2008 schedule

One of the most popular features of Wired Devils is the football schedule, with links to the opponent's website and local newspaper coverage. After each game a link to the boxscore is added.

And don't forget that you can also review all the schedules since 2001 on the Football page.

For those of you already planning trips to Athens or Madison, the official site has the future schedules through 2010, but don't make any firm plans just yet. Remember, planned games often change, and you really have to wait until the spring before each season to know for sure, especially with out-of-conference games.

Gaddabout's Grades

Sometimes resiliency is better than efficiency, and so far the Sun Devils have proven that this season. It was yet another inefficient game and it, once again, kept a Devils' opponent in a game that should not have been so close. It's called playing with fire. It's not something you want to do against a Pac-10 opponent.

3rd Down Efficiency

Off. 4 of 9, 44.4%; Def. 6-of-18 33.3%: It was actually not as good as it looks, because San Diego State was 2-for-2 on 4th down, but the numbers on third down are exactly where they need to be. One can only cross their fingers that these numbers hold up over the course of the season.

Grade: B-

Turnovers

Ratio: Net zero. What can be said? One more strange pass into no man's land for Carpenter that, for all intents and purposes, was easily forgettable considering the game he had. But the fumbles aren't a promising trend for the future. Nolan picked up an INT for the Devils to even things out. Otherwise, no fumbles. That's progress.

Grade: C

Penalties

8 penalties, 73 yards: I suppose we should be celebrating here because ASU only had one personal foul. The primary offender was the offensive line with four holds and an illegal block, but watching the game I have to agree with Erickson that this referee staff was calling it differently than the first two games. You just don't see holding called that often when the linemen's hands stay inside the shoulders. ASU had an illegal block, but the refs missed a big chop block on SDSU that I think was the play that put Gerald Munns out for three weeks with a Grade 3 knee ligament sprain. It was a pretty nasty block. Not intentional, but I was aghast no flag was thrown.

Grade: C-

Summary

Overall grade: C. Better than the Colorado game, but it was still sort of typical of the kind of carelessness we've seen in the out of conference schedule. I'm not expecting this team to set records with efficiency, but these numbers have to improve if they plan on collecting 5 or more wins in the conference. They need to sustain what they're doing on 3rd down and, at the very least, win the turnover battle in a few games without totally blowing it in the rest of the games. I'm going to concede this team -- as with most Erickson teams -- are just going to draw a lot of yellow laundry. You live with it as long as (a) it's not the nasty 15-yard variety and (b) the aggressiveness is also producing the positive kinds of plays that keep spirits high and momentum in maroon and gold.

Gaddabout's Grades: Colorado

Gaddabout's Grades is an on-going experiment measuring ASU's efficiency stats in comparison to success on the field. The author believes any earnest study of modern college football history reveals successful teams are efficient teams.

It's almost impossible to pick a spot to begin in a game in which ASU commits seven personal fouls, and 12 total penalties for over 100 yards. The first quarter alone was enough to quarantine the game film and only bring it out as punishment to anyone who thinks reckless abandon is the best and only way to play a game.

In the interest of consistency, I will continue the endeavor:

3rd Down Efficiency

Off. 5-of-18, 27.7%; Def. 4-of-18 22.2%: There's not much to explain here. Defense, good. Offense, disappointing rushing game. With Ryan Torain nursing an ankle injury, there were first-half moments where ASU actually failed to advance the ball an inch on 3rd-and-short. That won't cut it against a Pac-10 team.

If you're looking for the hidden stat here, it's fourth down conversion. ASU was 2/3 and Colorado was 0/4. When combined with 3rd down conversion, ASU was actually at 33 percent while Colorado was at a miserable 18 percent.

Grade: D

Turnovers

-2: Carpenter made one bad throw in this game. No one seemed to be communicating to Tyrice Thompson where he was in relation to the punted ball. Brent Miller makes a good catch downfield only to get a helmet square on the ball. It was a strange game, and one I don't think will be repeated. The only turnover I found disconcerting was the one ASU didn't lose -- Herring's fumble out of bounds that could have really changed the momentum of the game for good.

It's an ugly number, but I don't think it's as bad as it looks. Maybe ASU got this type of game out of the way so they won't have it against the better conference teams. Fingers crossed, anyone?

Grade: C-

Penalties

12-for-136: Of the 12 penalties, 11 of them were the kinds of mental mistakes directly related to coaching. Erickson said he doesn't see those kinds of mistakes on the practice field. Well, now you've got a whole film of them, coach. Time to get to work.

With the halo rule gone, timing the punt coverage to arrive at the returner at the same time of the ball is now an important skill. Regardless of the rule chance, you STILL CAN'T HIT THE RETURNER BEFORE THE BALL GETS THERE. I'm glad we've got that covered and we can get on with the season without seeing another mental mistake like that one.

Grade: F-

Summary

This happens every year. A team defies the efficiency stats and wins a game in spite of eye-popping inefficiency. What I can guarantee you is the never goes on for an entire season. If ASU is in double digits in penalties, upside down in turnover margin, and less than at least 35 percent on offensive 3rd-down conversion, it will not be playing beyond the UA game. That's a college football certainty.

So why did ASU win? Defense has a lot to do with it. Any team that holds an opponent's offense to less than 20 percent third-down conversion will win most of the team. ASU was just that much better than Colorado.

Don't count on surviving a game like this against a ranked opponent, though.

Grade: D-

Gaddabout's Grades

Long-timers at The Ranch will remember the origination of Gaddabout's Grades a few years ago: We were trying to determine if there was true forward motion in the program. More than a few years back I did a little study of modern-era college football teams, and the teams that were consistently ranked tended to do well in efficiency categories. It was not 100 percent accurate every year, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a team that had extended success that didn't do well in efficiency categories.

Since the advent of the Top 25 (as opposed to the original Top 20), ranked teams tended to have the following qualities: better than 38 percent offensive 3rd-down conversion; less than 38 percent defensive 3rd-down conversion; 6.5 penalties a game or less; a season's turnover margin better than approximately +8. ASU consistently failed in Gaddabout's Grades under Koetter, and actually regressed the last two seasons. The penalty situation was exacerbated by the kind of penalties ASU received -- the kind of 10 yards or more. It is no stretch to state that Koetter's unemotional approach to game prep had no impact on ASU's execution during the game. In fact, it was some of ASU's least efficient years in memory.

I did not expect ASU to make any dramatic improvements in these categories under Erickson. His teams tend to draw a lot of penalties from aggressive play. I did expect improvement in 3rd down efficiency on both sides of the ball. I think turnovers always will depend on the strength of the running game and experience at quarterback.

3rd Down Efficiency

Off. 13-of-17, 76.4%; Def. 28.5%: Total domination by ASU in this category. This is a direct relationship to ASU's line play. When it counted -- in the first half -- ASU was 6-of-7 to SJSU's 3-of-7.

Maybe ASU didn't get a lot of pressure on the QB, but the line held their gaps. On the other side, this is the product of strong running and a line blowing holes open. When you're constantly facing 3rd-and-short on offense, you tend to score more touchdowns and attempt less field goals. It's a sign of many other things going right.

Grade: A

Turnovers

+1: Nothing dynamite here, but ASU got two interceptions by forcing SJSU to do what it didn't want to do -- throw the ball. I'm giving a little extra credit here because the fumble came from Brent Miller, a typically reliable tight end, rather than from a quarterback or running back. Danny Sullivan also fumbled but got it back -- and credit to him for not losing his head in what was a very efficient game for him.

Grade: B

Penalties

5-for-40: Not bad. The intensity was high as it should be in the season opener. I would have been forgiving if ASU picked up a few more considering the intensity and a coach who lets his teams have fun on the field, but 5 penalties a game for the season is conference champion-type numbers. Both USC and Cal have averaged about 5.5 penalties a game the past 5 seasons.

What was also interesting was SJSU's 3 penalties. Not only was ASU heavily penalized last year, they seemed to draw the other team into drawing a lot of penalties, too. The number of the opponent usually does drop when the better team executes well. It tends to raise the level of execution for both teams. I suspect that's what we saw here.

Grade: A-

Summary

I cannot imagine the season starting better for ASU. They didn't just destroy the opponent, they avoided the kinds of execution pitfalls that suggested red flags for the future. For now I will ring this up as what we should have expected from a mostly veteran staff who knows how to get a team ready for a season opener.

The greater challenge is maintaining this kind of execution throughout the season. One cannot expect ASU to maintain a 75% third-down conversion percentage for an entire season, but 60+% for the month of September would be reason to get excited for this team heading into conference play. It would be much better if ASU clocked a +2 or better in turnovers, but if the 3rd-down conversion ratios remain strong and penalties continue to stay at a minimum, ASU won't need to collect so many turnovers to beat good teams. They will, however, need to hold on to the ball.

Overall grade: A-

My not-so-fearless prediction

Each year I make a prediction about the look and feel of the team before Tontozona. I don't look at the schedule. No analysis is done on the level of competition or any other external factors. I merely look down the roster of the team and come up with a number of wins I think the team is likely to produce.

Last year I said the team looked like a 7-win team. I had concerns about the lack of identity among the receivers, the lack of speed among the front 7, and the lack of experience in the secondary. In hindsight, there were many more problems facing the team, but I still felt I had the right notion about the team before the season began.

Before I get to this year, allow me to explain why I do this. I used to read all the magazines before a season, tried to analyze every little factor, every team in every major conference. This led to a good working knowledge of coaches and traditions, but it did little for my ability to predict winners and losers. College football is one of the more unpredictable sports in America. The regular season is a playoff, with one game a week, and it sets up nearly impossible to predict factors that affect a game beyond what we consider measurable dynamics. However, I did begin to see a pattern of winning based on very simple factors:

- Historical success of the head coach
- Returning starters, particularly 4th- and 5th-year seniors
- Relative strength of the units

OK, so it's not as simple as finding the team with the most returning seniors playing for a marginally successful head coach. A 3-8 team returning a lot of senior starters doesn't stand much of a chance of improving dramatically the next season. However, a team with 6 or 7 wins, returning a lot of starters/seniors, and with three or more strong units stands a very good chance of improving their status for the next season. This is especially true when there is senior leadership at QB.

ASU looks like an 8-win team to me this year. Keep in mind, I'm not looking at the schedule, and I'm making the probable assumption they will lose a game they shouldn't lose and win a game they shouldn't win. That's just college football.

The coach

Forget this is his first year. Dennis Erickson is one of the most successful active head coaches in college football. He resurrected Idaho, turned around Wazoo, maintained Miami, and built on his predecessor's success at Oregon State. What seems to be most true about Erickson is his allegiance to letting athletes be athletes. His schemes aren't new -- the playbook may not have changed much since he was an assistant for Jim Sweeney (to be fair, Sweeney was well ahead of his time innovating one-back schemes). What he does is try to put as much speed on the field as possible and put that athleticism in a position to make plays. He makes things fairly simple for his linemen. You won't find complex blocking schemes or defensive linemen being asked to hold gaps for linebackers to fill. Just beat the guy in front of you and get up or downfield. This bodes well for ASU and would seem to eliminate the problems of a new coach trying to overcoach a new team.

The returning starters/seniors

ASU will have 16 players (some redundant) with starting experience to fill 22 positions, with 13 seniors returning to the two-deep. The better number here is the latter, because it speaks to the production of the future graduating class, while leaving some question marks about 2008. Four of those seniors made the pre-season all-Pac-10 team, joined by sophomore defensive end Dexter Davis. It's a good sign of forward motion from last year.

General unit strength

The offense is strong across the board, and there are only three real question marks here:
(+ = major strengths, / = adequate, ! = major concerns)

QB (/): Can Rudy Carpenter recapture his accuracy and decision making of 2005? The likely answer is, "Yes," because the offense is no longer a strict downfield passing game. Erickson's offense is catered to Carpenter's style, allowing him to utilize the shotgun to see over the linemen, eliminate problematic drop-back footwork, and put more emphasis on shorter timing routes that lets the receiver do the work rather than the QB trying to deliver passes requiring major-league arm strength and timing. The concern here is the lack of depth and experience. If Carpenter is injured, the team can likely expect to take at least one step backwards in expectations. More if one of the youngsters doesn't grab the No. 2 job early and get some snap work with the first unit early in the practice season.

RB (+): Probably the strongest this position has been since Bruce Snyder's years, and perhaps the most talented since Frank Kush left Darryl Rogers a stack of talent in the early 80s. Torain will probably finish his two-year career among the best ever RBs at the school. Keegan Herring and Dimitri Nance are starter-capable backups with change-of-pace skill in the second and fourth quarters.

WR (!): Stands to be the most improved position, and look out for the youngsters, but someone will have to emerge as an every-down type receiver at the X and Z positions for this unit to solidify. It is potentially every bit an asset as the RB unit, but the Devils will need Mike Jones, Nate Kimbrough, and Chris McGaha to combine for at least 80 catches to open up the field for the talented slot receivers and tight ends. Without that kind of production, the defenses will shorten their safety coverage again and make it difficult to move the ball in larger chunks. The trio collected a meager 51 last year.

OL (+): It would be easy to panic about the lack of a true left tackle with all-conference pass protecting ability. Fact is, the line hasn't been a great pass blocking line since the start of the 2006 season. Since then, injuries have redefined this group. They've suddenly become a massive run-blocking group that opens holes for Torain. It doesn't look to change identities, with Brandon Rodd, Robert Gustavis, Mike Pollack, Paul Fanaika, Richard Tuitu'u, and Shawn Lauvao all showing strong run-blocking abilities. What should change is this line's ability to pick up blitzers with better line calls and technique. The loss of Carnahan to injury was especially difficult and exposed a line strong at guard and weak at tackle. This year positions are more settled and there won't be so much guessing taking place from week to week. A less stated but bigger concern is the mental toughness of the line, which was guilty of numerous false starts at critical junctures last year. Again, experience and position stability allows the assumption of improvement.

DL (!): The Devils appear to not have made any progress from last year. Once again they start the season with a strong half of a line, and two question marks on the other half. This year Dexter Davis and Michael Marquardt look to be strong anchors. It's a good start. Unfortunately injuries and inexperienced left the starters on the other side undecided heading into Tontozona, and it's never a good sign to start a season with questions at this unit. It stands to be a smaller, quicker unit, and if things don't go well to start the season, the staff may find it easier to tinker with 30 alignments with some hybrid looks from quick OLBs than trying to force a 40 front when personnel doesn't match.

LB (/): I actually like the talent here, and there's no shortage of depth. What I'm waiting on is for someone to show star ability at the position -- absolutely necessary to field a good defense in college football. Perhaps the corps will be quicker with Ryan McFoy making a move to OLB, but he will have to earn that position among strong, instinctive players like Travis Goethel and Gerald Munns. Goethel may end up being that star, with a Tillman-like tendency to read angles and make sure tackles. Morris Wooten in the middle gained some kudos during the spring, but nothing is ever certain when a transfer is starting his first year at MLB. Mike Nixon appears to be the utility backer who will move where depth requires him.

DB (/): CB Justin Tryon and S Josh Barrett return to put ASU secondary on solid ground for once in a long time, and the emergence of S Troy Nolan could make this unit one of the strongest in the conference. The question mark remains who will start opposite Tryon, and while decent candidates return, it appears JC transfer Jarrell Holman is lightly penciled in as the starter. The relationship between DL and the secondary is inseparable. They may be the two most integrated units in the game. A great shut-down secondary can create coverage sacks. A great all-around DL can force teams to throw when they don't want to and force QBs to make bad decisions. ASU honestly doesn't have either, though the secondary appears capable of making a strong showing if the defensive line can at least be effective against the run and allow Dexter Davis to avoid double teams in obvious passing situations.

ST (/): Punting looks relatively strong, kicking is a big question mark, but the return game is potentially better than the last year's strong effort. One hopes a return to conventional special teams looks improves the kick and punt coverage teams. Some talent, some question marks, but nothing so glaring to raise concerns going into the season. Freshman kicker Thomas Weber showed very good ability during the spring with the occasional hiccup. You never know how a kicker will perform until they take the field, though.

Summary

The team is better positioned to produce this year than last year. There's no controversy, no lingering off-the-field issues, and the players have a pretty good idea who will start where at most positions. Erickson is human and he's not going to turn this team into a BCS contender overnight. The talent just isn't quite there. However, the general schemes aren't changing (one-back offense, 4-3 defense), and if anything everything's been easier to learn for the players than if Koetter and staff had stuck around another year. Whether you believe in leadership or simply the best players giving a team a strong identity, it is a positive sign to see so many productive seniors on the two-deep. The offense won't have to guess who they are and what they want to do -- Torain and the OL will be featured, with Carpenter and the receivers allowed to play pitch and catch without having to do complicated adjustments on the fly. The defense needs starters to self-identify quickly at Tontozona to avoid players moving into positions by default. If players like Saia Falahola, Luis Vasquez, and Jonathan English can produce on the weakside of the defensive line, the entire defense has an opportunity to excel. But those are big ifs, and productivity there remains to be seen.

It's why I'm pegging the 2007 win total at 8.25, with the Devils giving themselves a chance to compete for a Holiday Bowl bid.