The big 2015 UMass football guide: Ride the offense to bowl eligibility?

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. Traction!

[Mark] Whipple is by no means a young up-and-comer, but one can see why UMass was attracted to him. He has a lengthy résumé, and once upon a time, he was able to build a competitive team in Amherst. And even though that was at the FCS level, UMass was at least a great FCS program. The Minutemen would have struggled to win four or five games at even the FCS level these past two years.

This is still a really hard job. We're still probably talking about a team that ranks in the No. 100-110 range and has no home-field advantage to speak of.

Still, we know that things probably aren't going to get worse, and we know that whatever steadiness is possible at the moment, odds are decent that Whipple will find it. Eventually.

That's how last year's UMass preview ended. The Minutemen were not a top-110 team in the first year of Mark Whipple's second stint. (His first stint, from 1998-2003, included 49 wins, three FCS playoff appearances, and the 1998 FCS national title.) A defunct running game and a dismal defense held the Minutemen back, and they improved only to 120th in the overall F/+ rankings.

Still, from the "you've got to start somewhere" files, UMass won more games (three) in 2014 than it had in 2012-13 combined (two), and with an 0-5 record in one-possession games, Whipple's charges were closer to 5-7 or 6-6 than 2-10. Better yet, during a four-game span in conference play, the Minutemen were a genuinely solid team. They beat Kent State, Eastern Michigan and Ball State by a combined 59 points and nearly upset Toledo on the road.

They ran out of steam in the last two games, and that hurt their overall ratings, but whereas EMU fans got a three-week glimpse of something decent, UMass fans got a four-game glimpse of something truly good by MAC standards. And with nearly everybody returning, there's a reason to believe that Whipple could expand the run of good play even further. Last year's ceiling seems like this season's realistic possibility.

2014 Schedule & Results

Record: 3-9 | Adj. Record: 1-11 | Final F/+ Rk: 120
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Adj. Scoring Margin	Win Expectancy
30-Aug	Boston College	36	7-30	L	6%	-36.8	0%
6-Sep	Colorado	83	38-41	L	27%	-14.3	59%
13-Sep	at Vanderbilt	115	31-34	L	11%	-28.7	34%
20-Sep	at Penn State	45	7-48	L	1%	-55.1	0%
27-Sep	Bowling Green	98	42-47	L	17%	-22.6	24%
4-Oct	at Miami (Ohio)	103	41-42	L	7%	-35.0	9%
11-Oct	at Kent State	107	40-17	W	50%	-0.2	92%
18-Oct	Eastern Michigan	128	36-14	W	26%	-14.7	90%
25-Oct	at Toledo	59	35-42	L	33%	-10.4	35%
12-Nov	Ball State	91	24-10	W	68%	11.2	98%
18-Nov	at Akron	105	6-30	L	7%	-34.1	3%
28-Nov	Buffalo	114	21-41	L	7%	-34.9	3%

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	21.7	105	39.1	121
Points Per Game	27.3	78	33.0	105

2. Not quite ready for the full climb

Up, then down. Further up, then down. Even further up, then flatline. UMass tried to climb a mountain in 2014, and while the Minutemen had some stellar moments, because of a specific injury they didn't reach the finish line. Following a rousing home win over Ball State, which saw them nearly double the Cardinals' total yardage and first downs, the team unintentionally packed it in. They were outgained by 394 yards and outscored, 71-27, by two bad teams (Akron and Buffalo) to finish the season.

A bad defense didn't help, but more importantly, quarterback Blake Frohnapfel got carted off the field with a leg injury in the fourth quarter of the Ball State win. Freshman Austin Whipple (son of Mark) started the final two and played like the freshman he was, completing 43 percent and throwing three picks. After catching 13 passes for 239 yards against Ball State, star wideout Tajae Sharpe caught just nine passes for 77 yards against Akron and Buffalo. And without a run game to lean on, things quickly fell apart.

Whipple is no longer a first-year guy and might be capable of relieving Frohnapfel in 2015, but it is clear that while the defense is still trying to figure things out, UMass' fall fortunes will ride mostly on the Frohnapfel-to-Sharpe connection.

3. A home field advantage? Maybe?

There's quite a difference between playing for 16,000 fans in a venue that holds 17,000 and in a venue that holds 69,000. While renovating Amherst's McGuirk Stadium, UMass continued to play in cavernous Gillette Stadium, without a homefield advantage to be found. But in 2014, the home games were split evenly, three in each venue.

*SAMPLE SIZE ALERT*, but early signs were promising.

• Average percentile performance (6 home games): 25% (31% in Amherst, 20% in Foxboro)
• Average percentile performance (6 road games): 18%

As means of comparison, EMU's home-road percentile splits were 23 percent at home and eight percent on the road (difference: 15 percent). Thursday previewee Buffalo was at 32 percent at home and 16 percent on the road (16 percent). The three games in Amherst created a similar split. At Foxboro, not so much.

As far as I can glean, the intent is to still split games between the two venues to some degree. On one hand, that makes sense. On the other hand, if your team plays quite a bit better in one venue than the other, sending games to Foxboro might be cutting off your nose to spite your face marginally increase your gate revenue.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.92	29	IsoPPP+	98.0	74
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	40.7%	73	Succ. Rt. +	94.3	90
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	31.2	92	Def. FP+	96.0	108
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.3	79	Redzone S&P+	86.8	109
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	24.5		ACTUAL	23	-1.5

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	51	82	93	74
RUSHING	115	88	71	98
PASSING	11	76	97	70
Standard Downs		78	86	66
Passing Downs		76	64	83

Q1 Rk	101	1st Down Rk	82
Q2 Rk	42	2nd Down Rk	89
Q3 Rk	104	3rd Down Rk	78
Q4 Rk	106

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.
Blake Frohnapfel	6'6, 229	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7954	241	437	3345	23	10	55.1%	22	4.8%	6.9
Austin Whipple	6'1, 203	So.	NR	NR	25	48	325	3	3	52.1%	6	11.1%	5.3
Ross Comis	6'2, 205	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7400
Andrew Verboys	5'11, 200	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000

4. The power of identity

Knowing what you want to be is important. It doesn't matter as much as pure talent, but it allows you to recruit the pieces you need and lean on go-to concepts in times of need.

UMass knew what it wanted to be. If pro-style bonafides were flammable, Whipple could keep his house heated year-round. After leaving UMass in 2003, he served as an assistant for the Steelers, Eagles, and Browns. In between, he called the shots for Randy Shannon's final two offenses at Miami, units that ranked 24th in Off. S&P+ in 2009 and 35th in 2010 with injury issues at quarterback.

Whatever "pro-style" means I'm not sure, but Whipple's been a sharp offensive mind for a while. And with a great pitch-and-catch combo, he utilized one of the most pass-heavy attacks in the country. UMass threw five of every nine plays on standard downs and three of four on passing downs. Such an attack puts a lot of pressure on the quarterback to make loads of good decisions; Frohnapfel made them. In 459 pass attempts, he was sacked only 22 times (the resulting sack rate of 4.8 percent wasn't bad considering how often Frohnapfel was looking downfield -- he averaged 13.9 yards per completion) and threw just 10 picks.

Frohnapfel has good size and will have all the chances in the world to impress pro scouts. Leaving Marshall for two years under Whipple is looking like a pretty good decision.

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Shadrach Abrokwah	RB	5'9, 202	Jr.	NR	N/A	123	573	7	4.7	3.7	41.5%	3	3
Lorenzo Woodley	RB	6'0, 212	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8584	102	420	5	4.1	3.4	36.3%	2	2
J.T. Blyden	RB	6'0, 196	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8532	38	116	0	3.1	2.8	28.9%	2	2
Jamal Wilson	RB	5'10, 206	Sr.	NR	N/A	20	88	1	4.4	1.5	45.0%	0	0
Marken Michel	WR	5'10, 185	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	N/A	19	115	2	6.1	7.5	52.6%	2	0
Blake Frohnapfel	QB	6'6, 229	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7954	19	73	0	3.8	3.8	42.1%	6	1
Jordan Broadnax	RB	5'9, 184	Sr.	NR	N/A	12	34	0	2.8	5.0	25.0%	0	0
Elgin Long	WR	5'10, 181	Sr.	NR	N/A	6	36	1	6.0	3.5	66.7%	0	0
Austin Whipple	QB	6'1, 203	So.	NR	N/A	5	15	0	3.0	0.5	40.0%	1	0
Sekai Lindsay	RB	5'10, 205	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8343
Marquis Young	RB	6'0, 200	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8100

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
Tajae Sharpe	WR	6'4, 200	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8329	135	85	1281	63.0%	29.3%	60.0%	9.5	249	9.5	157.3
Jean Sifrin	TE					72	41	637	56.9%	15.6%	52.8%	8.8	129	8.7	78.2
Rodney Mills	TE	6'1, 215	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	N/A	59	30	489	50.8%	12.8%	62.7%	8.3	108	8.3	60.1
Marken Michel	WR	5'10, 185	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	N/A	52	30	386	57.7%	11.3%	50.0%	7.4	15	7.2	47.4
Jalen Williams	WR	6'3, 191	Sr.	NR	0.8467	38	20	307	52.6%	8.2%	52.6%	8.1	55	8.1	37.7
Shadrach Abrokwah	RB	5'9, 202	Jr.	NR	N/A	19	13	78	68.4%	4.1%	57.9%	4.1	-77	4.1	9.6
Alex Kenney	WR					18	10	195	55.6%	3.9%	77.8%	10.8	71	8.3	23.9
Shakur Nesmith	WR	6'4, 200	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8206	16	7	105	43.8%	3.5%	75.0%	6.6	13	6.6	12.9
J.T. Blyden	RB	6'0, 196	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8532	12	8	40	66.7%	2.6%	33.3%	3.3	-56	3.7	4.9
Brandon Howard	TE	6'5, 250	Sr.	NR	N/A	8	4	57	50.0%	1.7%	50.0%	7.1	6	6.7	7.0
Andrew Libby	ATH	6'1, 208	So.	NR	N/A	8	5	26	62.5%	1.7%	37.5%	3.3	-35	2.5	3.2
Jamal Wilson	RB	5'10, 206	Sr.	NR	N/A	7	5	34	71.4%	1.5%	14.3%	4.9	-25	6.4	4.2
Bernard Davis	WR	6'1, 187	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	N/A	6	2	20	33.3%	1.3%	50.0%	3.3	-8	2.8	2.5
Jon Denton	TE	6'6, 260	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7000
Todd Stafford	TE	6'7, 261	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8224
Artayvious Lynn	TE	6'6, 205	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7400
Sam Franklin	WR	6'3, 185	Fr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8478
Andy Isabella	WR	5'10, 174	Fr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8400

5. A deep, exciting receiving corps

Again from last year's preview:

All things considered, Tajae Sharpe might be a hell of a wideout. The junior from Piscataway was the No. 1 and No. 2 target for UMass in 2013, and when tight end Rob Blanchflower was lost for the season with injury (he played only six games), Sharpe was the No. 3 target as well. When you consider the quality of the quarterback and the fact that said quarterback was frequently trying to pass on second- or third-and-long, Sharpe's 60-percent catch rate and 6.7 yards per target might have been super-human averages.

It's amazing what a decent supporting cast can do. While I'm sure Sharpe improved to some degree between his sophomore and junior seasons, with a more receiver-friendly system and more interesting weapons around him (in a more interesting system, to boot), he went from "maybe decent" to one of the most successful receivers in the country. He was a big-play threat early, catching 32 passes for 678 yards (including a 77-yard touchdown against Penn State) in his first five games, then a high-volume 44 passes for 680 in the next five. He did slow up along with the rest of the offense in the final two games, but his potential is enormous.

The receiving corps as a whole has decent upside. Wideouts Marken Michel and Jalen Williams caught 50 passes at 7.7 yards per target, sophomore Shakur Nesmith is a big guy with big-play potential, and UMass brings in a pair of high-upside freshmen -- Sam Franklin and Andy Isabella, who were given ratings well into the three-star range by the Composite -- as well. Jean Sifrin, now gone, turned into a nice security-blanket tight end for Frohnapfel, but Rodney Mills put up similar per-target numbers as Sifrin, at least.

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	97.2	2.64	3.55	39.5%	68.6%	22.0%	96.1	5.2%	4.7%
Rank	87	105	40	61	56	104	75	79	22

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Matt Sparks	C	6'4, 280	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	NR	24
Tyrell Smith	LT	6'5, 315	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7974	23
Fabian Hoeller	LG	6'3, 295	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	N/A	15
Elijah Wilkinson	RT	6'4, 315	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7900	12
Josh Bruns	RG	6'5, 303	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	8
Michael Boland	RG	6'7, 315	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	6
Tyshon Henderson	LT	6'7, 339	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8100	1
Lukas Kolter	RG	6'3, 310	So.	NR	N/A	0
Rich Queen	RG	6'3, 285	So.	2 stars (5.3)	N/A	0
Ryan Johnson	RT	6'5, 320	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	0
Sam Zeff	OL	6'5, 288	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7900	0
Dimitri Angelas	OL	6'5, 291	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7700
Anthony Fernandez	OL	6'6, 302	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000
Reche Thomas	OL	6'4, 325	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8419
Michael Yerardi	OL	6'6, 305	Fr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8113
Jack Driscoll	OL	6'4, 250	Fr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8013

6. Youth turns into experience

The passing numbers were even more impressive when you consider the total lack of big plays in the run game. Then-sophomores Shadrach Abrokwah and Lorenzo Woodley (a former star recruit) were rather successful in short-yardage situations, and their combined 39 percent opportunity rate (percentage of carries to gain at least five yards) was decent.

But UMass had just five rushes of at least 20 yards (only three teams had fewer) and two of at least 30 yards. The Minutemen were just good enough at the ground game to avoid too many passing-downs situations, but scoring drives had to be initiated by the pass, which made every down a passing down.

Athleticism is mostly responsible for big plays, but to the extent that experience was a problem, that should improve this fall. Not only are Abrokwah, Woodley, and sophomore J.T. Blyden all scheduled to return, but Whipple signed two three-star running backs. Sekai Lindsay might be the gem of the class, and if any can generate the occasional big play and introduce play-action potential ... look out.

The line has plenty of experience. UMass finished 2014 with seven players having accumulated 89 career starts; all seven return. And if Lindsay isn't the star of the recruiting class, big Reche Thomas might be.

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.87	79	IsoPPP+	79.2	118
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	44.5%	98	Succ. Rt. +	86.0	118
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	28.8	96	Off. FP+	96.0	110
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.8	104	Redzone S&P+	81.2	125
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	19.4		ACTUAL	17.0	-2.4

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	103	119	118	118
RUSHING	92	106	106	101
PASSING	102	125	119	122
Standard Downs		116	110	113
Passing Downs		125	124	126

Q1 Rk	84	1st Down Rk	110
Q2 Rk	128	2nd Down Rk	66
Q3 Rk	113	3rd Down Rk	126
Q4 Rk	73

7. Opponents knew to pass

When choosing which 2015 signees to list for MAC and Sun Belt teams, I basically look at JUCO transfers, those given a three-star designation by either Rivals or 247, or those given a high-two-star rating from Rivals. For UMass, then, I've listed nine players: two running backs, three receivers, three offensive linemen ... and one defender, freshman tackle Mario Patton.

Granted, some interesting redshirt freshmen could enter the fray -- tackle Jake Largay, defensive back Jarell Addo, etc. -- but it doesn't appear as if there will be any immediate help for a woeful UMass defense.

The UMass defense wasn't without its redeeming qualities. The Minutemen attacked the run nicely with linebacker Jovan Santos-Knox (6.5 non-sack tackles for loss), tackle Daniel Maynes (six), safety Joe Colton (six), tackle Robert Kitching (five), and end Enock Asante (four), and four of those five (sans Maynes) return. Plus, sophomores like tackle Shai-Ki Holines and linebackers Da'Sean Downey and Steve Casalicould all take promising steps forward.

Though there was a "when they weren't making a big play, they were giving up an even bigger one" factor, it's not hard to see the Minutemen churning out a decent run defense.

But the problem was the pass defense, from top (pass rush) to bottom (secondary). UMass couldn't stop the pass, and opponents knew it. So despite frequently holding leads (and despite corners Randall Jette and Trey Dudley-Giles combining for 27 passes defensed), opponents threw more than the national average on both standard and passing downs. And it worked. UMass allowed a 133.2 passer rating for the season, which actually ranked a non-horrific 89th, but when you adjust for opponent, the Minutemen had one of the four or five worst pass defenses in the country.

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	88.1	3.07	3.20	38.9%	63.0%	20.8%	59.1	1.6%	5.6%
Rank	111	85	55	63	39	45	121	126	97

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Daniel Maynes	NT					12	28.5	3.8%	7.5	1.5	0	0	0	0
Robert Kitching	NT	6'1, 307	Sr.	2 stars	N/A	12	25.5	3.4%	5.5	0.5	0	2	0	0
Peter Angeh	DE	6'2, 258	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7400	12	20.5	2.8%	4.0	1.0	0	1	0	0
Sha-Ki Holines	DT	6'3, 260	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8106	12	20.5	2.8%	3.0	2.0	0	0	0	0
Enock Asante	DE	6'2, 264	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	12	10.5	1.4%	4.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Leo Krizanovic	DT	6'2, 264	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	N/A	11	10.5	1.4%	2.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jake Largay	DT	6'6, 280	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8056
Jack Wynne	DE	6'5, 253	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7715
Chris Carter	DE	6'4, 276	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7644
Mario Patton	DT	6'3, 290	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7893

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Jovan Santos-Knox	ILB	6'2, 240	Sr.	NR	N/A	12	98.0	13.2%	8.5	2.0	0	6	3	0
Stanley Andre	ILB					12	83.0	11.2%	3.5	1.0	0	3	0	0
Kassan Messiah	OLB	6'4, 237	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	N/A	11	46.5	6.3%	5.5	3.0	0	1	0	0
Trey Seals	OLB	6'4, 237	Sr.	NR	N/A	9	27.5	3.7%	4.5	2.5	1	0	1	0
Da'Sean Downey	OLB	6'5, 234	So.	NR	N/A	12	25.5	3.4%	1.0	0.0	0	1	0	0
Steve Casali	ILB	6'2, 232	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7400	12	16.5	2.2%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
John Robinson-Woodgett	OLB	6'2, 228	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	N/A	11	16.0	2.2%	1.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Vondell Langston	ILB	6'0, 220	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	N/A	12	15.0	2.0%	1.5	0.5	0	0	0	0
Adam Richard	LB	6'3, 220	Jr.	NR	N/A	12	8.5	1.1%	0.0	0.0	0	0	1	0
Peter Ngobidi	LB	6'2, 221	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7891	10	5.0	0.7%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Joe Colton	S	5'10, 195	Sr.	NR	N/A	12	70.5	9.5%	7	1	0	4	0	0
Randall Jette	CB	5'11, 180	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	N/A	12	53.0	7.1%	0.5	0	4	14	1	0
Khary Bailey-Smith	S	6'2, 194	Sr.	NR	N/A	12	47.5	6.4%	0.5	0	3	3	1	0
Trey Dudley-Giles	CB	5'11, 182	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7500	12	41.5	5.6%	2	0	2	7	1	0
Jackson Porter	CB	6'1, 192	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7300	11	31.0	4.2%	1	0	2	2	0	0
Zeke Edmonds	S	6'0, 200	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000	9	8.5	1.1%	0.5	0	0	1	0	0
Lucas Amato	DB	6'0, 203	So.	NR	N/A	12	5.5	0.7%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jesse Monteiro	CB	5'11, 175	So.	NR	N/A	12	5.0	0.7%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Quayshun Smith	DB					11	3.5	0.5%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Iric Harris	DB	5'8, 180	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	N/A	5	2.0	0.3%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Jarell Addo	DB	6'2, 186	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8100
Charan Singh	DB	6'2, 192	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7533

8. Experience vs. good experience

In the mid-1980s, when Columbia was mired in an amazing losing streak that reached 44 games, the little guilty liberal underdog lover that was seven- or eight-year-old me began to scour the preview magazines for reasons why the streak would end soon, and why the Lions were going to become an epic turnaround story.

"Look how many starters they return!" I would tell my father.

"That's not always a good thing," he would respond.

While experience in the front seven might be a good thing (and an even better thing if a steady pass rusher emerges), the fact that the UMass secondary returns its top eight tacklers from last year isn't amazing news. The top four are all seniors, and again, a woeful pass rush impacted their coverage proficiency, but if UMass ranked 125th in Passing S&P+ despite some decent disruption stats above, I don't see that improving much.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Brian McDonald			57	37.7	6	19	10	50.9%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Blake Lucas	5'8, 166	Sr.	56	56.8	7	1	12.5%
Matthew Wylie			6	51.8	0	0	0.0%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Blake Lucas	5'8, 166	Sr.	24-25	2-3	66.7%	0-1	0.0%
Logan Laurent	6'4, 210	So.	13-18	4-5	80.0%	0-1	0.0%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Khary Bailey-Smith	KR	6'2, 194	Sr.	23	24.5	1
Trey Dudley-Giles	KR	5'11, 182	Sr.	8	33.6	0
Trey Dudley-Giles	PR	5'11, 182	Sr.	4	8.0	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams F/+	117
Field Goal Efficiency	125
Punt Return Efficiency	114
Kick Return Efficiency	7
Punt Efficiency	120
Kickoff Efficiency	43
Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency	74

9. Let's work a trade

In Tuesday's EMU preview, I mentioned that the Eagles are wasting a pretty decent place-kicker because they haven't been able to get games close enough for field goals to matter.

Well, UMass played in five one-possession games last year, and the fact that they missed six PATs and two field goals under 40 yards is something that can be devastating in close games. Maybe the two teams can work a trade? EMU sends over kicker Dylan Mulder, perhaps for a return man or No. 2 receiver?

2015 Schedule & Projection Factors

2015 Schedule
Date	Opponent	2014 F/+ Rk
12-Sep	at Colorado	83
19-Sep	Temple	67
26-Sep	at Notre Dame	34
3-Oct	Florida International	96
?	Akron	105
?	Kent State	107
?	Miami (Ohio)	103
?	Toledo	59
?	at Ball State	91
?	at Bowling Green	98
?	at Buffalo	114
?	at Eastern Michigan	128

Five-Year F/+ Rk	-50.0% (126)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	115 / 127
2014 TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin*	-6 / -5.1
2014 TO Luck/Game	-0.4
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	19 (10, 9)
2014 Second-order wins (difference)	4.4 (-1.4)

10. Play well at home, wherever that is

Second-order wins tell us that, the game's stats being what they were, UMass should have won between four and five games, not three. Turnovers luck tells us the Minutemen were slightly unlucky in the bounces department. And UMass boasts one of the highest returning-starter figures in the country.

These are encouraging things if you're a UMass fan. The Minutemen beat teams ranked No. 91, 107, and 128, and nearly beat teams ranked No. 59, 83, 98, 103, and 115. And their poor final ranking was weighed down by an injury. Now they take on a schedule that features eight teams that ranked worse than 90th last year.

There could be long-term concerns about a defense that struggled and hasn't been refreshed by recruiting. But having one good unit will get you pretty far in the MAC, and UMass' offense might be one of the best in a conference known for offense. If Blake Frohnapfel and Tajae Sharpe can stay healthy and get a few more big plays from the run game, the Minutemen will hum. And if they're due some good breaks in close games, they could very well threaten for bowl eligibility.

But even if they fall short of six wins ... read these words! UMass! Bowl eligibility! The Minutemen have hope they didn't have 12 months ago.