radcliff's departure. But the winner of the QB derby will have help in the backfield.

Receiving Corps

Player

Pos.

Ht, Wt

2013
Year

Rivals

Targets

Catches

Yards

Catch Rate

Yds/
Target

Target
Rate

%SD

Real Yds/
Target

RYPR

Cody Wilson

WR-F

103

840

71.8%

8.2

27.0%

44.7%

8.3

106.0

Titus Davis

WR-Z

6'2, 190

Jr.

** (5.4)

850

54.4%

10.8

20.7%

63.3%

10.5

107.2

Courtney Williams

WR-X

6'1, 212

Jr.

*** (5.5)

260

49.0%

5.3

12.8%

53.1%

5.3

32.8

Zurlon Tipton

6'1, 219

Sr.

** (5.2)

287

66.7%

8.0

9.4%

58.3%

8.0

36.2

Andrew Flory

WR-X

6'0, 182

So.

** (5.3)

340

68.0%

13.6

6.5%

24.0%

12.4

42.9

Caleb Southworth

113

64.3%

8.1

3.7%

71.4%

8.3

14.3

Ben McCord

6'4, 243

So.

*** (5.6)

66.7%

6.0

3.1%

75.0%

5.4

9.1

Tyler Lombardo

6'1, 248

Sr.

** (5.3)

63.6%

5.8

2.9%

63.6%

5.8

8.1

Connor Odykirk

6'3, 242

Sr.

54.5%

3.3

2.9%

81.8%

4.0

4.5

Jarrett Fleming

6'5, 264

Jr.

** (5.2)

50.0%

5.5

2.1%

75.0%

5.0

5.6

Deon Butler

6'3, 217

Jr.

** (5.2)

85.7%

12.0

1.8%

14.3%

8.8

10.6

Corey Willis

5'10, 170

Fr.

*** (5.6)

Wesley Thomas

6'0, 185

Fr.

*** (5.5)

Eric Cooper

6'0, 180

Fr.

** (5.4)

Zach Crouch

6'5, 235

Fr.

** (5.4)

Mark Chapman

6'0, 167

Fr.

** (5.4)

4. Titus Davis is a potential star

The winner of the QB battle will also have one hell of an explosive weapon in Titus Davis. Granted, Davis will need to improve his catch rates if he is to become CMU's new No. 1 guy (and stay out of trouble), but his ceiling is quite high. He caught 10 of 14 passes for 208 yards in a loss to Western Michigan, and even in his least efficient game of the season he showed absurd potential: Against NIU, he caught just one of eight passes ... for 92 yards and a touchdown.

Between Davis and sophomore Andrew Flory (three catches for 105 yards and two touchdowns versus Western Kentucky), CMU has some serious big-play potential. But someone will have to make the little plays, too.

5. Dan Enos loaded up on receivers

It is typically a fool's errand to look at an incoming recruiting class as a reflection of what a coach feels were his biggest needs. If you are relying on incoming freshmen to fill a hole, that hole is probably going to go unfilled. That said, it is difficult to ignore the fact that, in his 2013 signing class, Enos brought in five receivers/tight ends and five offensive linemen. These two units make up 48 percent of the incoming class and perhaps an even higher percentage of the higher-ceiling guys. According to Rivals.com, all five three-star signees, and five of the seven players receiving the highest two-star designation (5.4) are either receivers or offensive linemen.

One has to figure a few of these guys will see the field in 2013, especially in the receiving corps. (It often takes linemen a little while longer to assimilate.)

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	98.5	3.20	2.86	42.1%	59.4%	20.8%	132.2	2.4%	4.2%
Rank	76	22	90	29	101	92	34	19	26

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	Rivals	Career Starts/Honors/Notes
Eric Fisher	LT				34 career starts; 2012 1st All-MAC
Darren Keyton	RG				36 career starts
Mike Repovz	RT				28 career starts
Jake Olson	RT				26 career starts
Andy Phillips	LG	6'3, 306	Jr.	** (5.3)	18 career starts
Nick Beamish	C	6'3, 305	So.	** (5.2)	13 career starts
Kevin Henry	RT	6'4, 306	Jr.	*** (5.6)	4 career starts
Ramadan Ahmeti	LT	6'7, 300	So.	** (5.4)
Aaron McCord	C	6'4, 305	Sr.	** (5.4)
Cody Pettit	RG	6'3, 300	Sr.	** (5.4)
Derek Edwards	OL	6'5, 270	Fr.	*** (5.6)
Jack Ford	OL	6'6, 273	Fr.	*** (5.5)
Shakir Carr	OL	6'5, 292	Fr.	*** (5.5)
Alex Coty	OL	6'5, 280	Fr.	** (5.4)
J.P. Quinn	OL	6'5, 270	Fr.	** (5.4)

6. It seems every offensive line in the MAC is rebuilding

Ball State is replacing four multi-year starters, including two all-conference picks. Kent State is replacing three three-year (at least) starters, including two all-conference picks. Miami is replacing three multi-year starters, including a four-year guy.

And now you've got CMU, looking at replacing four guys who combined for 124 career starts. The offensive line is experience-friendly. In most years, you're probably going to have to replace some reasonably experienced guys. Plus, only three of the four lost linemen were starters for most of 2012 (Jake Olson was lost for the year early on). But CMU's returning total of 35 career starts is still quite low, and it will be interesting to see if any of the higher-upside freshmen find early work in the rotation. Size isn't an issue for CMU -- the six returnees from last year's two-deep average 6'4, 304-- but experience is.

Defense

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	90	114	108	116
RUSHING	91	111	102	110
PASSING	74	117	109	120
Standard Downs		118	104	121
Passing Downs		105	105	106
Redzone		121	124	120

Q1 Rk	114	1st Down Rk	123
Q2 Rk	96	2nd Down Rk	93
Q3 Rk	117	3rd Down Rk	99
Q4 Rk	118

7. Experience is good ... in theory...

While the offensive line and quarterback positions won't have much experience, most of the defense will. Is that a good thing? Some new blood might not be a bad idea for a defense that ranked 102nd or worse in almost every major advanced category above. This unit really didn't have any particular strength in 2012, other than perhaps the play at safety; but one of the two starting safeties is gone, and there is no immediate answer for Jahleel Addae's lost play-making ability.

Experience will help with some of last year's woes, but you need talent first. Does the defense have any?

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	89.0	3.21	3.75	41.7%	70.2%	14.2%	65.7	3.8%	3.4%
Rank	111	99	109	99	80	118	111	90	113

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	Rivals	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Caesar Rodriguez	DE				13	32.0	4.3%	9	4	0	0	0	0
Joe Kinville	DE				13	27.5	3.7%	5	2	0	1	0	0
Leterrius Walton	NG	6'5, 300	Jr.	** (5.3)	10	21.0	2.8%	3.5	2.5	0	1	0	0
Steve Winston	DE				13	19.5	2.6%	3	1.5	0	0	0	1
Jabari Dean	DT	6'2, 288	So.	** (5.3)	12	17.0	2.3%	1.5	1	0	0	1	1
Matt Losiniecki	NG	6'3, 280	Jr.	** (5.3)	13	15.5	2.1%	2	0	0	0	0	0
Chris Reeves	DE				8	10.5	1.4%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Louis Palmer	DT	6'2, 283	So.	** (5.4)	10	7.5	1.0%	1	1	0	0	0	0
Shafer Johnson	DT	6'1, 300	So.	** (5.4)	10	7.0	0.9%	0.5	0	0	0	0	0
Blake Serpa	DE	6'3, 250	So.	** (5.4)	10	6.5	0.9%	1	1	0	0	0	0
Kenny McClendon	DE	6'2, 250	Sr.	** (5.2)	12	4.5	0.6%	0.5	0	0	0	0	0
Alex Smith	DE	6'3, 250	Sr.	*** (5.5)	5	2.0	0.3%	0.5	0.5	0	0	0	0
Kelby Latta	DT	6'3, 312	RSFr.	*** (5.5)
Donnie Kyre	DE	6'2, 242	Fr.	** (5.4)

Linebackers

Name

Pos

Ht, Wt

2013
Year

Rivals

Tackles

% of Team

TFL

Sacks

Int

PBU

Shamari Benton

SLB

6'0, 223

Sr.

*** (5.5)

90.0

12.0%

1.5

Justin Cherocci

MLB

6'0, 231

Jr.

87.5

11.7%

2.5

Cody Lopez

WLB

6'1, 217

Jr.

** (5.2)

21.0

2.8%

Tim Hamilton

SLB

6'1, 233

So.

*** (5.5)

3.5

0.5%

Ryan Petro

WLB

6'1, 219

Jr.

** (5.4)

1.0

0.1%

Nathan Ricketts

6'3, 221

RSFr.

*** (5.5)

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	Rivals	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Avery Cunningham	FS	6'0, 203	Sr.	** (5.3)	13	65.0	8.7%	6	2	2	4	2	0
Jahleel Addae	SS				13	64.5	8.6%	7	2	4	5	0	0
Jason Wilson	CB	6'0, 174	Jr.	** (5.4)	13	39.5	5.3%	0	0	2	7	0	0
Jarret Chapman	NB	6'0, 194	Jr.	** (5.3)	11	38.5	5.1%	0	0	0	6	0	0
Anthony Young	CB				11	33.0	4.4%	0	0	1	3	1	0
Kavon Frazier	NB	6'0, 213	So.	** (5.2)	13	27.0	3.6%	0.5	0	1	3	0	0
Lorenzo White	CB				13	23.5	3.1%	0.5	0	1	9	0	0
Kevin King	DB	5'10, 190	Jr.	** (5.2)	11	10.5	1.4%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Taylor Bradley	DB				8	10.5	1.4%	0	0	1	1	0	0
Brandon Greer	FS	6'1, 203	So.	*** (5.5)	13	10.0	1.3%	0.5	0.5	0	0	0	1
Leron Eaddy	DB	5'10, 196	Sr.	** (5.0)	13	8.5	1.1%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Denzel Wimberly	SS	5'10, 201	So.	** (5.3)	13	6.0	0.8%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Dennis Nalor	DB	6'0, 178	Jr.	** (5.3)	13	5.5	0.7%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jordan Fields	DB	5'11, 170	RSFr.	*** (5.6)
Josh Cox	DB	5'10, 180	Fr.	** (5.4)

8. Attacking from all directions (by necessity)

Either by design or necessity, CMU came at you from everywhere last year. Safeties Avery Cunningham and Jahleel Addae combined for almost three times more tackles for loss than all CMU linebackers combined and almost as many sacks as CMU's starting defensive ends. That's impressive for the safeties ... and less-than-impressive (to put it kindly) for members of the front 6-7. Cunningham returns, as do ball hawks Jason Wilson and Jarret Chapman (combined: two interceptions, 13 passes broken up). However, this secondary was still far from strong (CMU was 120th in big plays allowed through the air, i.e. Passing PPP+), and the front of the defense is not guaranteed to improve.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Richie Hogan	6'2, 207	Sr.	50	41.8	2	12	15	54.0%
Curtis Huge			7	39.0	1	0	2	28.6%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	TB%
David Harman			54	61.3	16	29.6%
Connor Gagnon	6'1, 198	Sr.	19	58.9	5	0.0%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
David Harman			43-44	11-12	91.7%	4-8	50.0%
Curtis Huge			1-1	0-0	N/A	0-0	N/A

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2013 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Saylor Lavallii	KR	5'9, 213	So.	29	23.1	0
Courtney Williams	KR	6'1, 212	Jr.	11	21.0	0
Defarrel Davis	KR	6'2, 175	Sr.	7	24.3	0
Cody Wilson	PR			11	2.8	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams F/+	84
Net Punting	90
Net Kickoffs	71
Touchback Pct	85
Field Goal Pct	45
Kick Returns Avg	47
Punt Returns Avg	119

9. Wanted: a leg

In Saylor Lavallii and Defarrel Davis, CMU has a rather impressive pair of kick return men.Plus, punter Richie Hogan isn't bad, and CMU almost can't help but improve in the realm of punt returns this year. But kicker David Harman was perhaps the strongest player in last year's special teams unit, and he is gone.

2013 Schedule & Projection Factors

2012 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. Rk
31-Aug	at Michigan	22
7-Sep	New Hampshire	NR
14-Sep	at UNLV	110
21-Sep	Toledo	62
28-Sep	at N.C. State	61
5-Oct	at Miami (Ohio)	106
12-Oct	at Ohio	83
19-Oct	Northern Illinois	50
6-Nov	at Ball State	84
16-Nov	at Western Michigan	93
23-Nov	Massachusetts	124
29-Nov	Eastern Michigan	118

Five-Year F/+ Rk	87
Two-Year Recruiting Rk	100
TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin*	+2 / +7.9
TO Luck/Game	-2.3
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	14 (7, 7)
Yds/Pt Margin**	+0.3

10. The wildcard

We can conclude quite a bit about teams in the 2013 MAC. We know UMass and Akron will probably still struggle (and we know the odds are decent that Eastern Michigan will, too). We know that Northern Illinois, Toledo and Ohio are probably going to be strong, and we know that Kent State and Ball State (and, because of experience, perhaps Buffalo) should be, too.

But we really don't know much at all about Central Michigan. According to F/+, the Chippewas were the No. 9 team in the conference last year. They had plenty of flaws, more than most, but in 2013 they'll have as much experience and depth as anybody in the conference. I find myself growing pretty optimistic about CMU -- this team has more pure upside than most MAC teams -- but then I look at those defensive stats again and grow gun shy. Can you blame me?

Follow @SBNationCFB Follow @SBNRecruiting