PonyFans.com

Here are my position grades for the 2007 SMU Football Team based upon a standard of winning a CUSA championship:

Offense:

Quarterback: Justin Willis had an excellent freshman season and made other players better. With natural development could become a National Top 20 QB. He gets a A-/B+ although he probably doesn't deserve an A until he leads his team to a bowl in an extremely weak conference. Overall the Position gets a B because Willis most likely will miss at least 1-2 games and SMU has failed to recruit adequate Division 1A caliber replacements. Potential disaster if Willis is not available.

Runningbacks: Which DeMyron Martin shows up-the Freshman who has as much potential as any RB since the DP or the Sophomore who was the biggest disappointment on the team. I'll go with a C+ until he proves otherwise. Overall the position does have decent depth of players with experience.

Offensive Line: Everybody returns which would seem to suggest great improvement. That's what they said last year. Not a lot of talent in the offensive line. Slow, small and simply couldn't make the plays to allow a winning season. I'll give them a C and I think that is improvement over last year.

Tightend: Great Potential in Chase and nice depth with a cast of thousands. I think SMU is solid at TE and I'll give the position a B.

Wide Receivers: This is one of the first years SMU can put a group of WRs on the field that have the athletic ability to make big plays after the catch-but will they? . Columbus Givens who otherwise would be considered a potential difference maker must be considered a questionmark at this point. Zach Sledge will get you 2 catches and 16 yards per games-hopefully they will be first downs in a possession receiver role. Sledge is a liability as a starter. . Sanders is a potential superstar who should easily become the best post DP WR. Devin Lowery shouldn't have ever been moved to DB in the first place and if given a chance could blossom. Haven't seen Robinson yet but love his speed. Overall the unit grade gets a small deduction for poor depth and because SMU still needs improvement in stretching the field. I'll give the unit a C+ right now because there is only one proven experienced top level WR -but with the notation that they could explode to a solid B if questionmarks like Givens, Lowery and Robinson reach their potential.

Overall Offensive Grade: B-

Defense:

Defensive Line: Questionmarks at every position on the Defensive Line if you include Muse's injury. If healthy Muse is a B+ that gets knocked from a A- because of recurring injuries. I've always been a big Handy fan as he is one of the best athletes on the team on either line. A lot of potentially strong young players provide nice depth at DE. I expect Handy to be a solid B this year but he gets a B- because he hasn't proved it yet. The Defensive Tackles will probably improve more than any unit on the team . Serge Elizee should be starting within a month and could really solidify the unit by conference season. Think they may be adequate by conference season but will be exposed early in the season. Don't think the talent level or depth is there for a championship team. Overall I'll give the Defensive Line a C.

Linebackers: Could have been a real strength with the return of Carrington. There is not a single LB who is strong against the run and with an inexperienced Defensive Line this will become quite apparent. I do believe Tony Hawkins has the athletic ability to be a solid LB and really improved last year. Don't think he is a MLB and could struggle adjusting. I'll give him a C+ at MLB probably a B- at OLB. Wilton Mccray is a potentially great great strong safety prospect who doesn't support the run very well at LB. He is the Matador. Even in the passing game he really struggled against Tech last year. I'll give him a B- but only based upon experience. He needs to up his game to deserve a B but hopefully he will. All other guys at LBs are stop gaps who expose recruiting failures by Bennett. Overall I'll give the Linebackers a C because at some point in the season SMU is likely to suffer a key injury at LB and if Hawkins or McCray go down SMU will be in big trouble.

Defensive Backs: On paper there is sufficient talent at defensive back-but you know what they were awful last year and lost Sturdivant who covered for many of their mistakes. McCann should continue his solid improvement and should be solid B. I'm a big Brandon Jones guy and think he will eventually start. The first game he played at CB at SMU I marveled at his two TDs saving deflections in his first game against Tech . However, after that game he seemed to regress. With experience I think he can be solid. Lindley has all the talent in the world but he simply didn't get it done last year. Hudman is the darling of the insiders. But in the games he played last year he was responsible for some big home runs against SMU. I'd say he was mediocre at best-hoping for average this year. I'm going to withhold judgment on Haynes because of lack of playing time but will comment that he is unusually small for a FS and must be considered a questionmark coming into the season. The DBs deserved a D last year and were largely responsible for SMU failing to reach its goals. With added experience in Jones, McCann, Hudman and Lindlet one would hope for great improvement probably more than at any other position. SMU really appears to have helped its depth at DB with freshman recruits Bailey and Bell. Without these two recruits depth concerns might might knock the grade down. Until they prove it I'll give them a C and I think that is generous based on last years performance.

Overall Defensive Grade: C It is probably too much for SMU to expect a championship Defense when only two opening day starters from last year are expected to start at the same position they did on opening day last year against Texas Tech

Special Teams: Punting: Solid A Morestead is the best NFL prospect on the team. Kicks 'em high and long. Drop it down to an A- based on repeated breakdowns in Phil Bennett regime in Punt Protection.

Kick-Return Jessie Henderson A- which would have been an A except for the fact he is injury prone. I like all of SMU's potential return men in Henderson, Sanders, Robinson and another guy I'm missing. This unit could be the difference in going to a bowl with the new NCAA kickoff rule

Punt Return: I believe this is Sanders and he will be solid

FG Team: I think Morestead while slightly more inconsistent here is still a great FG talent. Outstanding potential. But I'll give the unit a B because I'm not a fan of what goes on in kick protection.

Overall Season Prediction 6-6. For every improvement on offense there is a bigger new questionmark on defense. Not sure if this team is better than last year OR the year before which I think was the stronger team. This is an extremely weak Division and Conference. There is no excuse for SMU not beating programs like Tulsa, UTEP, Rice, and Tulane consistently and at least competing with UH. But they won't dominate CUSA West. SMU is 4-25 on the road under Bennett and every road game and I mean every road game will be a struggle. Unfortunately most of SMU's toughest conference games are on the road against Tulsa, Southern Miss and UH not to mention TCU, an expected improved Memphis. Heck I think Arkansas St. will be an extremely difficult game on the road-just as NTSU was last year. By mid October I see this team improving a competing for a bowl. With 6 bowl affiliations one would think 6-6 might sneak in but I'll leave that prediction to fate one way or another.

If Stallion is right (and he has an eye for talent), then a 6-6 seaosn should get a coaching change.

I always thought grades were given for performance during the year, not for someone's opinion of how they would perform. We should fire PB now and announce Stallion as the new head coach so we don't waste the 2007 season!

And here I thought we were in the stronger side of a slightly better than average non-BCS conference. What is your deal with attacking our conference? Are you upset because it's not the SWC? Of the options we have right now, C-USA is the best one we have.

I agree with most of your assessment but feel they'll be better than 6-6.

I don't think Willis will put up the numbers he did last year only because they should use the running game more and be more balanced, I’ll be happy if he keeps the same TD/Int. ratio as last year and cuts his fumbes in half! Also, he’s a tough kid, prove that with the hand injury in the spring as well as playing in his high school playoffs with a leg he could barely walk on, thus he’ll only miss games if he has a major injury, and then it’ll be a lot more than 2.

I think the O-line will be improved with Enright at center allowing Poynter to play a position he is better at, and I've been told Enright snaps the ball quicker.

At WR, I mentioned it before that I think Givens may put up better numbers than Sander mainly because defenses will be keying on Sanders, which will also open the passing game to the TE's.

I agree, defensive line is a big question mark, but adding Serge and a healthy Muse they should be solid for conferance play.

The defensive backfield is young, but fast, and talking to a few players they believe this may be the strength of the defense, only time will tell.

I am predicting 8-4, and will even go 9-3 if they win on Monday.

Hey Mustangs,

While much of what Stallion says may be true, everything he says is based on the past. Not the present and certainly not the future.

So go out and prove him wrong. That's the most fun you'll ever have on this board.

WWNBD

I have a few differences of opinion:

I like the Oline more. Perhaps I over-rate continuity on the line, but I think that with 4 returning starters and a spring/summer with Coach Viloria, this line will be much improved this year, and the line will be a strenght of the team. I'd give them a solid "B"

I don't know what to make of the Dline. If Muse is injured for more than just the Tech game, and if Serge isn't able to take over one of the tackle spots early, I'd put them in the "D+/C-" range. I'm not a hater or a doom and gloomer, but Leonard and Parham in the middle scares the crap out of me, and I haven't seen much from Justin Smart when I've had a chance to watch him. I hope that these guys show up on the field, and I hate to pronounce them guilty until proven innocent... maybe I'm just preparing myself for the worst? I think that a healthy Muse pluse Serge in the middle would put this line at a "C", but as it stands today... not so much.

I will give Martin the benefit of the doubt though. He showed himself to be at least a "B" in his Freshman year. He's said all the right things this offseason, so I'll put myself down with Martin at a "B-" on the Missouri principle, but I expect he'll end the season an "A-" <---- That's some sunshine there.

As for Season prediction: As Stallion mentions, the road schedule is a beast. I think that home field advantage will count even more against the Ponies than other teams, given that we are relying on a strong offense, and have more question marks on defense. I think we sneak away with Two road wins, one home loss and end the season 7-5.

-CoS

Butts in the Stands wrote:I always thought grades were given for performance during the year, not for someone's opinion of how they would perform.

Then you don't enjoy trying to see how things will break? In both my professional and academic careers, creating predictive models has always been a priority. In "real world" situations it's freakin baffling to try and understand what is going to happen next in any given situation.

Football gives us a very limited # of factors and variables to look at (well, when compared to say, foreign relations). Yet even then, we can't figure out an accurate model. But to me, that doesn't take away the fun in trying.

Would it offend your sensibilities less if we used a 10 point scale instead of letter grades?

-CoS

Stallion, I generally feel like you were pretty fair and accurate in your grading although I would judge us just a notch higher in a few areas. Here are my rankings:

QB- Agree with you that Willis is A- but having no quality backup the QB position overall falls to a B+.

RB- I think you judged us a little weak here. While D-Mart was dissappointing we do have some good depth and quality players at the position. If we are going to deduct from QB we must add a bit to our RBs for this their depth. B- overall at RB.

WR- Agreed with the flaws and pitfalls of our unit here, but compared to other CUSA receiving corps I would think we have to be considerd in the upper half of the conference. And being that we are basing these grades relative to our conference I say B- for now, emphasizing the potential to be better than that.

O-Line- "best O-line in PB's tenure" is as backhanded of a compliment as you can receive and its the best I can give to this group. C+

TE- Agreed very solid with a B talent wise, but the way we use (or don't use them) makes me want to drop this grade. Not sure if thats allowed so I'll stick with B even though we could have Tony Gonzalez at the position and he still wouldn't be utilized properly.

Overall offense: B

D-Line- I simply cannot believe we will be starting 2 redshirt freshman and a redshirt soph vs Tech. "Well, we are really young on the d-line this year" blah blah blah. Handy I think is going to be, and has been, a very good player for us. A solid second best starter on the line, but a really good third best player on your starting unit. He will be very good, but I don't see him as a guy who can dominate a game on his own. Muse has shown many times he can be dominant when he is on the field. If we play much without both of these guys on the field, our line will be very poor. I have not seen Serge play and cannot comment on him. C- on the line, though if Muse plays 10+ games, Handy stays healthy, and a DT steps up and becomes a solid run stopper, that grade would obviously go up.

LBs- thank goodness we recruited Damon Hurst out of JUCO to be a contributor. oh wait, we lost our middle linebacker? okay, we need to move over our smallish (very good) outside linebacker inside now because noone else in the program can step in at MLB. With that said, Hawkins will adjust I hope and McCray is very solid. Bonilla is a step slow but he plays tough and lights people up fairly regularly, which gets you style bonus points. I'd give our starting unit a C+ but I have absolutely zero faith in what we have in the way of depth there. Overall C-.

DBs- Agreed they were AWFUL last year but while you mention Sturdivant as a guy who made up for mistakes, he was also burned deep rather frequently. Our 3rd and long pass defense combined with our goaline offense sunk us last year and that was with a great pass rush. That said, this is a very athletic unit we have coming back. Hudman and McCann were very inexperienced and thrust into prominent roles last year. Expect big improvements from both, solid play from Lindley, plus add in Jones and a couple of potential impact freshman and we might have some big plays coming from this secondary. Can they hold coverage for 8 seconds till we get pressure on the QB, doubtfull, but even based on the poor season last year C+ for this unit.

Defense overall: C/C-, not so good.

Special teams: Overall is the best in CUSA so you have to give this unit an A as a whole.

My brain tells me 6-6, my heart wants 7-5, and there isn't enough booze in the world to think we could actually have a shot at 8-4. Of course this doesn't mean I plan to stop drinking and hoping for it

Read the Ponyfans review and then see what you think. Is there a higher level of commitment and conditioning? Are there new young and returning experienced players ready to step in? It looks like the answer is yes.

Stallions whiney backward looking prediction is nothing but old news. Waaa ... we do not have 5 star players. We will never amount to anything waaaa....

Oddly enough, I agree with some of what Stallion said. However:

Stallion wrote:Offense:

Quarterback: Justin Willis had an excellent freshman season and made other players better.... Overall the Position gets a B because Willis most likely will miss at least 1-2 games and SMU has failed to recruit adequate Division 1A caliber replacements.

Two problems: nobody knows if Willis (or any other player on any team) will miss any games, and who knows whether Rhodes or Turner is "Division 1A caliber"? I don't know, and neither do you, because neither of us as seen them play. What we do know is that they're athletic guys who can throw, by all accounts, and the coaches sound cautiously optimistic. Of course, the coaches are like in the sense that they hope Willis stays healthy all year. But could the two backups play, if needed? Nobody knows yet. Therefore, the position can't be downgraded. A—

Stallion wrote:Offensive Line: Everybody returns which would seem to suggest great improvement. That's what they said last year. Not a lot of talent in the offensive line. Slow, small and simply couldn't make the plays to allow a winning season. I'll give them a C and I think that is improvement over last year.

Here's one where I disagree. Small next to Texas Tech's line? Sure. Of course, the Dallas Cowboys' line (avg.: 6-foot-2.2, 323.8) is smaller than the Tech offensive line (avg.: 6-foot-2.2, 333.4), too. OK, it's lighter. However, if you call Kenard Burley small or slow, you're not watching the line. He's a hoss and moves ridiculously well for a tackle. Ben Poynter isn't quite as tall as Darrin Johnson, but he's just as heavy, and he's stronger and more aggressive. B—

Stallion wrote:Wide Receivers: This is one of the first years SMU can put a group of WRs on the field that have the athletic ability to make big plays after the catch-but will they? . Columbus Givens who otherwise would be considered a potential difference maker must be considered a questionmark at this point. Zach Sledge will get you 2 catches and 16 yards per games-hopefully they will be first downs in a possession receiver role. Sledge is a liability as a starter. . Sanders is a potential superstar who should easily become the best post DP WR. Devin Lowery shouldn't have ever been moved to DB in the first place and if given a chance could blossom. Haven't seen Robinson yet but love his speed. Overall the unit grade gets a small deduction for poor depth and because SMU still needs improvement in stretching the field. I'll give the unit a C+ right now because there is only one proven experienced top level WR -but with the notation that they could explode to a solid B if questionmarks like Givens, Lowery and Robinson reach their potential.

I think you sell Sledge short. Players say he's the second-fastest WR on the team, after Robinson. Overall, I agree with you — Sanders, Givens, Lowery, Sledge, Robinson: nobody big in that group, but there are a lot of players. Can't wait to see Corey Fuller added to the bunch.

Stallion wrote:Defense:

Defensive Line: Questionmarks at every position on the Defensive Line if you include Muse's injury. If healthy Muse is a B+ that gets knocked from a A- because of recurring injuries. I've always been a big Handy fan as he is one of the best athletes on the team on either line. A lot of potentially strong young players provide nice depth at DE. I expect Handy to be a solid B this year but he gets a B- because he hasn't proved it yet. The Defensive Tackles will probably improve more than any unit on the team . Serge Elizee should be starting within a month and could really solidify the unit by conference season. Think they may be adequate by conference season but will be exposed early in the season. Don't think the talent level or depth is there for a championship team. Overall I'll give the Defensive Line a C.

Not to challenge, just curious: we all know Elizee is big, but what makes you say he should be starting in a month? We haven't seen him play, and I'm as eager as anyone to see him, but having never seen him and compared him to Parham, Berry, Leonard (who I also am eager to see), etc., what makes you say he's a starter in a month?

Stallion wrote:Linebackers: .... SMU is likely to suffer a key injury at LB and if Hawkins or McCray go down SMU will be in big trouble.

LIKELY to suffer a key injury? How about MIGHT suffer a key injury? Of course, that could be said of any position group on any team....

Stallion wrote:Defensive Backs: ... I'm going to withhold judgment on Haynes because of lack of playing time...

That's what I was getting at with Elizee, etc. I disagree with your overall assessment, though. Secondary looks like the strength of the defense ... at least on paper. B—

Stallion wrote:Kick-Return Jessie Henderson A- which would have been an A except for the fact he is injury prone. I like all of SMU's potential return men in Henderson, Sanders, Robinson and another guy I'm missing. This unit could be the difference in going to a bowl with the new NCAA kickoff rule

Sledge is the other candidate, I think. Good call, bringing up the kickoff rule.

Stallion wrote:Punt Return: I believe this is Sanders and he will be solid

Hope they don't risk getting Sanders killed back there. But yes, I think he can do the job.

Stallion wrote:Overall Season Prediction 6-6.

Wow, we almost agree. I'm saying 7-5.

Stallion wrote:Unfortunately most of SMU's toughest conference games are on the road against Tulsa, Southern Miss and UH not to mention TCU, an expected improved Memphis. Heck I think Arkansas St. will be an extremely difficult game on the road-just as NTSU was last year. By mid October I see this team improving a competing for a bowl. With 6 bowl affiliations one would think 6-6 might sneak in but I'll leave that prediction to fate one way or another.

Of course the Tech and TCU games will be tough — maybe painfully so — and road games always are tough. We need to remember that when WORLD IS COMING TO AN END crowd emerges after a loss.

Overall, good breakdown, stallion.

Stallion wrote:Here are my position grades for the 2007 SMU Football Team based upon a standard of winning a CUSA championship:

Offense:

Quarterback: Justin Willis had an excellent freshman season and made other players better. With natural development could become a National Top 20 QB. He gets a A-/B+ although he probably doesn't deserve an A until he leads his team to a bowl in an extremely weak conference. Overall the Position gets a B because Willis most likely will miss at least 1-2 games and SMU has failed to recruit adequate Division 1A caliber replacements. Potential disaster if Willis is not available.

Runningbacks: Which DeMyron Martin shows up-the Freshman who has as much potential as any RB since the DP or the Sophomore who was the biggest disappointment on the team. I'll go with a C+ until he proves otherwise. Overall the position does have decent depth of players with experience.

Offensive Line: Everybody returns which would seem to suggest great improvement. That's what they said last year. Not a lot of talent in the offensive line. Slow, small and simply couldn't make the plays to allow a winning season. I'll give them a C and I think that is improvement over last year.

Tightend: Great Potential in Chase and nice depth with a cast of thousands. I think SMU is solid at TE and I'll give the position a B.

Wide Receivers: This is one of the first years SMU can put a group of WRs on the field that have the athletic ability to make big plays after the catch-but will they? . Columbus Givens who otherwise would be considered a potential difference maker must be considered a questionmark at this point. Zach Sledge will get you 2 catches and 16 yards per games-hopefully they will be first downs in a possession receiver role. Sledge is a liability as a starter. . Sanders is a potential superstar who should easily become the best post DP WR. Devin Lowery shouldn't have ever been moved to DB in the first place and if given a chance could blossom. Haven't seen Robinson yet but love his speed. Overall the unit grade gets a small deduction for poor depth and because SMU still needs improvement in stretching the field. I'll give the unit a C+ right now because there is only one proven experienced top level WR -but with the notation that they could explode to a solid B if questionmarks like Givens, Lowery and Robinson reach their potential.

Overall Offensive Grade: B-

Defense:

Defensive Line: Questionmarks at every position on the Defensive Line if you include Muse's injury. If healthy Muse is a B+ that gets knocked from a A- because of recurring injuries. I've always been a big Handy fan as he is one of the best athletes on the team on either line. A lot of potentially strong young players provide nice depth at DE. I expect Handy to be a solid B this year but he gets a B- because he hasn't proved it yet. The Defensive Tackles will probably improve more than any unit on the team . Serge Elizee should be starting within a month and could really solidify the unit by conference season. Think they may be adequate by conference season but will be exposed early in the season. Don't think the talent level or depth is there for a championship team. Overall I'll give the Defensive Line a C.

Linebackers: Could have been a real strength with the return of Carrington. There is not a single LB who is strong against the run and with an inexperienced Defensive Line this will become quite apparent. I do believe Tony Hawkins has the athletic ability to be a solid LB and really improved last year. Don't think he is a MLB and could struggle adjusting. I'll give him a C+ at MLB probably a B- at OLB. Wilton Mccray is a potentially great great strong safety prospect who doesn't support the run very well at LB. He is the Matador. Even in the passing game he really struggled against Tech last year. I'll give him a B- but only based upon experience. He needs to up his game to deserve a B but hopefully he will. All other guys at LBs are stop gaps who expose recruiting failures by Bennett. Overall I'll give the Linebackers a C because at some point in the season SMU is likely to suffer a key injury at LB and if Hawkins or McCray go down SMU will be in big trouble.

Defensive Backs: On paper there is sufficient talent at defensive back-but you know what they were awful last year and lost Sturdivant who covered for many of their mistakes. McCann should continue his solid improvement and should be solid B. I'm a big Brandon Jones guy and think he will eventually start. The first game he played at CB at SMU I marveled at his two TDs saving deflections in his first game against Tech . However, after that game he seemed to regress. With experience I think he can be solid. Lindley has all the talent in the world but he simply didn't get it done last year. Hudman is the darling of the insiders. But in the games he played last year he was responsible for some big home runs against SMU. I'd say he was mediocre at best-hoping for average this year. I'm going to withhold judgment on Haynes because of lack of playing time but will comment that he is unusually small for a FS and must be considered a questionmark coming into the season. The DBs deserved a D last year and were largely responsible for SMU failing to reach its goals. With added experience in Jones, McCann, Hudman and Lindlet one would hope for great improvement probably more than at any other position. SMU really appears to have helped its depth at DB with freshman recruits Bailey and Bell. Without these two recruits depth concerns might might knock the grade down. Until they prove it I'll give them a C and I think that is generous based on last years performance.

Overall Defensive Grade: C It is probably too much for SMU to expect a championship Defense when only two opening day starters from last year are expected to start at the same position they did on opening day last year against Texas Tech

Special Teams: Punting: Solid A Morestead is the best NFL prospect on the team. Kicks 'em high and long. Drop it down to an A- based on repeated breakdowns in Phil Bennett regime in Punt Protection.

Kick-Return Jessie Henderson A- which would have been an A except for the fact he is injury prone. I like all of SMU's potential return men in Henderson, Sanders, Robinson and another guy I'm missing. This unit could be the difference in going to a bowl with the new NCAA kickoff rule

Punt Return: I believe this is Sanders and he will be solid

FG Team: I think Morestead while slightly more inconsistent here is still a great FG talent. Outstanding potential. But I'll give the unit a B because I'm not a fan of what goes on in kick protection.

Overall Season Prediction 6-6. For every improvement on offense there is a bigger new questionmark on defense. Not sure if this team is better than last year OR the year before which I think was the stronger team. This is an extremely weak Division and Conference. There is no excuse for SMU not beating programs like Tulsa, UTEP, Rice, and Tulane consistently and at least competing with UH. But they won't dominate CUSA West. SMU is 4-25 on the road under Bennett and every road game and I mean every road game will be a struggle. Unfortunately most of SMU's toughest conference games are on the road against Tulsa, Southern Miss and UH not to mention TCU, an expected improved Memphis. Heck I think Arkansas St. will be an extremely difficult game on the road-just as NTSU was last year. By mid October I see this team improving a competing for a bowl. With 6 bowl affiliations one would think 6-6 might sneak in but I'll leave that prediction to fate one way or another.

Wayyyyyyyyy to long to read... but I would say i generally agree, the C might be a little high for Defense and the B- might be low for Offense.
Offense: B (to B+, depending on our running game)
QB:B+
WR: B
RB: C to B
TE: B
OL: C+ to B
Defense: C- (possibly a C or C+ depending on Muse being back and this Serge Kid)
DL: C
LB: C-
DB: C
Special Teams: B+
KR: B+ to A-
PR: B-
Punter: A
FG: B+ to A-
KO: B

Final record: 8-4

If the keeper of the start says the QB gets an A, then IMO the QB finds a way to win a game that we probably have no business winning.

A-type QBs are the ones that have that certain intangible that makes their team rally around them.

Therefore, your 6-6 becomes 7-5.

MustangIcon wrote:O-Line- "best O-line in PB's tenure" is as backhanded of a compliment as you can receive and its the best I can give to this group. C+

That is, perhaps, a backhanded compliment. But I'd make so bold as to rephrase to say this is "our best OL -- tackle to tackle -- post DP" (even though you could say that's a backhanded compliment too).

As has been pointed out, the OL is generally the same guys only a year older. But that's actually a fairly strong endorsement seeing as how in the bigger/deeper programs OLs don't usually start until they're upper classmen.

This year's OL features a couple of 500 lb. bench pressers (and several who are close) compared to the handful of 400 lb. bench pressers we started to get in the Faucette era, which is significantly better than the sub-400 lb-ers we had prior to Faucette. According to John Hampton, "As a senior, our team had the same number of players who could bench 400 pounds as this version has putting up 500."

I know, bench isn't the best indicator, but I think most would agree that this year's OL is bigger and more athletic. In '05, we had just one OL who could bench 400, and that was Justin Boren. My oh my, but we've come a long way strenght-wise in the last two years.

As much as we liked Darren Johnson as a person and as a physical specimen, he was just too nice. Ben Poynter, arguably the Mustangs best blocker last year and this, is significantly stronger than Johnson, moves much better and is, well, fierce. LT, IMHO, is going to be an upgrade.

Kenard Burley, at RT, has developed into a potential All C-USA player and pro prospect. RT is an upgrade.

Sean Lobo has possibly taken Tommy Poynter's left guard position, so that's probably an upgrade. Plus, Lobo won't be playing hurt this year.

At RG, veteran Caleb Peveto is back and won't be playing injured, so that's also an improvement.

The only possible question mark is sophomore Mitch Enright taking over at center for Ben Poynter. But Enright played in 5 games last year as a RS freshman, so he may not be quite up to the level of B. Poynter last year, but he's certainly capable and is getting good reviews.

And perhaps most importantly, for the first time in 20 years we have enough QUALITY depth on the OL to put together an honest to goodness 2nd team from tackle to tackle -- probably good enough to have been the starting unit in the past with Tommy Poynter (if he's not starting), Ross Nigh, Chase Smith, and Joe Holmes. Plus, we have a slew of even bigger kids (e.g. Josh LeRibeus) waiting in the wings.

We've got good size, better than average strength and tons of experience. Our kids have been pushed around for the last 20 years; I'm looking forward to being able to finally shove back. The improved OL, hopefully with Willis and Martin keeping DLs honest this year, should score no less than a solid B (and potentially much better). I'm actually pretty excited about this year's Mustang OL.

Stallion,

Did Berry figure into your calculus on D-line? Didn't see much about him. Is he not in the mix here?

As for rating our team predictively, I think there is something to be said about the mojo of a team (similar to Gen. Patton's comments about intangibles). Does Viloria's strength and conditioning combined with a truly exceptional QB on offense give some oomph here? The problem for years was the less than optimistic stats on offense. Change that, and all of a sudden the defense doesn't like quite like that big sieve. Turnovers become much more important because they are more likely to turn into points. Just a thought...to me, judging that mojo factor isn't any less relevant than hypothetical ratings based ultimately on intuition.

Also, glaringly left out of predictive analysis is the comparative strengths and weaknesses between opponents and SMU. With Tech (I won't go any further b/c I tend to remain unfamiliar with opposing units until the week of the game), I think the matchup isn't Willis vs. their secondary, it's SMU's O-line and Martin's running vs. their defensive line and LBs. That is where the mismatch will start, IMHO, if indeed there is one. We know that Tech can score, and they can do it quickly and often. The question, then, is whether they can do so without Harrell on the field.

I think that SMU can run on them. May be wrong, but that's what I think.
I also think that they can run on SMU...but the question will be whether they will attempt to when Harrell is all primed to toss that pigskin. We shall see.