Kevin Sumlin's Texas A&M is finally experienced. With this schedule, does that matter?

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. On a loop

Sure, the 2012 team was headlined by freshmen. Quarterback Johnny Manziel and receiver Mike Evans were stars beyond their age and gave Kevin Sumlin's Aggies upside they wouldn't have otherwise had. Manziel won the Heisman as a redshirt freshman, and A&M won 11 games in its SEC debut.

Here's what else that 2012 team had: experience. The running backs were a junior (Ben Malena) and a senior (Christine Michael). The receivers complementing Evans (Ryan Swope and Uzoma Nwachukwu) were seniors. The line was led by a senior (Patrick Lewis) and two immensely talented juniors (Luke Joeckel, Jake Matthews).

The defense had seniors Spencer Nealy and Jonathan Mathis. The linebacking corps was loaded with seniors. The secondary had seniors (Steven Terrell and Dustin Harris) and a junior (Toney Hurd Jr.).

The young players provided upside, but they were able to thrive because of the structure.

The stability has vanished. The 2013 and 2014 defenses were ridiculously inexperienced, with recent star recruits and quite a bit of turnover drastically tamping down upside. And after Manziel left, the leadership on offense has been desperately young.

Sophomore Kenny Hill began 2014 as the starting quarterback, then got usurped by true freshman Kyle Allen and transferred. Allen began 2015 as the starter but saw his playing time limited by true freshman Kyler Murray. Freshmen and sophomores made up five of the top six receivers in 2014 and three of the top four in 2015. Meanwhile, the running game has been underutilized.

The last few years have been one giant "whole less than the sum of its parts" experience, and it's gotten worse. After finishing second in S&P+ in 2012, the Aggies have fallen to 12th in 2013, 30th in 2014, and 42nd in 2015.

Only a couple of years after being rumored for NFL jobs and supposedly taking over the state, Sumlin finds himself on one hell of a hot seat. Immediate success sets an impossible bar, and he has gotten further from it.

But if he is to be saved in 2016, it will be with experience. His offensive line has very little of it, but juniors and seniors have infiltrated the two-deep. Senior grad transfer Trevor Knight is the likely starting quarterback. Juniors James White and Keith Ford could carry the running backs. Eight of the top nine returning wideouts are either juniors or seniors. And a defense that improved dramatically under coordinator John Chavis is loaded with experience at each level.

Texas A&M will boast one of the best pass defenses in the country, and while Knight was far from impressive in most of his last two seasons at Oklahoma, he will have one of the more seasoned skill units in the SEC. There are still landmines galore -- a questionable line, a still-shaky run defense, a schedule that features eight projected top-25 opponents -- but one of the largest recent problems won't be one anymore.

Because of recruiting and returning production, A&M is projected to improve by quite a bit in 2016, back to 25th in S&P+. But per S&P+ the Aggies have a better than 50 percent chance of winning in only four games and are projected to win only 6.7. There are four virtual tossups and two likely wins among the first six games on the schedule; I, uh, recommend they win some of those.

2015 Schedule & Results

Record: 8-5 | Adj. Record: 9-4 | Final F/+ Rk: 34 | Final S&P+ Rk: 42
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Win Expectancy	vs. S&P+	Performance vs. Vegas
5-Sep	vs. Arizona State	50	38-17	W	84%	96%	+21.8	+17.5
12-Sep	Ball State	110	56-23	W	85%	99%	+10.7	+3.0
19-Sep	Nevada	97	44-27	W	86%	98%	-6.1	-17.0
26-Sep	vs. Arkansas	11	28-21	W	73%	65%	+3.2	-0.5
3-Oct	Mississippi State	16	30-17	W	93%	99%	+2.4	+6.0
17-Oct	Alabama	1	23-41	L	54%	14%	-10.7	-14.0
24-Oct	at Ole Miss	5	3-23	L	17%	0%	-15.0	-14.0
31-Oct	South Carolina	88	35-28	W	76%	91%	-8.0	-9.5
7-Nov	Auburn	33	10-26	L	17%	2%	-30.7	-23.5
14-Nov	Western Carolina	N/A	41-17	W	58%	95%	-13.0
21-Nov	at Vanderbilt	83	25-0	W	97%	100%	+21.9	+18.0
28-Nov	at LSU	10	7-19	L	35%	8%	-2.8	-6.5
30-Dec	vs. Louisville	39	21-27	L	35%	9%	-2.9	-4.5

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	30.4	55	22.7	30
Points Per Game	27.8	71	22.0	28

2. Nosedive, part 2

In 2014, Texas A&M started 5-0 while playing magnificent football; the Aggies' average percentile performance was 94 percent, as good as you'll see for a five-game span. The final seven games: 42 percent with a 2-5 record.

In 2015, it was nearly the same story.

• First 5 games:
  Record: 5-0 | Average percentile performance: 84% (~top 20) | Yards per play: A&M 6.5, Opp 5.3 (+1.2)
• Last 8 games:
  Record: 3-5 | Average percentile performance: 49% (~top 65) | Yards per play: Opp 5.5, A&M 5.0 (-0.5)

Some combination of injury and opponents adjusting to young players have caused the same issues in back-to-back years. The defense mostly held up last year, which should be seen as immensely exciting, but the offense's collapse resulted in a total restart.

Offensive coordinator Jake Spavital was sent away, replaced by UCLA's Noel Mazzone; Allen and Murray transferred away, with Allen providing a damning critique on the way out the door:

"I think the culture was a big part of it, and I think that stems from Johnny's era there. ... They [could] do that and still win games because they had Johnny … and five offensive linemen playing in the NFL right now. ... A lot of people were riding off that, ‘I can do whatever the hell I want and win on Saturday.'"

Your good traits create your bad ones. Sumlin's ability to bring swagger to the 2012 team reinforced his reputation as a players' coach. But young players need more discipline than A&M's have had. We'll see if this offensive reset has the same effect that his hire of Chavis did a year ago.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.18	106	IsoPPP+	101.4	60
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	43.0%	47	Succ. Rt. +	106.7	46
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	28.0	30	Def. FP+	26.9	17
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.0	100	Redzone S&P+	101.2	72
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	28.1		ACTUAL	24	-4.1

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	50	55	46	60
RUSHING	66	16	14	29
PASSING	39	81	77	79
Standard Downs		46	42	52
Passing Downs		74	51	82

Q1 Rk	16	1st Down Rk	56
Q2 Rk	37	2nd Down Rk	58
Q3 Rk	119	3rd Down Rk	33
Q4 Rk	50

3. A Mazzone offense

Mazzone has put together one of the more unique careers in college football. He has served as a coordinator under Tommy Tuberville, Dennis Erickson, Chuck Amato, Ed Orgeron, and Jim Mora. He has coached Deuce McAllister, Cadillac Williams, Steven Jackson, Philip Rivers, Brock Osweiler, Brett Hundley, and Josh Rosen.

Mazzone has been at the helm of powerful run-first attacks, dual-threat attacks, and precision pass-first units. He has led fantastic offenses (sixth in Off. S&P+ at NC State in 2003, eighth at UCLA in 2014) and dreadful ones (100th at Ole Miss in 1995, 73rd at NC State in 2004, 115th at Ole Miss in 2005).

Mazzone's 17 years as a coordinator have featured enough aspects that it's hard to define what a Mazzone offense is. Most recently he crafted a reasonably efficient attack around a true freshman (Rosen).

His 2015 UCLA attack ran only 53 percent of the time on standard downs and 23 percent on passing downs -- an even more pass-heavy approach than what A&M had last year. But the Bruins were built well around quick passing and accuracy. The top two targets (Jordan Payton and Thomas Duarte) each had success rates at 54 percent or higher, and No. 3 target Darren Andrews caught 67 percent of his targets out of the slot. Halfbacks and fullbacks combined for about five to six targets per game with a 72 percent catch rate as well.

In Knight's best moments, efficiency has been his strongest trait. In an 11-game span that included the final three games of 2013 and the first eight of 2014, Knight completed 62 percent of his passes at a relatively impressive 13.1 yards per completion. Passer rating: 140.4.

Knight was done in at OU by injury, a thin receiving corps, and eventually the emergence of Baker Mayfield. He is not as good as his incredible 2014 Sugar Bowl performance against Alabama would suggest, but Mazzone's system might offer him the best possible chance to succeed. And the simple fact that Knight does bring experience could be a tremendous asset.

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.
Kyle Allen					160	283	2210	17	7	56.5%	22	7.2%	6.7
Kyler Murray					72	121	686	5	7	59.5%	8	6.2%	4.9
Jake Hubenak	6'3, 215	Jr.	NR	0.7000	40	75	399	3	1	53.3%	6	7.4%	4.4
Trevor Knight (Oklahoma)	6'1, 215	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9008	22	40	305	2	2	55.0%	2	4.8%	7.0
Conner McQueen	5'10, 175	Sr.	NR	NR
Nick Starkel	6'3, 185	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8671
Hank Hughes	6'0, 185	Fr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.7893

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
Tra Carson	RB					243	1165	7	4.8	3.8	39.9%	2	2
Keith Ford (Oklahoma)	RB	5'11, 215	Jr.	4 stars (6.0)	0.9873	71	392	5	5.5	4.9	43.7%	3	3
James White	RB	6'0, 215	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8917	55	196	1	3.6	2.4	34.5%	0	0
Kyler Murray	QB					45	387	1	8.6	6.9	62.2%	3	1
Kyle Allen	QB					43	258	2	6.0	4.1	51.2%	8	2
Brice Dolezal	RB					38	191	1	5.0	2.9	47.4%	0	0
Kwame Etwi	RB	5'9, 195	So.	NR	NR	21	151	0	7.2	8.7	38.1%	1	0
Christian Kirk	WR	5'11, 200	So.	5 stars (6.1)	0.9886	11	54	0	4.9	2.2	54.5%	3	3
Jake Hubenak	QB	6'3, 215	Jr.	NR	0.7000	9	53	0	5.9	2.0	66.7%	2	1
Kendall Bussey	RB	5'9, 200	RSFr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8856
Trayveon Williams	RB	5'9, 190	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8949
Rakeem Boyd	RB	6'0, 195	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8752

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	Yds/ Target	%SD	Success Rate	IsoPPP
Christian Kirk	WR	5'11, 200	So.	5 stars (6.1)	0.9886	129	80	1009	62.0%	28.2%	7.8	65.9%	45.0%	1.63
Josh Reynolds	WR	6'4, 190	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8746	85	51	907	60.0%	18.6%	10.7	64.7%	52.9%	1.77
Ricky Seals-Jones	WR	6'5, 240	Jr.	4 stars (6.0)	0.9869	75	45	560	60.0%	16.4%	7.5	52.0%	49.3%	1.35
Speedy Noil	WR	5'11, 192	Jr.	5 stars (6.1)	0.9951	46	21	226	45.7%	10.0%	4.9	63.0%	39.1%	1.15
Kalvin Cline (Va. Tech)	TE	6'4, 230	Jr.	NR	NR	39	26	321	66.7%	9.7%	8.2	66.7%	N/A	N/A
Tra Carson	RB					33	29	183	87.9%	7.2%	5.5	51.5%	39.4%	1.20
Damion Ratley	WR	6'1, 190	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8661	32	15	200	46.9%	7.0%	6.3	65.6%	34.4%	1.78
Jeremy Tabuyo	WR	5'11, 195	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8460	15	9	102	60.0%	3.3%	6.8	60.0%	53.3%	1.33
Edward Pope	WR	6'4, 171	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8970	12	8	65	66.7%	2.6%	5.4	50.0%	50.0%	0.94
Sabian Holmes	WR					6	2	5	33.3%	1.3%	0.8	50.0%	16.7%	0.50
Boone Niederhofer	WR	6'0, 207	Sr.	NR	NR	4	2	7	50.0%	0.9%	1.8	75.0%	25.0%	0.61
Jamal Jeffery	WR	5'9, 180	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8767	2	2	-1	100.0%	0.4%	-0.5	50.0%	0.0%	0.00
Tanner Schorp	TE	6'3, 245	Jr.	NR	NR
Frank Iheanacho	WR	6'6, 220	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9589
Kemah Siverand	WR	6'1, 195	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8995
Greer Shetler	TE	6'4, 215	RSFr.	NR	NR
Quartney Davis	WR	6'2, 181	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9383
Aaron Hansford	WR	6'2, 210	Fr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9318
Clyde Chriss	WR	6'0, 175	Fr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9191

4. No excuses for this receiving corps

Knight will have a deeper receiving corps at his disposal than he ever has before.

Over the last two years, Josh Reynolds has averaged 11 yards per target and caught 105 passes for 1,792 yards. Christian Kirk is coming off of a high-usage freshman season with decent numbers. Speedy Noil played about like Kirk as a freshman before suffering through a sophomore slump of sorts last year. Ricky Seals-Jones is an enormous, if inconsistent, redzone target. Virginia Tech transfer Kalvin Cline is lengthy and lanky. Edward Pope averaged 11.1 yards per target in 2014 before struggling last year. And now there's another batch of four-star freshmen attempting to pierce the two-deep.

In terms of pure upside, it's hard to top this unit. A highlight reel would make this look like the best receiving corps in the country. But consistency has been an issue, and taking passes from ultra-young quarterbacks hasn't helped that. We'll see if a steady hand like Knight, plus another year of experience for everyone involved, can help.

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	122	3.32	3.96	43.5%	62.1%	15.6%	93.6	7.0%	7.3%
Rank	5	10	6	19	90	11	71	103	62

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	2015 Starts	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Germain Ifedi	RT					13	37
Mike Matthews	C					13	36
Joseph Cheek	RG					13	21
Avery Gennesy	LT	6'5, 310	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9069	13	13
Keaton Sutherland	LG	6'5, 300	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9201	8	8
Jeremiah Stuckey	LG					5	5
Koda Martin	RT	6'6, 300	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8697	0	0
Jermaine Eluemunor	RG	6'4, 320	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9144	0	0
J.J. Gustafson	C					0	0
Connor Lanfear	LG	6'6, 320	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9181	0	0
Ryan Lindblade	RT					0	0
Tank Davis	LT	6'4, 295	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8631	0	0
Erik McCoy	C	6'4, 310	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8402
Brayden Talbert	C	6'5, 300	RSFr.	NR	NR
Justin Dworaczyk	OL	6'6, 280	RSFr.	NR	NR
Kellen Diesch	OL	6'5, 275	Fr.	4 stars (6.0)	0.9480
Austin Anderson	OL	6'4, 280	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8792

5. Nobody get hurt

It can be difficult to judge offensive lines in the SEC because of the quality of the competition, but A&M's line graded pretty well in the opponent-adjusted Adj. Line Yards rating. The Aggies were fifth in the country, mostly because they kept the backfield clean. Even when A&M rushers struggled, they weren't losing yardage. Considering the youth in the passing game, the Aggie run game should have been utilized more.

That said, the Aggies stunk in short-yardage situations, a.k.a. the only time they were likely to actually lean on the run. Power success rate isn't adjusted for opponent, but 90th is bad regardless. They converted only about five of eight short-yardage attempts.

Running backs Keith Ford and James White are big enough to be solid in these situations, but no matter how good or bad the line was last year, it's starting over to some extent. Those responsible for only 21 of last year's 65 starts are back, and while there are plenty of former star recruits in the pipeline -- seniors Avery Gennesy and Jermaine Eluemunor, sophomores Keaton Sutherland and Connor Lanfear, freshmen Kellen Diesch and Austin Anderson -- depth could be a significant issue. A&M is only a couple of injuries away from leaning on either freshmen, walk-ons, or both.

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.25	66	IsoPPP+	113.1	31
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	38.7%	40	Succ. Rt. +	113.6	26
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	30.3	56	Off. FP+	31.1	37
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	3.6	14	Redzone S&P+	115.1	20
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	22.8		ACTUAL	18.0	-4.8

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	51	25	26	31
RUSHING	108	82	60	89
PASSING	4	2	3	3
Standard Downs		39	52	33
Passing Downs		13	3	26

Q1 Rk	83	1st Down Rk	35
Q2 Rk	10	2nd Down Rk	62
Q3 Rk	47	3rd Down Rk	8
Q4 Rk	10

6. Opponents knew to run

The collapse of the offense distracted us from some serious defensive redemption in College Station. Texas A&M ranked 87th in Def. S&P+ in 2013 and 58th in 2014 but improved back to 30th last fall. And while the run defense was still quite bad, last year's No. 82 Rushing S&P+ ranking is still better than 2014's No. 119 finish.

Chavis spent 14 seasons as Tennessee's coordinator and another six at LSU, and he brought a particularly Chavis defense to town last fall. The Aggies improved against the run and were dynamic against the pass. They allowed only a 111.9 passer rating and improved over the course of a given game: Four of opponents' 10 touchdown passes came in the first quarter.

Chavis picked his spots well, too -- on fourth downs, opponents were only 1-for-12 for seven yards and two interceptions.

You did not want to fall behind the chains against this defense because of the combination of awesome pass rush (ends Myles Garrett and Daeshon Hall: 34 tackles for loss, 19.5 sacks, seven forced fumbles) and dynamic secondary.

Unfortunately for A&M, opponents didn't have to pass all that much. They got away with running 68 percent of the time on standard downs and 39 percent on passing downs because the run defense was still a dramatic weakness.

A&M was able to get a strong push in short-yardage situations, and Garrett, Hall, tackle Daylon Mack, and linebackers Shaan Washington and Richard Moore all had at least six non-sack tackles for loss, which is indicative of an invasive run defense. But glitches were still prominant: A&M allowed 98 rushes of at least 10 yards, 123rd in FBS.

Almost all of the front seven returns, which certainly can't hurt. But the pressure is on -- the secondary returns quite a few exciting pieces, but that will only matter so much until opponents are actually forced to pass.

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	101	2.96	3.58	42.6%	54.1%	23.3%	142.5	5.6%	12.0%
Rank	56	81	102	109	11	23	10	46	7

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Myles Garrett	DE	6'5, 262	Jr.	5 stars (6.1)	0.9992	13	48.0	6.3%	19.5	12.5	1	2	5	0
Daeshon Hall	DE	6'6, 260	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9256	13	37.5	4.9%	14.5	7.0	0	2	2	0
Daylon Mack	DT	6'1, 335	So.	4 stars (6.0)	0.9915	13	23.5	3.1%	9.5	0.0	0	0	1	0
Zaycoven Henderson	DT	6'1, 300	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9118	11	22.0	2.9%	6.5	3.0	0	0	0	0
Alonzo Williams	DT					13	18.0	2.3%	6.0	1.0	0	2	1	0
Julien Obioha	DT					10	18.0	2.3%	3.5	1.5	0	2	1	0
Jarrett Johnson	DE	6'3, 260	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8916	13	15.0	2.0%	3.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Qualen Cunningham	DE	6'3, 240	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9289	13	14.0	1.8%	3.5	2.0	0	0	0	0
Hardreck Walker	DT	6'2, 290	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8938	8	7.5	1.0%	1.0	1.0	0	0	0	0
Kingsley Keke	DT	6'3, 315	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8913	13	5.0	0.7%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
James Lockhart	DE	6'3, 260	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9384	4	2.5	0.3%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Reggie Chevis	DT	6'1, 290	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8641
Justin Madubuike	DE	6'3, 245	Fr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9714

7. No excuses for the line

The upside is obvious. Garrett is maybe the scariest defensive end in college football, and Mack, also a former blue-chipper, held his own as a freshman for the most part. Now, for the first time in basically four years, there is experience to go with the high ceiling.

That also means there are no more excuses. Granted, there are a couple of openings on the two-deep at tackle, where Alonzo Williams and Julien Obioha have departed, but a starting four of Garrett, Hall, Mack, and Zaycoven Henderson could be fantastic, the end position has plenty of depth, and at worst a veteran tackle like Hardreck Walker could fill in in the middle. Monstrous sophomore Kingsley Keke has excellent speed for his size and looked pretty good in the spring.

There are also no excuses at linebacker. Injuries were a massive problem here last year, as of the six LBs to average at least 1 tackle per game, only Washington lasted all 13 games. The effect was obvious when you look at A&M's big-play numbers.

With a healthy Otaro Alaka and Richard Moore this time around, A&M should be able to match attacking talent with a propensity for fewer breakdowns.

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Shaan Washington	WLB	6'3, 235	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8507	13	55.0	7.2%	7.5	1.0	0	4	1	0
A.J. Hilliard	MLB					9	41.5	5.4%	4.0	1.0	0	1	1	0
Richard Moore	SLB	6'0, 210	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.8833	8	31.0	4.0%	7.5	1.0	0	1	0	0
Claude George	MLB	6'2, 230	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8640	11	14.0	1.8%	2.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Josh Walker	MLB	6'1, 240	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.9068	11	13.0	1.7%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Riley Garner	WLB	6'3, 220	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8398	13	12.0	1.6%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Otaro Alaka	WLB	6'3, 240	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9273	3	7.0	0.9%	1.0	0.0	0	1	0	0
Dwaine Thomas	SLB	6'2, 230	So.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8370	10	2.5	0.3%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Tyrel Dodson	LB	6'2, 235	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8796

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Armani Watts	FS	5'11, 200	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9160	13	104.5	13.6%	6	0	1	2	2	0
Justin Evans	SS	6'1, 195	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8762	12	62.5	8.2%	1	0	1	3	0	0
Donovan Wilson	NB	6'1, 205	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8224	13	49.5	6.5%	8.5	2	5	3	3	0
Brandon Williams	CB					13	31.5	4.1%	1	0	0	7	0	0
De'Vante Harris	CB					13	28.0	3.7%	1	0	2	8	0	0
Nick Harvey	CB	5'10, 180	Jr.	4 stars (6.0)	0.9698	13	24.0	3.1%	2	0	0	4	0	0
Justin Dunning	FS	6'4, 225	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9388	11	16.5	2.2%	0	0	1	0	0	0
Noel Ellis	NB	5'10, 185	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9078	12	13.5	1.8%	1	1	0	1	0	0
Devonta Burns	FS					13	12.0	1.6%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Sam Moeller	DB					13	12.0	1.6%	0	0	0	1	1	0
Alex Sezer Jr.	CB	5'9, 180	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8433	12	4.5	0.6%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Victor Davis	CB	6'0, 185	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8697	6	3.0	0.4%	0	0	0	3	0	0
DeShawn Capers-Smith	CB	6'0, 190	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8722	7	2.0	0.3%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Priest Willis (UCLA)	CB	6'2, 200	Jr.	4 stars (6.0)	0.9800
Larry Pryor	SS	6'0, 205	RSFr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9294
Roney Elam	CB	6'2, 180	RSFr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9164
Travon Fuller	DB	6'0, 170	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.9095
Charles Oliver	DB	6'2, 185	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.9039
Ikenna Okeke	DB	6'3, 200	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8761

8. A sudden lack of cornerbacks

A&M ranked second in the country in Passing S&P+ last year and returns almost every safety. The combination of Armany Watts, Justin Evans, and nickel back Donovan Wilson in the back should convince opponents to keep the ball on the ground, even if A&M's pretty good at defending the run, too.

Watts, Evans, and Wilson combined for 15.5 tackles for loss, seven interceptions, eight break-ups, and five forced fumbles last year, a majority of which came from Wilson. Chavis has been as good as almost any coach in the country at employing an aggressive nickel back, and Wilson took to the position like a duck in water.

Of course, you still need cornerbacks. And without Brandon Williams and De'Vante Harris, A&M appears a bit lacking in known quantities. Nick Harvey returns, Victor Davis was successfully aggressive in a reserve role, and UCLA transfer Priest Willis offers an experienced hand. But Williams and Harris combined to defense 17 passes; you don't have to be a spectacular cornerback to take advantage of this pass rush and safety play, but corner could still be an issue here until otherwise noted.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Drew Kaser			60	47.5	9	12	18	50.0%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Taylor Bertolet			71	62.6	32	1	45.1%
Daniel LaCamera	6'4, 220	So.	4	63.0	2	0	50.0%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Taylor Bertolet			38-38	12-16	75.0%	10-15	66.7%
Daniel LaCamera	6'4, 220	So.	3-3	0-0	N/A	0-0	N/A

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Christian Kirk	KR	5'11, 200	So.	20	19.3	0
Speedy Noil	KR	5'11, 192	Jr.	11	21.9	0
Christian Kirk	PR	5'11, 200	So.	14	24.4	2
Speedy Noil	PR	5'11, 192	Jr.	2	8.5	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams S&P+	38
Field Goal Efficiency	49
Punt Return Success Rate	34
Kick Return Success Rate	87
Punt Success Rate	54
Kickoff Success Rate	13

9. Can Kirk kick, too?

Between Kirk and Noil, A&M has two of the scariest return men in college football. Kirk was absurd in punt returns last year, and Noil was consistently strong in kick returns in 2014. Kirk's punt returns alone make this a solid special teams unit, but A&M must now replace two big legs: those of punter Drew Kaser and kicker Taylor Bertolet.

Bertolet was scattershot on shorter kicks (making two-thirds of your long field goals is great, but making only three-quarters of your shorter field goals is below average), and Kaser occasionally outkicked his coverage (A&M was third in punting average and 98th in punt return average), but they were assets. New kicker Daniel LaCamera and punter Shane Tripucka will struggle to match the upside of those they're replacing, though consistency could help.

2016 Schedule & Projection Factors

2016 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk	Proj. Margin	Win Probability
3-Sep	UCLA	12	-0.5	49%
10-Sep	Prairie View A&M	NR	45.7	100%
17-Sep	at Auburn	24	-3.5	42%
24-Sep	vs. Arkansas	17	-2.8	44%
1-Oct	at South Carolina	63	6.2	64%
8-Oct	Tennessee	9	-1.0	48%
22-Oct	at Alabama	1	-17.8	15%
29-Oct	New Mexico State	117	29.4	96%
5-Nov	at Mississippi State	21	-4.6	39%
12-Nov	Ole Miss	7	-3.0	43%
19-Nov	UTSA	116	29.1	95%
24-Nov	LSU	2	-8.4	31%
Projected wins: 6.7

Five-Year F/+ Rk	33.2% (13)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	13 / 10
2015 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	-6 / -5.3
2015 TO Luck/Game	-0.3
Returning Production (Off. / Def.)	65% (59%, 72%)
2015 Second-order wins (difference)	7.8 (0.2)

10. Another fast start would be stupendous

Last year's schedule provided a pretty interesting litmus test. A lot of writers saw the Aggies as a potential top-10 team, and if that's what you were projecting, the schedule set up perfectly: A&M was scheduled to only leave the state of Texas three times, got Alabama and Auburn at home, etc.

Others saw A&M as a borderline top-20 or top-25 team; I was in this camp. I saw a schedule that featured seven projected top-25 teams, called it "brutal" in the headline of last year's preview, and got some pushback.

In the end, the schedule only featured five top-25 teams, but I'm guessing by any definition, "brutal" applies to this year's schedule. Granted, there are still only four trips out of state, but for a team looking desperately for stability, the early going includes quite a few trying games: a visit from UCLA, a trip to face equally desperate Auburn, the annual Arkansas game in Jerry World. A visit from Tennessee caps the first half of the season, and a trip to Tuscaloosa starts the second half.

A&M faces a schedule with four likely wins and six games with win probability between 39 and 49 percent. A fast start and strong season are certainly on the table, especially if experience leads to the Aggies exceeding projections on offense. But wow, is this a tricky schedule. And wow, is this year's Hotseat Bowl on September 17 in Auburn going to be interesting.