Akron

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+0.1130th
  Defense+0.371st
• 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.
  Offense40.5%29th
  Defense53.2%1st
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3682nd
  Defense+1.2747th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0729th
  Defense+0.401st
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1731st
  Defense+0.409th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense46.7%33rd
  Defense58.8%1st
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense29.0%29th
  Defense37.6%7th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1253rd
  Defense3.791st
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.6%64th
  Defense13.0%14th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense20.3%6th
  Defense10.3%1st

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 Akron 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. L
   AUB
2. L
   TEM
3. W
   BRY
4. L
   OSU
5. L
   OHIO
6. W
   BGSU
7. L
   M-OH
8. L
   BUF
9. L
   BALL
10. L
    WMU
11. L
    KENT
12. L
    TOL

Bars above the line: better than expected for Akron.

Players, 2021

1. Zach GibsonQB126 plays · +0.224 pts/play · 124th of 219 QBs
   0.53WAR0.26 to 0.79
2. Jonzell NorrilsRB75 plays · +0.211 pts/play · 155th of 387 RBs
   0.30WAR0.23 to 0.36
3. Konata MumpfieldWR40 plays · +0.154 pts/play · 195th of 474 WRs
   0.11WAR0.08 to 0.16
4. Kato NelsonQB51 plays · +0.119 pts/play · 194th of 219 QBs
   0.11WAR0.00 to 0.25
5. Michael MathisonWR33 plays · +0.165 pts/play · 233rd of 474 WRs
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.13
6. Cory SmigelPK7 plays · +0.276 pts/play · 110th of 128 kickers
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.05
7. Tristian BrankTE14 plays · +0.012 pts/play · 41st of 234 TEs
   0.00WAR−0.02 to 0.02
8. DJ IronsQB76 plays · −0.106 pts/play · 219th of 219 QBs
   −0.15WAR−0.37 to 0.06

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 Akron'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.
  331331119th of 130Roster talent: 331, 119th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  120120122nd of 130Recruiting: 120, 122nd of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  63%63%82nd of 128Returning production: 63%, 82nd of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −23.1−23.1127th of 130SP+ rating: −23.1, 127th 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 Akron's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 3 clear-cut ones account for 0.05 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. at WMUQ4 0:00 4th & 25 at WMU 43, down 5Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.7 pts
2. vs BUFQ4 4:32 4th & 11 at BUF 18, down 12Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.7 pts
3. vs TEMQ3 6:49 4th & 18 at TEM 31, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.6 pts
4. at BGSUQ4 5:59 4th & 1 at AKR 36, up 15Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
5. vs BUFQ2 6:57 4th & 3 at BUF 18, down 9Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
6. vs OHIOQ1 3:10 4th & 1 at AKR 34, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
7. vs TEMQ2 11:46 4th & 3 at TEM 22, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
8. at M-OHQ3 0:29 4th & 10 at AKR 44, down 27Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

69th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   AUB
2. L

   TEM
3. W

   BRY
4. L

   OSU
5. L

   OHIO
6. W

   BGSU
7. L

   M-OH
8. L

   BUF
9. L

   BALL
10. L

    WMU
11. L

    KENT
12. L

    TOL

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Akron'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−0.82
• Possession & field position−0.03
• Clock−0.05
• Timeouts−0.08
• Other−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.95

Game by game

• AUBL 10-60 at AUB1% → 0%Before kickoff −49 · On the field −1: Scoreboard −3
• TEML 24-45 vs TEM34% → 0%Before kickoff −16 · On the field −33: Scoreboard −39, Clock −2
• BRYW 35-14 vs BRY82% → 100%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +21
• OSUL 7-59 at OSU0% → 0%Before kickoff −50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard −1
• OHIOL 17-34 vs OHIO23% → 0%Before kickoff −27 · On the field −23: Scoreboard −21, Timeouts −8
• BGSUW 35-20 at BGSU18% → 96%Before kickoff −32 · On the field +78: Scoreboard +61, Clock +2
• M-OHL 21-34 at M-OH8% → 0%Before kickoff −42 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −11
• BUFL 10-45 vs BUF19% → 3%Before kickoff −31 · On the field −16: Scoreboard −30, Clock −2
• BALLL 25-31 vs BALL9% → 7%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −2: Scoreboard −22, Clock −2
• WMUL 40-45 at WMU5% → 12%Before kickoff −45 · On the field +6: Scoreboard −10, Possession & field position −1
• KENTL 0-38 vs KENT17% → 0%Before kickoff −33 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −23
• TOLL 14-49 at TOL4% → 0%Before kickoff −46 · On the field −4: Scoreboard −6

Points of win probability, from Akron's side.

Closest call

MORG 21-24 AKR (2023) - Akron dropped to a 4.0% win probability before pulling it out.