Air Force

Profile vs. FBS, 2024

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+0.0317th
  Defense+0.1242nd
• 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.
  Offense42.1%43rd
  Defense41.7%50th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.041st
  Defense+1.2750th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0843rd
  Defense+0.0465th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense−0.132nd
  Defense+0.2323rd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.8%57th
  Defense47.2%50th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense24.5%7th
  Defense29.6%62nd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0349th
  Defense3.0245th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.9%87th
  Defense16.7%37th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense12.1%92nd
  Defense14.6%32nd

Percentiles among the 134 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, 2024

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
   MRMK
2. L
   SJSU
3. L
   BAY
4. L
   WYO
5. L
   NAVY
6. L
   UNM
7. L
   CSU
8. L
   ARMY
9. W
   FRES
10. W
    ORST
11. W
    NEV
12. W
    SDSU

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

Players, 2024

1. Quentin HayesQB146 plays · +0.322 pts/play · 98th of 232 QBs
   0.88WAR0.56 to 1.21
2. Dylan CarsonRB114 plays · +0.153 pts/play · 75th of 373 RBs
   0.33WAR0.25 to 0.39
3. John BushaQB91 plays · +0.073 pts/play · 200th of 232 QBs
   0.12WAR−0.08 to 0.32
4. Owen AllenRB48 plays · +0.111 pts/play · 244th of 373 RBs
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.12
5. Matthew DaporePK12 plays · +0.262 pts/play · 84th of 114 kickers
   0.06WAR0.03 to 0.09
6. Cade HarrisWR40 plays · +0.065 pts/play · 247th of 452 WRs
   0.05WAR0.01 to 0.09
7. Tylor LathamWR18 plays · +0.025 pts/play · 359th of 452 WRs
   0.01WAR−0.01 to 0.03

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

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2024

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 1 clear-cut one accounts for 0.01 of the 0.07 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 ORSTQ2 0:00 4th & 4 at ORST 34, up 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it1.1 pts
2. vs NAVYQ4 10:07 4th & 5 at NAVY 11, down 20Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)0.7 pts
3. vs NAVYQ2 6:54 4th & 2 at AF 28, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.7 pts
4. vs SJSUQ2 0:07 4th & 2 at SJSU 46, down 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)0.6 pts
5. vs CSUQ2 7:05 4th & 2 at AF 9, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.6 pts
6. at ARMYQ4 6:13 4th & 11 at AF 30, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)0.5 pts
7. at SDSUQ4 9:31 4th & 4 at SDSU 49, up 11Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.5 pts
8. vs FRESQ3 9:46 4th & 4 at FRES 19, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2024

49th of 134 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

   MRMK
2. L

   SJSU
3. L

   BAY
4. L

   WYO
5. L

   NAVY
6. L

   UNM
7. L

   CSU
8. L

   ARMY
9. W

   FRES
10. W

    ORST
11. W

    NEV
12. W

    SDSU

What moved it, 2024

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+0.22
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.03
• Timeouts−0.26
• Other−0.04
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.51

Game by game

• MRMKW 21-6 vs MRMK96% → 99%Before kickoff +46 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +7, Timeouts +1
• SJSUL 7-17 vs SJSU53% → 3%Before kickoff +3 · On the field −50: Scoreboard −48, Timeouts −4
• BAYL 3-31 at BAY9% → 0%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −9: Scoreboard −12
• WYOL 19-31 at WYO55% → 1%Before kickoff +5 · On the field −54: Scoreboard −43, Timeouts −1
• NAVYL 7-34 vs NAVY23% → 0%Before kickoff −27 · On the field −23: Scoreboard −26, Timeouts −1
• UNML 37-52 at UNM32% → 1%Before kickoff −18 · On the field −31: Scoreboard −34, Timeouts +1
• CSUL 13-21 vs CSU25% → 1%Before kickoff −25 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −24, Timeouts −8
• ARMYL 3-20 at ARMY9% → 1%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −14
• FRESW 36-28 vs FRES18% → 98%Before kickoff −32 · On the field +80: Scoreboard +60, Timeouts −11
• ORSTW 28-0 vs ORST38% → 100%Before kickoff −12 · On the field +62: Scoreboard +57, Timeouts −1
• NEVW 22-19 at NEV35% → 94%Before kickoff −15 · On the field +59: Scoreboard +53, Clock +3
• SDSUW 31-20 at SDSU56% → 98%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +42: 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.