Iowa football will be very different than usual in 2015 (just kidding)

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. It's not that bad ...

It could be much, much worse.

Since peaking at 11-2 and seventh in the polls in 2009, Iowa under Kirk Ferentz has settled into a groove that is more satisfactory than satisfying.

The Hawkeyes have been to four bowls in five years (with a 4-8 dud in the middle), winning either seven or eight games alongside each. They haven't been ranked since late in 2010, no, and despite the Big Ten having approximately 17 January 1 bowls, they have only once played on January 1 in this span. They beat three 10- or 11-win teams in 2010-11 but have only done so once since (and that was NIU).

Things aren't wonderful in Iowa City. But they aren't as bad as we tend to make them seem. They're better than what Ferentz inherited in 1999, for one. They're better than what predecessor Hayden Fry inherited, too.

Before Fry set the bar, and before Ferentz did a decent job of raising it, Iowa was a wasteland for two decades. In a conference that features downside -- each of the first five Big Ten teams previewed so far has spent at least one season ranked below 70th in the F/+ rankings, and four have spent time below 80th -- Iowa's floor seems higher. The Hawkeyes have been in the 60s twice and in the top 50 three times since 2010. Plus, every time we think this is it for Ferentz, that there's no coming back, he responds by putting a much-improved team on the field.

A free fall, this is not. But still ...

It's not hard to see why Iowa fans are frustrated. When the Hawkeyes fail, they fail in the same fashion, over and over. They have produced a top-40 offense (in terms of Off. S&P+) once since 2006 and haven't ranked in the top 60 since 2010. Their leading rusher has averaged better than five yards per carry once since Shonn Greene left, and that was only barely (5.1 in 2012). And when Ferentz felt the need to liven up the unit, he chose the most uninspiring candidate imaginable in former Texas O.C. Greg Davis. The offense bottomed out the next year before rebounding slightly.

Iowa's "run the ball and play good defense" ways have been hampered by an inability to run the ball, but the defense hasn't helped. The Hawkeyes managed one top-30 defense (in Def. S&P+) in four years. The 2013 unit broke through to 10th with an experienced cast, then collapsed to 67th.

2014 was a missed opportunity; coming off of a bounce-back season, the Hawkeyes faced not a single team that ranked better than 24th in F/+, and the only two regular-season opponents that ranked better than 37th came to Iowa City. But they still barely finished above .500, ceding major ground to Minnesota. A top-30 team would have won 11 games or more. Iowa was 63rd, the third-worst showing of the last decade.

Ferentz set a high bar in winning nine or more games five times and registering four top-10 finishes between 2002 and '09. There has been little reason to hope another top-10 surge is possible, but Iowa still averaged 67,512 in home attendance last year. There's little reason for the athletic director to seek change. Yet.

2014 Schedule & Results

Record: 7-6 | Adj. Record: 7-6 | Final F/+ Rk: 63
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Adj. Scoring Margin	Win Expectancy
30-Aug	Northern Iowa	NR	31-23	W	29%	-13.0	66%
6-Sep	Ball State	91	17-13	W	85%	24.6	99%
13-Sep	Iowa State	92	17-20	L	26%	-15.3	46%
20-Sep	at Pittsburgh	43	24-20	W	65%	8.8	63%
27-Sep	at Purdue	84	24-10	W	80%	19.9	99%
11-Oct	Indiana	88	45-29	W	55%	3.0	75%
18-Oct	at Maryland	62	31-38	L	54%	2.1	65%
1-Nov	Northwestern	71	48-7	W	95%	38.9	100%
8-Nov	at Minnesota	37	14-51	L	2%	-46.0	0%
15-Nov	at Illinois	78	30-14	W	86%	25.2	100%
22-Nov	Wisconsin	25	24-26	L	45%	-2.8	16%
28-Nov	Nebraska	30	34-37	L	31%	-11.7	7%
2-Jan	vs. Tennessee	24	28-45	L	2%	-46.0	0%

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	27.9	71	28.6	67
Points Per Game	28.2	71	25.6	52

2. Withering away

Iowa had a decent passing game, run defense, and 2014 start. A home dud against Iowa State didn't have anybody spizzed up about a great year, but the Hawkeyes still started 6-2, handling Northwestern and Purdue with ease and pulling off a fun comeback at Pitt.

They weren't taking full advantage of a weak schedule, but they were looking at another nine-win season and top-50 final ranking. And then the last five games happened.

• Average Percentile Performance (first 8 games): 61% (record: 6-2)
• Average Percentile Performance (last 5 games): 33% (record: 1-4)

Over the final five, Iowa got shoved around, allowing at least 5.9 yards per play in four games and giving up at least 37 points in three. A thin defense -- five linemen, five linebackers, and four defensive backs took most of the snaps -- couldn't maintain its edge.

The offense had exciting moments against Illinois and Wisconsin (combined: 7.3 yards per play) but came up empty against Minnesota, Nebraska, and (when it mattered) Tennessee.

After playing at a top-50 level for eight games, Iowa barely played top-90 ball thereafter.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.84	70	IsoPPP+	93.8	81
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	40.1%	87	Succ. Rt. +	96.1	82
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	30.5	77	Def. FP+	103.0	33
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.5	59	Redzone S&P+	95.3	78
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	22.1		ACTUAL	22	-0.1

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	66	86	86	81
RUSHING	63	109	106	106
PASSING	56	61	54	60
Standard Downs		98	96	99
Passing Downs		45	55	44

Q1 Rk	91	1st Down Rk	78
Q2 Rk	77	2nd Down Rk	80
Q3 Rk	87	3rd Down Rk	97
Q4 Rk	32

3. Figure out what you're good at

Greg Davis took some hints. With an awful run game and a decent passing game, Iowa threw more normal. After rushing 68 percent of the time on standard downs and 35 percent on passing downs in 2013, those numbers fell to 61 and 31. Strangely, the Hawkeyes threw quite a bit when up big and ran quite a bit when down big, but this was still more pass-happy than an Iowa offense tends to be.

So what does that mean moving forward? Iowa has suffered from attrition issues at the skill positions, and while there appears to be talent, exactly what is Ferentz intending to do (or let Davis do)?

There is a belief, real or perceived, that Ferentz is not interested in playing the most talented players, opting for hard-working strength program guys and intangibles. It was a hypothesis reinforced by the Rudock/Beathard debate last year, the continued use of Mark Weisman at running back, and tine increasingly heavy use of walk-ons at important positions.

Iowa could potentially start six walk-ons, an unsustainable amount of non-scholarship talent on a Big Ten roster, especially when those walk-ons are at left tackle and weakside linebacker. For a rebuilding program, useful walk-ons are a key way of protecting young scholarship talent. For a program with a 16-year head coach, each walk-on represents a recruiting and/or development failure. In Iowa's case, many of those are the result of players transferring out and leaving a hole.

Continuous use of Weisman really did confuse me. At 230-plus pounds, Weisman should have been a nice efficiency back, but his efficiency numbers were awful, and he didn't make up for it with explosiveness. He had two good games in 2014 (he had 212 yards at 6.4 yards per carry against Maryland and Illinois) and otherwise averaged 3.3 yards per carry.

Of course, there weren't superior candidates. Jordan Canzeri averaged 4.2 yards per carry until erupting for 120 yards in the bowl game. Akrum Wadley showed potential against Northwestern and Minnesota (24 carries, 174 yards) but fumbled twice in 33 total carries and had just nine rushes for 12 yards in the final four games. Jonathan Parker had outstanding averages but somehow managed to fumble three times in 16 carries.

Iowa would be smart to lean on the pass again, but with turnover atop the depth chart, it will be interesting to see if Ferentz leans more on players with high ceilings or those with high floors. Assume the latter.

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.
Jake Rudock					213	345	2436	16	5	61.7%	18	5.0%	6.4
C.J. Beathard	6'2, 209	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8359	52	92	645	5	2	56.5%	4	4.2%	6.4
Tyler Wiegers	6'4, 222	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8727
Ryan Boyle	6'2, 215	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8477
Drew Cook	6'5, 220	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8313

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Mark Weisman	RB					213	812	16	3.8	2.9	32.9%	2	1
Jordan Canzeri	RB	5'9, 192	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7667	102	494	0	4.8	5.3	32.4%	0	0
Jake Rudock	QB					49	286	3	5.8	3.2	59.2%	5	3
Akrum Wadley	RB	5'11, 185	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7683	33	186	1	5.6	5.0	45.5%	2	2
Damon Bullock	RB					27	74	0	2.7	2.0	22.2%	0	0
C.J. Beathard	QB	6'2, 209	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8359	24	182	0	7.6	8.2	45.8%	1	1
Jonathan Parker	RB	5'8, 185	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7852	16	141	1	8.8	15.7	37.5%	3	2
LeShun Daniels, Jr.	RB	6'0, 225	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8093	15	49	1	3.3	2.1	46.7%	0	0
Derrick Mitchell, Jr.	RB	6'1, 212	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8398
C.J. Hilliard	RB	5'10, 195	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8488

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
Kevonte Martin-Manley	WR					89	52	521	58.4%	20.9%	64.0%	5.9	-120	5.9	60.4
Tevaun Smith	SE	6'2, 205	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8289	70	43	607	61.4%	16.4%	50.0%	8.7	83	8.5	70.4
Jake Duzey	TE	6'4, 248	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8479	54	36	392	66.7%	12.7%	53.7%	7.3	-40	7.5	45.5
Damon Bullock	RB					42	32	265	76.2%	9.9%	38.1%	6.3	-110	6.4	30.7
Ray Hamilton	TE					35	18	175	51.4%	8.2%	60.0%	5.0	-53	5.0	20.3
Damond Powell	WR					32	19	317	59.4%	7.5%	43.8%	9.9	84	10.7	36.8
Matt VandeBerg	WR	6'1, 185	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7848	25	14	256	56.0%	5.9%	60.0%	10.2	82	10.0	29.7
Jacob Hillyer	SE	6'4, 212	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8323	21	11	105	52.4%	4.9%	52.4%	5.0	-34	4.8	12.2
Jordan Canzeri	RB	5'9, 192	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7667	11	9	123	81.8%	2.6%	45.5%	11.2	19	12.6	14.3
Derrick Willies	WR					7	4	71	57.1%	1.6%	85.7%	10.1	22	9.1	8.2
Macon Plewa	FB	6'2, 244	Sr.	NR	NR	7	7	38	100.0%	1.6%	71.4%	5.4	-41	5.1	4.4
John Kenny	FB					7	4	27	57.1%	1.6%	57.1%	3.9	-22	3.8	3.1
Andrew Stone	WR	5'11, 175	Sr.	NR	NR	4	3	48	75.0%	0.9%	75.0%	12.0	13	14.8	5.6
Henry Krieger Coble	TE	6'4, 250	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8529	4	3	28	75.0%	0.9%	50.0%	7.0	-7	7.1	3.2
George Kittle	TE	6'0, 225	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8107
Jay Scheel	WR	6'1, 195	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8833
Jon Wisnieski	TE	6'5, 247	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8722
Jerminic Smith	WR	6'1, 180	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8274

4. A passing game with potential

Jake Rudock wasn't that bad. He played in 12 games and produced a passer rating of at least 128 in seven. He was terrible against Minnesota and Tennessee, but everybody was terrible in those games. He completed 62 percent of his passes, he had a solid 1.4 percent interception rate, and he averaged the same yards per pass attempt (6.4) as backup C.J. Beathard.

But it has long been assumed by Iowa fans that Beathard's ceiling is higher. And with an offense that needed a boost, it became a source of frustration that Iowa trotted out the high-floor guy.

That's no longer a concern. Rudock transferred to Michigan. And Beathard better not get hurt because it's all freshmen and redshirt freshmen after him. Granted, RSFr. Tyler Wiegers was a four-star and could have plenty of upside, but this is Beathard's offense now.

In theory, he's got some nice weapons. The top two returning wideouts, Tevaun Smith and Matt VandeBerg, were the two best on a per-target basis, Canzeri is solid out of the backfield, and in theory, Jake Duzey and Jacob Hillyer could provide some big efficiency targets. The passing game seems to be in infinitely better shape than the run, even if it turns out that Beathard is more all-or-nothing than Ferentz would prefer (and even if the loss of his flowing locks saps his power).

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	93.8	2.7	3.69	37.1%	69.2%	17.7%	111.6	6.3%	2.8%
Rank	97	98	27	87	45	44	51	95	4

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Brandon Scherff	LT					36	Outland Trophy; Unanimous All-American, 2014 1st All-Big Ten
Austin Blythe	C	6'3, 290	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8987	35	2014 2nd All-Big Ten
Jordan Walsh	RG	6'4, 290	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9325	23
Andrew Donnal	RT					16
Sean Welsh	LG	6'3, 288	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8575	10
Tommy Gaul	C					7
Eric Simmons	C	6'2, 295	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8307	0
Mitch Keppy	RG	6'5, 300	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8372	0
Cole Croston	LT	6'5, 295	Jr.	NR	NR	0
Ike Boettger	RT	6'6, 300	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8097	0
Boone Myers	LT	6'5, 300	So.	NR	NR	0
Keegan Render	RT	6'4, 305	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8282
Lucas LeGrand	OL	6'5, 280	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8489
Ross Reynolds	LG	6'4, 300	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7906
James Daniels	OL	6'4, 290	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8909
Landan Paulsen	OL	6'5, 290	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8755
Levi Paulsen	OL	6'5, 290	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8745
Jacob Newborg	OL	6'3, 280	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8569
Brett Weechter	OL	6'5, 275	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8291

5. Bad line stats with a top-five draft pick

Iowa had the Outland Trophy winner at left tackle, a fourth-round draft pick at right tackle, and a second-team all-conference performer at center. Iowa ranked 97th in Adj. Line Yards.

Rarely will you see something that incongruous. This tells you quite a bit about the quality of the running backs -- in terms of unadjusted stats, Iowa was top-50 in stuff rate (avoiding run stops behind the line) and power success rate but was just 87th in opportunity rate (carries of at least five yards), and if you wanted to pin the line's failings on the backs, that's a good place to start.

If Canzeri, Leshun Daniels Jr., and the fumble-prone sophomores are able to get upfield faster, that will help the line out. Of course, it might need the help: two tackles, including all-world first-rounder Brandon Scherff, are gone.

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.84	61	IsoPPP+	97.8	72
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	40.2%	54	Succ. Rt. +	109.7	32
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	29.0	93	Off. FP+	100.0	65
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.5	81	Redzone S&P+	108.3	38
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	15.8		ACTUAL	16.0	+0.2

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	22	60	51	72
RUSHING	66	45	42	54
PASSING	7	89	67	100
Standard Downs		69	58	78
Passing Downs		55	46	65

Q1 Rk	85	1st Down Rk	52
Q2 Rk	91	2nd Down Rk	68
Q3 Rk	39	3rd Down Rk	75
Q4 Rk	31

6. An Iowa defense

With a coordinator named Parker, Iowa defended the run and attacked the quarterback on passing downs. This is what we've come to expect.

First, it was otherworldly coordinator Norm Parker, then Phil Parker (unrelated) took it from there. The philosophy has remained, but the talent and experience levels produce wildly differing results.

After producing its best defense in four years in 2013, Iowa was forced to replace all three linebackers and half of its secondary, and the reconfigured defense couldn't keep up down the stretch.

Ferentz did what he always does: employ a tiny rotation, keeping the starters on the field. That tends to mean good things when the experience levels are up to par, and it ensures the high floor, but it also tends to ensure a drop-off when the defense is too green. And in 2014, it also meant diminishing returns in November.

With freshmen and sophomores having turned into sophomores and juniors in the back seven, one can expect an improved pass defense, but there might be concerns up front, where three-fifths of the rotation and both starting tackles need to be replaced.

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	105.7	2.82	3.52	38.7%	64.4%	19.4%	108.8	4.3%	10.1%
Rank	41	48	82	61	46	64	46	73	22

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Louis Trinca-Pasat	DT					13	49.0	7.5%	11.5	6.5	0	3	0	0
Drew Ott	DE	6'4, 272	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8266	13	41.5	6.4%	12.0	7.5	1	2	1	0
Nate Meier	DE	6'2, 252	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7585	13	37.5	5.7%	6.0	1.5	0	0	0	0
Carl Davis	DT					13	25.0	3.8%	9.0	2.0	0	0	0	0
Mike Hardy	DE					13	12.0	1.8%	3.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jaleel Johnson	DT	6'4, 310	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9184	13	6.5	1.0%	2.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Melvin Spears	DE	6'2, 268	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8495	4	2.5	0.4%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Nathan Bazata	DT	6'2, 284	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8119	9	2.0	0.3%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Darian Cooper	DT	6'2, 282	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8983
Faith Ekakitie	DT	6'3, 290	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9197
Kyle Terlouw	DT	6'4, 288	Jr.	NR	NR
Brant Gressel	DT	6'2, 280	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8523
Matt Nelson	DE	6'8, 270	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8619
Parker Hesse	DE	6'3, 240	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8256
Terrence Harris	DE	6'3, 252	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7893
Brady Reiff	DE	6'4, 235	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8436
Michael Slater	DE	6'2, 265	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8345
Anthony Nelson	DE	6'6, 220	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8337

7. Wanted: tackles

Louis Trinca-Pasat and Carl Davis combined for 20.5 tackles for loss and 8.5 sacks, strong disruption stats for a defense that needed them. The return of end Drew Ott should ensure a pass-rushing presence, but tackles appeared to be the key to Iowa's decent run defense.

Trinca-Pasat and Davis provided cover for the two freshman linebackers behind them, and now the training wheels are off for Josey Jewell and Bo Bower, not to mention another sophomore, Ben Niemann, who played sparingly.

There is upside among the replacements in the middle. Juniors Jaleel Johnson and Faith Ekakitie are former four-star recruits, and Johnson showed hints of potential in reserve play. Sophomore Nathan Bazata finished the spring on the first string, and whatever the tackles produce in 2015, they'll probably produce even more in 2016.

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Quinton Alston	MLB					13	69.5	10.6%	6.0	3.5	0	5	2	0
Josey Jewell	MLB	6'2, 230	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7844	11	36.5	5.6%	1.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Bo Bower	WLB	6'1, 228	So.	2 stars (5.3)	NR	13	28.0	4.3%	5.5	1.0	2	2	0	0
Reggie Spearman	WLB					11	25.5	3.9%	2.0	1.0	0	3	0	0
Travis Perry	MLB	6'3, 234	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7400	10	13.5	2.1%	1.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Ben Niemann	OLB	6'3, 225	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7985	13	7.0	1.1%	1.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Cole Fisher	OLB	6'2, 236	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8467	13	5.0	0.8%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Aaron Mends	WLB	6'0, 212	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8216
Jameer Outsey	LB	6'3, 235	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8221
Angelo Garbutt	LB	6'2, 210	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8404
Jack Hockaday	LB	6'1, 215	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8332

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
John Lowdermilk	SS					13	80.5	12.3%	3	0	3	3	2	0
Jordan Lomax	FS	5'10, 205	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8504	13	68.0	10.4%	1	0	1	6	1	0
Desmond King	CB	5'11, 200	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8330	13	53.0	8.1%	2	0	3	5	0	0
Greg Mabin	CB	6'2, 200	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8224	13	44.0	6.7%	2	0	1	5	0	0
Maurice Fleming	CB	6'0, 205	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8768	11	9.5	1.5%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Anthony Gair	FS	6'2, 210	Jr.	NR	0.8465	13	7.0	1.1%	0	0	1	0	0	0
Sean Draper	CB	6'0, 190	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8469	12	6.5	1.0%	0	0	1	0	0	0
Miles Taylor	SS	6'0, 195	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8377	13	6.0	0.9%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Malik Rucker	DB					6	4.0	0.6%	0.5	0	0	0	0	0
Solomon Warfield	DB	6'0, 180	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8519
Marcel Joly	DB	5'11, 185	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8315
Jalen Embry	DB	6'0, 184	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8400
Omar Truitt	DB	5'11, 185	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8489
Brandon Snyder	SS	6'1, 210	RSFr.	NR	NR

8. Plenty to like about the secondary

Trinca-Pasat was also a unique pass rushing threat from the tackle position. He and Drew Ott were solid enough at pressuring the quarterback that Parker didn't have to blitz much to create passing downs advantages. And each of the four starters in the defensive backfield -- i.e., all four guys who actually played -- had between one and three tackles for loss and between six and eight passes defensed.

Of course, playing a big load of bad passing offenses made the numbers look better. The pass rush was decent, and efficiency wasn't an issue, but while Iowa only allowed 34 passes of 20-plus yards (27th in the country), their opponent-adjusted big-play prevention ratings (IsoPPP+) were poor.

This wasn't a spectacular pass defense, but it had potential. And with Ott and three-quarters of the secondary returning, one can assume a slightly improved level. Someone like sophomore Miles Taylor or junior Anthony Gair will have to replace the production of leading tackler John Lowdermilk, but that's doable. Trinca-Pasat might be the trickiest player to replace.

The success of this defense could come down to the backbone.

In general, linebackers are the easiest players to replace on the defense. Or at least, losing your linebackers has less of a statistical impact than losing starters on the line or in the secondary. But Iowa's linebackers were as disruptive as almost any in the country in 2013; the three starters, all seniors, combined for 35.5 tackles for loss, 11.5 sacks, six interceptions, six break-ups, and six forced fumbles.

In 2014, five Iowa linebackers combined for 16 TFLs, 7.5 sacks, two picks, 10 PBUs, and two FFs. Those missing plays made the biggest difference in Iowa's decline. In theory, Iowa could return both starting DTs, all three starting LBs, and one of two safeties in 2016, creating a strong backbone for another good D. But it's hard to get a read on what this still-young spine might produce this fall.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Dillon Kidd	6'2, 215	Sr.	46	38.5	1	19	12	67.4%
Connor Kornbrath	6'6, 242	Sr.	18	37.4	2	6	7	72.2%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Marshall Koehn	6'0, 200	Sr.	68	59.5	43	0	63.2%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Marshall Koehn	6'0, 200	Sr.	38-38	8-11	72.7%	4-5	80.0%
Mick Ellis	5'10, 180	So.	7-7	0-1	0.0%	0-0	N/A

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Jonathan Parker	KR	5'8, 185	So.	24	22.1	0
Jordan Canzeri	KR	5'9, 192	Sr.	7	19.3	0
Matt VandeBerg	PR	6'1, 185	Jr.	12	6.8	0
Riley McCarron	PR	5'9, 186	Jr.	8	1.6	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams F/+	104
Field Goal Efficiency	75
Punt Return Efficiency	44
Kick Return Efficiency	104
Punt Efficiency	117
Kickoff Efficiency	54
Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency	81

9. Not enough on special teams

Iowa's special teams unit had some strengths: Marshall Koehn has a big leg, and Matt VandeBerg was able to consistently pick up yards on punt returns.

But punt coverage was a nightmare (yards per return allowed: 15.1, 123rd in the country and worst even in the returns-happy Big Ten), and Iowa was just about the only team in the conference not to have a dynamite kick returner. Koehn was a bit scatter-shot inside of 40 yards, but he's fine. The field position game needed a bit more work.

2015 Schedule & Projection Factors

2015 Schedule
Date	Opponent	2014 S&P+ Rk
5-Sep	Illinois State	NR
12-Sep	at Iowa State	86
19-Sep	Pittsburgh	38
26-Sep	North Texas	125
3-Oct	at Wisconsin	25
10-Oct	Illinois	63
17-Oct	at Northwestern	62
31-Oct	Maryland	56
7-Nov	at Indiana	81
14-Nov	Minnesota	42
21-Nov	Purdue	74
27-Nov	at Nebraska	30

Five-Year F/+ Rk	11.4% (42)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	56 / 50
2014 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	-6 / -6.3
2014 TO Luck/Game	+0.1
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	12 (5, 7)
2014 Second-order wins (difference)	7.4 (-0.4)

10. A top-40 team could win nine games

Once again, Iowa's schedule is manageable, with only one projected top-25 team and seven projected 60th or worse. If Iowa doesn't improve one iota, the Hawkeyes will go to another bowl, their 13th in 15 years.

But if you're an Iowa fan, 2009 is getting further away in the rearview mirror, and you'd like to know that Ferentz is building toward something better eventually. There's little proof.

In 2013, we thought the end was nigh, and Ferentz responded by fielding a top-30 team. It's not inconceivable that the same thing could happen -- the passing game clicks, the run game isn't terrible, the run defense is stable, the pass defense improves.

But a) while top-30 could be possible, top-20 or better seems impossible, and b) the smart money isn't on such a rebound. By focusing on the floor more than the ceiling, Ferentz has created one of the more stable programs in the conference, one less capable of collapsing than at least half of the rest of the Big Ten.