Air Force

Profile vs. FBS, 2021

Farther out is better on every spoke. Dashed ring: the FBS median.

• EPA per play

  Expected points added on an average snap: how much each play moved the scoring odds.
  Offense+0.2584th
  Defense+0.1447th
• Success rate

  Share of snaps that stayed on schedule: half the yards needed on 1st down, 70% on 2nd, all of them on 3rd or 4th.
  Offense46.3%77th
  Defense37.7%90th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1611th
  Defense+1.416th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2485th
  Defense+0.1243rd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.4597th
  Defense+0.1960th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense50.6%68th
  Defense41.5%94th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense34.2%78th
  Defense31.2%45th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.4490th
  Defense2.8373rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense11.4%98th
  Defense17.2%53rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense8.4%99th
  Defense18.7%82nd

Percentiles among the 130 FBS teams this season, where higher is better for the offense and the defense alike (a defense's numbers are what it allowed). The line in each bar is the FBS median. Garbage time excluded. Source: CollegeFootballData.

Drives vs. expectation, 2021

Every snap has an expected-points value: what a drive from that spot, down and distance is worth on average. A drive over expected beat its starting spot; defense counts what Air Force allowed, so lower is better. The adjusted number fits every team against the opponents it actually played, so it leans toward average early in a season. Ranks are among FBS teams.

Game by game

1. W
   LAF
2. W
   NAVY
3. L
   USU
4. W
   FAU
5. W
   UNM
6. W
   WYO
7. W
   BOIS
8. L
   SDSU
9. L
   ARMY
10. W
    CSU
11. W
    NEV
12. W
    UNLV
13. W
    LOU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Air Force.

Players, 2021

1. Haaziq DanielsQB220 plays · +0.262 pts/play · 89th of 219 QBs
   1.08WAR0.59 to 1.56
2. Brad RobertsRB238 plays · +0.189 pts/play · 19th of 387 RBs
   0.84WAR0.59 to 1.07
3. Emmanuel MichelFB59 plays · +0.185 pts/play · 217th of 387 RBs
   0.20WAR0.16 to 0.26
4. Brandon LewisWR44 plays · +0.157 pts/play · 170th of 474 WRs
   0.13WAR0.09 to 0.17
5. Warren BryanQB18 plays · +0.217 pts/play · 201st of 219 QBs
   0.07WAR0.03 to 0.11
6. DeAndre HughesWR52 plays · +0.062 pts/play · 349th of 474 WRs
   0.06WAR−0.01 to 0.14
7. Micah DavisWR38 plays · +0.076 pts/play · 369th of 474 WRs
   0.05WAR0.00 to 0.11
8. Dane KinamonWR32 plays · +0.077 pts/play · 386th of 474 WRs
   0.05WAR0.00 to 0.10

By position group, against FBS

Linemen and defenders are valued as units, in points per game against the median FBS unit, because play-by-play doesn't say who was on the field. Players are valued against a replacement-level backup, so the two aren't added together.

Wins above replacement credits each play's expected points to the players involved, adjusted for the opponent, and compares Air Force's players with a typical backup; 53 points make a win. Only snaps while the game was in doubt count, so a starter on a team that blows opponents out plays fewer of them: read value per play beside WAR. The line under each player (or the range on a phone) is the 90% interval. Ranks are among FBS teams and players. How this works

What it had and what it did, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  3030130th of 130Roster talent: 30, 130th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  133133104th of 130Recruiting: 133, 104th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  77%77%61st of 128Returning production: 77%, 61st of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +7.4+7.454th of 130SP+ rating: +7.4, 54th of 130 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 130 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion

Conversion by season

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2021

Each real fourth down is valued three ways (go for it, kick, punt) from the score, clock and field position before the snap, using league-wide odds rather than Air Force's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 8 clear-cut ones account for 0.12 of the 0.17 expected wins. The model sees the situation, not the injury report, so a call it disagrees with can still be right. Ranks are among FBS teams; 1st gave up the least.

Costliest calls against the numbers

1. vs ARMYQ4 5:03 4th & 10 at ARMY 39, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.6 pts
2. at CSUQ2 0:00 4th & 8 at AF 34, up 7Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.5 pts
3. vs USUQ4 5:56 4th & 2 at AF 45, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
4. at NAVYQ3 12:59 4th & 4 at NAVY 42, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
5. vs WYOQ2 4:38 4th & 2 at WYO 46, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
6. at NAVYQ3 7:32 4th & 4 at NAVY 44, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
7. at LOUQ3 1:50 4th & 2 at AF 10, up 15Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
8. vs FAUQ2 0:01 4th & 4 at FAU 4, up 17Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

23rd of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

Expected wins adds up Air Force's chance of winning each game as the model saw it at kickoff - a 70% favorite counts 0.7.

1. W

   LAF
2. W

   NAVY
3. L

   USU
4. W

   FAU
5. W

   UNM
6. W

   WYO
7. W

   BOIS
8. L

   SDSU
9. L

   ARMY
10. W

    CSU
11. W

    NEV
12. W

    UNLV
13. W

    LOU

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Air Force's pregame chance; everything after that is the field. The model's own breakdown of each game's final play splits the on-field part by what drove it, and the parts add up exactly. How it works →

• Scoreboard+1.40
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.20
• Timeouts−0.07
• Other+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.55

Game by game

• LAFW 35-14 vs LAF99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +3
• NAVYW 23-3 at NAVY71% → 99%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +38, Clock +1
• USUL 45-49 vs USU77% → 5%Before kickoff +27 · On the field −72: Scoreboard −57, Clock −4
• FAUW 31-7 vs FAU56% → 100%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +44: Scoreboard +42, Timeouts +2
• UNMW 38-10 at UNM76% → 100%Before kickoff +26 · On the field +24: Scoreboard +29, Clock +1
• WYOW 24-14 vs WYO64% → 96%Before kickoff +14 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +32, Timeouts +2
• BOISW 24-17 at BOIS39% → 84%Before kickoff −11 · On the field +45: Scoreboard +44, Clock +2
• SDSUL 14-20 vs SDSU57% → 4%Before kickoff +7 · On the field −52: Scoreboard −52, Clock −3
• ARMYL 14-21 vs ARMY57% → 6%Before kickoff +7 · On the field −50: Scoreboard −60, Clock +16
• CSUW 35-21 at CSU59% → 99%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +40: Scoreboard +45, Clock +2
• NEVW 41-39 at NEV50% → 55%Before kickoff 0 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +13, Clock +3
• UNLVW 48-14 vs UNLV89% → 100%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +15
• LOUW 31-28 at LOU49% → 94%Before kickoff −1 · On the field +45: Scoreboard +48, Clock +3

Points of win probability, from Air Force's side.

Closest call

AF 41-38 SJSU (2016) - Air Force dropped to a 10.7% win probability before pulling it out.