The Nevada Wolf Pack should take a step forward in 2016, but a big enough one?

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. A bowl win in your setback year

Brian Polian's hire was confusing. He had spent the last eight seasons as special teams coordinator and/or position coach at Notre Dame, Stanford, and Texas A&M, he had never served as an offensive or defensive coordinator, and he had no ties to Chris Ault or Nevada.

If nothing else, 2014 was a partial vindication. But the squad was senior-heavy, and Polian will have to turn the team over to youngsters. That could pay off, especially if Polian's ability to identify talent turns out to be a strength.

But whether you are an optimist or a pessimist, the Wolf Pack will see a lot of change, and that usually results in setbacks.

-- The 2015 Nevada preview

On paper, my sentiment in last year's Nevada preview was right. With turnover at quarterback, the Wolf Pack fell from 64th to 91st in Off. S&P+. With inexperience in the secondary, they fell from 87th to 100th in Def. S&P+.

The quality in Polian's third season was Nevada's worst since probably 2004, the first year of Ault's final stint as head coach. Going by the S&P+ ratings, they were the second-worst bowl team, ahead of only No. 101 New Mexico.

That said, Nevada was quite a bit better than 99th over the season's final month. This was destined to be a reset season, and one of your biggest goals in a year like that is to be better at the end than at the beginning. Nevada pulled that off and scored a bowl win to boot. In an awkward MWC-vs-MWC matchup in Tucson, the Wolf Pack took down Colorado State to win the inaugural Arizona Bowl and finish 7-6.

Tangible late growth and a happy finish? There are worse ways to go about a reloading year.

Entering Polian's fourth season, the question shifts to the long-term. What are the expectations in Reno? With an offense now loaded with experience and a secondary deep enough to perhaps account for part of a massive rebuild in the front seven, it feels safe to assume Nevada again ranks between about 80th and 100th. Their odds of making a third straight bowl (and an 11th in 12 years) are solid.

Polian has been a decent recruiter by MWC standards and has decent results. Is that enough? The Wolf Pack have finished 7-6 four times in five years since the wonderful 13-1 of 2010, and 2016 is probably in a similar range. Hell, 2017 probably will too -- just as the defense finds a solid level of experience again, the offense will have to replace a ton of starters.

At some point, do those with influence tire of being decent? Have they already? There are a lot of hard jobs in the Mountain West, and from a revenue perspective, the Wolf Pack lag behind other schools in the conference. And while they're not too far removed from the Bay area, they still have at least a slight disadvantage compared to a San Jose State or Fresno State.

What should be a reasonable result for UNR each year? Did Ault's innovation and success set the bar too high? Is Polian succeeding a hall of famer, or is a conference-average performance below what we should expect?

2015 Schedule & Results

Record: 7-6 | Adj. Record: 2-11 | Final F/+ Rk: 97 | Final S&P+ Rk: 99
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Win Expectancy	vs. S&P+	Performance vs. Vegas
3-Sep	UC Davis	N/A	31-17	W	50%	98%	+0.5
12-Sep	Arizona	77	20-44	L	6%	1%	-13.4	-12.0
19-Sep	at Texas A&M	34	27-44	L	12%	2%	+6.1	+17.0
26-Sep	at Buffalo	98	24-21	W	51%	76%	+0.3	+4.0
3-Oct	UNLV	105	17-23	L	24%	40%	-10.9	-13.0
10-Oct	New Mexico	99	35-17	W	88%	100%	+12.5	+13.0
17-Oct	at Wyoming	115	21-28	L	9%	12%	-16.7	-14.0
24-Oct	Hawaii	120	30-20	W	24%	49%	-0.4	+3.0
5-Nov	at Fresno State	103	30-16	W	47%	82%	+12.7	+10.0
14-Nov	San Jose State	89	37-34	W	32%	38%	+1.8	+2.0
21-Nov	at Utah State	53	27-31	L	50%	63%	+16.0	+11.0
28-Nov	at San Diego State	43	14-31	L	13%	1%	+1.9	0.0
29-Dec	vs. Colorado State	86	28-23	W	41%	45%	+13.1	+8.0

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	25.2	91	34.0	100
Points Per Game	26.2	86	26.8	62

2. A high-stress season

The numbers didn't like Nevada much, but with so many close games against opponents of a similar quality, this season could have gone in a couple directions. The Wolf Pack were 3-3 in games decided by one possession, and these games were as close on the chart as the scores suggested.

Win expectancy looks at the stats from a game and derives how frequently you would win said game with said stats. Nevada's season was topsy-turvy -- the Wolf Pack beat Hawaii, SJSU, and Colorado State despite a win expectancy under 50 percent, and they lost to Utah State despite expectancy over 60. They benefited a bit from turnovers luck, and they were probably a little bit lucky to reach a bowl at all, but with a few more lucky or unlucky bounces, 8-4 and 4-8 were both very much on the table.

If there's good news here, it's that the late-season product was definitely a little bit better than the mid-season product. With an S&P+ rating well into the 100s, Nevada exceeded expectations down the stretch.

• Performance vs. S&P+ projection (first 8 games): -2.8 PPG
• Performance vs. S&P+ projection (last 5 games): +9.1 PPG

The 40th percentile basically equates to a top-75 performance, and Nevada hit that level six times in 13 games and three times in the last five. But the scary part was the downside -- they hit 13 percent (~top 110) or lower on four occasions. The bad performances were usually away from home, but the Wolf Pack also managed to lose at home to in-state rival UNLV. Not a good look.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.19	99	IsoPPP+	92.1	95
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	42.2%	63	Succ. Rt. +	94.1	99
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	31.6	104	Def. FP+	31.4	101
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.8	37	Redzone S&P+	97.6	83
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	15.7		ACTUAL	12	-3.7

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	86	96	99	95
RUSHING	25	75	101	54
PASSING	114	103	80	109
Standard Downs		105	106	97
Passing Downs		89	67	93

Q1 Rk	106	1st Down Rk	90
Q2 Rk	84	2nd Down Rk	106
Q3 Rk	99	3rd Down Rk	76
Q4 Rk	61

3. Pistol 2.0

Despite diminishing returns, Polian lost his offensive coordinator to a head coaching job. Over the last four seasons, Nevada's Off. S&P+ ranking fell from 34th to 41st to 64th to 91st, but Hawaii still hired alum Nick Rolovich. Rolovich had to work with a lot of youth last year, and the Warriors were willing to overlook 2015 struggles.

In Rolovich's place, Polian made an intriguing hire. Tim Cramsey comes to Reno after three years of manning a dominant offense at Montana State. A product of the Chip Kelly tree (he was New Hampshire's tight ends and running backs coach in the three years before Kelly made the jump to Oregon), Cramsey improved FIU's offense as coordinator in 2012 -- the Golden Panthers improved from 109th to 82nd in Off. S&P+ in Mario Cristobal's final season -- but ended up in Bozeman when Cristobal was fired.

Cramsey's Bobcat offense featured a mixture of spread principles; by most accounts, he works frequently from the pistol formation with which Nevada has become synonymous (Ault debuted the formation in the 2000s), but Montana State didn't lean heavily on the run. In 2015, including sacks as pass attempts, MSU ran 53 percent of the time. Cramsey might represent the evolution between Ault's original idea and a more pass-friendly system.

That said, his system is friendly to mobile quarterbacks, and he inherits a decent one in Tyler Stewart. Stewart's passing absolutely needs to improve -- he averaged just 5.7 yards per pass attempt last year, and Nevada ranked just 103rd in Passing S&P+ -- but in about six non-sack carries per game, he averaged 6.3 yards per carry. With an exciting pair of running backs, he could be part of a dangerous backfield.

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2016 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Comp	Att	Yards	TD	INT	Comp Rate	Sacks	Sack Rate	Yards/ Att.
Tyler Stewart	6'4, 220	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8398	186	326	2139	15	7	57.1%	20	5.8%	5.7
Hunter Fralick	6'2, 205	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8225	0	3	0	0	0	0.0%	0	0.0%	0.0
Danté Mayes	6'2, 190	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7883
Cristian Solano	6'1, 170	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7685
Ty Gangi	6'2, 205	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7000

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Don Jackson	RB					230	1082	8	4.7	6.0	30.9%	3	0
James Butler	RB	5'9, 200	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8123	209	1346	10	6.4	7.6	40.2%	1	0
Tyler Stewart	QB	6'4, 220	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8398	78	489	4	6.3	4.1	59.0%	5	2
Akeel Lynch (Penn State)	RB	5'11, 220	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8851	55	282	2	5.1	8.7	29.1%	0	0
Blake Wright	RB	5'10, 200	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7585	4	8	0	2.0	0.5	25.0%	0	0
Kelton Moore	RB	5'11, 200	RSFr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7000
Jaxson Kincaide	RB	5'9, 180	Fr.	NR	0.8000

4. An all-or-nothing ground game

In 2015, Nevada had a run-first offense that was drastically inconsistent at actually running the ball. It's easy to get distracted by the raw totals -- namely, the fact that Don Jackson and James Butler combined for 2,428 rushing yards and 18 touchdowns -- but only 35 percent of their carries gained five or more yards, and the Wolf Pack were very dependent on big plays to score points.

Big plays are great and necessary. But they are also rather random and unreliable. Relying on big gashes can also result in a three-and-outs problem.

The good news is that, despite Jackson's departure, Butler was the better of the two in 2015. He gained five yards on 40 percent of his carries (not great, but better than Jackson's 31 percent), and despite his 5'9 stature, he proved durable, rushing at least 16 times in eight of 13 games. His 189 yards on 24 carries powered the way to the bowl win.

Meanwhile, one all-or-nothing back leaves, and another one takes his place. Penn State graduate transfer Akeel Lynch was even less efficient (29 percent opportunity rate in both 2014 and 2015) and more explosive. With Butler, Lynch, and perhaps a youngster like three-star freshman Jaxson Kincaide, there will be as much big-play potential as ever. But less variance would be great. A line that returns all eight players with starting experience should help, even if the line wasn't incredibly effective.

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	Yds/ Target	%SD	Success Rate	IsoPPP
Jerico Richardson	WR-X	5'11, 190	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8135	111	68	745	61.3%	35.0%	6.7	51.4%	48.6%	1.26
Hasaan Henderson	WR-F	6'5, 220	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8263	91	53	734	58.2%	28.7%	8.1	56.0%	49.5%	1.49
Wyatt Demps	WR-Z	6'4, 195	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8181	45	27	232	60.0%	14.2%	5.2	55.6%	40.0%	1.09
Jarred Gipson	TE	6'1, 240	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7300	28	19	247	67.9%	8.8%	8.8	60.7%	60.7%	1.35
Don Jackson	RB					12	7	77	58.3%	3.8%	6.4	16.7%	33.3%	1.74
James Butler	RB	5'9, 200	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8123	12	7	44	58.3%	3.8%	3.7	50.0%	25.0%	1.24
Victor Gonzalez	WR-Z	6'0, 170	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7578	4	1	1	25.0%	1.3%	0.3	50.0%	0.0%	0.00
Kameron Richardson	WR	6'7, 220	Sr.	NR	NR	3	1	7	33.3%	0.9%	2.3	66.7%	33.3%	0.58
Brayden Sanchez	WR	5'11, 200	Sr.	NR	NR	2	2	27	100.0%	0.6%	13.5	50.0%	100.0%	1.09
Evan Faunce	TE	6'4, 240	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7894	2	1	18	50.0%	0.6%	9.0	100.0%	50.0%	2.06
Rodney Lawson	WR-Z	6'0, 190	Sr.	NR	NR	2	1	5	50.0%	0.6%	2.5	50.0%	50.0%	0.49
Tucker Melcher	WR-F	6'1, 190	Jr.	NR	NR	1	0	0	0.0%	0.3%	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Austin Carrow	TE	6'3, 255	Sr.	NR	NR	1	0	0	0.0%	0.3%	0.0	100.0%	0.0%	0.00
Andrew Celis	WR	5'11, 190	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8167
Ahki Muhammad	WR	5'9, 185	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7985
Matt Moen	TE	6'3, 245	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7585
Brandon Scott	TE	6'3, 230	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7659
Dominic Christian	WR	6'1, 180	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8033
Trevion Armstrong	WR	6'3, 215	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8538

5. Got the receivers?

Cramsey's passing knowhow played a role in his hire, and between a senior quarterback (Stewart) and a receiving corps led by three seniors and a junior, he inherits a passing game with all the experience you could want.

Experience doesn't automatically equal quality, though. The foursome of upperclassmen returning in 2016 -- receivers Jerico Richardson, Hasaan Henderson, and Wyatt Demps and tight end Jarred Gipson -- combined to average just 7.1 yards per target over 21 targets per game. That's not the worst average, but when you account for competition, it's pretty bad. Only passes to Gipson had a success rate over 50 percent, and there weren't enough big plays to account for the mediocre efficiency.

There might be room for new blood. Cornerback Ahki Muhammad has been working as a slot receiver this spring and has earned praise from Polian. And either of two three-star youngsters -- redshirt freshman Dominic Christian or true freshman Trevion Armstrong -- could slip into the rotation.

If Cramsey is able to engineer improvement in the passing game, the run could be spectacular.

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	98.2	2.97	3.47	38.3%	59.6%	20.3%	87.5	3.0%	9.5%
Rank	82	53	42	75	106	85	81	24	96

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	2015 Starts	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Austin Corbett	LT	6'4, 300	Jr.	NR	NR	13	25
Jeremy Macauley	RG	6'1, 300	Sr.	NR	NR	11	23
Nathan Goltry	C	6'2, 300	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8333	13	13
Jacob Henry	RT	6'4, 280	Sr.	NR	NR	13	13
Joey Anglemire	LG	6'3, 295	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7444	1	11
Ziad Damanhoury	LG	6'6, 310	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8200	8	8
Adam Khouri	LG	6'3, 300	Jr.	NR	NR	4	6
Daren Echeveria	RG	6'4, 280	So.	2 stars (5.2)	NR	2	2
Humberto Lopez	LT	6'5, 310	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7593	0	0
Brent Roling	LG					0	0
Thomas Newton	C	6'1, 250	Jr.	NR	NR	0	0
Ilya Lopez	RT	6'3, 275	Jr.	NR	NR	0	0
Sean Krepsz	OL	6'5, 320	So.	NR	0.7000	0	0
Jake Nelson	OL	6'5, 275	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.21	42	IsoPPP+	91.6	96
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	43.8%	89	Succ. Rt. +	88.2	106
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	26.5	124	Off. FP+	26.5	118
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.1	42	Redzone S&P+	93.1	96
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	18.6		ACTUAL	21.0	+2.4

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	73	98	106	96
RUSHING	91	93	91	92
PASSING	52	101	120	80
Standard Downs		92	110	81
Passing Downs		107	97	110

Q1 Rk	58	1st Down Rk	97
Q2 Rk	117	2nd Down Rk	75
Q3 Rk	84	3rd Down Rk	102
Q4 Rk	103

6. Bending, then breaking

Like a lot of the Mountain West, Nevada's pass rush was pretty solid in 2015. The Wolf Pack ranked 60th in Adj. Sack Rate and proved better than most at generating pressure on standard downs.

The problem was that even with a good pass rush, Nevada only brought down the quarterback once for about every 16 passes. And when the QB didn't go down, he was probably finding an open receiver.

With almost all of the pass rush coming from the line, defensive coordinator Scott Boone elected to play it safe with his linebackers, hoping their presence in coverage would help out a green secondary. But usually it just delayed the inevitable. Nevada played extreme bend-don't-break defense and was okay in the redzone, but the Wolf Pack didn't have the depth (or the offensive efficiency) to avoid wearing down. They ranked 58th in the first quarter and 84th in the third but fell into the triple digits in both the second and fourth quarter.

To the extent that this was a depth problem, it probably won't get any better in 2016. Nevada basically played seven linemen, but the top four are gone, including a pair of dynamic pass rushers (Lenny Jones and Ian Seau, who combined for 17 sacks, eight breakups, and 31 tackles for loss).

It's the same story at linebacker, where five of the primary seven contributors are gone. Polian has recruited relatively well in the front seven, but that recruiting is going to have to reap major dividends in 2016. Otherwise a more experienced secondary is just going to be covering for a frazzled front seven this time around.

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	89.7	3.19	3.52	40.9%	66.7%	18.7%	101.7	6.2%	6.2%
Rank	108	109	95	94	69	84	60	26	87

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Lenny Jones	DE					13	42.5	5.8%	12.5	7.0	0	4	0	0
Ian Seau	DE					13	35.0	4.8%	18.5	10.0	0	4	5	0
Rykeem Yates	DT					12	24.0	3.3%	5.0	2.0	0	1	0	1
Kevin McReynolds	NT					13	20.0	2.7%	3.0	0.0	0	0	1	0
Salesa Faraimo	NT	6'2, 290	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7300	12	16.0	2.2%	4.0	1.0	0	1	0	0
Malik Reed	DE	6'1, 245	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7533	13	15.0	2.0%	3.5	1.0	0	1	0	0
Korey Rush	DT	6'1, 260	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8514	12	10.0	1.4%	2.0	1.0	0	1	0	0
Patrick Choudja	DE	6'3, 235	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8519	13	7.0	1.0%	0.0	0.0	0	1	0	0
Jarid Joseph	DE	6'2, 230	So.	NR	0.7733	10	2.5	0.3%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Kalei Meyer	DT	6'1, 270	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7544	12	2.0	0.3%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jordan Silva	DE	6'4, 245	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7633
Kori Collons	DE	6'5, 215	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8316
Ricky Thomas Jr.	DE	6'1, 215	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8044
Hausia Sekona	DT	6'1, 265	RSFr.	NR	0.7967
Nakita Lealao	DT	6'2, 305	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8333
Kameron Toomer	DE	6'3, 235	Fr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8200
Nick Gregg	DT	6'0, 294	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7700

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Jordan Dobrich	LB					12	79.0	10.7%	6.5	1.0	2	2	1	0
Matthew Lyons	LB					12	62.5	8.5%	6.0	1.0	0	0	0	1
Bryan Lane Jr.	LB					12	44.5	6.1%	2.5	1.0	1	3	0	0
Faigofie Faaituala	LB					13	38.5	5.2%	2.0	0.0	0	4	0	0
Alex Bertrando	LB	6'2, 225	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	NR	9	24.0	3.3%	1.0	0.0	0	1	0	1
L.J. Jackson	LB	6'0, 200	Sr.	NR	NR	12	18.0	2.4%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Trevor Taft	LB					12	10.0	1.4%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Travis Wilson	LB	6'1, 215	Jr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7733	8	4.0	0.5%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Colton Concellos	LB	6'3, 220	Jr.	NR	NR	5	1.5	0.2%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jake Lacaden	LB	5'11, 215	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7433
Lucas Weber	LB	6'0, 215	So.	NR	NR
Riley Brand	LB	6'1, 215	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8156
Gabe Sewell	LB	6'0, 230	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8141
Lawson Hall	LB	6'0, 210	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8260
Alec Simpson	LB	6'1, 215	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8289
D.J. Powe	LB	6'2, 210	Fr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8007

7. New blood

Boone did seem to make a concerted effort to get 2016's starters some action in 2015. Sophomores Malik Reed and Korey Rush and junior Patrick Choudja all made appearances on and of, and Reed and Rush flashed some play-making potential.

Between these three, senior tackle Salesa Faraimo, JUCO transfer Nakita Lealao, and three-star youngsters (Kori Collons, Ricky Thomas Jr., Kameron Toomer, Nick Gregg), you figure there are enough candidates to create a decent starting four on the line. And at linebacker, seniors Alex Bertrando and L.J. Jackson have experience in the rotation, and there are five more three-star freshmen (two redshirts, three true) in the mix.

The odds of finding seven decent starters are relatively solid. But the second string is going to be completely unproven, and it will be a lot to ask for these players to spell the eventual starters effectively. Depth appears it might again be a big issue on D.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Asauni Rufus	SS	6'0, 190	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7807	13	81.5	11.1%	0	0	1	2	1	0
Dameon Baber	FS	5'11, 180	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8475	10	55.0	7.5%	0.5	0	6	2	0	0
Kendall Johnson	CB	6'0, 185	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7906	13	37.0	5.0%	0	0	0	2	0	0
Elijah Mitchell	CB	5'8, 180	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7826	13	32.0	4.4%	2	0	1	4	0	0
Ahki Muhammad	CB	5'9, 185	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7985	13	28.5	3.9%	0.5	0	0	3	0	0
Elijah Moody	CB	5'11, 175	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7893	12	13.5	1.8%	0	0	1	3	0	1
Randy Uzoma	CB	6'1, 205	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8332	13	11.5	1.6%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Jaden Sawyer	SS	6'0, 195	Jr.	NR	NR	13	10.5	1.4%	0	0	1	0	1	0
Teré Calloway	S					3	2.0	0.3%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jimbo Davis	S	5'10, 180	Jr.	NR	NR
Daniel Brown	CB	5'10, 165	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8048
Kevin Howell	DB	5'10, 179	Fr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7974
Daylon Johnson	DB	6'1, 171	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7926

8. The secondary has no choice but to step up

Sophomore, sophomore, junior, senior, sophomore, sophomore. A majority of this year's top returnees in the secondary were freshmen last year, and that tells a pretty specific story. Nevada was dreadful and conservative even with a good pass rush last year.

There were flashes of potential, though. Dameon Baber had three interceptions against Fresno State and two against Buffalo, and corners Elijah Mitchell and Elijah Moody combined for nine passes defensed -- not a great total, but decent.

Even if Muhammad sticks at slot receiver, this unit has almost no choice but to improve over last year's numbers. Baber and Asauni Rufus should make for an increasingly solid safety duo in the coming season, and former star recruit Randy Uzoma still has one last chance to make waves.

With this much returning experience, the pass rush should almost certainly improve. But it might need to improve a lot.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Alex Boy	6'3, 200	Sr.	65	42.0	4	28	18	70.8%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Brent Zuzo	5'10, 180	Sr.	67	61.4	28	2	41.8%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Brent Zuzo	5'10, 180	Sr.	38-40	13-13	100.0%	4-6	66.7%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Elijah Mitchell	KR	5'8, 180	Sr.	25	26.4	1
Rodney Lawson	KR	6'0, 190	Sr.	2	26.0	0
Andrew Celis	PR	5'11, 190	So.	11	13.8	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams S&P+	7
Field Goal Efficiency	12
Punt Return Success Rate	33
Kick Return Success Rate	43
Punt Success Rate	25
Kickoff Success Rate	65

9. Special teams might be the defense's best friend

Offensive and defensive efficiency are the single biggest factors in deciding a game, but special teams can flip close games in your favor. And while Nevada had plenty of efficiency issues in 2015, the Wolf Pack special teams unit made up for a lot of deficiencies. Because of Brent Zuzo, they were almost guaranteed three points when they got inside the opponent's 30, and strong coverage and returns meant that Nevada had only bad field position (because of efficiency issues) and not the worst field position in the country.

Everybody's back in this unit -- Zuzo, punter Alex Boy, return men Elijah Mitchell and Andrew Celis. There is a lot of variance in special teams results, but this should be a strong unit again.

2016 Schedule & Projection Factors

2016 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk	Proj. Margin	Win Probability
3-Sep	Cal Poly-SLO	NR	18.9	86%
10-Sep	at Notre Dame	11	-24.5	8%
17-Sep	Buffalo	109	10.5	73%
24-Sep	at Purdue	88	-4.6	39%
1-Oct	at Hawaii	118	5.7	63%
8-Oct	Fresno State	94	4.2	60%
15-Oct	at San Jose State	92	-2.9	43%
22-Oct	Wyoming	110	10.8	73%
5-Nov	at New Mexico	102	0.6	51%
12-Nov	San Diego State	55	-4.7	39%
19-Nov	Utah State	73	-1.5	47%
26-Nov	at UNLV	114	4.9	61%
Projected wins: 6.4

Five-Year F/+ Rk	-9.0% (78)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	96 / 93
2015 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	9 / 2.9
2015 TO Luck/Game	+2.3
Returning Production (Off. / Def.)	84% (95%, 73%)
2015 Second-order wins (difference)	6.1 (0.9)

10. Progress over here, regression over there

The pieces appear to be aligning for the Nevada offense. There's experience in the passing game and on the offensive line, and there's major big-play potential in the backfield. The Wolf Pack might be able to match last year's explosiveness while taking a few steps forward in the efficiency department.

That's good because the defense is going to have to fight to tread water. Nevada hasn't had a particularly good defense since 2011, but the Wolf Pack are replacing almost every starter up front and hoping that their secondary can go from overwhelmed to seasoned in a single offseason.

S&P+ projects Nevada at 91st, and that feels about right to me -- that suggests the offense will improve a little more than the defense regressed. And of course, in the tossup-heavy Mountain West, that should mean another fall of drama and close games.

Nine of Nevada's 12 opponents are projected 88th or worse, and the Wolf Pack are given between a 39 and 63 percent chance of winning in eight games with three likely wins and one likely loss. That should make for another bowl campaign and another hard ceiling around seven or eight wins.