USF football went from bad to awesome overnight. Is awesome the new normal?

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. The new normal?

A funny thing happened in the AAC last year.

Early on, three up-and-comers stole headlines. Memphis beat Ole Miss and started 8-0. Temple beat Penn State, started 7-0, and brought ESPN College GameDay to town for a game against Notre Dame that it nearly won. Navy and its record-setting quarterback started 9-1, also with only a loss to Notre Dame.

The AAC emerged as the conference for thrilling Group of Five action, finishing with Houston's two-touchdown win over Florida State in the Peach Bowl.

But at the end of the regular season, a completely different team was the hottest in the conference.

It seemed like Willie Taggart was done in Tampa-St. Pete. His first two years had resulted in excellent recruiting and a 6-18 record. Recruiting will buy you time, but only so much. A 1-3 start to 2015 made it feel like doom was on the way, that Taggart's long-term role would be bringing in talent with which his replacement could win. I didn't feel good about the title of my 2015 USF preview -- "It's bad" -- but ... it was bad.

USF had shown brief signs of life, though. The Bulls were tied 7-7 at halftime with Florida State before falling victim to Dalvin Cook's 266 rushing yards, and they went up 10-0 on a Memphis team at its peak before falling late. There was nothing appealing about an 18-point loss to Maryland, but there were hints of quality play. And the hints became shouts when Syracuse came to town.

USF beat the Orange and SMU by 24, took down an emerging UConn on the road, won at ECU, then kicked things up one more gear. They finished the regular season beating Temple by 21, Cincinnati by 38, and UCF by 41.

Even with a bowl loss to WKU -- the season's best mid-major per the S&P+ ratings -- USF finished in the S&P+ top 50 for the first time since 2011, Skip Holtz's second year. The defense was solid (46th in Def. S&P+) after a year in the wilderness, and the offense was legitimately interesting (50th in Off. S&P+) for the first time since ranking 44th in 2008, Jim Leavitt's second-to-last year.

This was a USF renaissance, and a month into the season we didn't really know it was coming. It just sort of happened.

Sudden gains are tricky to interpret. From a stat standpoint, you tend to get better projections from an extended period of time -- on average, a look at five-year recent history (perhaps weighted for recency), for instance, probably tells you more about a program's baseline health than a nine-game sample from last season.

But if your sudden gains come from a depth chart coming of age, or a quarterback emerging, why would five-year history play much of a role? The team we saw late last year, with running back Marlon Mack and quarterback Quinton Flowers creating a devastating backfield, and receiver Rodney Adams creating big plays, and linebackers Auggie Sanchez and Nigel Harris getting into the backfield, and devastating corner Deatrick Nichols making plays near and far from the line of scrimmage ... well ... that's the team we could see again. This breakthrough didn't happen with a bunch of seniors.

USF has major questions in the trenches, where three starters are gone on each side. But if quality recruiting helps to prevent too much of a breakdown, the pieces are in place for the Bulls to do a late-2015 impression for much of 2016.

2015 Schedule & Results

Record: 8-5 | Adj. Record: 7-6 | Final F/+ Rk: 44 | Final S&P+ Rk: 50
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Win Expectancy	vs. S&P+	Performance vs. Vegas
5-Sep	Florida A&M	N/A	51-3	W	90%	100%	+30.4
12-Sep	at Florida State	12	14-34	L	26%	4%	+14.3	+8.0
19-Sep	at Maryland	76	17-35	L	9%	3%	-5.2	-11.0
2-Oct	Memphis	41	17-24	L	29%	14%	+3.4	+2.0
10-Oct	Syracuse	85	45-24	W	88%	100%	+31.0	+18.5
17-Oct	at Connecticut	80	28-20	W	45%	60%	+4.1	+11.0
24-Oct	SMU	106	38-14	W	76%	100%	+7.1	+12.5
31-Oct	at Navy	21	17-29	L	39%	16%	+0.0	-4.5
7-Nov	at East Carolina	73	22-17	W	62%	80%	+5.5	+9.0
14-Nov	Temple	45	44-23	W	89%	99%	+24.4	+24.0
20-Nov	Cincinnati	72	65-27	W	97%	100%	+35.1	+40.5
26-Nov	at Central Florida	128	44-3	W	84%	100%	+14.9	+41.0
21-Dec	vs. Western Kentucky	15	35-45	L	44%	18%	+0.5	-7.5

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	31.6	50	25.1	46
Points Per Game	33.6	41	22.9	35

3. The switch flipped

Thanks mostly to a romp over FAMU, USF's early-season numbers were at least decent. But against two ACC teams and Memphis, the Bulls still didn't look the part of a breakthrough candidate. Playing well for a quarter or a half isn't the same thing as challenging for 60 minutes.

But after a rough couple of games against FSU and Maryland, quarterback Flowers figured things out against Memphis.

He completed 17 of 26 passes for 199 yards and a 134.7 passer rating; at that point, his season-long passer rating was 112.4. Over the next nine games, it would rise to 166.0. He still wasn't a high-efficiency passer, but his mistakes diminished (he had four INTs in the first four games, and four in the final nine), and the play-action potential of this offense skyrocketed. The effects were obvious.

• Average Percentile Performance (first 4 games): 39% (~top 80) | Record: 1-3 | Yards per play: USF 5.5, Opp 5.1 (+0.4) -- without FAMU: Opp 6.0, USF 4.7 (-1.3)
• Average Percentile Performance (next 8 games): 73% (~top 35) | Record: 7-1 | Yards per play: USF 6.8, Opp 5.3 (+1.5)

Flowers was an impressive get for Taggart and company a few years ago, a nearly four-star recruit. His output as a true freshman wasn't particularly inspiring -- 8-for-20 passing with two picks. But freshmen become sophomores. And with a little help from the offense, the defense was able to tighten its grip.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.38	21	IsoPPP+	112.7	33
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	43.8%	40	Succ. Rt. +	100.8	71
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	30.5	84	Def. FP+	30.8	93
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.7	42	Redzone S&P+	106.3	51
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	17.8		ACTUAL	15	-2.8

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	35	37	71	33
RUSHING	10	18	56	10
PASSING	95	58	83	45
Standard Downs		32	60	25
Passing Downs		64	82	55

Q1 Rk	50	1st Down Rk	39
Q2 Rk	55	2nd Down Rk	15
Q3 Rk	23	3rd Down Rk	36
Q4 Rk	53

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.
Quinton Flowers	6'0, 209	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8890	162	275	2290	22	8	58.9%	18	6.1%	7.5
Steven Bench					14	22	177	2	1	63.6%	1	4.3%	7.6
Asiantii Woulard (UCLA)	6'3, 213	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9369
Brett Kean	6'1, 220	RSFr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8187
Chris Oladokun	6'2, 184	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8327

3. The next box to check: passing downs success

Despite a below-average pace, South Florida finished the season with 77 gains of 20-plus yards, 25th in the country. That was a massive improvement of 2014's total of 45 (107th). A lot of this sudden explosiveness came because of the ground game, but Flowers' ability to get the ball downfield was huge. He averaged 14.1 yards per completion, which, when combined with his and Mack's explosiveness, gave USF's offense the personality of a coil, ready to spring out at any moment.

Now just imagine what the Bulls could do with a bit more efficiency and a bit more success on passing downs.

Young quarterbacks are not typically efficient quarterbacks, and Flowers was still quite young last fall. But the next step in his development will be learning how to keep the chains moving once behind schedule. That he and Mack gained at least five yards on 45 percent of their carries meant that he wasn't facing TOO many passing downs, but the explosiveness aspect of this offense was still far ahead of the efficiency aspect.

On third-and-4 or more, Flowers completed just 38 of 77 passes (49 percent) for 422 yards, three touchdowns, and two interceptions. Only half of the 38 completions went for a first down. If you could stop USF on first down, you were almost certainly going to stop the Bulls on third.

Quarterbacks with this level of mobility do not always improve too much when it comes to passing downs passing. We'll see if Flowers can become an exception.

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Marlon Mack	RB	6'0, 210	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8365	210	1381	8	6.6	6.7	44.8%	3	0
Quinton Flowers	QB	6'0, 210	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8890	173	1077	12	6.2	5.7	45.7%	3	1
Darius Tice	RB	5'10, 211	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8256	88	460	4	5.2	4.9	39.8%	2	1
D'Ernest Johnson	RB	5'10, 208	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8727	71	307	1	4.3	3.1	39.4%	1	1
Rodney Adams	WR	6'1, 190	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8992	11	87	1	7.9	8.4	45.5%	2	2
Steven Bench	QB					8	65	2	8.1	4.9	62.5%	1	0
Trevon Sands	RB	5'11, 170	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8539
Elijah Mack	RB	6'0, 215	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8437

4. From potential to production

Flowers' emergence as a dual threat in the backfield, helped both Mack and the USF offensive line. Mack was still a 1,000-yard rusher as a freshman in 2014, averaging 5.1 yards per carry, but he gained at least five yards only 32 percent of the time. USF's run game was woefully inefficient.

The combination of an extra year of experience for Mack, a mobile quarterback (Mike White and Steven Bench combined for 22 non-sack carries and 55 yards in 2014), and an extra year of experience for the line made all the difference in the world. USF rose from 126th in Adj. Line yards to 31st, from 125th in Rushing S&P+ to 18th. And despite Flowers' sophomore limitations, the Bulls also improved from 112th in Passing S&P+ to 58th.

This was a rising tide, and Mack benefited more than anybody. In only seven more carries, he gained 340 more yards.

That Flowers returns next to Mack is unquestionably a good thing, but there are at least a few questions to answer up front. USF must replace the center-guard combination of Brynjar Gudmundsson and all-conference Thor Jozwiak, plus right tackle Mak Djulbegovic. (The Great Names quotient up front is really taking a hit this year.) Juniors Jeremi Hall and Glen Bethel are formerly well-regarded recruits who have waited for their turn in the starting lineup, and USF's massive improvement last year came despite losing three different starters up front. So turnover doesn't have to be the end of the world. But it's at least a question the Bulls have to answer. And if the answer is satisfactory, the offense will roll.

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	Yds/ Target	%SD	Success Rate	IsoPPP
Rodney Adams	SLOT	6'1, 190	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8992	69	44	816	63.8%	24.0%	11.8	63.8%	49.3%	2.21
Marquez Valdes-Scantling (NC State)	WR-X	6'5, 205	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8119	43	22	281	51.2%	10.8%	6.5	50.0%	N/A	N/A
Chris Barr	SLOT	5'10, 175	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8389	40	23	200	57.5%	13.9%	5.0	67.5%	40.0%	1.16
Ryeshene Bronson	WR-Z	6'3, 200	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8753	36	17	258	47.2%	12.5%	7.2	66.7%	38.9%	1.62
D'Ernest Johnson	RB	5'10, 208	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8727	33	25	346	75.8%	11.5%	10.5	45.5%	51.5%	1.98
Sean Price	TE					28	20	306	71.4%	9.8%	10.9	53.6%	67.9%	1.62
Marlon Mack	RB	6'0, 205	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8365	20	16	111	80.0%	7.0%	5.6	50.0%	35.0%	1.50
Elkanah Dillon	TE	6'5, 245	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8256	17	9	208	52.9%	5.9%	12.2	58.8%	47.1%	2.65
A.J. Legree	WR-Z	6'1, 195	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8438	12	7	53	58.3%	4.2%	4.4	58.3%	33.3%	1.23
Tyre McCants	WR-X	5'11, 210	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8606	10	6	162	60.0%	3.5%	16.2	30.0%	50.0%	3.35
Darius Tice	RB	5'10, 206	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8256	7	5	10	71.4%	2.4%	1.4	42.9%	0.0%	0.00
Marlon Pope	TE					6	2	42	33.3%	2.1%	7.0	33.3%	33.3%	1.89
Jordan Reed	SLOT	5'10, 170	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8289	5	4	18	80.0%	1.7%	3.6	60.0%	20.0%	2.04
Austin Aikens	WR	6'0, 184	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8181	1	0	0	0.0%	0.3%	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Stanley Clerveaux	WR-X	6'3, 203	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8270
Mitchell Wilcox	TE	6'4, 243	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8098
Darnell Salomon	WR	6'3, 210	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8971
DeVontres Dukes	WR	6'4, 203	Fr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8113

5. All the continuity you could want

If the running game is up to snuff (and I assume it will be), USF has even more passing weapons this year. Losing high-efficiency tight end Sean Price hurts, but every wideout targeted with a pass last year is back, and NC State transfer Marquez Valdes-Scantling is a newly eligible, big-bodied option.

In the spring, the presence of Valdes-Scantling moved Rodney Adams to the slot; that's an interesting development, as Adams was devastating from a wide position last year. Of 215 players with at least 65 targets last year, Adams was one of only 11 to combine 18-plus yards per catch with a success rate of at least 49 percent.

Adams was an incredible threat on the right side of the field; we'll see if this slot move sticks, or what his slot presence can do for wideouts Valdes-Scantling, Ryeshene Bronson, etc. And we'll also see if USF can find a role for the latest star recruit in the receiving corps, big-bodied four-star freshman Darnell Salomon.

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	108.8	3.2	3.8	43.6%	63.0%	17.2%	92.9	4.7%	6.7%
Rank	31	21	15	18	82	32	73	62	52

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	2015 Starts	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Thor Jozwiak	LG					13	27	2015 2nd All-AAC
Brynjar Gudmundsson	C					13	38
Dominique Threatt	RG	6'1, 323	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8594	13	20
Kofi Amichia	LT	6'4, 291	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8619	13	14
Mak Djulbegovic	RT					13	13
Cameron Ruff	LG	6'3, 318	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8382	0	1
Clavion Nelson	RT					0	0
Jeremi Hall	RG	6'5, 340	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8496	0	0
Glen Bethel	RT	6'6, 300	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8690	0	0
Michael Smith	LG	6'3, 303	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8178	0	0
Michael Galati	C	6'3, 290	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8046	0	0
Billy Atterbury	RT	6'4, 295	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8335
Marcus Norman	LT	6'6, 300	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8392
Christion Gainer	OL	6'6, 310	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8471
Logan MacDonald	OL	6'4, 270	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8122
Michael Wiggs	OL	6'3, 290	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7986

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.29	79	IsoPPP+	103.2	54
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	39.0%	44	Succ. Rt. +	104.8	50
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	31.5	36	Off. FP+	30.9	42
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	3.8	20	Redzone S&P+	109.7	29
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	22.0		ACTUAL	25.0	+3.0

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	52	51	50	54
RUSHING	31	54	47	63
PASSING	85	59	62	55
Standard Downs		63	65	69
Passing Downs		27	22	37

Q1 Rk	21	1st Down Rk	56
Q2 Rk	29	2nd Down Rk	49
Q3 Rk	109	3rd Down Rk	40
Q4 Rk	51

6. The identity is set

Tom Allen spent one year at USF, and it jump-started both his career and the Bulls' defense. USF had fallen from 34th to 96th in Def. S&P+ in 2014, but Allen, the former Ole Miss linebackers coach, brought his attacking 4-2-5 defense to town, and the results were fantastic. After a month of decent play, USF began to swarm as intended.

Allen took the Indiana defensive coordinator job, but his lone season in Tampa helped to craft an identity Taggart wants to maintain. He promoted linebackers coach Raymond Woodie to defensive coordinator, and it appears the 4-2-5 "Bulls Sharks" defense (Get it? Because Ole Miss went by the "Land Sharks?") will remain intact.

Now we just have to see if Woodie's got the linemen to do what Allen did last year.

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	102.4	2.61	2.96	35.9%	68.9%	24.5%	125.8	6.8%	8.7%
Rank	48	25	44	38	88	13	27	14	38

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Eric Lee	DE					13	40.5	5.2%	12.0	5.0	1	4	2	0
Deadrin Senat	DT	6'1, 315	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8712	12	36.5	4.7%	5.5	0.0	0	0	1	0
James Hamilton	DT					13	26.0	3.4%	6.5	3.0	0	0	0	0
Derrick Calloway (2014)	DT	6'2, 285	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8746	12	24.5	3.6%	5.0	3.0	0	2	1	0
Zack Bullock	BULL					13	24.0	3.1%	4.5	1.0	0	2	0	0
Demetrius Hill	DE					13	21.5	2.8%	7.5	3.0	1	3	1	0
Daniel Awoleke	DT	6'5, 283	Sr.	NR	NR	13	18.5	2.4%	4.0	2.0	0	0	0	0
Bruce Hector	DT	6'4, 296	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7961	12	16.5	2.1%	7.0	5.0	0	1	1	0
Kevin Bronson	DT	6'4, 280	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8367	10	11.5	1.5%	3.5	2.5	1	3	1	0
Mike Love	DE	6'4, 260	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8282	12	7.0	0.9%	1.5	1.0	0	1	0	0
Vincent Jackson	BULL	6'2, 248	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8572
Josh Black	BULL	6'2, 250	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8233
Eric Mayes	DT	6'4, 284	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8217
Juwan Brown	DE	6'2, 250	So.	NR	NR
Marlon Gonzalez	DT	6'4, 280	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8510
Kirk Livingstone	DE	6'4, 256	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8249
Tramal Ivy	DE	6'4, 243	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8622
LaDarrius Jackson	BULL	6'4, 243	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8342
Frank Johnson	DE	6'5, 235	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8076

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Auggie Sanchez	MLB	6'2, 242	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7793	13	94.0	12.2%	8.5	0.5	0	1	0	0
Nigel Harris	WLB	6'0, 231	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8594	11	36.0	4.7%	4.5	1.5	1	0	1	0
Tashon Whitehurst	WLB					10	29.0	3.8%	1.5	1.5	0	0	0	0
Danny Thomas	MLB	6'1, 225	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8543	12	8.0	1.0%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
C.J. Garye	WLB					9	7.0	0.9%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Nick Holman	WLB					11	4.0	0.5%	0.0	0.0	0	1	0	0
Jimmy Bayes	LB	6'3, 225	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8743
Cecil Cherry	MLB	6'0, 240	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8771
Nico Sawtelle	LB	6'2, 220	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8094
Andre Polk	LB	6'4, 215	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8520
Mi'Cario Stanley	MLB	6'2, 225	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8481

7. A rebuild up front

USF boasted seven linemen with at least four tackles for loss last season, but five are now gone. That's scary for a couple of different reasons. First, it lops off a good amount of proven play-making ability; USF ranked 13th in stuff rate and 27th in Adj. Sack Rate, and the line was a big part of that disruptive ability. Backups like tackle Kevin Bronson and Mike Love showed flashes of potential in limited action, and they could thrive with more opportunities. And with returning juniors Deadrin Senat and Bruce Hector and sixth-year senior Daniel Awoleke still ahead of Bronson (and former starter Derrick Calloway maybe returning after dealing with academic issues), it does appear the tackle rotation will be outstanding. Still, you're trading a lot of production for a lot of potential at end.

Second, it kills depth. USF went eight or nine deep up front last year. Even if players like Love and Bronson begin to thrive, only four returnees made any tackles last year. The second string in 2016 will almost certainly consist of sophomores and newcomers.

Now, Taggart has recruited well enough that perhaps this isn't a problem at all. The three likely BULL ends -- sophomores Vincent Jackson, Josh Black, and LaDarrius Jackson -- were all mid- to high-three-star recruits, and any of them could thrive given an opportunity. Another mid-three-star recruit, JUCO end Tramal Ivy, could also produce quickly. So could redshirt freshman Kirk Livingstone or Frank Johnson, another JUCO.

Still, USF is moving from "did" to "could" this year. Maybe this all works out okay, but it's not a given.

If the line holds up, however, the linebackers should once again thrive. The duo of Auggie Sanchez and Nigel Harris returns after combining for 13 tackles for loss (a solid number for a set of 4-2-5 linebackers), and four-star former star recruits like Danny Thomas, Jimmy Bayes, and Cecil Cherry could each be ready to contribute as well.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Jamie Byrd	STRIKER					13	74.5	9.7%	11	5	3	4	2	0
Deatrick Nichols	CB	5'10, 185	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8507	13	55.0	7.1%	8.5	1	4	5	2	0
Nate Godwin	STRIKER	5'10, 205	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8435	13	54.5	7.1%	1	0	0	3	0	0
Devin Abraham	FS	5'9, 188	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8220	13	46.0	6.0%	2	1	3	3	0	0
Tajee Fullwood	FS	6'2, 199	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8457	13	34.0	4.4%	1	0	0	2	2	0
Johnny Ward	CB	6'0, 178	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7961	12	26.5	3.4%	1	1	0	1	0	0
Ronnie Hoggins	CB	5'8, 170	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8512	13	24.0	3.1%	1.5	0	2	6	0	0
Mazzi Wilkins	CB	6'0, 170	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8401	11	16.0	2.1%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Khalid McGee	STRIKER	5'10, 197	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8625	12	15.5	2.0%	3	0	0	0	0	1
Jalen Spencer	CB	6'0, 183	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8162	10	4.5	0.6%	0	0	1	0	0	0
Jaymon Thomas	SS	6'3, 196	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7859	6	4.5	0.6%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Lamar Robbins	CB	6'2, 200	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8754	9	3.0	0.4%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Nate Ferguson	CB	5'9, 180	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8148	5	2.0	0.3%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Hassan Childs	SS	6'0, 180	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8241
Austin Hudson	FS	6'2, 209	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7994
Malik Dixon	SS	6'3, 207	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8355
Craig Watts	S	6'0, 190	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8903
Josh Dunn	S	6'0, 195	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8560
Armunz Mathews	DB	6'0, 190	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8328
Michael Hampton	CB	6'1, 180	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8234

8. Almost all the continuity you could want

The line is basically the only question mark. In Allen's scheme, the secondary went from young and atrocious in 2014 to dynamic and reliable in 2015. Opponents' passer rating fell from 141.3 (with just six interceptions) in 2014 to 118.8 (with 17) last fall. And over the last half of the season, the pass defense went from decent to outstanding.

• First six games: 60% completion rate, 131.9 passer rating
• Next six games: 53% completion rate, 107.5 passer rating

Losing Jamie Byrd, the dynamic nickel back in this alignment, hurts. Byrd accounted for a rare combination of 11 tackles for loss and seven passes defensed last fall. But everyone else is back, from severely underrated corner Deatrick Nichols (8.5 TFLs, nine passes defensed), to safeties Nate Godwin, Devin Abraham, Tajee Fullwood, and Khalid McGee to corners Johnny Ward, Ronnie Hoggins, and Mazzi Wilkins. Hoggins and McGee combined for 4.5 tackles for loss and eight passes defensed as freshmen last season, but they might still have to wait one more year to play a significant role because the depth chart is so loaded. And this says nothing of players like redshirt freshman Malik Dixon or four-star freshman Craig Watts, who might have to wait a couple of years.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Mattias Ciabatti			57	43.2	4	12	13	43.9%
Brent Gordon	6'3, 190	So.	7	39.6	0	4	1	71.4%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Michael Hill			61	55.6	2	2	3.3%
Emilio Nadelman	5'6, 173	Jr.	20	56.7	5	2	25.0%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Emilio Nadelman	5'6, 173	Jr.	53-54	9-11	81.8%	6-12	50.0%
Michael Hill			1-1	0-0	N/A	0-0	N/A

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
D'Ernest Johnson	KR	5'10, 208	Jr.	21	26.8	0
Rodney Adams	KR	6'1, 190	Sr.	16	29.1	1
Tajee Fullwood	PR	6'2, 203	Jr.	19	10.4	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams S&P+	70
Field Goal Efficiency	85
Punt Return Success Rate	103
Kick Return Success Rate	9
Punt Success Rate	33
Kickoff Success Rate	126

9. Explosiveness coming, explosiveness going

You were guaranteed to see some pretty big kick returns in USF games last year. The Bulls averaged 26.7 yards per return, sixth in the FBS last year; meanwhile, while they allowed only 19.9 yards per return (38th), they were all-or-nothing, giving up 11 returns of 30-plus yards (120th). And they kicked fewer touchbacks than almost anybody in the country.

Emilio Nadelman showed decent leg strength, making six of 12 field goals from beyond 40 yards. If he can improve on his 56.7-yard kickoff average and boot a few more touchbacks, USF's special teams strengths should outweigh its weaknesses.

2016 Schedule & Projection Factors

2016 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk	Proj. Margin	Win Probability
3-Sep	Towson	NR	30.3	96%
10-Sep	Northern Illinois	79	10.9	74%
17-Sep	at Syracuse	44	-2.0	45%
24-Sep	Florida State	5	-8.9	30%
1-Oct	at Cincinnati	70	2.3	55%
8-Oct	East Carolina	78	10.8	73%
15-Oct	Connecticut	81	12.8	77%
21-Oct	at Temple	61	0.5	51%
28-Oct	Navy	66	8.3	68%
12-Nov	at Memphis	77	3.7	58%
19-Nov	at SMU	98	10.4	73%
26-Nov	Central Florida	99	17.7	85%
Projected wins: 7.9

Five-Year F/+ Rk	-9.2% (81)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	54 / 49
2015 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	10 / 4.2
2015 TO Luck/Game	+2.4
Returning Production (Off. / Def.)	79% (89%, 70%)
2015 Second-order wins (difference)	7.9 (0.1)

10. Fewer tossups than everybody else

Thanks in part to recruiting, USF's projected S&P+ rating ranks 41st overall and first in the AAC. That's a decent amount of faith, considering the Bulls' initial struggles under Taggart and the rebuilding in the trenches.

In a conference loaded with parity, this gives the Bulls a few more likely wins than other AAC contenders. That's an important currency. They have at least a 73 percent chance of winning in six games and are between 45 and 58 percent in four more.

From a stat perspective, USF is the favorite in the AAC East. Defending champion Temple will have something to say about that, but the Owls have plenty to prove in their own right. Regardless, it appears the bones of USF are strong.