Tulsa football will score on anybody and also allow anybody to score

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here. Below, a unique review of last year's team, a unit-by-unit breakdown of this year's roster, the full 2016 schedule with win projections for each game, and more.

1. A fun rebuild

You have to enjoy the general problem-solving approach of AAC teams: If your team stinks, go out and get a new head coach who is either a) an offensive dynamo, b) an exciting up-and-comer, or c) both.

• Two years ago, UConn chose B.
• Last year, Houston, Tulsa, and SMU chose C
• This year, Tulane chose A, UCF chose C, ECU chose C (though ECU didn't actually stink), and in replacing an awesome coach who got hired elsewhere, Memphis chose C as well.

This hiring stuff is easy.

While defense-friendly coaches still reside at Temple, USF, UConn, and to some degree Cincinnati, the American Athletic Conference is becoming increasingly defined by offense. Houston brought in Ohio State's offensive coordinator. SMU brought in Clemson's. And perhaps a bit more under the radar, Tulsa brought in Baylor's and found immediate success (on one side of the ball).

Philip Montgomery was able to immediately boost Tulsa's offense by about seven points per game (adjusting for opponent), and he was able to do something Morris wasn't able to immediately do at SMU: significantly improve the win total. Tulsa bounced from 2-10 to 6-7, taking care of business against the bad teams on the schedule and beginning to restore the program after a devastating two-year slide.

Because you also have to play defense, Tulsa still wasn't a very good football team overall. But as Virginia Tech learned, the Golden Hurricane were relentless, going full-speed for 60 minutes and forcing opponents to keep scoring if they were to maintain distance. For the most part this wasn't a problem -- Oklahoma scored 52, Memphis scored 66, Cincinnati scored 49, Navy scored 44, Virginia Tech scored 55 -- but to beat Tulsa you were going to have to run a marathon. You were going to have to put in the work.

In the short-term, Montgomery's first season was an absolute success. Now the shift in perspective turns to the long-term. Tulsa has been one of the more steadily successful programs in what is now the AAC over the last 15 years or so; after bottoming out at 2-21 in 2001-02, the Golden Hurricane rebounded with three bowls in four years under Steve Kragthorpe and another three in four under Todd Graham. They won the Conference USA title in 2012 under Bill Blankenship but graduated a ton of contributors and didn't have the pieces to replace them. After winning 11 games that year, Tulsa won just five in 2013-14.

With so many other strong hires in this conference, Montgomery will have to figure out how to keep the program's ceiling high. Tulsa's five-year recruiting ranks just ninth in the conference, and per the 247Sports Composite, Montgomery's 2016 class ranked 11th, 10th in per-recruit average.

Montgomery should be able to field a strong offense moving forward -- without his own recruits in place, he was already able to bump Tulsa's Off. S&P+ ranking to 51st -- but will he be able to figure out the defensive sie of the ball? When Art Briles did at Baylor, it turned the Bears from a 7-6 or 8-5 program into a Big 12 champion, but Briles' recruiting classes don't rank at the bottom of the conference, either, at least not anymore.

The Tulsa defense was dragged down by youth in 2015, but that won't be a viable excuse for much longer. The Golden Hurricane have upside on offense and experience on defense; we'll get at least a passing glimpse at the program's overall ceiling under Montgomery this fall.

2015 Schedule & Results

Record: 6-7 | Adj. Record: 1-12 | Final F/+ Rk: 95 | Final S&P+ Rk: 94
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Win Expectancy	vs. S&P+	Performance vs. Vegas
5-Sep	Florida Atlantic	96	47-44	W	49%	59%	-0.5	-4.0
12-Sep	at New Mexico	99	40-21	W	75%	94%	+18.6	+23.0
19-Sep	at Oklahoma	4	38-52	L	30%	4%	+12.4	+17.0
3-Oct	Houston	26	24-38	L	26%	4%	-22.5	-7.0
10-Oct	UL-Monroe	121	34-24	W	47%	75%	-18.1	+0.5
17-Oct	at East Carolina	73	17-30	L	29%	17%	-9.7	-2.5
23-Oct	Memphis	41	42-66	L	29%	10%	-16.2	-13.5
31-Oct	at SMU	106	40-31	W	36%	60%	+1.2	+5.5
7-Nov	Central Florida	128	45-30	W	50%	89%	-7.8	-1.5
14-Nov	at Cincinnati	72	38-49	L	23%	8%	+1.4	+6.5
21-Nov	Navy	21	21-44	L	15%	0%	-8.3	-11.0
27-Nov	at Tulane	119	45-34	W	24%	28%	+3.1	+5.0
26-Dec	vs. Virginia Tech	59	52-55	L	40%	31%	+8.9	+10.5

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	31.3	51	38.1	117
Points Per Game	37.2	21	39.8	121

2. Bad teams couldn't keep up. Good teams, however...

Thanks mostly to the fact that opposing defenders couldn't hold onto passes -- Tulsa suffered 66 pass break-ups on offense but only eight interceptions, the fourth-lowest INT-to-PBU ratio in the country -- turnovers luck benefited the Golden Hurricane by an average of about three points per game in 2015. That can define a season when you play in a bunch of close games, but that wasn't really the case here. Tulsa beat FAU by three in the season opener and lost to Virginia Tech by three in the finale; in between, no game was decided by fewer than nine points.

Tulsa was in its own way kind of a sure thing in 2015. Without exception, the Golden Hurricane lost to decent teams and beat bad ones.

• Games vs. S&P+ top 75
  Average percentile performance: 27% (~top 95) | Record: 0-7 | Average score: Opp 48, TU 33 | Yards per play: Opp 7.4, TU 6.0
• Games vs. S&P+ No. 91+
  Average percentile performance: 47% (~top 70) | Record: 6-0 | Average score: TU 42, Opp 31 | Yards per play: TU 6.1, Opp 5.6

The offense was prolific no matter what, just as opposing offenses were. But against better teams, Tulsa just had no hope of making stops. Oklahoma averaged 9.1 yards per play, Memphis 7.3, Cincinnati 7.9, Navy 8.2, and Virginia Tech 7.4.

Again, the Tulsa defense will be quite a bit more experienced this year. That will help. But is there enough pure talent here? And is there any semblance of the depth required to defend on a team with such a high-tempo, frequent-possessions offense.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.35	28	IsoPPP+	100.3	62
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	40.4%	81	Succ. Rt. +	97.6	83
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	31.7	106	Def. FP+	31.7	106
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.9	29	Redzone S&P+	97.2	88
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	26.6		ACTUAL	20	-6.6

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	13	76	83	62
RUSHING	61	92	91	92
PASSING	11	66	72	62
Standard Downs		64	73	64
Passing Downs		87	97	75

Q1 Rk	89	1st Down Rk	52
Q2 Rk	59	2nd Down Rk	41
Q3 Rk	78	3rd Down Rk	99
Q4 Rk	22

3. Commitment

Montgomery serves as his own offensive coordinator after holding the same role for Briles for three years. (He was also Briles' co-coordinator for the six years before that.) His vision is the Briles vision: Play at a relentless tempo, spread opponents from sideline to sideline, and do whatever the defense cannot stop.

At its best, Baylor's offense has been balanced and devastating; during 2013's Fiesta Bowl run, for instance, Lache Seastrunk and Shock Linwood rushed for 2,058 yards (7.2 per carry!) while quarterback Bryce Petty completed 62 percent of his passes for 4,200 yards and a 174.3 passer rating.

Tulsa wasn't completely ready for liftoff yet in 2015. The Golden Hurricane couldn't run the ball consistently against decent defenses (at least, not until the bowl game, when D'Angelo Brewer and Zack Langer gained 168 yards on 22 carries), and without play-makers well-versed in this system, passing downs were a bit of a challenge.

Still, Tulsa was committed to tempo and stretching the field both horizontally and vertically, and it worked well enough to triple the win total.

Senior quarterback Dane Evans returns in 2016, and a second year in this sytem could help immensely. The biggest issue he might face this fall is that the top layer of skill position help has been skimmed off. Langer is gone, as are two of last year's top three receivers (Keyarris Garrett, Conner Floyd). But when you look at what returns, that might not actually be an issue at all.

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.
Dane Evans	6'1, 210	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8404	305	485	4332	25	8	62.9%	40	7.6%	7.8
Chad President	6'3, 222	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8881	0	3	0	0	0	0.0%	1	25.0%	-5.3
Ryan Rubley	6'3, 220	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8048
Will Hefley	6'5, 207	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7920
Luke Skipper	6'3, 200	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8125

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Zack Langer	RB					201	777	18	3.9	3.3	31.3%	3	3
D'Angelo Brewer	RB	5'9, 185	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7852	162	837	6	5.2	4.3	40.1%	2	1
Ramadi Warren	RB	5'9, 210	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8151	71	475	6	6.7	8.7	40.8%	3	2
Dane Evans	QB	6'1, 210	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8404	56	254	2	4.5	2.3	46.4%	4	2
James Flanders	RB	5'10, 203	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8125	21	87	0	4.1	1.6	33.3%	0	0
Chad President	QB	6'3, 222	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8881	16	64	0	4.0	7.0	25.0%	0	0
Rowdy Simon	RB	5'8, 203	Jr.	NR	NR	7	35	1	5.0	2.0	42.9%	0	0
Keevan Lucas	WR	5'10, 195	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8004	6	46	0	7.7	3.3	66.7%	0	0
Javon Thomas	RB	6'2, 223	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7959

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	Yds/ Target	%SD	Success Rate	IsoPPP
Keyarris Garrett	WR					159	96	1588	60.4%	33.7%	10.0	54.1%	43.4%	2.10
Joshua Atkinson	WR	6'2, 208	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8113	108	76	1071	70.4%	22.9%	9.9	61.1%	54.6%	1.73
Conner Floyd	IR					72	45	458	62.5%	15.3%	6.4	51.4%	44.4%	1.31
Justin Hobbs	WR	6'4, 207	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7593	53	32	551	60.4%	11.2%	10.4	54.7%	45.3%	2.11
Keevan Lucas	WR	5'10, 195	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8004	41	26	409	63.4%	8.7%	10.0	58.5%	48.8%	2.04
D'Angelo Brewer	RB	5'9, 185	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7852	17	15	107	88.2%	3.6%	6.3	58.8%	35.3%	1.45
Mandel Dixon	TE					7	4	29	57.1%	1.5%	4.1	85.7%	57.1%	0.62
Zack Langer	RB					5	4	61	80.0%	1.1%	12.2	0.0%	60.0%	1.74
Nigel Carter	WR	6'3, 205	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7883	4	2	27	50.0%	0.8%	6.8	0.0%	25.0%	2.16
Bishop Louie	IR	5'10, 172	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	NR	3	2	13	66.7%	0.6%	4.3	33.3%	33.3%	1.44
Chris Minter	TE	6'3, 247	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7756
Brodrick Umblance	WR	6'1, 184	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7893
Payton Prince	TE	6'4, 252	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7935
Jarion Anderson	WR	5'9, 179	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7793
Rob Riederer	TE	6'0, 230	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	NR
Josh Stewart	WR	6'4, 201	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8187
Jordan Brown	WR	6'2, 198	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8106
Keenen Johnson	WR	6'1, 190	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8090

4. All the toys you need

At 6'0, 220 pounds, Langer provided some size in the backfield and was the clear short-yardage guy of choice, scoring 18 touchdowns. He was pretty good at falling forward, too, and avoiding losses. That's obviously important. But from an upside perspective, Langer was limited, and his absence this year might mean a breakout opportunity for Brewer and sophomore Ramadi Warren, who combined to average 5.6 yards per carry to Langer's 3.9.

Brewer rushed for at least 90 yards in five games, and in a brief feature audition, Warren rushed 33 times for 307 yards against UCF and Cincinnati. Warren's three fumbles in 71 carries were far too much, but if maturation leads to improvement in that regard, the Brewer-Warren combination could be devastating. It certainly was in the spring game: The duo combined for 199 yards on 19 carries (granted, against the Tulsa defense).

Meanwhile, the loss of Garrett and Floyd should simply mean more opportunities for Justin Hobbs and Keevan Lucas. Lucas was the star of the 2014 offense, catching 101 passes for 1,219 yards; projected over 13 games, he was on pace for 85 catches and 1,330 yards through four games but injured his knee against Houston and was lost for the season.

In Lucas' absence, Joshua Atkinson emerged as a solid target; meanwhile, Hobbs surged in the middle of his freshman season, catching 24 passes for 438 yards in a six-game span before fading a bit late.

Lucas' presence in the slot, with Arkinson and Hobbs lined up wide, could create a trio more prolific than Garrett-Floyd-Atkinson/Hobbs was last year. That's a pretty exciting thought, as the receiving corps was a strength in 2015.

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	99.2	2.91	3.29	37.1%	64.4%	16.2%	80.8	7.2%	8.3%
Rank	76	62	59	88	75	17	96	108	85

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	2015 Starts	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Garrett Stafford	LG					13	39
Chris Wallace	RG					13	25
Dylan Foxworth	C					0	18
Evan Plagg	LT	6'3, 292	Jr.	NR	NR	13	13
Chandler Miller	C	6'3, 290	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7785	13	13
Blake Belcher	OT	6'5, 304	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8063	1	13
Willie Wright	RT	6'3, 296	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8144	12	12
Zac Uhles	LT	6'3, 276	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8044	0	1
Alex Pagonis	LG	6'5, 320	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7300	0	0
Tyler Bowling	RG	6'6, 325	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8095	0	0
Isaac Johnson	RT	6'7, 275	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8141	0	0
Blake Browning	C	6'0, 298	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7793
Deya Mhiesen	OL	6'7, 305	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8560
Rowdy Frederick	OL	6'4, 330	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8346
Tiller Bucktrot	OL	6'5, 350	Fr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8066
Waahid Muhammad	OL	6'7, 295	Fr.	2 stars (5.2)	0.8018

5. Dane took a lot of hits

The 2015 college football season was defined in part by quarterback injuries. Baylor, TCU, Notre Dame, Florida State, Oregon, and others all had their respective seasons defined in part by QB availability.

Evans took nearly every non-garbage time snap for Tulsa in 2015, but he took a lot of hits in the process, and it was perhaps a bit lucky that he didn't end up on the sidelines for a while. Tulsa's retooled line kept defenders out of the backfield in the run game (with help from Langer's ability to fall forward) but struggled in pass protection. Evans' willingness to extend plays to look downfield didn't really help in this regard. But regardless of fault, Evans took 40 sacks while rushing 56 additional times. That's risky.

Tulsa's line must replace two starters but returns four: 2014 starter Blake Belcher returns after tearing his ACL in the first game of last season. His return, along with that of veterans like Zac Uhles and Alex Pagonis (and the addition of big JUCO Deya Mhiesen) should assure that Tulsa's line is at least as effective as it was last year.

Still, 2015 backup QB and former four-star prospect Chad President should be ready to go -- Evans might be due a knock or two.

(Meanwhile, in my opinion, the fact that Tulsa signed linemen with the beautiful names of Rowdy Frederick and Tiller Bucktrot should have earned the Golden Hurricane's class an automatic spot in the top 25.)

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.32	97	IsoPPP+	81.4	122
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	46.6%	113	Succ. Rt. +	86.8	114
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	28.9	92	Off. FP+	29.0	89
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.7	93	Redzone S&P+	87.2	116
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	22.6		ACTUAL	24.0	+1.4

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	126	121	114	122
RUSHING	118	120	119	119
PASSING	125	117	105	115
Standard Downs		122	118	123
Passing Downs		115	109	116

Q1 Rk	123	1st Down Rk	122
Q2 Rk	96	2nd Down Rk	123
Q3 Rk	126	3rd Down Rk	103
Q4 Rk	114

6. Bill Young's worst defense in a very, very long time

Bill Young has been around a long time. From 1988 to 2012, he spent 24 seasons as a power-conference defensive coordinator at Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, Kansas, Miami, and Oklahoma State. His steady, conservative defenses were key in complementing prolific offenses at Kansas and OSU -- Kansas ranked 21st in Def. S&P+ in 2005 and 35th during 2007's 12-1 run, and Oklahoma State ranked 20th in 2009 and 21st during 2011's 12-1 run.

Young's defenses were never particularly elite in recent times, but they were always solid and sound.

2015 must have driven Young crazy. After a few years at the high school level, he returned to college football, inherited a unit that had fallen apart in 2014 (from 51st in 2013, the Golden Hurricane plummeted to 122nd in 2014) and found he couldn't do much with it. His approximate bend-don't-break principles couldn't apply with a defense that bent just fine but broke repeatedly. Tulsa allowed 259 gains of 10-plus yards last fall; no one else in the country allowed more than 241. Granted, part of that was because of tempo and the stress that the offense was putting on the defense, but ... when you allow 18 more gains of 10-plus yards than the wretched Texas Tech defense, you've got problems.

Improvement is likely in 2016, and not only because of "it almost literally can't get worse" principles. Four key linemen were sophomores in 2015, and the Golden Hurricane return six of eight linemen, five of six linebackers, and seven of nine defensive backs. Injuries luck was on Tulsa's side for the most part, but experience was not. This won't suddenly become the top-50 defense Young is accustomed to (especially if injuries are more of a problem), but it would be a surprise if the Golden Hurricane didn't attain some level of competence here.

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	85	3.18	3.19	43.7%	58.7%	19.4%	67.2	3.9%	5.1%
Rank	122	108	63	121	26	74	115	101	104

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Derrick Luetjen	DT					13	37.0	4.5%	9.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Jeremy Smith	DE	6'5, 260	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7652	11	31.5	3.8%	6.5	2.5	0	0	0	0
Derrick Alexander	DE					13	28.5	3.5%	8.5	3.5	0	2	1	0
Jesse Brubaker	DT	6'3, 270	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8093	13	23.0	2.8%	4.5	2.0	0	1	2	0
Frankie Davis	DE	6'2, 240	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8004	12	16.5	2.0%	1.0	0.0	0	1	0	0
Kolton Shindelar	DT	6'6, 276	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7883	12	10.5	1.3%	2.5	2.5	1	0	0	0
Jerry Uwaezuoke	DT	6'3, 286	Sr.	NR	NR	13	9.5	1.2%	1.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Myles Mouton	DE	6'3, 257	So.	2 stars (5.2)	0.7578	13	8.0	1.0%	3.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Suleiman Masumbuko	DT					11	5.5	0.7%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jake Hanks	DE	6'2, 240	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7752	6	3.0	0.4%	1.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Hayden Carman	DT	6'4, 289	Sr.	NR	NR	13	2.5	0.3%	0.0	0.0	0	1	0	0
Michael Anderson	DE	6'3, 250	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7900
Johnnie Williams	DE	6'5, 275	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8159
Tyarise Stevenson	DT	6'4, 320	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7954
Jimmy Nelson	DE	6'3, 248	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7903

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Matt Linscott	STAR	6'1, 223	Sr.	NR	NR	13	84.0	10.3%	16.0	5.0	1	4	1	0
Trent Martin	MIKE	6'2, 232	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8089	13	81.5	10.0%	14.0	2.0	0	3	4	0
Craig Suits	WLB	6'0, 220	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7300	11	37.0	4.5%	5.5	0.0	1	1	1	0
Zik Asiegbu	WLB					13	20.0	2.4%	1.0	0.5	0	0	1	0
Petera Wilson	MIKE	6'2, 220	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8607	13	14.5	1.8%	2.5	1.0	0	1	1	0
C.J. Gooden	LB	6'1, 227	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8133	10	13.0	1.6%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Shawn Norman	STAR					12	11.0	1.3%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Matt Hickman	MIKE					12	8.0	1.0%	0.0	0.0	0	0	1	0
Conner Sherwood	LB	6'3, 232	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8053	13	6.5	0.8%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Tim Quickel	LB	6'2, 225	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7593	11	4.5	0.5%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Khari Harding	LB	6'1, 235	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8595
Robert Revels III	LB	6'3, 234	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8213

7. Run stuffs were a relative strength

The pass rush was, like most things, a weakness for Tulsa in 2015, but the Golden Hurricane appeared to thrive at getting defenders into the backfield against the run. Linebackers Matt Linscott, Trent Martin, and Craig Suits, combined for 35.5 tackles for loss, and only seven were sacks. That's a lot of run stuffs. Combined with a decent presence from ends Jeremy Smith and Myles Mouton, and it appears you've got the components of a disruptive run defense.

The problem, however, was obvious: Making stops against the run helps a lot more when you aren't also a) giving up a ton of big run plays and b) giving up a lot of big gains on passing downs. That strong safety Michael Mudoh made 13 percent of Tulsa's tackles, 20-plus more than either Linscott or Martin, tells a story. Young had some nice, aggressive pieces, but he couldn't use them without risking a 30-yard gain.

Again, to the extent that this was an experience issue, things could improve. But you have to wonder about the level of athleticism and actual talent, too. Like Young, this front seven has a lot to prove in 2016.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Michael Mudoh	SS					13	105.5	12.9%	3.5	0	1	6	1	0
Jeremy Brady	FS	5'10, 197	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7600	13	59.5	7.3%	0	0	2	3	0	0
Kerwin Thomas	CB	5'10, 170	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7906	13	52.0	6.3%	2	0	2	12	1	0
Jordan Mitchell	FS	6'2, 187	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7793	13	31.5	3.8%	0	0	0	3	0	0
Darrell Williams	CB					11	28.0	3.4%	1	0	2	5	0	0
Will Barrow	CB	5'9, 172	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8444	11	24.5	3.0%	0	0	0	3	0	0
McKinley Whitfield	SS	6'4, 212	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8389	13	17.0	2.1%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Johnell Celistan	CB	6'2, 197	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7900	13	10.0	1.2%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Samuel Gottsch	S	6'2, 190	So.	NR	NR	13	7.5	0.9%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Brodrick Umblance	CB					13	7.0	0.9%	0	0	0	0	0	0
J.R. Reed	FS	6'1, 191	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7981	13	3.5	0.4%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Reginald Robinson II	CB	6'1, 185	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8345
Keidrien Wadley	CB	6'1, 185	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7300
Keanu Hill	CB	6'2, 185	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7855

8. Pass defense ... won't be worse?

Stressed by big run plays and a lack of a pass rush, the secondary didn't have much of a chance in 2015. It held up reasonably well in wins -- 55 percent completion rate, 126.9 passer rating -- but against the good teams it got consistently rocked (69 percent, 165.4).

Losing their leading tackler by far, Mudoh, isn't a good thing, nor is losing corner Darrell Williams. But there does appear to be some play-making abilty here: corner Kerwin Thomas defensed 14 passes, and Will Barrow and Johnell Celistan each got hands on passes in backup opportunities. The safety position could be well-manned with senior Jeremy Brady, junior Jordan Mitchell, and sophomores McKinley Whitfield and J.R. Reed. Add in JUCO transfer Keanu Hill and three-star redshirt freshman Reginald Robinson II, and it appears the secondary's got the athletes and some semblance of experience. One last box to check: more help from the front seven.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Dalton Parks	6'3, 209	Sr.	68	41.2	6	32	18	73.5%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Preston Soper	6'0, 205	Jr.	86	59.5	16	1	18.6%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Redford Jones	5'10, 175	Jr.	58-60	14-18	77.8%	3-7	42.9%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Bishop Louie	KR	5'10, 172	Jr.	20	19.5	0
Ramadi Warren	KR	5'9, 210	So.	12	20.3	0
Conner Floyd	PR			8	14.3	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams S&P+	112
Field Goal Efficiency	105
Punt Return Success Rate	12
Kick Return Success Rate	96
Punt Success Rate	50
Kickoff Success Rate	114

9. Kickoffs > punts

Good news: Dalton Park's punts are mostly unreturnable, and last year, at least, with Conner Floyd as return man, punt returns were a strength.

Bad news: Punts didn't matter much in Tulsa games. Floyd got all of eight return opportunities all year.

Worse news: Kickoffs and kick returns, far more frequent occurrences, were a weakness. The result was a field position magin that ranked 99th in the country. Tulsa forfeited about 2.8 yards per possession to opponents based solely off of field position. With that defense, that was beyond problematic. And now Floyd's gone.

2016 Schedule & Projection Factors

2016 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk	Proj. Margin	Win Probability
3-Sep	San Jose State	92	3.4	58%
10-Sep	at Ohio State	14	-24.8	8%
17-Sep	NC A&T	NR	18.1	85%
24-Sep	at Fresno State	94	-3.5	42%
7-Oct	SMU	98	5.2	62%
15-Oct	at Houston	53	-12.9	23%
22-Oct	Tulane	122	13.1	78%
29-Oct	at Memphis	77	-8.5	31%
5-Nov	East Carolina	78	-1.4	47%
12-Nov	at Navy	66	-10.9	26%
19-Nov	at Central Florida	99	-1.5	47%
25-Nov	Cincinnati	70	-2.9	43%
Projected wins: 5.5

Five-Year F/+ Rk	-7.1% (75)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	89 / 79
2015 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	4 / -4.0
2015 TO Luck/Game	+3.3
Returning Production (Off. / Def.)	70% (73%, 67%)
2015 Second-order wins (difference)	4.8 (1.2)

10. Plenty of bad teams still on the schedule

With a tougher schedule, Tulsa might not have found the six wins requisite (in most years) for a bowl appearance. The Golden Hurricane didn't beat any teams with much of a pulse and really only came close once. That wasn't their fault, mind you, but there's no question the schedule helped.

The schedule might be an asset again in 2016. Tulsa faces six teams projected worse than 90th in S&P+, and while the projection has the Golden Hurricane remaining about the same as last year (93rd), it's not hard to see them improving on both sides of the ball. Dane Evans is in his second year of running the Montgomery's system now, and despite some losses, it's impossible not to be pretty excited about what he'll have stocked in the skill position drawer. Meanwhile, experience should help the defense to improve at least a little bit unless injuries strike in a rougher way than last year.

Barring massive injuries, then, I view the No. 93 projection as a bit conservative, and I would expect something in the 7-5 range for Tulsa this time out.

A lot will be dictated by two early-season tossups against Mountain West teams. Go 2-0 against SJSU and Fresno State, and Tulsa is sitting pretty. Go 0-2, and suddenly a sixth win is hard to find.

Philip Montgomery passed his Year Zero test with flying colors and should be able to put up points to his heart's content in 2016. Whether his defense can actually stop decent offenses occasionally, however, will dictate his ceiling both this year and into the future.