Kentucky's football rebuild has not gone as planned. Is 2016 the breakthrough?

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 slippery hill to climb

Recruiting well out of the gates will earn you goodwill and buy you time, especially when you're in a rebuilding job.

But your grace period isn't particularly long; to keep recruiting well, you need to show improvement quickly. And the balance is always tricky -- the results need to come while most of your good recruiting classes are too young to make that big a difference.

Mark Stoops hit every right note when he started out at Kentucky. There was that moment in Summer 2013, for instance, when he had the top recruiting class in the country. While mid-summer recruiting rankings are only useful with many large grains of salt -- that top class ended up ranking 22nd in the 247Sports Composite, powered mostly by early commitments -- it was supposed to signify something. Kentucky isn't supposed to sign even top-25 classes unless the sport involves a round ball.

In the two seasons that followed, Kentucky has twice started quickly, then crumbled. The Wildcats were 5-1 in 2014 before losing six straight by an average score of 44-22. Last year, they were 4-1, then lost six of seven. (The only win was over Charlotte.)

In Stoops' three seasons, they are 4-20 in SEC play.

Struggling is common in the early stages of a rebuild. But 2015 was particularly disappointing.

It wasn't that UK didn't improve enough. The Wildcats regressed drastically. The record remained the same, but they fell from 58th to 95th in S&P+, worse than when they were at 2-10 in 2013. Under a new coordinator, the offense fell from 74th to 104th in Off. S&P+. The passing game was woefully inefficient, and while the run game had its explosive moments, there weren't enough to consistently move the chains.

Following the loss of a couple of difference-makers up front, the Wildcats were toothless on defense, ranking 122nd in Adj. Sack Rate and 121st in stuff rate. There was no havoc whatsoever. It felt like this was unintentionally a bend-don't-break defense, only it gave up too many big plays.

It just didn't feel like Kentucky had the talent necessary to do damage in the SEC.

Stoops hasn't found a set of offensive coaches he trusts yet (he brought in a couple more new ones this year), and while he was a successful defensive coordinator, he has not yet fielded even a top-50 defense, per Def. S&P+.

Recruiting has fallen into the mid-30s (still solid, considering the record), and UK's preseason S&P+ projection is the worst in the SEC. This has gone from hopeful to dire awfully quickly.

If that 2014 class begins to develop, however, Stoops could still right the ship. Of the six 247 four-star recruits he signed in 2014, five could become either starters or key contributors this year: quarterback Drew Barker, Williams (the only signee who has truly played like a four-star thus far), defensive linemen Denzil Ware and Matt Elam, and defensive back Darius West.

If the offense improves, it will likely be because Barker and a trio of 2014 receivers (Dorian Baker, Garrett Johnson, Blake Bone) developed a strong rapport to complement Williams. If the defense improves, odds are good that an improved line led by not only Elam and Ware but also 2014er Adrian Middleton (and maybe Tymere Dubose, too) led the way.

The 2014 class was the reason we all thought we Stoops was maybe onto something. And now the 2014 class will have to save a foundering program.

I don't want to call this a make-or-break year, because I don't think Stoops is in danger of getting fired (barring some 1-11 debacle), but UK fell off-track in a major way. It's hard to imagine things working out well for Stoops unless we begin to see some serious hints of progress this year.

2015 Schedule & Results

Record: 5-7 | Adj. Record: 4-8 | Final F/+ Rk: 91 | Final S&P+ Rk: 95
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Win Expectancy	vs. S&P+	Performance vs. Vegas
5-Sep	UL-Lafayette	104	40-33	W	68%	90%	+0.2	-10.0
12-Sep	at South Carolina	88	26-22	W	28%	23%	+20.8	+11.5
19-Sep	Florida	27	9-14	L	22%	4%	-0.2	-2.0
26-Sep	Missouri	75	21-13	W	70%	92%	+15.4	+5.0
3-Oct	Eastern Kentucky	N/A	34-27	W	41%	69%	-16.2
15-Oct	Auburn	33	27-30	L	54%	58%	-2.4	-1.0
24-Oct	at Mississippi State	16	16-42	L	9%	0%	-11.6	-14.5
31-Oct	Tennessee	18	21-52	L	10%	0%	-22.0	-22.0
7-Nov	at Georgia	30	3-27	L	7%	0%	-6.9	-10.0
14-Nov	at Vanderbilt	83	17-21	L	48%	61%	+6.6	-1.0
21-Nov	Charlotte	124	58-10	W	90%	100%	+34.4	+23.5
28-Nov	Louisville	39	24-38	L	15%	1%	-4.2	-10.0

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	23.2	104	30.1	80
Points Per Game	24.7	95	27.4	69

2. Winning on the road comes last

I'm writing a book. It's about 50 of the most interesting college football teams of all time; the 1993 Wisconsin Rose Bowl team made the list.

I bring this up not because the Badgers were, like UK, led by a successful former defensive coordinator (former Notre Dame DC Barry Alvarez), but because a) I recently finished this chapter and it's fresh in my mind, and b) in the early years under Alvarez, Wisconsin was dragged down by its road performances. The Badgers were 1-11 away from Camp Randall in Alvarez's first three seasons and fell just short of bowl bids in his second and third years (both 5-6 campaigns).

So ... Kentucky to the Rose Bowl this year then? Probably not. Wisconsin's third season under Alvarez was full of clear potential and close calls -- the 1992 Badgers beat Ohio State and lost three road games by a combined 10 points, while 2015 Kentucky's best win was against Missouri by eight points at home, and the only decent road performances were against South Carolina and Vanderbilt.

• UK on the road:
  Record: 1-3 | Average percentile performance: 23% (~top 100) | Yards per play: Opp 6.2, UK 5.0 (-1.2)
• UK at home:
  Record: 4-4 | Average percentile performance: 46% (~top 70) | Yards per play: UK 5.7, Opp 5.2 (+0.5)

Still, Alvarez's tenure is a reminder that a) it takes a while to build talent when you inherit a down program, and b) good road performances are often the last piece of the puzzle. Kentucky fans can hope, anyway.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.26	65	IsoPPP+	100.2	66
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	37.4%	108	Succ. Rt. +	97.8	82
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	32.0	111	Def. FP+	31.0	95
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.4	65	Redzone S&P+	104.0	57
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	19.7		ACTUAL	22	+2.3

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	89	75	82	66
RUSHING	79	42	52	40
PASSING	79	91	96	89
Standard Downs		91	86	91
Passing Downs		43	68	43

Q1 Rk	40	1st Down Rk	61
Q2 Rk	110	2nd Down Rk	43
Q3 Rk	48	3rd Down Rk	75
Q4 Rk	28

3. A Cincinnati offense

After a one-year experiment with a spread-like offense that didn't really take, Stoops looked a little bit north for help in installing his third offense in three years. Now offensive coordinator Eddie Gran and quarterbacks coach Darin Hinshaw (also listed as co-coordinator), imports from the University of Cincinnati, will attempt to deliver Stoops his first decent offense.

Cincinnati's offense had quite a bit of upside. The Bearcats were dynamic at throwing, ranking 23rd in Passing S&P+ while balancing efficiency with explosiveness. The run game didn't produce enough big plays to be reliable, but with former blue-chipper Gunner Kiel, UC's offense was one of the better in the mid-major universe.

Kentucky has its own former blue-chipper in charge. Barker took the starting job from Patrick Towles last year, which resulted in Towles transferring to Boston College. The problem: Barker didn't have a chance to show much upside. Towles' battles with mistake throws got him replaced -- he was maddening in his ability to make a few consecutive great throws, then ruin the progress with an interception or a poor throw. But he was also able to occasionally deliver a big play or two. His 11.7 yards per completion weren't great, but they were better than Barker's 10.4.

No matter. It's Barker's job now, and he's still only a sophomore. Maybe Hinshaw's the guy to tap into the potential.

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.
Patrick Towles					183	326	2148	9	14	56.1%	25	7.1%	5.7
Drew Barker	6'3, 225	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9425	35	70	364	1	2	50.0%	5	6.7%	4.4
Stephen Johnson	6'2, 183	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8115
Gunnar Hoak	6'4, 200	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8485

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Stanley Boom Williams	RB	5'9, 196	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8983	121	855	6	7.1	10.6	41.3%	3	1
Jojo Kemp	RB	5'10, 200	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8607	98	555	6	5.7	5.5	42.9%	1	0
Mikel Horton	RB	6'1, 230	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8812	82	318	3	3.9	3.8	30.5%	3	2
Patrick Towles	QB					46	223	5	4.8	4.2	39.1%	1	0
Drew Barker	QB	6'3, 225	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9425	20	77	1	3.9	3.1	35.0%	0	0
Sihiem King	RB	5'9, 172	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8439	11	127	1	11.5	12.5	54.5%	0	0
Will Thomas Collins	FB	5'11, 241	Sr.	NR	NR
Benjamin Snell, Jr.	RB	5'11, 211	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8482

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	Yds/ Target	%SD	Success Rate	IsoPPP
Dorian Baker	WR	6'3, 208	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8558	96	55	608	57.3%	26.6%	6.3	57.3%	41.7%	1.29
Garrett Johnson	WR	5'11, 175	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8550	80	46	694	57.5%	22.2%	8.7	53.8%	43.8%	1.76
Jeff Badet	WR	6'0, 180	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8433	49	29	430	59.2%	13.6%	8.8	57.1%	42.9%	1.91
Blake Bone	WR	6'5, 213	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8646	28	20	210	71.4%	7.8%	7.5	50.0%	60.7%	1.05
Ryan Timmons	WR	5'10, 198	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8668	24	12	114	50.0%	6.6%	4.8	50.0%	25.0%	1.69
Stanley Boom Williams	RB	5'9, 196	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8983	22	13	74	59.1%	6.1%	3.4	45.5%	27.3%	0.95
C.J. Conrad	TE	6'5, 245	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8988	21	15	149	71.4%	5.8%	7.1	57.1%	47.6%	1.38
Mikel Horton	RB	6'1, 230	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8812	10	10	140	100.0%	2.8%	14.0	40.0%	70.0%	1.76
Charles Walker	WR	5'11, 203	Jr.	NR	NR	10	5	61	50.0%	2.8%	6.1	20.0%	40.0%	1.24
Jojo Kemp	RB	5'10, 200	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8607	7	4	12	57.1%	1.9%	1.7	42.9%	14.3%	1.29
Sihiem King	RB	5'9, 172	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8439	5	4	6	80.0%	1.4%	1.2	60.0%	0.0%	0.00
Alexander Montgomery	WR	6'2, 210	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8313	4	3	18	75.0%	1.1%	4.5	75.0%	50.0%	0.96
Greg Hart (Nebraska)	TE	6'5, 245	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8503
Darryl Long	TE	6'4, 246	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8600
Jabari Greenwood	WR	6'3, 195	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8681
Tavin Richardson	WR	6'3, 216	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8481
Dakota Holtzclaw	WR	6'7, 216	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8518

4. Continuity where you need it

59.4 percent, 57.1 percent, 61.4 percent. Those are the success rates for Kiel's top three targets (Shaq Washington, Chris Moore, Max Morrison) last year at UC. Kentucky's top three targets last year: 41.7, 43.8, 42.9.

Because of Towles' inconsistency, the quarterback change, etc., the passing game was woefully inefficient, which is a problem when you've got at least a slight pass-first offense. It's also a problem when you've got a weapon like Boom Williams but can't free him much because opponents don't respect your other weapons.

The goal for Gran is simple: Deliver just enough efficiency with your passing game that you can take advantage of Williams' immense upside. He is one of the best in the country when he gets to the second level of a defense, and success elsewhere will open up that many more second-level chances. (Williams' backup, senior JoJo Kemp also has wheels. And sophomore Sihiem King, too.)

If nothing else, continuity will be a boon here. The receiving corps loses no one of consequence, and the top seven returning wideouts are all juniors and seniors. Speedy Garrett Johnson has big-play potential, and there is nice diversity in this unit -- Dorian Baker and Blake Bone are big possession types, while Johnson, Jeff Badet, and Ryan Timmons are all smaller speedster types. And tight end C.J. Conrad is only a sophomore -- as with Barker, there's plenty of time for him to develop the four-star potential he was supposed to have.

UK's passing game doesn't have to produce Cincinnati numbers for this offense to do some damage, but if it can improve from 91st in Passing S&P+ into at least the 50s or 60s, it could stretch defenses out just enough to unleash Williams and his compadres in the backfield.

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	96	2.6	2.82	38.8%	62.2%	23.9%	86.8	6.2%	8.2%
Rank	91	109	103	71	89	113	82	88	84

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	2015 Starts	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Jon Toth	C	6'5, 310	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8370	12	35
Jordan Swindle	LT					11	34
Zach West	LG					3	33
Ramsey Meyers	RG	6'4, 305	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8351	12	24
Nick Haynes	LG	6'3, 316	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8088	9	10
Kyle Meadows	RT	6'5, 300	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8631	9	10
George Asafo-Adjei	RG	6'5, 315	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8751	3	3
Cole Mosier	LT	6'6, 335	Jr.	NR	NR	1	3
Zach Myers	RG	6'3, 305	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8338	0	1
Jervontius Stallings	RG	6'3, 318	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8206	0	0
Logan Stenberg	LG	6'6, 318	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8587
Mason Wolfe	RT	6'6, 305	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8160
Tate Leavitt	LT	6'6, 310	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8833
Landon Young	LT	6'7, 305	Fr.	5 stars (6.1)	0.9609
Luke Fortner	LG	6'6, 305	Fr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8274
Drake Jackson	C	6'2, 302	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9331

5. Recruiting? [ x ] Improvement? [    ]

The line protected its quarterbacks better in 2015, or at least benefited from quicker passing. After ranking 106th in Adj. Sack Rate, the Wildcats improved to a still-shaky 82nd.

The run blocking, however, cratered. Injuries had a role -- only two players started all 12 games, and three-year starter Zach West only appeared in the starting lineup three times. Five freshmen and sophomores started in at least one game.

In theory, the line could improve dramatically this fall. Six of the eight players who started at least one game last year are back. Second, in come the reinforcements: four-star JUCO Tate Leavitt, blue-chip freshman Landon Young, and four-star freshman Drake Jackson all could join the rotation, giving UK a nice balance between upside and experience.

The main problem: UK could improve into the 70s in both primary line categories (Adj. Line Yards, Adj. Sack Rate), and that would represent significant improvement. The bar's pretty low here, but hey, that means UK will almost certainly clear it.

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.18	27	IsoPPP+	89.2	101
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	44.2%	94	Succ. Rt. +	86.8	113
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	27.6	113	Off. FP+	27.9	103
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.0	29	Redzone S&P+	91.1	104
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	21.2		ACTUAL	20.0	-1.2

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	59	109	113	101
RUSHING	97	99	109	87
PASSING	28	109	107	109
Standard Downs		115	113	112
Passing Downs		98	113	85

Q1 Rk	49	1st Down Rk	95
Q2 Rk	116	2nd Down Rk	104
Q3 Rk	111	3rd Down Rk	94
Q4 Rk	95

6. Why does the defense still stink?

Stoops was a strong coordinator, albeit in defense-friendly situations. Under brother Mike (himself a successful DC) at Arizona, he produced a No. 15 ranking in Def. S&P+ in 2006 and No. 26 in 2009. In three years as Florida State's DC (2010-12), his Seminole attack was in the top 10 each year.

At Kentucky thus far, his Wildcat defense has ranked 89th, 51st, and 80th. The 2014 defense was able to exploit a nice passing downs pass rush, though if the opposing quarterback was able to stay upright, the pass was probably going to be successful.

Without 2014's ace pass rushers, Bud Dupree and Za'Darius Smith, UK went back to square one. The line was one of the least disruptive in the country, and with a new batch of youngsters in the secondary, the Wildcats really weren't good at anything.

If that's going to change, we'll see signs this year. The secondary now features four sophomores who made at least 14.5 tackles last year, and one of them (big corner Chris Westry) showed potential, albeit while getting burned a lot too. But sophomore safety Mike Edwards underwent trial by fire, and it's certainly not too late for Edwards and fellow sophomore Darius West to prove recruiting services right.

The front seven, though, could tamp down the upside. Injuries didn't help this unit, but it was dreadful regardless, and now the line must replace three of last year's top five tacklers while the linebacking corps replaces its top four.

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	88.2	3.10	3.69	35.8%	78.3%	14.2%	59.3	2.6%	6.1%
Rank	114	96	112	36	117	121	122	116	88

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Cory Johnson	DT					11	47.0	6.7%	8.0	2.0	1	1	1	1
Farrington Huguenin	DE					12	38.5	5.5%	4.0	1.5	0	2	0	0
Denzil Ware	RUSH	6'2, 255	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.9051	12	30.5	4.4%	5.5	1.0	0	0	1	0
Regie Meant	DT	6'4, 302	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8181	10	22.5	3.2%	1.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Jabari Johnson	RUSH					12	19.0	2.7%	2.0	0.5	0	0	0	0
Matt Elam	NG	6'7, 360	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.9272	12	16.5	2.4%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Melvin Lewis	DT					6	14.0	2.0%	2.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Courtney Miggins	DE	6'5, 285	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8800	11	8.5	1.2%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Adrian Middleton	DT	6'3, 303	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8635	4	5.5	0.8%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Daron Blaylock	RUSH					11	5.0	0.7%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Jacob Hyde	NG	6'2, 320	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8544
Alvonte Bell	DE	6'5, 260	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8107
Kengera Daniel	DE	6'5, 260	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8575
Tymere Dubose	NG	6'5, 320	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8322
De'Niro Laster	RUSH	6'4, 241	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8487
Naquez Pringle	DT	6'3, 330	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8056
Jordan Bonner	RUSH	6'5, 220	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8606
Kordell Looney	DT	6'3, 285	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8462

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Josh Forrest	MLB					12	66.0	9.5%	6.0	3.5	2	5	1	0
Khalid Henderson	WLB					11	48.0	6.9%	6.5	2.0	1	2	1	0
Ryan Flannigan	WLB					9	39.0	5.6%	0.5	0.0	0	2	0	0
Jason Hatcher	SLB					9	28.0	4.0%	5.5	2.0	0	3	0	0
Jordan Jones	WLB	6'2, 220	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8782	8	6.5	0.9%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Courtney Love (Nebraska)	MLB	6'2, 242	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8762	12	5.0	0.7%	1.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Josh Allen	SLB	6'5, 230	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7967	12	2.5	0.4%	1.5	0.5	0	1	0	0
Kobie Walker	SLB	6'3, 215	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8690
Nico Firios	MLB	6'2, 242	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8541
Eli Brown	WLB	6'2, 215	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9006
Kash Daniel	MLB	6'1, 241	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8948
Jaylin Bannerman	LB	6'5, 218	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8487
Roland Walder	WLB	6'3, 215	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8465
Jamar "Boogie" Watson	SLB	6'3, 234	Fr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8182

7. Another front-seven reset

Sophomore rush end Denzil Ware managed 5.5 tackles for loss as a freshman. Sophomore linebacker Josh Allen was only on the field long enough to make 2.5 tackles but made 1.5 behind the line and broke up a pass. Sophomore tackle Adrian Middleton saw decent rotation time in the middle of the season.

You have to squint, but you can find at least a little bit of potential in certain young members of the front seven. Plus, this has been a recruiting priority, so there might be plenty of newcomers with upside. But it's been a double-dip recession of sorts up front, with the only known difference-makers departing for the second straight year. Though some of these pieces could become useful, depth is an obvious issue, bordering on either problematic or terrifying.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
A.J. Stamps	FS					12	52.0	7.5%	0.5	0	1	8	0	0
Marcus McWilson	SS	6'0, 210	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8999	11	49.0	7.0%	1.5	1	0	2	1	0
Mike Edwards	SS	6'0, 200	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8888	12	32.0	4.6%	2	0	1	2	1	0
Chris Westry	CB	6'4, 195	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8469	12	29.5	4.2%	1.5	1	2	8	0	0
Blake McClain	FS	5'11, 200	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8181	12	25.0	3.6%	1	0	0	5	1	0
J.D. Harmon	CB	6'2, 200	Sr.	NR	NR	12	20.5	2.9%	0	0	3	2	1	0
Derrick Baity	CB	6'3, 182	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8432	12	16.5	2.4%	1	0	0	2	0	0
Cody Quinn	CB					10	16.0	2.3%	1	0	0	2	0	0
Darius West	FS	6'0, 206	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9067	10	14.5	2.1%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Kendall Randolph	CB	6'0, 182	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8768	9	8.5	1.2%	0.5	0	0	1	0	0
Fred Tiller	CB					7	3.5	0.5%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jared Tucker	CB	5'11, 175	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8487
Marcus Walker	FS	6'1, 202	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8764
Kei Beckham	DB	5'11, 175	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8634
Jordan Griffin	CB	6'0, 177	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8811
Tobias Gilliam	CB	5'11, 185	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8543
Davonte Robinson	CB	6'2, 187	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8440

8. Fewer worries, relatively speaking

Granted, for the number of four-star DBs Stoops has signed, this has been quite the two-star secondary during his tenure. But it really was a young unit last year, and unlike the front seven, it had quite a few youngsters who showed more than simple hints of potential.

Westry could be a tough nut for offenses to crack in the coming years, and with eight of last year's top 10 back, continuity should be Kentucky's friend here, just as it will be at WR. Kentucky's pass defense was woeful last year, but while one of the two reasons for that (an awful pass rush) won't be any better, at least youth will be less of an issue. Probably.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Landon Foster			61	40.3	2	16	10	42.6%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Austin MacGinnis	5'10, 180	Jr.	37	61.5	14	0	37.8%
Miles Butler	5'9, 171	So.	25	59.6	2	0	8.0%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Austin MacGinnis	5'10, 180	Jr.	22-23	9-10	90.0%	4-7	57.1%
Miles Butler	5'9, 171	So.	11-12	3-3	100.0%	1-1	100.0%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Sihiem King	KR	5'9, 172	So.	23	21.7	0
J.D. Harmon	KR	6'2, 200	Sr.	4	32.0	0
Ryan Timmons	PR	5'10, 198	Sr.	8	7.4	0
Charles Walker	PR	5'11, 203	Jr.	3	7.3	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams S&P+	40
Field Goal Efficiency	34
Punt Return Success Rate	48
Kick Return Success Rate	83
Punt Success Rate	59
Kickoff Success Rate	85

9. When decent isn't enough

Kentucky had the worst field position margin in the SEC (minus-4.4 yards per possession) and one of the worst in the country (113th), but that was mostly because of offensive mistakes and defensive misery. Special teams did its best to make up some of the difference; UK was decent in both punts and punt returns, and Austin MacGinnis and Mile Butler were perfectly solid in the place-kicking department.

Of course, kickoff returns were poor (which is a problem when you're allowing a lot of scores), and kickoffs weren't particularly impressive either.

Punter Landon Foster is gone, which could hurt a little since he was better than average, but at the very least the return of MacGinnis/Butler and a decent punt returner in Ryan Timmons should make sure this remains a decent unit. But unless the defense improves, "decent" won't do much.

2016 Schedule & Projection Factors

2016 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk	Proj. Margin	Win Probability
3-Sep	Southern Miss	72	0.3	51%
10-Sep	at Florida	19	-20.4	12%
17-Sep	New Mexico State	117	14.5	80%
24-Sep	South Carolina	63	-1.7	46%
1-Oct	at Alabama	1	-32.7	3%
8-Oct	Vanderbilt	69	-0.7	48%
22-Oct	Mississippi State	21	-12.5	24%
29-Oct	at Missouri	47	-11.0	26%
5-Nov	Georgia	15	-15.1	19%
12-Nov	at Tennessee	9	-22.9	9%
19-Nov	Austin Peay	NR	40.6	99%
26-Nov	at Louisville	20	-20.3	12%
Projected wins: 4.3

Five-Year F/+ Rk	-15.6% (92)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	36 / 32
2015 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	-2 / 1.5
2015 TO Luck/Game	-1.5
Returning Production (Off. / Def.)	62% (62%, 61%)
2015 Second-order wins (difference)	5.0 (0.0)

10. This would be a good time to exceed your projections

Last year wrecked whatever upward trajectory Kentucky had developed. That might seem like a strange thing to say after a second straight 5-7 finish, but the Wildcats were more tenuous and less impressive last year, especially after the first month of the season.

Now things look like 2014 was a happy blip. And it's up to Stoops, his new hires, and his 2014 class to rectify things.

If they don't, 2016 will be awfully long. The first half of the season does feature three tossups among a likely win and two likely losses, so it's possible that UK will again post a decent early record. But after Vanderbilt leaves town on October 8, the Wildcats will face five games as a double-digit underdog in their last six contests. Yikes.

Winning tossups won't be enough, in other words. Kentucky's simply going to have to be a much better program than the numbers suggest. If Stoops' new offensive hires hit their mark, and if the passing game clicks like it seems it could on paper, then maybe things will be fine. But UK lost the statistical benefit of the doubt last year.