Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. Good hires abound

Stanford replaced Walt Harris with Jim Harbaugh, then David Shaw. UCLA replaced Rick Neuheisel with Jim Mora. Washington State replaced Paul Wulff with Mike Leach. Arizona State replaced Dennis Erickson with Todd Graham. Arizona replaced Mike Stoops with Rich Rodriguez. Colorado replaced Jon Embree with Mike MacIntyre. Washington replaced Ty Willingham with Steve Sarkisian. USC replaced Lane Kiffin with Steve Sarkisian, as well.

It's amazing how much better your conference gets when schools replace coaches with better coaches.

The Pac-12 may have been the best, deepest conference in the country last season. Stanford and Oregon have achieved sustained elite (or nearly elite) play in recent years. UCLA, Arizona State, and Washington went from solid to very good. Arizona was only a couple of steps behind. Colorado and Washington State went from awful to respectable, respectively. USC's record belied its advanced stats, Oregon State was solid, and Utah was extremely interesting until an injury to its quarterback.

Basically, everyone but Cal had reason to believe 2013 was a sign of great things to come. And the primary reason for that is cash and good hires. Pac-12 schools seem to be pulling in plenty of the former, and that tends to help a bit with the latter.

With Sarkisian's departure to USC, Washington was forced to dip back into the pool of hires again, and on paper, the Huskies may have just made another upgrade. In eight seasons of coaching a major (in performance, if not in name) program at Boise State, Chris Petersen went 92-13, engineered five top-11 finishes, and won two BCS bowls. Washington has won 92 games in the last 16 years, pulled off five top-11 finishes in the last 30, and won two BCS-grade bowls in the last 23.

In terms of pure accomplishment, it's difficult for anyone in the country to make a better hire than Petersen. But almost nothing is guaranteed. Even the best-looking hires can fail to pan out because of differences in recruiting, or culture, or booster influence, or luck. And while Petersen's record is sparkling, it's not without some question marks.

1. What happened the last two years? Here's what I said in January's "Grading the coaching hires" piece:

Boise State slipped rather drastically in recent years. After ranking first in the F/+ rankings in 2010 (ahead of even national champion Auburn) and fifth in 2011, the Broncos slipped to 21st in 2012 and 45th in 2013. Losing breakthrough talent like Kellen Moore hurt, but perhaps the biggest source of slippage came in the booth, where Petersen was tasked with replacing successful assistant after successful assistant. It's quite possible that opponents were simply beginning to catch up to Boise State tactically; if that's the case, then this isn't a slam-dunk success. But if the problem was more in continuing to find great assistants or landing diamond-in-the-rough talent, then those will be rectified to a good degree at UW.

Until he proves otherwise, we don't know for sure that Petersen has the same edge that he had from 2006-11. I'm not concerned about this, but he still has to prove it isn't a concern.

2. What happens with recruiting? At Boise State, Petersen had to get creative in locating and landing high-caliber athletes. He did well with it for quite a while, but according to Rivals, in his last five recruiting classes in Boise, he landed one four-star recruit and 11 high-three-stars (those with the 5.7 Rivals Rating).

With his talent development, Petersen obviously doesn't need top-15 recruiting classes to produce top-15 results. But in the rising tide of the Pac-12, he'll probably need to do better than he has of late, both in recruiting and performance. Plus, as we all know, recruiting successes help to keep anxious fans assuaged until real progress begins on the field. (Actually, as a Missouri fan, I can say that fans are never assuaged when recruiting is involved. Disregard that last sentence. No matter how many three-star recruits turn into four-star performers, fans will flip out when you lose a local four-star or when you land a prospect with a small offer sheet. Ignore them.)

Early signs are encouraging. Petersen and his staff secured three four-star commitments late in the 2014 recruiting cycle and has one four-star commitment thus far in the 2015 class. Petersen doesn't need too many of those guys, but he'll probably need a few.

3. What's the baseline here?

Over the last seven seasons in Seattle, Washington has been excellent once, terrible once, and almost perfectly average five times. It took Sarkisian a while to break through, and he left as soon as he had done so, but compared to Pac-12 peers, what should we expect from the Washington program from year to year? How will we know if Petersen is over- or underachieving?

Really, though, these are long-term questions. In the short-term, i.e. 2014, Petersen should be able to do some damage with this roster.

2013 Schedule & Results

Record: 9-4 | Adj. Record: 12-1 | Final F/+ Rk: 18 Date Opponent Opp. F/+ Rk Score W-L Adj. Score Adj. W-L 5-gm Adj. Avg. 31-Aug Boise State 45 38-6 W 44.9 - 16.9 W 14-Sep vs. Illinois 71 34-24 W 30.1 - 23.2 W 21-Sep Idaho State N/A 56-0 W 35.0 - 13.9 W 28-Sep Arizona 25 31-13 W 24.0 - 13.4 W 5-Oct at Stanford 3 28-31 L 35.9 - 17.3 W 17.0 12-Oct Oregon 5 24-45 L 32.0 - 30.1 W 11.8 19-Oct at Arizona State 13 24-53 L 16.4 - 32.8 L 7.1 26-Oct California 103 41-17 W 29.0 - 26.1 W 3.5 9-Nov Colorado 95 59-7 W 41.1 - 19.3 W 5.8 15-Nov at UCLA 15 31-41 L 32.9 - 26.7 W 3.3 23-Nov at Oregon State 42 69-27 W 45.5 - 21.9 W 7.6 29-Nov Washington State 53 27-17 W 25.7 - 20.1 W 12.0 27-Dec vs. BYU 30 31-16 W 29.3 - 22.7 W 12.8

Category Offense Rk Defense Rk Spec. Tms. Rk F/+ +12.1% 22 +11.8% 21 +2.4% 19 Points Per Game 37.9 18 22.8 29 Adj. Points Per Game 32.4 39 21.9 19

2. A UCLA-style blip

After a few years of waiting for "seven-win Steve" to break through -- well, to break through again after moving from 0-12 to 7-6 in just two seasons -- Washington fans were quite polarized midway through last season. On one hand, the Huskies' dominance of Boise State and Arizona was proof that they were a tremendous football team. On the other, losses to Stanford and Oregon proved that they weren't as good as they needed to be to get back to the BCS, and a hungover blowout loss at Arizona State hinted at a potential season collapse.

This was a pretty mature, talented Washington squad, however. After easing past a bad California team the week following the ASU game, the Huskies found fourth gear again.

Adj. Points Per Game (first 5 games) : Washington 34.0, Opponent 16.9 (plus-17.1)

: Washington 34.0, Opponent 16.9 (plus-17.1) Adj. Points Per Game (next 3 games) : Opponent 29.7, Washington 25.8 (minus-3.9)

: Opponent 29.7, Washington 25.8 (minus-3.9) Adj. Points Per Game (last 5 games): Washington 34.9, Opponent 22.1 (plus-12.8)

Like UCLA, a mid-season blip tamped down the ratings for an otherwise fantastic team. And like UCLA, Washington wasn't ready to clear the rather tall Oregon-Stanford hurdle.

But unlike UCLA, Washington shares a division with Oregon and Stanford. For now, that's advantage: UCLA.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE Raw Category Rk Opp. Adj. Category Rk EXPLOSIVENESS IsoPPP 1.15 64 IsoPPP+ 101.1 54 EFFICIENCY Succ. Rt. 45.3% 39 Succ. Rt. + 108.9 31 FIELD POSITION Def. Avg. FP 27.9 27 Def. FP+ 104.4 15 FINISHING DRIVES Pts. Per Trip in 40 4.8 18 Redzone S&P+ 117.4 16 TURNOVERS EXPECTED 15.2 ACTUAL 16 +0.8

Category Yards/

Game Rk S&P+ Rk Success

Rt. Rk PPP+ Rk OVERALL 13 39 31 25 RUSHING 15 34 33 24 PASSING 36 38 30 43 Standard Downs 60 46 77 Passing Downs 16 12 33

Q1 Rk 42 1st Down Rk 70 Q2 Rk 71 2nd Down Rk 25 Q3 Rk 2 3rd Down Rk 7 Q4 Rk 71

3. Bringing the Boise way (whatever that means) to Seattle

When Kellen Moore was passing for millions of yards at Boise State, we always used the Broncos as an example of Moneyballing, of underdog tactics, in college football. But unlike the air raid or the flexbone option, Boise's underdog tactics weren't specific to a given style of football. There were no obvious, identifying characteristics.

At its best, what Boise State did under Petersen was identify potential talent advantages, move defenders around the field (using motion or varied formations), create numbers and talent advantages, and keep doing it until opponents adjusted. If that meant passing for 3500+ yards, as Moore did in all four seasons of his career, that was fine. If that meant a run-pass balance with shorter passing and more power running, c'est la vie. At their best, the Broncos were constantly a step ahead of defenses, preparing for the defensive adjustment, then countering it immediately.

Last season, Boise State was at its best when running back Jay Ajayi was pounding into the middle of the defense (often with a huge run-up to the line) and quarterbacks Grant Hedrick and Joe Southwick were slinging quick passes to the perimeter. Boise State wasn't as effective in the last couple of seasons when the talent level dropped, but the intentions remained the same.

In 2014, Petersen and offensive coordinator Jonathan Smith (his QBs coach at BSU the last two seasons) should be able to find some talent advantages to milk, especially in the running game. Washington has an Ajayi-style efficiency back in sophomore Dwayne Washington (one with solid speed to boot) and some potential speedsters in seniors Jesse Callier and Deontae Cooper. (Plus, apparently all-world defender Shaq Thompson pulled a Myles Jack and spent some time in the backfield this spring as well. Be afraid.) They'll be running behind a vastly experienced line to boot.

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2014 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player Ht, Wt 2014

Year Rivals Comp Att Yards TD INT Comp

Rate Sacks Sack Rate Yards/

Att. Keith Price 233 352 2966 21 6 66.2% 27 7.1% 7.4 Cyler Miles 6'4, 217 So. 4 stars (6.0) 37 61 418 4 2 60.7% 2 3.2% 6.3 Jeff Lindquist 6'3, 240 So. 4 stars (5.8) Troy Wililams 6'2, 199 RSFr. 4 stars (6.0) K.J. Carta-Samuels 6'2, 225 Fr. 4 stars (5.8)

Running Back

Player Pos. Ht, Wt 2014

Year Rivals Rushes Yards TD Yards/

Carry Hlt Yds/

Carry Opp.

Rate Bishop Sankey RB 327 1866 20 5.7 5.4 42.2% Keith Price QB 55 286 5 5.2 3.7 43.6% Jesse Callier RB 5'10, 202 Sr. 3 stars (5.7) 48 213 3 4.4 5.7 29.2% Dwayne Washington RB 6'2, 221 So. 3 stars (5.5) 47 332 4 7.1 7.4 48.9% Deontae Cooper RB 6'0, 201 Sr. 4 stars (5.8) 43 270 3 6.3 10.7 30.2% Cyler Miles QB 6'4, 217 So. 4 stars (6.0) 21 218 0 10.4 12.2 52.4% Ryan McDaniel RB 10 47 0 4.7 2.4 50.0% John Ross WR 5'11, 180 So. 3 stars (5.7) 6 37 0 6.2 4.2 50.0% Jaydon Mickens WR 5'11, 171 Jr. 4 stars (5.8) 5 17 0 3.4 1.3 40.0% Lavon Coleman RB 6'0, 215 RSFr. 3 stars (5.7)

Shaq Thompson LB 6'2, 231 Jr. 5 stars (6.1)

Jomon Dotson RB 5'11, 175 Fr. 3 stars (5.6)



Receiving Corps

Player Pos. Ht, Wt 2014

Year Rivals Targets Catches Yards Catch Rate Target

Rate %SD Yds/

Target NEY Real Yds/

Target RYPR Jaydon Mickens SLOT 5'11, 171 Jr. 4 stars (5.8) 82 65 688 79.3% 21.2% 64.7% 8.4 -24 8.4 89.6 Kevin Smith WR 78 50 765 64.1% 20.2% 56.8% 9.8 158 9.1 99.6 Austin Seferian-Jenkins TE 52 36 450 69.2% 13.4% 69.6% 8.7 29 9.0 58.6 Kasen Williams WR 6'3, 221 Sr. 4 stars (5.8) 48 29 421 60.4% 12.4% 43.2% 8.8 58 9.0 54.8 Bishop Sankey RB 35 28 304 80.0% 9.0% 55.2% 8.7 -2 9.3 39.6 Damore'ea Stringfellow WR 30 20 259 66.7% 7.8% 62.5% 8.6 21 8.8 33.7 John Ross WR 5'11, 180 So. 3 stars (5.7) 18 16 208 88.9% 4.7% 64.3% 11.6 41 8.7 27.1 Marvin Hall WR 5'10, 182 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 14 8 140 57.1% 3.6% 25.0% 10.0 37 23.9 18.2 Joshua Perkins TE 6'4, 228 Jr. 3 stars (5.6) 11 5 57 45.5% 2.8% 87.5% 5.2 -16 11.1 7.4 Jesse Callier RB 5'10, 202 Sr. 3 stars (5.7) 10 9 53 90.0% 2.6% 44.4% 5.3 -40 4.9 6.9 DiAndre Campbell WR 6'2, 199 Sr. 2 stars (5.3) 8 3 34 37.5% 2.1% 100.0% 4.3 -15 4.2 4.4 Michael Hartvigson TE 6'6, 255 Sr. 3 stars (5.7) Darrell Daniels TE 6'4, 241 So. 4 stars (5.8) Kendyl Taylor WR 5'10, 203 So. 3 stars (5.7) David Ajamu TE 6'5, 244 RSFr. 3 stars (5.5) Neel Salukhe WR 5'11, 162 RSFr. NR Dante Pettis WR 6'1, 175 Fr. 3 stars (5.6) Brayden Lenius WR 6'5, 220 Fr. 3 stars (5.6)

4. Upside? Check. Experience? Well...

Kasen Williams has been one of the nation's better possession receivers throughout his career, and in Jaydon Mickens, Washington has an interesting potential run-and-catch threat. Sophomore John Ross was rather thrilling in a small sample last year, and former four-star tight end Darrell Daniels will attempt to break into the rotation this fall in Washington's attempt to replace Austin Seferian-Jenkins.

You can talk yourself into quite a few of Washington's potential receiving options, but this is a potential-versus-production unit. Williams and Mickens have proven themselves, but that's about it. Mickens, Ross, and senior DiAndre Campbell finished the spring atop the depth chart (Williams was still recovering from last season's broken leg), with junior Josh Perkins the top tight end. This could be a pretty fluid two-deep while the options get figured out.

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 111.5 2.76 4.5 41.9% 77.4% 17.4% 82.4 4.3% 9.1% Rank 23 89 2 37 13 39 91 58 99

Player Pos. Ht, Wt 2014

Year Rivals Career Starts Honors/Notes Micah Hatchie LT 6'5, 301 Sr. 3 stars (5.6) 26

Colin Tanigawa RG 6'3, 279 Sr. 3 stars (5.6) 26

Dexter Charles LG 6'5, 278 Jr. 3 stars (5.6) 21

Ben Riva RT 6'7, 313 Sr. 3 stars (5.7) 21

Erik Kohler LG 21

Mike Criste C 6'6, 318 Sr. 3 stars (5.6) 20

James Atoe RG 6'7, 375 Sr. 2 stars (5.2) 7

Shane Brostek RG 6'4, 287 Jr. 2 stars (5.4) 3

Siosifa Tufunga LG 6'3, 321 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 0

Ross Dolbec RT 6'5, 304 Jr. NR 0

Jake Eldrenkamp LT 6'5, 287 So. 3 stars (5.5) 0

Michael Kneip LG 6'5, 283 So. 2 stars (5.3) 0

Dane Crane C 6'3, 300 RSFr. 3 stars (5.7)



Coleman Shelton LT 6'4, 276 RSFr. 3 stars (5.5)



Andrew Kirkland RT 6'4, 302 RSFr. 3 stars (5.5)



5. The best asset a young QB can have

The quarterback position appears potentially unsettled -- sophomore Cyler Miles, the presumptive starter, was suspended this spring and missed some prime development time -- but whoever lines up behind center will be a former four-star signee, and Petersen and Smith should have no problem leaning on the run if they need to.

Not only do they have a handful of potentially strong running backs, but they have a line that ranked 23rd in Adj. Line Yards last season and returns seven players with starting experience (124 career starts) and all five of last year's primary starters. Plus, with Micah Hatchie and Dexter Charles both out with injuries this spring, some backups got some development time as well.

Pass protection was a bit of an issue last season, but some of that was on quarterback Keith Price, who sometimes held onto the ball too long in attempt to make a play. Miles had a quicker delivery (in a small sample) and a lower sack rate.

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE Raw Category Rk Opp. Adj. Category Rk EXPLOSIVENESS IsoPPP 1.05 18 IsoPPP+ 115.4 7 EFFICIENCY Succ. Rt. 39.9% 38 Succ. Rt. + 112.9 21 FIELD POSITION Off. Avg. FP 30.6 59 Off. FP+ 100.5 55 FINISHING DRIVES Pts. Per Trip in 40 3.8 26 Redzone S&P+ 129.8 5 TURNOVERS EXPECTED 24.6 ACTUAL 23.0 -1.6

Category Yards/

Game Rk S&P+ Rk Success

Rt. Rk PPP+ Rk OVERALL 56 12 21 14 RUSHING 61 39 49 46 PASSING 61 6 5 7 Standard Downs 26 36 12 Passing Downs 4 5 15

Q1 Rk 3 1st Down Rk 38 Q2 Rk 18 2nd Down Rk 13 Q3 Rk 46 3rd Down Rk 6 Q4 Rk 27

6. Passive against the run, vicious against the pass

Washington's recruiting in the front seven improved in recent years, but that had not yet translated to stellar run defense. The Huskies ranked 39th in Rushing S&P+ and 66th in Adj. Line yards, but if they were able to force you to pass, bad things were about to happen to you. End Hau'oli Kikaha was one of the best pure pass-rushing ends in the country, which meant that UW didn't have to blitz much to get pressure.

Linebackers defensed 16 passes, and an active, experienced secondary did even more damage. This was a tough, super-fast defense, and only a couple of offenses had any major success. Oregon and Arizona State averaged 7.0 yards per play; everybody else averaged 4.6.

An experienced line will probably need to do the secondary a few more favors this fall. Whereas seven of the top nine tacklers on the line return (including Kikaha), along with four of six at linebacker, the secondary's been stripped rather bare.

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 98.5 3.35 3.02 41.6% 68.6% 14.8% 129.6 5.0% 11.0% Rank 66 111 34 91 74 114 16 50 5

Name Pos Ht, Wt 2014

Year Rivals GP Tackles % of Team TFL Sacks Int PBU FF FR Hau'oli Kikaha DE 6'3, 250 Sr. 3 stars (5.5) 13 58.0 7.4% 15.5 13.0 0 3 3 0 Cory Littleton DE 6'3, 227 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 13 47.5 6.0% 10.0 5.0 0 2 1 0 Danny Shelton NT 6'2, 332 Sr. 4 stars (5.8) 13 47.5 6.0% 3.5 2.0 0 3 0 0 Evan Hudson DT 6'5, 281 Sr. 3 stars (5.5) 13 16.5 2.1% 4.5 4.0 0 1 0 0 Josh Shirley DE 12 10.5 1.3% 4.0 3.0 0 1 1 0 Connor Cree DT 12 9.0 1.1% 1.0 1.0 0 0 0 0 Taniela Tupou DT 6'2, 277 Jr. 3 stars (5.7) 13 6.0 0.8% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 Joe Mathis DE 6'2, 248 So. 4 stars (5.8) 12 5.5 0.7% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 Marcus Farria DE 6'4, 235 So. 3 stars (5.7) 7 5.5 0.7% 2.5 2.5 0 0 0 0 Damion Turpin DT 6'4, 263 So. 3 stars (5.6) 4 2.0 0.3% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 Andrew Hudson DE 6'3, 251 Sr. 3 stars (5.7) Jarett Finau DE 6'3, 268 Jr. 2 stars (5.4) Psalm Wooching DE 6'3, 230 So. 3 stars (5.6) Elijah Qualls NT 6'2, 298 RSFr. 4 stars (5.8) Kaleb McGary DL 6'7, 285 Fr. 4 stars (5.8) Greg Gaines DT 6'1, 305 Fr. 3 stars (5.6) Jaylen Johnson DE 6'3, 245 Fr. 3 stars (5.6) Jaimie Bryant NT 6'4, 309 Fr. 3 stars (5.5)

Linebackers

Name Pos Ht, Wt 2014

Year Rivals GP Tackles % of Team TFL Sacks Int PBU FF FR Princeton Fuimaono OLB 13 68.5 8.7% 4.0 1.5 0 0 2 0 Shaq Thompson OLB 6'2, 231 Jr. 5 stars (6.1) 13 64.0 8.1% 4.0 0.5 1 4 0 0 John Timu ILB 6'1, 244 Sr. 3 stars (5.6) 12 57.5 7.3% 3.5 2.0 2 2 0 0 Travis Feeney OLB 6'4, 217 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) 13 45.5 5.8% 5.0 2.5 0 6 0 0 Thomas Tutogi ILB 13 21.5 2.7% 0.5 0.0 0 1 0 0 Scott Lawyer OLB 6'2, 223 Jr. 2 stars (5.4) 13 15.0 1.9% 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 Jamaal Kearse OLB 13 10.0 1.3% 1.0 1.0 0 0 0 0 Sean Constantine OLB 6'2, 221 RSFr. 4 stars (5.8) Connor O'Brien OLB 6'3, 229 RSFr. 3 stars (5.7) Keishawn Bierria OLB 6'1, 216 RSFr. 3 stars (5.6) Azeem Victor ILB 6'3, 243 RSFr. 3 stars (5.6)

7. Potential and experience up front

Hey, we finally joined Facebook!

In theory, if the secondary gets weaker, the front seven could pick up the slack. New defensive coordinator Pete Kwiatkowski, another Boise import (his defenses ranked first, 11th, and 17th in Def. F/+ from 2010-12 before regressing to 72nd last fall), knows how to max out potential up front, and he certainly has some toys to play with.

First, there are the starters. Kikaha and Shaq Thompson are back. So is monstrous nose Danny Shelton. John Timu was a solid inside linebacker, and Travis Feeney was a fine complement for Thompson at OLB. But Washington was still shaky against the run with this lineup, and it will be interesting to see what tweaks Kwiatkowski makes.

It will also be interesting to see who joins the rotation. Joe Mathis (end), Elijah Qualls (tackle), and Sean Constantine (OLB) are all four-star youngsters on the second string, and in Kaleb McGary, UW boasts a monstrous four-star freshman end as well. This front seven, then, gives you both known quantities and high-upside unknowns. And if the Huskies can crack the top 30 in Rushing S&P+ (possible) and maintain a strong pass rush (probable), that will help the pass defense immensely.

Secondary

Name Pos Ht, Wt 2014

Year Rivals GP Tackles % of Team TFL Sacks Int PBU FF FR Sean Parker S 13 56.5 7.2% 3.5 1 4 4 0 0 Marcus Peters CB 6'0, 198 Jr. 3 stars (5.7) 13 49.5 6.3% 3.5 1 5 9 1 1 Tre Watson S 13 42.0 5.3% 2.5 0 1 8 1 0 Will Shamburger S 10 40.0 5.1% 1.5 0 0 1 0 0 Gregory Ducre CB 13 38.5 4.9% 1.5 0 2 7 1 0 Kevin King S 6'2, 181 So. 3 stars (5.6) 10 15.5 2.0% 0 0 0 1 0 1 Cleveland Wallace CB 9 8.0 1.0% 0.5 0 1 1 0 0 Travell Dixon CB 6'1, 200 Sr. 4 stars (6.0) 4 7.0 0.9% 0 0 0 1 1 0 Trevor Walker S 5'11, 187 So. 3 stars (5.6) 6 5.5 0.7% 0 0 0 0 0 0 Brandon Beaver S 6'0, 184 So. 4 stars (5.8) 6 2.0 0.3% 0 0 0 0 0 0 Thomas Vincent S 6'0, 200 Jr. 2 stars (5.3) Brian Clay CB 6'1, 193 Jr. 3 stars (5.5) Jermaine Kelly CB 6'1, 188 RSFr. 4 stars (5.8) Budda Baker S 5'10, 180 Fr. 4 stars (6.0) Darren Gardenhire CB 6'0, 180 Fr. 3 stars (5.7) Naijiel Hale CB 5'11, 180 Fr. 3 stars (5.7)

8. Questions in the back

First, the good news: ace cornerback Marcus Peters is back. That alone assures that Washington has one known quantity and a guy to scrap with the strong No. 1 receivers of the Pac-12. But the top three safeties and corner Gregory Ducre are gone, meaning that, unlike the front seven, the secondary will have to depend on some high-caliber youngsters sooner than later.

That the youngsters are of high caliber is not in dispute. Sophomore Brandon Beaver and redshirt freshman Jermaine Kelly, each former four-stars, were solid in the spring; both could be full-time starters in 2014. Plus, incoming freshman Budda Baker was the best high school player in the state and probably won't need much acclimation to make a difference.

The ceiling is high in the secondary, but moving from seniors to freshmen and sophomores rarely works out without some growing pains. The pass rush will help, but a passive, rather ineffective secondary hurt Boise State significantly last year, and the same could happen, at least temporarily, to Washington in 2014.

Special Teams

Punter Ht, Wt 2014

Year Punts Avg TB FC I20 FC/I20

Ratio Travis Coons 62 40.4 2 22 23 72.6%

Kicker Ht, Wt 2014

Year Kickoffs Avg TB OOB TB% Travis Coons 57 60.4 8 0 14.0% Cameron Van Winkle 5'10, 173 So. 34 60.4 11 0 32.4%

Place-Kicker Ht, Wt 2014

Year PAT FG

(0-39) Pct FG

(40+) Pct Travis Coons 62-63 9-9 100.0% 6-7 85.7%

Returner Pos. Ht, Wt 2014

Year Returns Avg. TD John Ross KR 5'11, 180 So. 31 23.2 1 Kevin Smith KR 5 16.0 0 Marvin Hall PR 5'10, 182 Jr. 5 9.4 0 Kasen Williams PR 6'3, 221 Sr. 5 1.8 0

Category Rk Special Teams F/+ 19 Field Goal Efficiency 9 Punt Return Efficiency 79 Kick Return Efficiency 22 Punt Efficiency 28 Kickoff Efficiency 102 Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency 76

9. A new set of legs

Losing Travis Coons means losing a great kicker, a strong punter, and a mediocre kickoffs guy all in one. Two of the three could be difficult to replace. John Ross gives the Huskies a good kick returner, and you could do worse than Marvin Hall and Kasen Williams (you could also do better), but Cameron Van Winkle and others have some shoes to fill in the kicking game.

2014 Schedule & Projection Factors

2014 Schedule Date Opponent Proj. Rk 30-Aug at Hawaii 97 6-Sep Eastern Washington NR 13-Sep Illinois 63 20-Sep Georgia State 128 27-Sep Stanford 6 11-Oct at California 82 18-Oct at Oregon 3 25-Oct Arizona State 21 1-Nov at Colorado 99 8-Nov UCLA 20 15-Nov at Arizona 36 22-Nov Oregon State 43 29-Nov at Washington State 68

Five-Year F/+ Rk 4.2% (48) Two-Year Recruiting Rk 23 TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin* 7 / 9.4 TO Luck/Game -0.9 Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.) 13 (6, 7)

10. Another potential mid-season blip

Washington played its two worst games of the season against two of its best opponents, Oregon and Arizona State. If the same thing happens this fall, we could be talking about another mid-season funk, as the Huskies play Stanford, Oregon, and Arizona State in a four-game span, then host UCLA two weeks after ASU.

Then again, there might not be a funk at all. Three of those four opponents come to Seattle, and it only takes a couple of ifs to make Washington one hell of a team in 2014. If Cyler Miles has his head on straight and catches on to Petersen's system quickly, and if the run defense improves with greater experience, Washington won't have any demonstrable weaknesses.

And if the secondary is able to play at a high level despite youth, then UW could be a Pac-12 contender.

Granted, those are three pretty significant ifs, and I doubt all three come to fruition. But Steve Sarkisian left Washington in infinitely better shape than he found it, and Chris Petersen has a lot more exciting pieces than he did in Boise last year. The projections for UW are conservative, but of course they are -- the Huskies have only been truly good once in almost a decade.

It's not hard to see the Huskies achieving above projection, though. And with a good first year or two, it's not hard to see recruiting working out just fine and Petersen enjoying one hell of a tenure at UW. Washington's a big reason why the Pac-12 is so damn strong now, and the Huskies aren't likely to fade too much in the coming years.

Follow @SBNationCFB Follow @SBNRecruiting