As long as Rich Rod is in town, Arizona is a Pac-12 South contender

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. Arizona and the art of timely greatness

Computer rankings look at how frequently you're awesome. There are plenty of codas to that sentence: "... and how frequently you stink," or "... and against whom," for example. But since these types of ratings are designed to catch every play, every drive, and every game -- not just a head-to-head matchup, not just the handful of games you saw on TV -- they're going to come up with anti-social opinions.

For instance: Arizona was possibly the fourth-best team in the Pac-12 South last year. The F/+ ratings placed the Wildcats 28th, ahead of Colorado and No. 29 Utah and barely behind No. 27 Arizona State. Jeff Sagarin had them 37th, ESPN's FPI 25th. They showed plenty of upside but struggled to maintain it from week to week, and it cost them with the computers.

Arizona won the division, by the way. The Wildcats won 10 games for the first time since 1998 and went to a major bowl for the first time since 1993. They knocked off eventual Playoff finalist Oregon in Eugene, beat every regular season opponent not based in Los Angeles, reached as high as eighth in the polls, and finished in the Fiesta Bowl.

The Wildcats achieved rare heights in what was just Rich Rodriguez's third season, and they did so with extreme youth. They started a redshirt freshman at quarterback and were led in rushing by a true freshman. Their receiving corps and linebacking corps were littered with sophomores. And they won a division that featured teams ranked No. 12 in F/+ (10-3 UCLA), No. 16 (9-4 USC), and No. 27 (10-3 Arizona State).

How? By looking good at precisely the right time. They played four games at a 90th-percentile level or higher, and three were must-wins against Oregon, Utah, and Arizona State. They played poorly against iffier opponents like UTSA, California, and Washington (and going by the stats, they probably should have lost to both Cal* and UW), and two of their four losses were outright duds (UCLA, Oregon). That dragged their ratings down, but in the most important games, they put together their best performances.

* I guess you don't need stats to know that a game won by a Hail Mary is one you were lucky to win.

Their rivals couldn't say that. UCLA lost to Utah and Stanford, both at home. USC lost to Utah and suffered a complete meltdown in a dumb home loss to Arizona State. Arizona State suffered a stultifying loss to Oregon State and got its doors blown off at home by UCLA. Utah lost to Washington State and got destroyed by Arizona.

Four different South teams won big games and had opportunities to seize the crown, and three dropped the dagger. Arizona didn't. The stats can say what they want; the team that failed to falter made the Pac-12 title game.

So now what? Arizona faces rebuilds both on the offensive line and in the secondary, but the Wildcats are far more experienced elsewhere. They should have one of the conference's best run defenses and maybe the best attacking linebacker (Scooby Wright III) and safety (William Parks) in the country. And unless the offensive line implodes, they should be able to open up more of the playbook for a quarterback who was occasionally revelatory. They've got one of the most tantalizing backfields in the Pac-12, and they return three junior receivers who combined for 2,152 yards.

Arizona won't be the South favorite, and that makes sense when you look at what other schools return and when you reflect on last year's good fortune. But that's okay. Rodriguez is turning the Wildcats into a proven entity, a consistent top-30 program that could have quite a few more opportunities for title games and big bowls in the future.

2014 Schedule & Results

Record: 10-4 | Adj. Record: 11-3 | Final F/+ Rk: 28
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Adj. Scoring Margin	Win Expectancy
29-Aug	UNLV	118	58-13	W	93%	35.0	100%
4-Sep	at UTSA	109	26-23	W	54%	2.4	58%
13-Sep	Nevada	64	35-28	W	84%	23.7	91%
20-Sep	California	65	49-45	W	49%	-0.8	33%
2-Oct	at Oregon	3	31-24	W	91%	30.9	72%
11-Oct	USC	16	26-28	L	57%	3.9	20%
25-Oct	at Washington State	77	59-37	W	85%	24.0	97%
1-Nov	at UCLA	12	7-17	L	22%	-18.0	0%
8-Nov	Colorado	83	38-20	W	69%	11.6	83%
15-Nov	Washington	58	27-26	W	58%	4.6	37%
22-Nov	at Utah	29	42-10	W	96%	40.2	99%
28-Nov	Arizona State	27	42-35	W	91%	32.0	92%
5-Dec	vs. Oregon	3	13-51	L	16%	-23.3	0%
31-Dec	vs. Boise State	21	30-38	L	60%	5.8	16%

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	34.8	33	25.3	48
Points Per Game	34.5	29	28.2	80

2. Never the same team

Want to see what a young team looks like in chart form? Check out the percentile graph above. If Rodgriguez sprouted a few gray hairs last fall, you couldn't blame him. Lou Holtz's famous "you never have the same team twice in a row" truism was rarely more true than this.

Arizona was great against UNLV and mediocre against UTSA. Very good against Nevada and iffy against Cal. Tremendous against Oregon and middle-of-the-road against USC. Just fine against Wazzu and awful against UCLA.

The Wildcats established a higher baseline down the stretch, with decent performances against Colorado and Washington and awesome ones against Utah and ASU, but they followed that up with a just-happy-to-be-there dud against Oregon and a performance against Boise State that was decent but not good enough.

Youth doesn't necessarily affect upside, but it can obliterate consistency.

Moving forward, it's hard to know what to think. I'm not too worried about the offensive line, both because there are still a lot of juniors and seniors, and last year's line didn't set a high bar. But the secondary had three seasoned safeties leading the way for a unit that was better at big-play prevention than anything else. Expect the same level of aggression and playmaking, but more frequent slip-ups could result in similar inconsistency.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.88	48	IsoPPP+	101.9	64
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	40.4%	79	Succ. Rt. +	96.1	81
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	26.6	5	Def. FP+	108.1	4
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.3	77	Redzone S&P+	97.5	71
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	18.6		ACTUAL	18	-0.6

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	26	65	75	64
RUSHING	47	64	68	54
PASSING	22	69	80	66
Standard Downs		65	79	60
Passing Downs		74	69	82

Q1 Rk	55	1st Down Rk	54
Q2 Rk	87	2nd Down Rk	62
Q3 Rk	38	3rd Down Rk	64
Q4 Rk	86

3. Neither good nor bad at anything

In Monday's Utah preview, I noted how remarkably mediocre the Utes' offensive ratings were.

You will never see more mediocre stats than Utah's above. The Utes ranked between 60th and 79th in almost every category, with basically one strength (field position created) and one weakness (fade in the second and fourth quarters). That's incredible.

Arizona had almost exactly the same range, right down to the strengths (field position) and weaknesses (fading in games). It's almost eery.

Of course, the similarities end. Arizona operated at a far more breakneck pace, spread opponents out more, and passed to set up the run instead of the opposite. And while Utah was led mostly by juniors and a few seniors, Arizona was super-young.

As with Utah, full-season averages meant only so much with Arizona and quarterback Anu Solomon. Solomon's best performances were incredible, and his worst were dreadful, and it was hard to know which was coming. Solomon produced a 186.1 passer rating in the division decider against Arizona State and an 85.5 against Washington. He had a 146.5 in his first game against Oregon, and a 73.8 in his second. He carried the Arizona offense for drives at a time, and the threw a few careless picks and took too many sacks, especially on passing downs and especially against Boise State (eight in 58 attempts).

Arizona's iffy efficiency numbers screamed, "Young quarterback," but the Wildcats won 10 games despite growing pains and despite asking Solomon to shoulder a significant load (73 passes against Cal, 72 against USC, 49 against Boise State, 48 against UCLA).

And now, in theory, the growing pains could pay off.

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.
Anu Solomon	6'2, 205	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8716	313	540	3793	28	9	58.0%	36	6.3%	6.1
Jesse Scroggins III					7	18	152	1	1	38.9%	2	10.0%	7.0
Jerrard Randall	6'1, 185	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.9158	0	3	0	0	0	0.0%	0	0.0%	0.0
Brandon Dawkins	6'3, 195	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8647

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Nick Wilson	RB	5'10, 199	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9039	236	1375	16	5.8	8.3	31.4%	1	1
Terris Jones-Grigsby	RB					122	567	3	4.6	4.5	36.1%	3	2
Anu Solomon	QB	6'2, 205	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8716	101	543	2	5.4	5.0	42.6%	2	1
Jared Baker	RB	5'8, 192	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8690	25	99	2	4.0	1.9	40.0%	1	1
Jerrard Randall	QB	6'1, 185	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.9158	15	104	1	6.9	9.0	40.0%	0	0
Jesse Scroggins III	QB					8	53	0	6.6	3.3	62.5%	2	1
Zach Green	RB	5'10, 220	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8463	7	19	0	2.7	1.5	14.3%	0	0
Jonathan Haden	RB	5'6, 181	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8682
Orlando Bradford	RB	5'9, 195	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8454

4. Just get them in the open field

As a true freshman, Nick Wilson was one of the nation's most explosive backs; of the 26 FBS backs who carried more than 200 times, Wilson average of 8.3 highlight yards per opportunity ranked third behind only Indiana's Tevin Coleman and Wisconsin's Melvin Gordon. And Solomon was one of only 20 quarterbacks to average 5 with at least 100 non-sack carries.

Meanwhile, receiver Cayleb Jones averaged 14 yards per catch over five receptions per game, darty slot receiver Samajie Grant averaged 16 per catch over 3.5, and Trey Griffey averaged 13.1 over 2.2.

There was all sorts of potential explosiveness. All Arizona needed to do was get these guys in the open field. Easier said than done.

Jones' catch rate was a mediocre 57 percent, and of the eight players targeted at least 20 times, only half were over 60 percent. Hill's 31 percent opportunity rate (percentage of carries gaining at least five yards) was worse than all but two backs (Oklahoma State's Desmond Roland, BC's Jon Hilliman) in that 26-man sample.

Run or pass, efficiency was the issue. Part of that can perhaps be pinned on the line, but more can probably be ascribed to youth. If experience leads to better consistency (and the line doesn't crater), this offense could be something.

Jones, a former Texas blue-chipper, was able to shoulder a heavy load, albeit with diminishing returns: 29 catches for 475 yards and six scores in the first four games, 34 for 356 and two in the next eight. Grant thrived late, catching 18 passes for 347 yards and four touchdowns in the final four regular season games. And while Wilson was mostly ineffective in two postseason games (32 carries, 112 yards), he was brilliant with the division title on the line; against ASU and Utah, he carried 44 times for 396 yards and six touchdowns.

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
Cayleb Jones	WR	6'3, 215	Jr.	4 stars (6.0)	0.9657	130	74	1029	56.9%	25.0%	57.7%	7.9	113	7.9	105.2
Austin Hill	WR					77	48	630	62.3%	14.8%	53.2%	8.2	46	8.2	64.4
Samajie Grant	SLOT	5'9, 177	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8547	60	45	718	75.0%	11.5%	56.7%	12.0	189	12.0	73.4
DaVonte' Neal	SLOT					55	27	214	49.1%	10.6%	56.4%	3.9	-132	3.9	21.9
Trey Griffey	WR	6'3, 195	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8534	46	31	405	67.4%	8.8%	56.5%	8.8	34	8.9	41.4
Nate Phillips	WR	5'7, 180	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8166	42	25	272	59.5%	8.1%	59.5%	6.5	-35	6.4	27.8
David Richards	WR	6'4, 213	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8519	41	23	211	56.1%	7.9%	51.2%	5.1	-75	5.3	21.6
Tyrell Johnson	SLOT	5'7, 160	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8591	25	14	120	56.0%	4.8%	80.0%	4.8	-54	4.4	12.3
Terris Jones-Grigsby	RB					16	15	187	93.8%	3.1%	50.0%	11.7	17	11.3	19.1
Nick Wilson	RB	5'10, 199	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9039	16	12	90	75.0%	3.1%	31.3%	5.6	-51	5.6	9.2
Josh Kern	TE	6'5, 229	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8481
Trevor Wood	TE	6'5, 251	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8590
Abraham Mendivil	WR	6'1, 194	So.	NR	NR
Jonathan Haden	SLOT	5'6, 181	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8682
Tony Ellison	WR	5'11, 176	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8316
Matt Morin	TE	6'2, 239	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8156
Shun Brown	WR	5'10, 165	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8562
Cedric Peterson	WR	6'0, 190	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8560

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	104.2	2.9	3.84	35.9%	63.8%	18.0%	90.0	3.8%	10.6%
Rank	56	72	15	96	94	47	83	41	108

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Steven Gurrola	C					26	2014 2nd All-Pac-12
Mickey Baucus	LT					52
Fabbians Ebbele	RT					51
Cayman Bundage	LG	6'2, 281	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8735	26
Jacob Alsadek	RG	6'7, 298	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8351	11
Lene Maiava	RT	6'5, 301	Sr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7733	7
Freddie Tagaloa (California)	LT	6'8, 316	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9001	7
Carter Wood	C	6'2, 274	Sr.	NR	NR	1
Kaige Lawrence	RG	6'3, 290	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8312	0
Zach Hemmila	LG	6'3, 293	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8904	0
T.D. Gross	RT	6'6, 285	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8095	0
Layth Friekh	LT	6'5, 278	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8633	0
Jordan Poland	OL	6'7, 343	RSFr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8893
Levi Walton	C	6'3, 285	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8194
Cody Creason	OL	6'4, 270	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8747

5. The only seniors are up front

When you return quite a few big names from a division champion, it seems a little silly to look too far into the future. But as decent as Arizona's offense could be in 2015, it could be spectacular in 2016. Solomon and all of the skill position guys are either sophomores or juniors.

But for the second straight year, the 2015 line could be senior-heavy. Three of the five returnees with starting experience (52 career starts) are seniors, including the only two-year starter, guard Cayman Bundage.

There's an interesting mix of upside and experience. Three of 12 listed linemen were Rivals four-stars, including Cal transfer Freddie Tagaloa, and all three are scheduled to return in 2016. It will be interesting to see how high-ceiling players mix with seasoned pieces like seniors Lene Maiava and Carter Wood. [Update: Wood, who has fought foot injuries for the last two years, will miss his senior season with those chronic foot problems.]

Regardless, the bar isn't very high. The line was decent at keeping defenders out of the backfield on standard downs, but while the young backfield did the line no favors, the line didn't do a ton for the youngsters either.

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	0.81	44	IsoPPP+	117.6	25
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	41.4%	69	Succ. Rt. +	107.3	39
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	29.6	81	Off. FP+	101.0	51
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	4.7	99	Redzone S&P+	102.0	53
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	28.7		ACTUAL	26.0	-2.7

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	105	28	36	25
RUSHING	70	25	24	32
PASSING	121	39	48	36
Standard Downs		29	44	24
Passing Downs		35	26	43

Q1 Rk	40	1st Down Rk	32
Q2 Rk	58	2nd Down Rk	32
Q3 Rk	31	3rd Down Rk	72
Q4 Rk	19

6. Arizona vs. assumptions

A lot about Arizona's defense clashed with logic.

A. For much of the season, the D carried the O. That isn't what we assume when Rodriguez is involved, but that might be our fault. When Rodriguez and coordinator Jeff Casteel are connected, the result is encouraging: their WVU defenses ranked at 45th or better each year from 2005-07 (and peaked at ninth in 2007), and their last two Arizona Ds have ranked 48th or better.

B. At first glance, Arizona had bend-don't-break tendencies, combining excellent big-play prevention numbers with decent efficiency numbers. But bend-don't-break units are known for playing relatively passive ball until the red zone. Arizona was aggressive enough to record 98 tackles for loss (12th in FBS) and was poor at keeping opponents out of the end zone in scoring opportunities.

C. With a high-tempo offense that struggled with efficiency, one could understand if Arizona's defense had to shoulder too much of a load and faded. But the Wildcats' two best defensive quarters were Q3 and Q4.

D. Casteel's 3-3-5 structure sacrifices size for speed. However, Arizona was better against the run (25th in Rushing S&P+) than the pass (39th in Passing S&P+).

Gee, it's almost like generalizations don't always work!

When we dial in, we see that Arizona combined an aggressive run front with a bend-don't-break secondary. Experienced Arizona DBs prevented big plays but took calculated risks, especially on passing downs, something that's easy to do when you've got a kamikaze pass rush.

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	115.4	2.71	3.29	38.6%	55.3%	19.0%	124	3.5%	13.7%
Rank	18	35	69	59	10	71	27	91	2

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Reggie Gilbert	DE	6'4, 262	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8389	14	40.0	4.5%	5.5	3.0	0	1	1	0
Dan Pettinato	DT					14	34.0	3.8%	4.5	4.0	0	3	2	1
Parker Zellers	NT	6'1, 247	So.	NR	NR	13	13.5	1.5%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Sani Fuimaono	NT	6'1, 288	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8100	9	12.0	1.4%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jeff Worthy	DT	6'2, 287	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8578	12	9.5	1.1%	4.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Calvin Allen	DT	6'6, 266	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8382	6	3.5	0.4%	1.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Luca Bruno	DT	6'4, 264	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8314
Jack Banda	DE	6'3, 228	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8025
Marcus Griffin	NT	6'0, 302	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8608
Anthony Fotu	DE	6'2, 274	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8708
Timmy Hamilton	DE	6'4, 250	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8367
Sharif Williams	NT	6'2, 313	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8310
Finton Connolly	DT	6'3, 255	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8457

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Scooby Wright III	MLB	6'1, 246	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7898	14	131.0	14.8%	29.0	14.0	0	0	6	0
Cody Ippolito	MLB	6'2, 242	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7863	14	42.5	4.8%	6.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Derrick Turituri	SLB	6'1, 265	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8207	14	38.0	4.3%	5.0	3.0	0	1	0	0
Jake Matthews	WLB	6'3, 221	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	NR	11	22.0	2.5%	1.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
DeAndre' Miller	WLB	6'3, 230	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8656	3	7.0	0.8%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Hank Hobson	MLB					14	5.5	0.6%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Antonio Smothers Jr.	LB	6'2, 232	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8690
Sir Thomas Jackson	SLB	6'0, 222	Sr.	NR	NR
Marquis Ware	LB	6'0, 229	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9213
Jamardre Cobb	LB	6'0, 239	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9173

7. You won't run very well on Arizona

It's not hard to see Arizona's front six being every bit as effective. Active tackle Dan Pettinato is gone, but he's the only departure from last year's two-deep. The line returns end Reggie Gilbert and most of last year's space-fillers; plus, four-star redshirt freshman Marcus Griffin and JUCO transfers Anthony Fotu and Timmy Hamilton could join the rotation as well.

At linebacker ... wow. That juniors Cody Ippolito and Derrick Turituri (combined: 11 tackles for loss, four sacks) return is good enough news, as is the addition of four-star redshirt freshmen Marquise Ware and Jamardre Cobb to the two-deep.

But there's also the matter of Scooby: Scooby Wright III came out of nowhere to record a nation's-best 29 tackles for loss (only one other player had more than 22.5) and 14 sacks while also fulfilling the roles of a tackling-machine middle linebacker. Wright was around the ball more than any defender in the country. If he were the only returning Arizona linebacker, this would still be a great linebacking corps.

Arizona ranked 18th in Adj. Line Yards and 27th in Adj. Sack Rate and managed a startling combination of other stats: 10th in power success rate and second in passing downs sack rate. And the Wildcats did this despite iffy size and a ton of sophomores. Now both are less problematic.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Jared Tevis	BANDIT					14	99.5	11.3%	9	4	2	4	2	0
Jourdon Grandon	FS					14	71.0	8.0%	2	1	3	4	1	0
Tra'Mayne Bondurant	SPUR					14	68.5	7.7%	6.5	2	2	3	5	1
William Parks	SPUR	6'1, 194	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8225	14	66.5	7.5%	13	1	2	8	0	0
Jonathan McKnight	CB					14	46.0	5.2%	0.5	0	1	13	0	0
Jarvis McCall Jr.	CB	6'2, 182	So.	3 stars (5.6)	NR	12	40.5	4.6%	1	0	0	7	0	0
Jamar Allah	FS	6'1, 186	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8016	14	26.5	3.0%	0	0	0	1	0	1
Cam Denson	CB	5'11, 168	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9314	12	19.5	2.2%	0	0	2	2	0	0
Tellas Jones	BANDIT	6'0, 189	Jr.	NR	NR	14	15.5	1.8%	2	1	0	0	0	0
Anthony Lopez	SPUR	5'11, 211	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8297	14	15.0	1.7%	2.5	1	0	0	1	1
Blake Brady	BANDIT					14	4.5	0.5%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Yamen Sanders	S					14	4.5	0.5%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Brendan Murphy	CB					14	3.0	0.3%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Carter Hehr	S	5'10, 188	So.	NR	NR	7	3.0	0.3%	0	0	0	0	0	0
David Price	FS	6'1, 212	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8247	5	2.0	0.2%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Johnny Jackson	CB	5'10, 184	Sr.	NR	NR	7	2.0	0.2%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Devin Holiday	CB	5'10, 162	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8385	6	2.0	0.2%	0	0	1	0	0	0
Davonte' Neal	CB	5'10, 173	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9731
Kwesi Mashack	CB	5'8, 203	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8280
Paul Magloire Jr.	S	6'1, 210	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8543
Dane Cruikshank	DB	6'2, 195	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8428
Anthony Mariscal	S	6'0, 192	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8519
Devon Brewer	FS	5'10, 169	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8232

8. Scary turnover in the most important area

Let's play Optimist vs. Pessimist!

In the Arizona secondary, the optimist sees a potential All-American in safety William Parks and sees six returning DBs who combined for 18.5 tackles for loss, three sacks, four interceptions, and 18 pass breakups. All six were on the field long enough to record at least 15 total tackles, and four were either freshmen or sophomores last year. Good!

A pessimist notes simply that four departed DBs were not only instrumental in Arizona's big-play prevention but also combined for 18 tackles for loss, seven sacks, eight picks, and 24 breakups, not to mention eight forced fumbles. This unit was deep and experienced enough (and, it must be said, healthy enough) that Casteel could use it aggressively and still avoid disaster. And now it is far less deep, and if the injury bug decides to bite, the experience level will drop off a cliff.

You know in advance when you're going to be losing a lot of seniors, and Rodriguez attempted to prepare for this exodus. He signed a couple of JUCO transfers and made sure to play with a pretty deep rotation: 10 DBs averaged at least one tackle per game, compared to just four linemen and five linebackers. And younger players like corners Jarvis McCall Jr. and Cam Denson and safety Tellas Jones rewarded this faith by making some havoc plays.

Plus, this spring junior Davonte' Neal -- a former blue-chipper and stud athlete who was far from amazing as a receiver -- moved to cornerback.

Arizona has a deep well of candidates and proven talent at the top in Parks, McCall, and others. Still, it's scary losing what Arizona lost, and any injuries could poke a major hole in the most important unit on Casteel's defense.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Drew Riggleman	6'2, 213	Sr.	76	46.1	9	8	23	40.8%
Anu Solomon	6'2, 205	So.	4	37.5	1	0	3	75.0%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Casey Skowron	5'10, 160	Sr.	89	61.5	48	1	53.9%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Casey Skowron	5'10, 160	Sr.	57-57	16-23	69.6%	4-5	80.0%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2015 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Tyrell Johnson	KR	5'7, 160	So.	29	23.7	0
Samajie Grant	KR	5'9, 177	Jr.	3	17.3	0
DaVonte' Neal	PR	5'10, 173	Jr.	12	11.1	1
Nate Phillips	PR	5'7, 180	Jr.	3	10.7	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams F/+	69
Field Goal Efficiency	79
Punt Return Efficiency	89
Kick Return Efficiency	97
Punt Efficiency	42
Kickoff Efficiency	17
Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency	42

9. More consistent place-kicking, please

Arizona has major strengths in Drew Riggleman's booming punts (even if he sometimes outkicks his coverage) and Casey Skowron's kickoffs. Plus, while Tyrell Johnson and DaVonte' Neal were pretty hit-or-miss in returns (hence the poor efficiency ratings), they were both explosive. But one of the most underrated features of a given team is the ability to consistently hit shorter field goals. Skowron's leg is immense, and he nailed four of five field goals beyond 40 yards. But he barely made two-thirds of his sub-40 field goals, and his misses were costly: he was 2-for-7 against USC and UCLA in games the Wildcats lost by a combined 12 points.

Arizona's offense can help Skowron out by finishing a few more drives in the end zone and therefore asking him to make fewer 3-pointers, but Skowron's got to figure out how to guide that cannon a bit more.

2015 Schedule & Projection Factors

2015 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk
3-Sep	UTSA	121
12-Sep	at Nevada	82
19-Sep	Northern Arizona	NR
26-Sep	UCLA	7
3-Oct	at Stanford	11
10-Oct	Oregon State	70
17-Oct	at Colorado	75
24-Oct	Washington State	66
31-Oct	at Washington	55
7-Nov	at USC	13
14-Nov	Utah	39
21-Nov	at Arizona State	24

Five-Year F/+ Rk	16.1% (34)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	41 / 49
2014 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	8 / 10.1
2014 TO Luck/Game	-0.7
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	12 (6, 6)
2014 Second-order wins (difference)	8.0 (2.0)

10. Count the ifs

It takes three "ifs" to turn Arizona into a sleeper in the Pac-12 South:

1. If the new starting quarterback can one-up B.J. Denker.
2. If the new stable of running backs can follow blocks well.
3. If the defensive line doesn't become a total liability.

-- 2014 Arizona guide

Nailed it! Solomon was indeed an upgrade, Wilson and senior Terris Jones-Grigsby were able to run semi-effectively at key times (even if the line didn't prove the biggest of holes), and the defensive line, small and raw, held up.

So let's try this again. What three "ifs" do the Wildcats need to win back-to-back division titles?

1. The secondary doesn't become a liability. That might mean staying healthy, and it might mean newcomers are able to hold up.
2. The offensive line can at least match last year's numbers while the more experienced backfield helps the front five out more.
3. Arizona avoids the "one on, one off" routine and strings together consistent quality. The Wildcats played with fire in performing their best when they absolutely had to; it's hard to get away with that twice.

The schedule could help. While the Wildcats do have to play at Stanford, they draw the three weakest teams in the North (Oregon State, Washington, Washington State) and avoid Oregon. That will help, even if trips to USC and Arizona State are harrowing.

In all, I doubt Rodriguez is able to pull off another magic act in 2015, but he's pulling off a more important trick anyway: Arizona isn't going away. The Wildcats had managed just three winning seasons in the 13 years between when Dick Tomey left and Rodriguez arrived. Now they've pulled off three in a row.

When Rodriguez and Casteel are together, good things happen. After a 3-8 start in 2001, Rodriguez's last six WVU teams averaged 9.7 wins per year; his first three 'Zona teams have averaged 8.7. His team should be good in 2015 and, barring an unlikely mass exodus to the pros, excellent in 2016.