Unit Rankings: Big 12 North Offenses
by Bill C. on Jun 19, 2009 11:00 AM CDT
in Mizzou Football 2009
Email
PrintDue to a number of factors--desire to use BTBS numbers right now for something other than Bowling Green analysis, annoyance at the quickly-forming "Nebraska is obviously almost back" consensus (how many times have we heard that since 2001?), etc.--I thought I'd take some time and lay out some North Division analysis based on the unit rankings* that I've been using for the BTBS previews the last two weeks.
As I've mentioned before, the unit rankings are a work in progress, but they're at least a place to start. Clearly I think Missouri's WR/TE corps was better than #25 in the country last year (meanwhile, their O-line was good, but probably not #5 in the country), but for the most part they seem like a good jumping-off point. Again, I can go into detail on this if I need to, but I'm working with the assumption that nobody cares that much about the methods. If I'm wrong, let me know.
Before we jump in, however, I'd like to post a graph. It represents each North team's point differential in their ten North division games in 2007-08. This should also be part of any jumping-off point for analysis of the North.
Mizzou went 9-1 versus the North in 2007-08, with only a last-second loss in a rivalry game marring a perfect record. Their per-game point differential was +25.8. Yes, they technically tied for North titles with Kansas in 2007 and Nebraska in 2008, but make no mistake: they destroyed the North. Kansas was 8-2, but with only a differential of +12.0. Nebraska: +1.4. Colorado: -14.4. Yes, Mizzou has lost a ton of talent, but...25 points' worth per game? 40?
Alright, with that out of the way, let's get started. Today, we look at offense. Tomorrow, defense. For each unit, I'll look at the 2008 unit rankings, try to perceive who has risen or fallen since last year, and come up with rough rankings for this year. And I'm going to try my best to keep my own personal biases out of the equation (for proof, simply look at the QB rankings).
OFFENSE
Quarterbacks
2008 Rankings
-
Missouri (#11 in the country)
-
Nebraska (#13)
-
Kansas (#27)
- Kansas State (#65)
- Iowa State (#92)
- Colorado (#113)
Missouri, Kansas Nebraska and Kansas State lose their starters, leaving Todd Reesing a clear #1. Everybody can agree on that. But what about after that? Austen Arnaud and Cody Hawkins return, but they were ranked very low. Conservatively, let's rank Arnaud and Hawkins #2-3, simply because they are known quantities (in Hawkins' case, too known, I think). Who's #4 among MU's Blaine Gabbert, NU's Zac Lee, and KSU's Carson Coffman (or Grant Gregory)? Taking away the junk time work that Gabbert and Coffman/Gregory have gotten, the only other thing we have to go by is recruiting profile. Gabbert was a 5-star recruit, Lee a 4-star JUCO, Coffman a 2-star, and Gregory a 2-star. I like Coffman, but for this exercise I'm trying to take my own opinions out of the equation for now, simply because I'm biased. So we're going to rely totally on my own numbers and external factors like recruiting rankings. So despite the fact that my list would look different than this, here's what we come up with:
Tentative 2009 Rankings
- Kansas
- Iowa State
- Colorado
- Missouri
- Nebraska
- Kansas State
Running Backs
2008 Rankings
-
Missouri (#16)
- Nebraska (#20)
- Kansas (#69)
- Iowa State (#90)
- Colorado (#107)
- Kansas State (#119)
The BTBS numbers do NOT like Lamark Brown and Logan Dold, apparently. Anyway, basically everybody returns most key contributors--Derrick Washington, Roy Helu, Jr., Jake Sharp, Alexander Robinson, Darrell Scott/Rodney Stewart, Lamark Brown/Keithen Valentine/Logan Dold (though Dold may have been moved to defense). Therefore, we won't change the rankings much. I could see moving CU ahead of ISU simply because Stewart and Scott were both hurt a bunch, but again...we're trying to deal as much as possible with known quantities.
Tentative 2009 Rankings
-
Missouri
- Nebraska
- Kansas
- Iowa State
- Colorado
- Kansas State
Wide Receivers / Tight Ends
2008 Rankings
-
Kansas (#23)
- Missouri (#25)
- Nebraska (#27)
- Kansas State (#48)
- Iowa State (#96)
- Colorado (#110)
Well, first things first: CU had one reliable weapon--Josh Smith--and he's gone. So it's safe to say they're staying #6. And with the return of Dezmon Briscoe and Kerry Meier, KU stays #1. Missouri loses Maclin and Coffman, so they'll fall. Nebraska loses Swift and Peterson, so they'll fall. Iowa State returns everybody, but they don't make up enough ground. Really, I think KSU slides into the #2 spot here with Brandon Banks and Deon Murphy returning. So that leaves Mizzou vs Nebraska for #3.
Career stats for projected top three receivers and top tight end:
- Missouri: Danario Alexander (78 catches, 997 yards, 8 TDs), Jared Perry (91 catches, 1148 yards, 7 TDs), Jerrell Jackson (9 catches, 98 yards), Andrew Jones (20 catches, 146 yards). Total = 198 catches, 2389 yards, 15 touchdowns, 12.1 yards per catch, one TD every 13.2 catches).
- Nebraska: Menelik Holt (34 catches, 452 yards, 1 TD), Niles Paul (24 catches, 220 yards), Chris Brooks (3 catches, 31 yards, 1 TD), Mike McNeill (33 catches, 467 yards, 6 TDs). Total = 94 catches, 1170 yards, 8 touchdowns, 12.4 yards per catch, one TD every 11.8 catches).
The per-catch stats are extremely similar, with a slight advantage to NU, but Mizzou has by far the experience advantage. And if I'm giving Cody Hawkins an experience advantage...well...
Tentative 2009 Rankings
-
Kansas
- Kansas State
- Missouri
- Nebraska
- Iowa State
- Colorado
Offensive Line
2008 Rankings
- Missouri (#5)
- Kansas State (#20)
- Kansas (#25)
- Iowa State (#60)
- Nebraska (#61)
- Colorado (#102)
Offensive line rankings are based on line yards and sack rates (adjusted, as always, for strength of schedule), in case you were wondering. Anyway, Mizzou was a clear #1 in the North last year, and with the return of Tim Barnes, Kurtis Gregory, and Elvis Fisher, and the seeming emergence of Dan Hoch this spring, they will stay #1. K-State's line, led by Nick Stringer and potential stars like Clyde Aufner and Colten Freeze, actually looks pretty solid as well. Iowa State returns four OL starters and a good blocking TE in Derrick Catlett--they have the most combined returning starts in the North. Nebraska does have to replace probably their best overall OL (to me, at least) in Lydon Murtha, but their experience level is solid. Colorado's line is full of good recruits, but they were so young, thin, and injury-prone last year that there's no telling what their ceiling is. But they were so far in last place here that they'll stay there.
So pretty much everybody stays in the same order...but what to do with Kansas? They were quite far ahead of ISU and NU, but they return a mere 26 career starts, easily the lowest in the conference as a whole. This could be the offense's Achilles Heel, and with improvement possible from ISU, I'll squeeze KU between the 'Clones and the Huskers.
Tentative 2009 Rankings
-
Missouri
- Kansas State
- Iowa State
- Kansas
- Nebraska
- Colorado
OFFENSE SUMMARY
Alright, so to get a general, reasonably unscientific way of judging the talent level here, let's simply add everybody's rankings together and see what happens. Lowest number = best, obviously.
Tentative 2009 Offensive Ranking
1T. Missouri (9)
1T. Kansas (9)
3. Iowa State (14)
4T. Nebraska (16)
4T. Kansas State (16)
6. Colorado (20)
I honestly didn't know how the numbers would play out when I started that exercise, but it does make some sense. For all the loss analysts mention when talking about Missouri, it only affects the passing game side of the equation. Missouri still has the division's best running back and best offensive line, and with the right approach and play-calling, those strengths can take a large load off of Blaine Gabbert's shoulders. Plus, Gabbert does have two extremely experienced, relatively proven quantities in Perry and Alexander at WR (assuming they're healthy). I'd still give a slight nod to Kansas overall*, but there is at least some cause for optimism for Mizzou this year.
* This is 90% honesty and a 10% attempt at a jinx of Kansas. Jinx...JINX...NOONAN!
Tomorrow we look at defenses. Does Nebraska have enough of a defensive advantage to make up for a lacking offense?
16 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank you for putting this together ...
… it puts some numbers to a thought I’ve been having: that Nebraska’s personnel losses are somehow diminished and our losses are amplified in the minds of the media (Tim Griffin and Phil Steele).
Was once caught putting at night ... with the 15-year old daughter of the dean
by mitch cumstein on Jun 19, 2009 11:14 AM CDT reply actions
as is our stock line here...
…switch all of Mizzou’s players and coaches to NU and NU’s to MU, and this year, despite the losses of Daniel/Coffman/Maclin, NU would be a Top 15 team this year after the two North titles and Top 5 finish in ‘07 (THEY’RE BACK!!!!!), while with the loss of Ganz/Lucky/Swift/Peterson, Mizzou would be out of the Top 40.
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
It's the status quo
The pundits can not live in a world in which Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Penn St. all have crappy football teams. So, they have to say “this is the year they come back” every year. It actually worked for PSU, so may if we all clap our hands, the Huskers and Fighting Leprechauns will rise up again
(bonus points if you get the reference…)
I'm the guy that keeps Mr. Death in his pocket.
by Mizzou Grad on Jun 19, 2009 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions
ooh...watch it with Penn State...
…a certain beefy RMN manager will be on you about that one. :-)
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
hey..I dont take offense to it...
They were down…but they recovered. They may be in for a tough year this year because their lines were pretty decimated by graduation, but they have decent skill players back on offense (QB and RB especially) and should still be at .500 or slightly better.
"Write a wise saying and your name will live forever." - Anonymous
Rock M Nation
Here's the deal:
If you want to truly believe that Nebraska is “back” (this time it’s true!!), then believe it. You may even be right. Nobody knows on June 19. The point of this post (and the corresponding one tomorrow) is to try to make sure that the debate starts on the right foot, with as many facts as humanly possible 2.5 months before the season starts. Starting with things like “obviously Nebraska is almost back” and “This time CU really will be a sleeper!” without actually looking into it is a poor way to start a debate. I’m trying to help out the haters (including the obvious NU fan who just sent me a two-sentence e-mail) make sure they start the debate in the right place…that’s all… :-)
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
Several points, questions, and random observations
First: How many times have we heard “Nebraska is back!” since 2001? Let’s see, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009. That’s [let me add it up, not so good with the numbers], nine times.
Second: You might throw Daniel Thomas in the mix for K-State. It sounds like he has his junior college academics taken care of and will be on the field this fall. He fits the Snyder mold for quaterbacks better than Coffman or Gregory.
Third: There is another picture of Reesing. If anyone can find and post the one of him jumping into his offensive lineman’s arms using his legs, 100 cocktails to you.
Fourth: Logan Dold did move to defense. Lamark Brown did move back to wide receiver.
Fifth: Deon Murphy is gone. I don’t think he was looking forward to Snyder’s requirement that his players have an obscure trait known as “discipline.”
Sixth: A Nebraska fan emailed you? Over that?!
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
Seriously...
…I could have been MUCH more mean than that…and probably have been before…
And I apparently COMPLETELY missed that about Murphy…
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
Ed the Editor is here to say
TYPO!
The first line after the jump says:
Missouri, Kansas and Kansas State lose their starters, leaving Todd Reesing a clear #1.
Should probably say “Missouri, Nebraska and Kansas State”.
Oh yeah? Well...YOU'RE a typo...
…yeah, I got nothing. Will sneak in and make the change when nobody’s looking.
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
Fantastic.
And not just because we ended up tied for first.
Just awesome.
And this line:
* This is 90% honesty and a 10% attempt at a jinx of Kansas. Jinx…JINX…NOONAN!
It made me laugh. Well done. I can’t wait for the defensive preview.
I could really care less
about the “Nebraska is back” stuff. However, I do have issues with some of these rankings, particularly offensive line. Your assessment of Lydon Murtha’s talents are overblown – the guy was a physical specimen, but wasn’t that great a contributor. However, you rank the Huskers fifth based on what, exactly? Line yards and sack rates – is there some actual formula here, or did you just look at rankings?
The offensive line category seems like just a good excuse to rank us low.
With regards to why the media pundits are dismissing Missouri and not Nebraska despite both losing a lot of key players – there are just too many things that change this season for you guys, especially when you include coaching staff changes. You might rationalize that your past defensive coordinator sucked, but that doesn’t mean a new guy will be any better, plus between both coordinators, it just takes time to learn what’s changed.
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
OL formula:
I used combined rankings for Line Yards+ (the amount of a running play attributed to the O-line, based on a Football Outsiders formula…and the “+” being my own ties to strength of schedule by comparing a team’s output to what was expected against a given opponent) and Adjusted Sack Rate (simply the sack rates allowed on both Standard Downs and Passing Downs, again adjusted for opponent). Here were the overall rankings, including the top overall:
Texas Tech: #2 adj. sack rate (ASR), #3 LY+, #1 overall
Oklahoma: #3 ASR, #5 LY+, #2 overall
Penn State: #9 ARS, #4 LY+, #3 overall
Memphis: #11 ASR, #14 LY+, #4 overall
Missouri: #6 ASR, #25 LY+, #5 overall
Kansas State: #12 ASR, #62 LY+, #20 overall
Kansas: #67 ASR, #19 LY+, #25 overall
Iowa State: #17 ASR, #102 LY+, #60 overall
Nebraska: #40 ASR, #81 LY+, #61 overall
Colorado: #82 ASR, #97 LY+, #104 overall
I could go into even more detail if you really want, but that’s the result. As for the “excuse to rank low” comment—I’m not even going to acknowledge that. It does me absolutely no good to find a reason to rank somebody high or low, and as I mentioned at the top, I thought MU’s #5 overall ranking was too high (and clearly, Memphis’s probably was too), and that these categories were just a starting point, and that the rankings will continue to be tweaked a millions times.
And for the record, I DIDN’T think the coordinator sucked. I liked Eberflus. Any ‘rationalizing’ I’m doing in not really paying attention to the coordinator changes is that a) the new guys—Yost, Steckel—are anything but new. This staff has been together so long—when you hear them talk, you realize they’re all thinking with the same brain—that it doesn’t worry me too much. And beyond that, b) like I also said, I tried to stick as much as humanly possible with knowns. There’s nothing I can do to estimate how much difference a coordinator change will make, and while nobody is bias-free, I tried to keep bias out as much as possible.
And again…these unit rankings were meant simply to make sure the discussion started in the right place. The projections I’ve been tinkering with have Kansas and Nebraska tied for 1st at 5-3 and Mizzou a step behind at 4-4. The whole purpose wasn’t to “justify” picking Missouri really high or something—it was just that any national-level analysis you get starts with assumptions like “NU = back” and “MU = dead” and “CU = sleeper,” and the conversation never really gets anywhere. The bottom line is that KU, NU, and MU have more proven quantities than the rest of the division, the others are a couple of steps behind, and, in NU’s case, NU is nowhere close to being more proven than MU or (especially) KU. I get stuck on Nebraska in a lot of these posts because, well, it’s fun to bag on Nebraska. :-) Just like others enjoy bagging on Gary PInkel, I enjoy random jabs at NU, but those jabs have nothing to do with any conclusions being reached, and anytime I get my numbers involved…well…I’ve spent way too much on these stats to be looking for excuses to back up my own opinions.
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
oh yeah, and...
…I really didn’t spend much time on the tentative 2009 rankings. The point of these posts was to basically establish a rough hierarchy. The actual rankings—whether someone is 3rd or 4th or something—were rather unimportant. If I did this again, I’d probably end up with a lot of rankings that are slightly different than those were here, but in the end, it would still be the same conclusion—the top tier is three roughly equal teams in MU, KU, and NU, the bottom tier is three roughly equal teams in ISU, CU, and KSU.
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
If you really think that Lydon Murtha was Nebraska's best offensive lineman last season...
…you’ve pretty much lost any credibility your article might have had. (And don’t use the NFL draft as your basis unless you’re prepared to defend Josh Freeman being the best quarterback in the Big XII North last season…)
by Husker Mike on Jun 25, 2009 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
