The big 2015 ULM football guide: Can the Warhawks' funky offense rebound?

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. Short term vs. long term

Three top-100 rankings in four years. An upward trickle in the recruiting rankings. Minimal turnover and improving depth. A defense that was both young and outstanding.

On paper, Todd Berry continues to do mighty impressive things in one of the tougher jobs in FBS. Cash flow is improving -- and with it, so are facilities -- but even with three money games per year, the athletic budget is still the lowest in FBS, the recruiting budget is barely one-eighth that of Sun Belt mate South Alabama (plus, ULM uses UL system standards for athletic eligibility, not NCAA standards), and in a state saturated with schools fighting for football talent, the peak for ULM recruiting isn't going to be high. But Berry seems to be making things work. On paper.

On the field, ULM has now regressed by two wins in each of the last two seasons. A drop-off was expected in 2013, following an eight-win season and the school's first bowl bid. But last season's 4-8 dud was surprising. At least, it was to me.

Whether you are predisposed to assume that 2012 was a one-time thing or that 2014 will represent a nice bounce back after frustration in 2013, you have quite a bit of evidence to cite. [...]

I'm confident the Warhawks can get back to six or seven wins and a top-100 F/+ rating this year. That could be good enough for third in the conference, second with solid injuries luck.

I was partially right, anyway. The F/+ rankings show ULM was a top-100 team last fall. But early-season good fortune turned into late-season bad luck, and while the defense was easily Berry's best since 2011, an offense that had taken a few steps backwards in 2013 took another one. ULM took down four of the five worst teams on the schedule and no one else, and their last five losses came by a combined 24 points. They only needed a little more offense to turn four wins into seven or eight.

So now what? Where should we set the bar for a program that has one arm tied behind its back and has to face brutal non-conference slates every year? Berry has pushed a lot of the right buttons, and his 2012 season featured enough incredible memories for two or three seasons. But one fun season loses its luster after a while.

Berry's 2015 squad should be competitive again simply because of the defense. It was one of the best in the mid-major universe last year, and it returns two of its top four linemen (along with a load of exciting underclassmen), its top three linebackers, and four of its top five defensive backs. There will once again be plenty of play-making potential from this speedy, confusing 3-3-5.

But there's nothing guaranteeing the offense will rebound, and if it doesn't, ULM will again be more a tough out than a Sun Belt contender.

2014 Schedule & Results

Record: 4-8 | Adj. Record: 2-10 | Final F/+ Rk: 97
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Adj. Scoring Margin	Win Expectancy
28-Aug	Wake Forest	101	17-10	W	79%	18.5	100%
6-Sep	Idaho	112	38-31	W	45%	-3.0	75%
13-Sep	at LSU	22	0-31	L	1%	-51.8	0%
27-Sep	Troy	126	22-20	W	30%	-11.9	51%
4-Oct	at Arkansas State	66	14-28	L	20%	-19.7	3%
11-Oct	at Kentucky	68	14-48	L	8%	-33.6	0%
25-Oct	Texas State	95	18-22	L	44%	-3.7	33%
1-Nov	at Texas A&M	42	16-21	L	45%	-2.8	28%
8-Nov	at Appalachian State	104	29-31	L	46%	-2.3	33%
15-Nov	UL-Lafayette	72	27-34	L	24%	-16.5	5%
22-Nov	at New Mexico State	124	30-17	W	55%	2.9	91%
29-Nov	at Georgia Southern	57	16-22	L	45%	-2.9	12%

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	19.9	115	27.9	62
Points Per Game	20.1	115	26.3	59

2. Crashing narratives

When you're a young team with a struggling offense, you want to see improvement from September to November. That was the case, and that's a strange thing to say for a team that lost seven of eight to finish the season.

• Average percentile performance (first 6 games): 31%
  (Record in one-possession games: 3-0)
• Average percentile performance (last 6 games): 43%
  (Record in one-possession games: 0-4)

After holding Wake Forest to 94 total yards, ULM survived a visit from Idaho and was held to 93 total yards by LSU. The Warhawks won a tossup game over a bad Troy, then got outgained by Arkansas State and Kentucky by 312 yards and outscored by 48 points. They were 3-3, but they weren't very good.

Then they outgained Texas State by 24 yards and lost by four. They outgained Texas A&M by 104 yards but fell short in an upset bid by five points. They lost by a combined nine to an improving Appalachian State and UL-Lafayette. And despite getting significantly outgained by Georgia Southern in the season finale, they managed to stay close.

The offense never came around, but after averaging better than 4.9 yards per play just once in the first nine games of the season, ULM did so in each of the last three games. That's a plus. And while the defense faded, the Warhawks still allowed fewer than 5.8 yards per play (the national average) in eight of 12 games.

But this would be more encouraging if the offense that improved late in the year didn't also have to replace its starting quarterback, starting running back, leading receiver, and three multi-year starters on the line.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.71	123	IsoPPP+	70.5	124
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	37.9%	106	Succ. Rt. +	87.7	114
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	31.1	90	Def. FP+	99.0	77
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	3.8	110	Redzone S&P+	88.9	97
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	20.5		ACTUAL	17	-3.5

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	109	120	114	124
RUSHING	126	127	119	127
PASSING	25	103	89	111
Standard Downs		120	114	123
Passing Downs		122	107	124

Q1 Rk	74	1st Down Rk	120
Q2 Rk	122	2nd Down Rk	117
Q3 Rk	127	3rd Down Rk	125
Q4 Rk	115

3. Misplaced mojo

When the casual fan thinks of ULM, they start with one of two things: either the 2012 upset of Arkansas, or the two-QB formation. The 2012 offense set the bar impossibly high; it ranked 62nd in Off. S&P+, scored three second-half touchdowns in the upset of Arkansas, put up 410 yards and 28 points against Auburn, and, yes, whipped out a two-QB look against Baylor on national television.

The magic ran out in 2013. Despite returning eight offensive starters, the Warhawks plummeted to 111th in Off. S&P+. Kolton Browning battled injury, and an efficiency offense forgot how to be efficient. Fifth-year Colorado State transfer Pete Thomas provided a stopgap at quarterback, and the pass efficiency improved a bit, but the run game was a nightmare. The line couldn't open holes, and the running backs couldn't create on their own. ULM had to pass more than it wanted to, and despite a decent receiving corps, there just weren't enough big plays.

ULM's reputation made shade to the offensive side of the ball, but the Funroe left two years ago.

Thomas, leading rusher Centarius Donald, and top target Kenzee Jackson are all gone, as are three linemen who had combined for about nine seasons' worth of starts (four from tackle Joseph Treadwell). Thomas was solid, but some new blood in the run game isn't an awful idea. And if recruiting has indeed improved in recent years, then perhaps a transfusion will be exactly what the Warhawks needed. But on average, replacing six starters doesn't improve a unit.

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2015 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player

Ht, Wt

2015 Year

Rivals

247 Comp.

Comp

Att

Yards

TD

INT

Comp Rate

Sacks

Sack Rate

Yards/ Att.

Pete Thomas

301

501

3181

14

6

60.1%

44

8.1%

5.4

Brayle Brown

6'2, 207

Sr.

2 stars (5.3)

0.7000

14

24

172

1

1

58.3%

0

0.0%

7.2

Earnest Carrington

6'2, 223

Sr.

2 stars (5.3)

0.7000

Brian Williams

6'4, 205

So.

2 stars (5.2)

0.7000

Anthony Monken

6'4, 209

RSFr.

2 stars (5.4)

0.8126

Daniel Fitzwater

6'6, 233

Jr.

3 stars (5.5)

0.8200

Chandler Eiland

6'0, 196

Fr.

2 stars (5.4)

0.8019

4. No shortage of quarterbacks

Thomas was asked to carry a heavy load in 2014, attempting 45 passes per game and, not including sacks, rushing another five or six times per game. Recruiting quarterbacks has been a strength for Berry (per the 247Sports Composite, he has signed three three-star quarterbacks in the last two years) and thanks to minimal turnover -- two seniors are scheduled to return, as is sophomore Brian Williams -- Berry and offensive coordinator Steve Farmer have their pick of a large litter.

When you've got six potential starters, including some with high ceilings, the odds are good that the winner will be solid, be it big JUCO transfer Daniel Fitwater, veteran Brayle Brown, big-armed redshirt freshman Anthony Monken, etc.

A mobile quarterback allows you to more effectively create numbers and matchup advantages, and perhaps with so many interesting candidates, you can fear injury less and run your QB a bit more. ULM needs all the help it can get, but the winner will face significant pressure to create opportunities.

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Centarius Donald	RB					153	606	6	4.0	3.3	30.7%	3	3
Pete Thomas	QB					66	240	3	3.6	2.0	36.4%	3	2
Tyler Cain	WR	5'8, 185	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000	63	214	0	3.4	2.1	33.3%	1	1
DeVontae McNeal (2013)	RB	5'11, 211	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.7000	29	205	2	7.1	15.2	31.0%	N/A	N/A
Kaylon Watson	RB	6'1, 220	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7685	9	31	0	3.4	1.7	33.3%	0	0
Brayle Brown	QB	6'2, 200	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000	8	15	0	1.9	3.2	37.5%	3	0
Nathan Meadors, Jr.	RB	5'7, 166	Jr.	NR	N/A	6	25	0	4.2	2.0	50.0%	0	0
Ben Luckett	RB	5'11, 216	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7652

5. A rushing nightmare

In 2013, big plays bailed out an inefficient attack. Four ULM rushers had at least one carry of 50-plus yards, and five had at least one reception of 40-plus. But big plays are inconsistent beings. They are volatile and unreliable.

The best offense is the one that consistently creates big-play opportunities, and those opportunities were next to nil for Warhawk rushers in 2014. ULM had 18 rushes of 10-plus yards (worst in the country), three of 20-plus (ditto), and not a single rush of 30-plus. That's amazing.

So it's hard to think the losses will have too much of an effect. The return of explosive senior DeVontae McNeal might help, and big sophomore Kaylon Watson (who saw playing time as a freshman because McNeal was lost to injury) might be ready for a heavier load. And while losing three multi-year starters is never a good thing for an offensive line, injuries and general shuffling did allow for other players to get experience. Two sophomores (tackle Chase Regian and guard Frank Sutton Jr.) combined for 19 starts, and junior guard Jimmy Chung got a start, too.

If the run game can provide any sort of consistent threat, the passing game could be exciting. Rashon Ceaser averaged more than 14 yards per catch in his first two seasons (he was relegated to more of a possession role in last season's attack), and Ajalen Holley had a few huge games in 2014 -- six catches for 175 yards against Idaho, five for 109 vs. Troy, three for 105 vs. UL-Lafayette. Incoming freshman Markis McCray was a Composite three-star, and ULM has signed a few interesting wideouts in the last two classes. Give the defense any reason to pay attention to the ground game, and the pass could thrive.

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	%SD	Yds/ Target	NEY	Real Yds/ Target	RYPR
Kenzee Jackson	WR					133	79	866	59.4%	26.5%	62.4%	6.5	-104	6.6	93.6
Rashon Ceaser	WR	6'0, 188	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	112	77	872	68.8%	22.3%	72.3%	7.8	-47	7.8	94.3
Ajalen Holley	WR	5'10, 192	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7600	97	57	863	58.8%	19.3%	58.8%	8.9	162	8.9	93.3
Tyler Cain	WR	5'8, 185	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000	59	45	273	76.3%	11.8%	50.8%	4.6	-255	4.5	29.5
Centarius Donald	RB					32	21	189	65.6%	6.4%	56.3%	5.9	-64	5.9	20.4
Alec Osborne	TE	6'3, 226	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7894	29	17	116	58.6%	5.8%	69.0%	4.0	-93	3.6	12.5
Tony Cook	WR					18	9	102	50.0%	3.6%	55.6%	5.7	-13	5.7	11.0
Tyrone Carter	WR					7	2	17	28.6%	1.4%	28.6%	2.4	-13	1.4	1.8
Harley Scioneaux	TE	6'5, 244	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000	5	5	22	100.0%	1.0%	80.0%	4.4	-34	2.6	2.4
De'Vonte Haggerty	WR	5'11, 179	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7500	4	2	9	50.0%	0.8%	50.0%	2.3	-16	1.9	1.0
Pete Thomas	QB					2	1	8	50.0%	0.4%	50.0%	4.0	-5	4.6	0.9
Jared Mapps	WR	6'2, 201	Sr.	NR	N/A
D'Marius Gillespie	WR	6'1, 211	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7726
Marcus Green	WR	5'8, 185	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7433
Brennan Bradley	WR	6'4, 196	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000
Stoney Hawkins	TE	6'3, 232	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7533
Markis McCray	WR	5'10, 171	Fr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8044
Xavier Brown	WR	5'11, 186	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7400

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	75.9	2.49	2.31	33.1%	71.4%	20.4%	74.1	6.6%	10.0%
Rank	125	115	124	116	35	80	117	98	105

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Joseph Treadwell	LT					48
Demiere Burkett	LG					31
Ben Risenhoover	RG					29
Chase Regian	RT	6'2, 289	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7759	12
Colby Mitchell	C	6'2, 280	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000	11
Frank Sutton, Jr.	LG	6'4, 295	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	7
Jimmy Chung	RG	6'2, 287	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7752	1
Jeremy Burton	LT					0
Matthew Oubre	LG					0
Trey Martin	C					0
Brandon Bridgers	LT	6'4, 316	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7300	0
Jeff Savage	LG	6'2, 296	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7985	0
Brian Thlang	C	6'1, 294	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7683
Keaton Baggs	RT	6'5, 290	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7652
Jake Snyder	RG	6'2, 281	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000
Rey Baltazar	LT	6'6, 303	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7433

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.86	74	IsoPPP+	105.7	51
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	39.3%	42	Succ. Rt. +	105.2	45
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	28.1	108	Off. FP+	98.0	88
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.3	58	Redzone S&P+	101.1	61
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	17.9		ACTUAL	16.0	-1.9

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	48	47	45	51
RUSHING	86	63	49	75
PASSING	14	40	47	41
Standard Downs		53	41	66
Passing Downs		44	59	35

Q1 Rk	34	1st Down Rk	26
Q2 Rk	54	2nd Down Rk	23
Q3 Rk	53	3rd Down Rk	88
Q4 Rk	24

6. Wasting a nasty defense

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of ULM's 2014 offense wasn't that it was bad; it's that it prevented ULM from taking full advantage of a fun, aggressive, effective defense. Despite inheriting awful field position, the Warhawks managed to hold six opponents to 22 or fewer points and resist the run despite a 3-3-5 formation that brings built-in size disadvantages.

Opponents knew to run, but ULM forced enough passes to maximize an unpredictable pass rush. The Warhawks had at least five sacks in four different games, and seven players had at least three sacks each. Linebackers Hunter Kissinger and Michael Johnson made plays against both run and pass, and defensive coordinator Troy Reffett had the pieces. ULM both harassed the quarterback and prevented big plays on passing downs, and per the ratings above, the Warhawks' best defensive quarter was the fourth.

ULM held two SEC foes to 26 points per game and limited a strong Georgia Southern offense to 22. This was an excellent unit.

There were a few more breakdowns down the stretch, and while one can possibly blame that on exhaustion from carrying the offense, depth may have been an issue. ULM really only played four linemen and four linebackers while redshirting most of its 2014 class.

It bears mentioning that ULM was a bit lucky on the injury front; the Warhawks were able to play only eight players in the front six, after all, and the top five linemen, four of the top five linebackers, and six of the top eight defensive backs played in all 12 games. Injuries were limited mostly to the offensive side.

Thanks to redshirts, if the injury bug does bite, the Warhawks could be equipped to handle it: the under-used second string returns mostly intact, and the Warhawks boast not only a large batch of athletic redshirt freshmen, but also a few potential high-impact newcomers -- three-star ends Donald Louis and Sam Miller, three-star defensive backs Cortez Sisco Jr. and Xavier Dias, and JUCO end Colton Moorehead.

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	100.6	2.80	3.65	39.0%	74.4%	20.3%	166.5	7.8%	13.0%
Rank	59	44	96	65	103	49	4	8	4

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Gerrand Johnson	NT	6'1, 290	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8535	12	62.0	9.1%	12.5	6.5	0	0	0	0
Joey Gautney	DE					12	37.0	5.4%	5.5	3.5	0	1	2	0
Lorenzo Jackson	DE	6'2, 244	Sr.	NR	N/A	12	36.0	5.3%	12.5	3.0	0	1	0	1
Malcolm Edmond	DE					12	11.0	1.6%	1.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Jacob Tyson	DE	6'1, 272	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7519	12	6.0	0.9%	2.0	2.0	0	0	1	0
David Elias, Jr.	NT	6'2, 276	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7859	11	1.5	0.2%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jackson Randle	NT	6'2, 251	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000
Shaquille Warren	DE	6'2, 239	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7659
Ben Banogu	DE	6'4, 246	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7578
Colton Moorehead	DE	6'3, 255	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7867
Donald Louis Jr.	DE	6'2, 268	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8017
Sam Miller	DE	6'4, 220	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8082
Jaylen Veasley	NT	6'2, 278	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7948

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Hunter Kissinger	LB	6'3, 230	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	12	60.0	8.8%	10.5	5.0	2	1	0	0
Michael Johnson	LB	6'2, 226	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000	12	59.0	8.7%	16.0	8.0	0	0	1	0
Cody Robinson	LB	6'1, 216	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000	12	39.5	5.8%	6.0	3.5	1	3	2	0
Ray Stovall	LB					10	37.0	5.4%	8.5	3.5	0	1	1	0
Braxton Moore	LB	6'0, 226	Jr.	NR	N/A	12	5.0	0.7%	1.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Tevyn Cagins	LB	6'2, 228	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7100	11	4.0	0.6%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Alex Johnson	LB	6'0, 202	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7800	12	2.0	0.3%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jarred Dunn	LB	6'0, 224	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7500
Sterling Doss	LB	6'0, 227	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7700
David Griffith	LB	6'1, 209	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7719
Cody McGuire	LB	6'3, 229	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7494
Chase Day	LB	6'2, 215	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7759

7. Potential for further nastiness: high

Depth aside, of the seven players with at least three sacks, five are scheduled to return, including a trio of senior linebackers (Johnson, Kissinger, Cody Robinson), and super-active nose tackle Gerrand Johnson. Robinson was also solid dropping into pass coverage, and thanks in part to the pressure up front, safety Mitch Lane was able to put together an all-star campaign in 2014: 4.5 tackles for loss, seven passes defensed. Lane also returns, there's no immediate reason to assume any of these players will be less effective.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Mitch Lane	HAWK	6'1, 215	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000	12	71.0	10.5%	4.5	0	3	4	0	0
Cordero Smith	S					12	49.0	7.2%	1	1	0	3	1	0
Justin Backus	S	6'2, 182	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7600	12	44.0	6.5%	1	0	2	5	0	0
Trey Caldwell	CB	5'9, 189	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7200	10	36.5	5.4%	1	0	1	7	0	0
Lenzy Pipkins	CB	6'1, 195	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7900	9	28.0	4.1%	3	1	1	2	0	0
Rob'Donovan Lewis	CB					12	20.5	3.0%	0	0	0	4	0	0
Bryce Ray	S					12	17.5	2.6%	0	0	1	1	0	0
Tre' Hunter	S	6'0, 184	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7200	12	9.5	1.4%	1	0	0	0	0	0
Ferrando Joseph	CB					7	8.5	1.3%	1	0	0	1	0	0
Junior Williams	CB	5'11, 193	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7519	11	7.5	1.1%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Marquis McCullum	HAWK	6'0, 189	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000	12	2.5	0.4%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Roland Jenkins	S	6'0, 185	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7700
Grant Dotsy	CB	5'10, 185	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7300
Wesley Thompson	S	6'0, 188	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7652
Marcus Hubbard	CB	5'9, 176	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7644
Aaron Townsend	S	6'1, 170	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7433
Cortez Sisco Jr.	S	6'1, 206	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8377
Xavier Dias	DB	5'11, 189	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8126

8. Depth should pay off

Depth was tested a bit more in the secondary, with both corners Trey Caldwell and Lenzy Pipkins missing time. Then-senior Rob'Donovan Lewis was able to fill in, but he's gone, as are safeties Cordero Smith and Bryce Ray. Recent recruiting classes might first be tested in the secondary, but at first glance, there are plenty of exciting candidates who might be ready.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Justin Manton			76	42.4	8	18	20	50.0%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Justin Manton			54	59.9	29	2	53.7%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Justin Manton			23-23	15-17	88.2%	5-7	71.4%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Tyler Cain	KR	5'8, 185	Sr.	36	21.7	0
De'Vonte Haggerty	KR	5'11, 179	So.	2	14.0	0
Rashon Ceaser	PR	6'0, 188	Sr.	12	9.5	0
Trey Caldwell	PR	5'9, 189	Sr.	2	4.5	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams F/+	82
Field Goal Efficiency	18
Punt Return Efficiency	62
Kick Return Efficiency	77
Punt Efficiency	92
Kickoff Efficiency	103
Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency	38

9. One Manton = three lost starters

Justin Manton was a shaky 5-for-9 on field goals during ULM's strong 2012, but he morphed into one of the Sun Belt's steadiest legs; he averaged more than 42 yards per punt, booted touchbacks on more than half of his kickoffs, and made nearly every kick under 40 yards last fall (and made five of seven longer than 4). That he was asked to kick 24 field goals tells you something about ULM's inability to turn opportunities into points, but he still made sure ULM got something out of the opportunities it had.

The loss of Manton is a scary one, not only because he was a solid place-kicker, but also because any dropoff in leg strength could shine a light on some awful coverage units. Despite solid raw averages from Manton, ULM ranked 92nd in Punt Efficiency and 103rd in Kickoff Efficiency. Maybe Manton's replacement i fine -- and whoever it is, hopefully he isn't asked to attempt 24 field goals -- but this is a red flag.

2015 Schedule & Projection Factors

2015 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. Rk
5-Sep	at Georgia	4
12-Sep	Nicholls State	NR
26-Sep	at Alabama	2
10-Oct	at Tulsa	117
?	Appalachian State	104
?	Arkansas State	66
?	Georgia Southern	57
?	New Mexico State	124
?	at Idaho	112
?	at Texas State	95
?	at Troy	126
?	at UL-Lafayette	72

Five-Year F/+ Rk	-22.4% (100)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	119 / 123
2014 TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin*	-1 / -2.7
2014 TO Luck/Game	+0.7
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	13 (5, 8)
2014 Second-order wins (difference)	4.3 (-0.3)

10. Is this year any different?

Todd Berry doesn't enjoy the "U" word, but ULM was an underdog's dream in 2012, combining funky formations with strong crunch-time performances, upsetting one power-conference opponent and nearly taking down two more, and going 6-2 in conference play despite all the built-in disadvantages. But the Warhawks have fallen from eight wins to six to four, and that's always going to be a concern.

This program is as healthy and deep as it has ever been. But one has to be concerned about both the offensive dropoff and the turnover on the offensive first string. Can the defense not only hold its own again but dominate, especially if injuries are a little less kind? Can new blood give this offense an energy boost? With one "yes" for those two questions, this is a potential bowl team. But a yes isn't guaranteed.

Whatever ULM's goals are, a win at Tulsa would be a nice way to get there. ULM faces only two power opponents in non-conference play, and Tulsa hasn't been Tulsa for a couple of years now (and is breaking in a new head coach). If the Warhawks can go 2-2 in non-conference, reach six or seven wins overall seems far less of a chore.