Very interesting stuff, though I'm not sure what all of it means. I come away from it with a few impressions, though. First of all, the list of potential players is quite large at most positions, especially RB and Receiver.

Next, I'm left with the feeling that it would be easy to misinterpret some of the numbers. In particular the raw offensive line numbers show that Ohio ranked 61st in raw line yards, and ranked 68th in "opp rate" at 39.1%, the percentage of times a back gained 5 yards or more. That sounds like the line did a pretty good job, yet when you look at the running backs you find that the running backs were down around 26-30%. The backs that lifted Ohio's "opp rate" were Vick and Sprague, both at about 60%.

Having QBs that can scramble for yardage is a big advantage, but it's not the same thing as an effective offensive line. Go back to the offensive line stats and look at the "Power Success Rate", which in Ohio's case is probably a more accurate reflection of the actual line, and you find Ohio ranked 91 in that measure.

In the end I agree with his conclusion, which is that Ohio should show significant improvement this fall, and should win at least 8 games. They have a lot of players coming back, and really DT is the only place that lost all the starters. It was reassuring to see Porter and Aloese score well in Winter Conditioning (Aloese=Super Iron, Porter=Green) because both will need to step up and play some ball this fall.