The big 2015 Marshall football guide: Just as dangerous, but more vulnerable

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. What is Marshall?

Simply put, Marshall was awesome. The Thundering Herd faded in November, which damaged the overall ratings, but they still rampaged through most of the season. They played just about the easiest schedule imaginable, but they played at a high level against those teams.

Among teams not currently in power conferences, Marshall's 2014 squad ranked highly in recent history. In 10 years of F/+ ratings, Marshall ranks ninth among all non-power teams, fourth in the "No Boise State" division.

Highest mid-major F/+ ratings (besides Boise State), 2005-14
1. 2007 USF
2. 2012 Utah State
3. 2009 Cincinnati
4. 2014 Marshall
5. 2007 Cincinnati

You could make the case that the Herd are really second on that list behind Utah State, since USF and Cincinnati were part of the BCS Big East.

For three years, Doc Holliday recruited like gangbusters while putting a mediocre product on the field; the Herd were a perfectly average Conference USA team every year between 2007 (when Mark Snyder was still the head coach) and 2012.

But then things changed.

In my 2013 Marshall preview, I said "So when does the surge begin? Now? Another year? Ever?" and the Herd responded with a 10-win season. An upset loss at Rice in the conference title game kept sentiments from rising too high, but with the components of a potentially dominant offense and defense, it became clear that Marshall was well-stocked heading into 2014.

Marshall almost won at Virginia Tech, pummeled East Carolina to win the Conference USA East, and looked like the bigger, stronger, faster team against Maryland in the Military Bowl. The Herd looked the part in 2013 and began to play like it.

They return an ace quarterback, his top target, a couple of explosive running backs, two all-conference offensive linemen, and nine starters from a defense that recorded 102 tackles for loss and improved from 117th to 78th in Def. F/+ last season.

Marshall is your Conference USA overlord in 2014. And I'm not sure it's close.

For 10 weeks, it wasn't. Marshall outscored opponents by an average score of 47-16 and only once won by fewer than 19. The better the opponent (relatively speaking), the bigger the statement. Marshall handled eventual Conference USA East runner-up Middle Tennessee by 25 points, then avenged the 2013 loss to Rice with a 41-14 pasting. The schedule precluded the Herd from getting any attention from the Playoff committee, but this was still remarkable.

The pace trailed off in late November. UAB almost pulled a huge upset in Birmingham on November 22, and on November 28, after never giving up more than 775 yards and 37 points in any two-game span, Marshall allowed 738 yards and 67 points to Western Kentucky in a thrilling shootout loss. The Herd looked iffy in pulling off a comeback win over Louisiana Tech in the conference title game before returning to their old selves in a bowl shellacking of Northern Illinois.

Marshall finished just 17th in the F/+ rankings after flirting with a top-10 finish. Regardless, this was an awesome team.

And now it starts over. The record-setting pass-and-catch combination of Rakeem Cato (14,079 career passing yards and 131 touchdowns) and Tommy Shuler (322 career catches and 25 touchdowns) is gone. So are Marshall's top three tacklers on the defensive line and three of four at linebacker. And so is all-conference center Chris Jasperse. Marshall didn't ride to dominance with 22 senior starters, but a new identity begins.

So what is Marshall? A team that slowly laid a foundation for high-caliber football, broke through in 2013, and will remain Conference USA's heavyweight? Or was this a team built around Cato, Shuler, and front-seven talent that won't be donning the green and white?

Recruiting rankings suggest the former. Not only do the Herd return plenty of proven pieces, they'll be replacing Cato with one of three three-star quarterbacks, and there are still 10 three- or four-star freshmen or sophomores in the receiving corps. Marshall has more than lived up to its recruiting rankings the last two years, and the departure of a few starters won't automatically change that.

Still, sometimes a cluster of talented players proves more special than others. It's hard to assume the new guys will be just as strong. Marshall has a lot to prove.

2014 Schedule & Results

Record: 13-1 | Adj. Record: 12-2 | Final F/+ Rk: 17
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Adj. Scoring Margin	Win Expectancy
30-Aug	at Miami (Ohio)	103	42-27	W	73%	14.3	100%
6-Sep	Rhode Island	N/A	48-7	W	78%	18.0	100%
13-Sep	Ohio	106	44-14	W	78%	18.4	100%
20-Sep	at Akron	105	48-17	W	92%	32.4	100%
4-Oct	at Old Dominion	108	56-14	W	95%	39.6	100%
11-Oct	Middle Tennessee	87	49-24	W	78%	18.1	99%
18-Oct	at Florida International	96	45-13	W	84%	23.1	100%
25-Oct	Florida Atlantic	100	35-16	W	75%	15.6	100%
8-Nov	at Southern Miss	110	63-17	W	87%	26.7	100%
15-Nov	Rice	86	41-14	W	91%	31.4	100%
22-Nov	at UAB	79	23-18	W	39%	-6.8	47%
28-Nov	Western Kentucky	50	66-67	L	41%	-5.2	48%
6-Dec	Louisiana Tech	35	26-23	W	55%	3.2	54%
23-Dec	vs. Northern Illinois	69	52-23	W	88%	27.7	100%

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	39.6	12	25.5	50
Points Per Game	45.6	3	21.0	18

2. Hello, soapbox

For much of 2014, Marshall was an undefeated, dominant, potentially top-10 team that continuously got crushed for an awful schedule.

And to be sure, the schedule was horrendous. The Herd played eight teams that ranked 96th or worse in the F/+ ratings and only two that ranked better than 69th. Plus, in those two games, they lost to WKU and nearly lost to Louisiana Tech, both at home. So it was easy to make a case that the Herd had benefited from a weak schdule and would have lost more with a normal schedule.

But that underscores the level at which they played for the first 10 games, a level they reached again in the Boca Raton Bowl. (They couldn't even get a game against a power team in a bowl.) And with the way the College Football Playoff committee ignored the Herd for most of the season, even as they were threatening to crack the top 10 in the opponent-adjusted advanced stats, Marshall became a poster child for why advanced stats should have a role in Playoff selection.

In late-February, I had the privilege of sitting on the College Football Analytics panel at the Sloan Sports Analytics Conference in Boston. It was a fun shoulder-rubbing experience, and it produced one hell of a to-do list, but it also featured this exchange.

Me: Marshall was an interesting example -- not that they were a contender, but they were undefeated for much of the year. And when they originally drew up their 2014 schedule, it had, I think Louisville, maybe? It had a power team on it, and it had a better Conference USA on it. And then the [non-conference] game falls through, and Conference USA gets weakened a little bit. They could have tried harder, I guess, but they ended up getting punished for something that wasn't necessarily due to what they were doing on the field.

Oliver Luck: And keep in mind, all the committee can do is look at who you played that year.

Or they could use opponent-adjusted stats to accurately compare output to expected output based on who you played.

I like to say that good stats can make sure the conversation starts in the right place. Even if Marshall had kept up their 10-week pace through 13 weeks and wrapped up a top-10 placement in F/+ and other rankings, the Herd probably would have still been behind Boise State in the Playoff rankings for the fact that Boise State got whipped by Ole Miss. That's not right. There's a better way.

I'm all for encouraging more exciting non-conference scheduling. But I'm not in favor of punishing a team for what some associate athletic director did two years earlier. Marshall was awesome, and Marshall was ignored.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.13	1	IsoPPP+	136.3	10
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	47.7%	17	Succ. Rt. +	105.6	49
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	29.3	62	Def. FP+	100.0	65
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	5.1	10	Redzone S&P+	104.6	55
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	20.0		ACTUAL	24	+4.0

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	2	21	45	10
RUSHING	8	14	62	2
PASSING	18	30	32	29
Standard Downs		16	49	4
Passing Downs		33	42	37

Q1 Rk	16	1st Down Rk	12
Q2 Rk	31	2nd Down Rk	4
Q3 Rk	20	3rd Down Rk	39
Q4 Rk	22

3. The big-play guys are back

Like Louisiana Tech, Marshall bailed itself out with big plays, especially in an all-or-nothing running game. And for all of his successes, Rakeem Cato only completed 59 percent of his passes. Marshall's offense was more efficient and explosive than Tech's, but it was the same concept.

Almost to a man, the big-play guys return. You've got the absurdly explosive senior trio of Devon Johnson, Steward Butler, and Remi Watson, who rushed for 3,111 yards last year and produced serious explosiveness numbers. (That Johnson averaged 8.9 highlight yards per opportunity at 246 pounds is ridiculous. He averaged more than 20 yards per reception, as well.) You've also got four-star sophomores Angelo Jean-Louis and Deon-Tay McManus and senior Davonte Allen; the trio combined for a ridiculous 21.1 yards per catch with a paltry 49 percent catch rate. And you've got young speedsters like Donquell Green and Reggie Rogers threatening to break into the rotation as well.

This will still be the most explosive offense in Conference USA.

But you still need to move the chains consistently. And in losing both Tommy Shuler and tight end Eric Frohnapfel (combined: 71 percent catch rate) and the mobile Cato, you're losing the most efficient aspects of your offense. That's tricky to replace.

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.

Rakeem Cato

267

451

3903

40

13

59.2%

21

4.4%

8.0

Gunnar Holcombe

6'3, 208

Jr.

3 stars (5.6)

0.8231

12

21

119

0

0

57.1%

0

0.0%

5.7

Michael Birdsong

6'5, 239

Jr.

NR

NR

Cole Garvin

6'1, 210

RSFr.

3 stars (5.5)

0.8244

Chase Litton

6'6, 212

Fr.

3 stars

0.8360

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Devon Johnson	RB	6'1, 246	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8163	206	1767	17	8.6	8.9	51.0%	3	1
Steward Butler	RB	5'9, 192	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8479	107	798	7	7.5	8.0	44.9%	1	1
Remi Watson	RB	5'11, 196	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8157	100	546	6	5.5	6.2	36.0%	2	1
Rakeem Cato	QB					73	609	8	8.3	6.5	60.3%	5	1
Brandon Byrd	RB					23	94	1	4.1	4.7	26.1%	0	0
Gunnar Holcombe	QB	6'3, 208	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8231	7	66	0	9.4	9.6	57.1%	0	0
Tony Pittman	RB	5'10, 206	So.	2 stars	0.7893	7	56	1	8.0	6.0	57.1%	0	0
Delvin Weems	RB	5'8, 195	Fr.	3 stars	0.8467

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
Tommy Shuler	SLOT					134	92	1138	68.7%	29.9%	70.9%	8.5	39	8.3	150.6
Angelo Jean-Louis	WR-Z	6'0, 184	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9213	50	21	490	42.0%	11.2%	62.0%	9.8	211	10.3	64.9
Deon-Tay McManus	WR-Z	6'2, 228	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8950	50	26	422	52.0%	11.2%	60.0%	8.4	94	8.4	55.9
Eric Frohnapfel	TE					48	37	420	77.1%	10.7%	54.2%	8.8	-13	8.7	55.6
Davonte Allen	WR-X	6'2, 201	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8200	40	22	544	55.0%	8.9%	67.5%	13.6	270	13.5	72.0
Craig Wilkins	WR-Z					34	19	236	55.9%	7.6%	67.6%	6.9	0	7.1	31.2
Ryan Yurachek	TE	6'3, 231	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7626	25	17	149	68.0%	5.6%	68.0%	6.0	-54	6.4	19.7
Hyleck Foster	SLOT	5'10, 191	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8093	24	18	254	75.0%	5.4%	54.2%	10.6	42	10.5	33.6
Justin Hunt	WR-X	6'3, 197	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7967	15	7	119	46.7%	3.3%	60.0%	7.9	28	7.9	15.7
Devon Johnson	RB	6'1, 246	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8163	7	6	121	85.7%	1.6%	42.9%	17.3	52	20.0	16.0
Demetrius Evans	WR					5	4	47	80.0%	1.1%	80.0%	9.4	0	9.6	6.2
Josh Knight	WR	6'1, 193	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7859	4	2	13	50.0%	0.9%	75.0%	3.3	-12	3.9	1.7
Deandre Reaves	WR	5'10, 180	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8331	3	2	26	66.7%	0.7%	100.0%	8.7	2	N/A	3.4
Donquell Green	WR	5'8, 163	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8235
Emanuel Beal	WR	6'1, 212	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8457
Kaleb Harris	TE	6'3, 219	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7900
Emanuel Byrd	TE	6'3, 228	Jr.	3 stars	NR
Reggie Rogers	WR	6'1, 190	Fr.	3 stars	0.8363
Larry Dunnon	WR	6'4, 200	Fr.	3 stars	0.8242
Latrell Nieves	WR	6'0, 168	Fr.	2 stars	0.8074
Raylen Elzy	WR	6'4, 198	Fr.	3 stars	0.7913
Reese Wooten	WR	6'1, 170	Fr.	3 stars	0.7200

4. The apprentices looked pretty good

If you believe recruiting rankings, you find Marshall has multiple high-ceiling options for replacing both Cato and Shuler. But you also don't have to just rely on the rankings.

Gunnar Holcombe averaged only 5.7 yards per pass attempt last year, but he was throwing almost entirely in garbage time, and he showed Cato-esque mobility when tucking and running. And if he isn't efficient enough behind center, then there are other potential options. Michael Birdsong threw for 2,700 yards and 22 touchdowns as a sophomore starter for James Madison in 2013 before transferring, Cole Garvin was a big get in 2014, and Chase Litton was one of the most highly touted members of the 2015 class.

And while it feels strange saying "Don't worry about losing Tommy Shuler" ... did you see what slot backup Hyleck Foster did last year when given the opportunity? He caught 18 of 24 passes for 254 yards and began to shine when given a larger role late: 10 of his catches, and two of his three touchdowns, came against WKU and Louisiana Tech. Between Foster, the big-play guys, and a wealth of three-star freshmen and redshirt freshmen, I can't pretend to worry about the loss of Shuler.

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	116.5	3.61	4.37	47.1%	61.2%	13.4%	121.3	2.1%	9.9%
Rank	14	4	1	9	106	4	38	10	102

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Chris Jasperse	C					53	2014 1st All-CUSA
Clint Van Horn	RT	6'5, 295	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	NR	22	2014 1st All-CUSA
Sebastian Johansson	LG	6'5, 292	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	NR	25
Michael Selby	C	6'2, 276	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8414	14
Trevor Mendelson	LT					12
Blake Brooks	LG					5
Tom Collins	LG	6'5, 277	Sr.	NR	NR	0
Eric Ansley	RT	6'7, 309	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000	0
Chris Huhn	RG	6'5, 278	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8348	0
Sandley Jean-Felix	LT	6'5, 309	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8345	0
AJ Addison	LT	6'6, 288	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8700	0
Cody Collins	RG	6'1, 283	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7804	0
Nate Devers	C	6'3, 285	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8665
Jordan Dowrey	RG	6'1, 295	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7755
Fedrice Binot	LT	6'4, 282	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000
Levi Brown	OL	6'4, 275	Fr.	2 stars	0.8348

5. Either great or terrible at everything

Marshall's line was interesting: 14th in Adj. Line Yards, fourth in stuff rate (run stops at or behind the line), 10th in standard downs sack rate ... and 102nd in passing downs sack rate and 106th in power success rate (despite blocking for a big back). You will see disparities, especially in pass-blocking stats (where the mobility and play-making tendencies of a quarterback have as much to do with the rates as the line does), but that's an impressive difference.

In theory, the line could be a question mark. It loses one of two all-conference performers, not to mention two other full- or part-time starters. But returnees have combined for 61 career starts, and the wealth of young, high-ceiling options is a plus. You don't have to assume that every former three-star recruit is going to turn into an all-conference guy, but the odds are good that two good starting options will emerge from a deep pool.

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.72	6	IsoPPP+	119.9	22
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	38.9%	33	Succ. Rt. +	102.5	55
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	32.7	18	Off. FP+	103.0	30
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.0	30	Redzone S&P+	94.1	89
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	26.7		ACTUAL	22.0	-4.7

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	32	35	53	22
RUSHING	55	69	86	42
PASSING	24	19	16	18
Standard Downs		55	85	33
Passing Downs		6	6	8

Q1 Rk	68	1st Down Rk	34
Q2 Rk	28	2nd Down Rk	96
Q3 Rk	29	3rd Down Rk	12
Q4 Rk	106

6. Opponents did all they could not to pass

Marshall's run defense was decent -- not efficient but good at minimizing big plays. If you remained consistent, you could move the ball on the Herd on standard downs, stay ahead of the chains, and sometimes put points on the board, at least if you could get the ball in the end zone against a strong redzone defense.

The pass defense separated Marshall from some random bend-don't-break CUSA defense. Once you had to pass, you were dead meat. The Herd ranked 55th in Standard Downs S&P+ but sixth in Passing Downs S&P+, sacking the quarterback on one of every nine PD pass attempts and seemingly getting a hand on every pass the quarterback was able to throw.

(There is always an exception. WKU's Brandon Doughty completed 35 of 51 for 516 yards, eight scores, and two picks on November 28. His output represented 19 percent of Marshall's total passing yards allowed and 38 percent of touchdowns. He was the only quarterback to top a passer rating of 126 against Marshall, but he posted a 197.5. That's one hell of an exception.)

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	93.7	3.14	2.46	39.2%	68.8%	17.3%	136.8	5.6%	11.8%
Rank	91	92	11	68	75	97	13	45	10

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
James Rouse	DT					14	32.0	3.8%	10.5	2.5	0	0	3	0
Arnold Blackmon	DE					13	30.0	3.6%	15.5	8.0	0	3	4	0
Ra'Shawde Myers	DE					14	29.5	3.5%	5.0	3.5	0	0	1	0
Jarquez Samuel	NT	6'4, 290	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8160	14	22.0	2.6%	5.0	1.0	1	0	0	0
Steve Dillon	DT	6'4, 278	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8400	14	22.0	2.6%	2.5	1.5	0	0	0	0
Joe Massaquoi	DE	6'5, 254	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	NR	14	20.5	2.4%	3.0	2.0	0	1	1	0
Gary Thompson	DE	6'1, 258	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7700	9	14.5	1.7%	3.5	2.0	0	1	0	0
Armonze Daniel	DE	6'4, 244	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8631	14	14.0	1.7%	2.0	0.0	0	0	2	0
Ricardo Williams	DT	6'5, 260	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8725	13	11.5	1.4%	3.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Tomell One	NT	6'3, 279	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8148	11	10.0	1.2%	1.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Blake Keller	DE	6'2, 229	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8143
Ryan Bee	DE	6'7, 260	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7783
Jason Smith	DT	6'3, 285	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7593
Malik Thompson	DT	6'6, 275	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.7778
Damien Dozier	DE	6'4, 215	Fr.	2 stars	0.8296
Channing Hames	DE	6'5, 255	Fr.	3 stars	0.8429
Ty Tyler	DE	6'3, 231	Fr.	2 stars	0.8371

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Neville Hewitt	WLB					14	82.5	9.8%	13.0	5.0	1	3	0	0
Jermaine Holmes	MLB					14	72.5	8.6%	11.0	2.5	0	0	1	0
D.J. Hunter	SLB	6'0, 209	Sr.	4 stars (5.9)	NR	14	53.5	6.4%	10.0	5.5	0	0	0	0
Raheem Waiters	SLB					14	20.0	2.4%	3.5	1.0	0	0	0	1
Evan McKelvey	WLB	6'2, 231	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7593	5	17.0	2.0%	1.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Raheim Huskey	MLB	6'2, 218	So.	NR	NR	13	16.5	2.0%	2.5	2.0	0	1	1	0
Stefan Houston	WLB	6'3, 215	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8500	14	12.5	1.5%	1.0	0.0	0	0	1	0
Cortez Carter	LB					14	11.5	1.4%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Shawn Petty (Maryland)	MLB	6'0, 251	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7923
Chase Hancock	SLB	6'2, 206	RSFr.	NR	NR
Devontre'a Tyler	LB	6'2, 238	Jr.	3 stars	0.7900
Marquis Couch	WLB	6'2, 218	Fr.	3 stars	0.8086
Doyle Grimes	LB	6'2, 210	Fr.	2 stars	0.8160

7. Plenty of reason to run

Just as the Marshall offense might be as good or better at big plays while growing more inefficient, Marshall's pass defense could get even better (or at least remain as good) while its run defense forms a few more cracks.

Ends Arnold Blackmon and Ra'Shawde Myers are gone, as are big-play tackle James Rouse and, perhaps most important, run-stuffing linebackers Neville Hewitt and Jermaine Holmes, who combined for 16.5 non-sack tackles for loss.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Taj Letman	SS	6'2, 189	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8609	14	70.0	8.3%	0.5	0	4	4	0	0
Darryl Roberts	CB					14	60.5	7.2%	3.5	0	1	17	1	0
Corey Tindal	CB	5'9, 183	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7700	14	55.0	6.5%	2	0.5	1	12	0	0
A.J. Leggett	FS	6'0, 188	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9193	12	52.0	6.2%	1	0	4	4	1	0
Tiquan Lang	FS	5'8, 170	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7943	12	50.5	6.0%	2.5	0	1	7	0	0
Antavis Rowe	CB	5'10, 160	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000	12	17.5	2.1%	1	0	0	1	0	0
Rodney Allen	CB	5'11, 180	So.	NR	NR	14	8.0	1.0%	0	0	0	2	0	0
Keith Baxter	CB	6'0, 195	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8109	12	7.5	0.9%	0	0	0	2	0	0
Cody Carter	FS	5'10, 177	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	NR	13	6.5	0.8%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Kendall Gant	SS	6'3, 199	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8995	7	5.5	0.7%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Michael Johnson	CB	5'9, 166	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8672
Chocolate Wilson	CB	5'10, 169	So.	3 stars	0.8538
Chris Williams-Hall	CB	6'0, 190	Fr.	NR	NR
Von Davis	S	6'0, 175	Fr.	3 stars	0.8550
Roosevelt Lawrence	DB	5'10, 159	Fr.	3 stars	0.8335
Antonio Howard	CB	5'10, 163	Fr.	3 stars	0.8209

8. Still nasty

Cornerback Darryl Roberts defensed 18 passes and recorded 3.5 tackles for loss last year, and I'm almost ignoring that he's gone. That's how impressive the rest of the secondary is and should be.

Safeties Taj Letman, A.J. Leggett, and Tiquan Lang (four tackles for loss, nine interceptions, 15 break-ups) are back. So is corner Corey Tindal (13 PDs, two TFLs). Plus, sophomores Antavis Rowe and Rodney Allen got their feet wet in garbage time, and a pool of three-star youngsters like sophomore Kendall Gant and Chocolate Wilson and freshmen Von Davis, Roosevelt Lawrence, and Antonio Howard should produce one early difference-maker.

Losing Roberts means a regression is possible ... but not likely. The biggest threat to the pass defense isn't in this unit at all -- it's in what happens if the pass rush regresses too much.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Tyler Williams	6'0, 200	Sr.	42	44.1	7	11	10	50.0%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Kaare Vedvik	6'4, 200	So.	98	61.9	45	8	45.9%
Nick Smith	5'10, 168	So.	12	61.3	2	0	16.7%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Justin Haig			82-82	14-18	77.8%	3-3	100.0%
Nick Smith	5'10, 168	So.	1-1	0-0	N/A	0-0	N/A

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Deandre Reaves	KR	5'10, 180	Sr.	32	29.1	1
Remi Watson	KR	5'11, 196	Sr.	6	15.8	0
Tommy Shuler	PR			24	9.5	0
Hyleck Foster	PR	5'10, 191	So.	4	6.0	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams F/+	10
Field Goal Efficiency	69
Punt Return Efficiency	14
Kick Return Efficiency	2
Punt Efficiency	93
Kickoff Efficiency	48
Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency	39

9. Don't kick it to Deandre

Marshall was explosive on offense and destroyed the pass on defense, and that was enough to dominate most of the time. With a strong special teams unit, however, the Herd were on another level entirely for a while.

Punting was both mediocre and rare, kickoffs and place-kicking were decent (one area where occasional offensive inefficiency could be noticed: Justin Haig was asked to kick 21 field goals last year; that's too many). But returns were spectacular. Tommy Shuler was an excellent punt returner, and Deandre Reaves was a spectacular kick returner. Haig and Shuler are gone, which could spark regression here, but the Herd still have Reaves.

2015 Schedule & Projection Factors

2015 Schedule
Date	Opponent	2014 F/+ Rk
6-Sep	Purdue	84
12-Sep	at Ohio	106
19-Sep	Norfolk State	NR
26-Sep	at Kent State	107
3-Oct	Old Dominion	108
9-Oct	Southern Miss	110
17-Oct	at Florida Atlantic	100
24-Oct	North Texas	125
31-Oct	Charlotte	NR
7-Nov	at Middle Tennessee	87
14-Nov	Florida International	96
28-Nov	at Western Kentucky	50

Five-Year F/+ Rk	-1.7% (61)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	72 / 72
2014 TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin*	-2 / 6.8
2014 TO Luck/Game	-3.1
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	11 (6, 5)
2014 Second-order wins (difference)	12.5 (0.5)

10. Under 10 wins would be a shock

Marshall is still going to be more athletic than its competition on what is, yes, another pretty weak slate. A Purdue-Ohio-Kent State non-conference slate would have been pretty challenging in 2012, when all three went bowling, but none of those were top-80 teams in 2014. In fact, only one 2015 opponent was.

Again, that's only so much Marshall's fault -- at some point between 2011-13, Purdue, Ohio, Kent State, Southern Miss, North Texas, and FIU were all between solid and downright good -- but the Herd should be able to take advantage again.

This isn't a Playoff contender, but the Herd boast as many known play-makers as anybody in the conference, and even the glaring holes have three-star candidates for replacement. The strengths (pass defense, big plays on offense) will be as strong, but the weaknesses (run defense, offensive efficiency) will probably be weaker, which will make the Herd an awfully volatile team, one that will probably suffer an upset at some point.

And if the Herd decide to fall into a late-season funk again, then a November slate that features trips to both MTSU and WKU could be more than tricky.

Still, it would be surprising if this team didn't win 10-plus games for the third straight year. It took a while for Doc Holliday's tricked-out machine to start rolling, but there's just too much potential here for the Herd to fall far.