Alabama

Profile vs. FBS, 2018

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+0.4199th
  Defense+0.0378th
• 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.
  Offense56.7%99th
  Defense35.4%97th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2670th
  Defense+1.3510th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2493rd
  Defense−0.0587th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.6098th
  Defense+0.0967th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense60.2%99th
  Defense38.3%99th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense46.5%99th
  Defense31.2%66th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.6498th
  Defense2.5088th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense12.6%98th
  Defense23.0%82nd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense10.7%98th
  Defense20.3%95th

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, 2018

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 Alabama 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
   LOU
2. W
   ARST
3. W
   MISS
4. W
   TA&M
5. W
   UL
6. W
   ARK
7. W
   MIZ
8. W
   TENN
9. W
   LSU
10. W
    MSST
11. W
    CIT
12. W
    AUB
13. W
    UGA
14. W
    OU
15. L
    CLEM

Bars above the line: better than expected for Alabama.

Players, 2018

1. Tua TagovailoaQB231 plays · +0.269 pts/play · 74th of 225 QBs
   1.16WAR0.78 to 1.53
2. Damien HarrisRB81 plays · +0.214 pts/play · 132nd of 351 RBs
   0.32WAR0.27 to 0.38
3. Josh JacobsRB70 plays · +0.184 pts/play · 184th of 351 RBs
   0.24WAR0.20 to 0.29
4. Jerry JeudyWR44 plays · +0.128 pts/play · 172nd of 434 WRs
   0.11WAR0.05 to 0.16
5. Jalen HurtsQB15 plays · +0.248 pts/play · 208th of 225 QBs
   0.07WAR0.05 to 0.10
6. Irv Smith Jr.TE35 plays · +0.101 pts/play · 20th of 204 TEs
   0.07WAR0.01 to 0.13
7. DeVonta SmithWR32 plays · +0.084 pts/play · 315th of 434 WRs
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.08
8. Henry Ruggs IIIWR32 plays · +0.064 pts/play · 345th of 434 WRs
   0.04WAR0.00 to 0.08

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 Alabama'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, 2018

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  9799792nd of 130Roster talent: 979, 2nd of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  3073071st of 130Recruiting: 307, 1st of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  78%78%35th of 129Returning production: 78%, 35th of 129 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +36.3+36.31st of 130SP+ rating: +36.3, 1st 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, 2018

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 Alabama's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 0 clear-cut ones account for 0.00 of the 0.04 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 AUBQ2 2:31 4th & 1 at ALA 34, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
2. at LSUQ2 6:59 4th & 3 at LSU 5, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
3. vs MIZQ3 11:37 4th & 1 at ALA 47, up 20Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
4. vs MIZQ2 2:33 4th & 3 at MIZ 3, up 17Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
5. vs CLEMQ3 15:00 4th & 6 at CLEM 22, down 15Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.3 pts
6. vs MSSTQ2 11:57 4th & 7 at MSST 38, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
7. vs LOUQ2 2:02 4th & 4 at LOU 47, up 21Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
8. vs ARSTQ4 6:38 4th & 1 at ALA 29, up 50Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2018

53rd of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   LOU
2. W

   ARST
3. W

   MISS
4. W

   TA&M
5. W

   UL
6. W

   ARK
7. W

   MIZ
8. W

   TENN
9. W

   LSU
10. W

    MSST
11. W

    CIT
12. W

    AUB
13. W

    UGA
14. W

    OU
15. L

    CLEM

What moved it, 2018

Every game starts at Alabama'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+0.70
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.01
• Timeouts+0.04
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.66

Game by game

• LOUW 51-14 vs LOU95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +7
• ARSTW 57-7 vs ARST98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• MISSW 62-7 at MISS94% → 100%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +10
• TA&MW 45-23 vs TA&M94% → 100%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +9
• ULW 56-14 vs UL100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• ARKW 65-31 at ARK98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +4
• MIZW 39-10 vs MIZ96% → 100%Before kickoff +46 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +5
• TENNW 58-21 at TENN97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +7
• LSUW 29-0 at LSU87% → 100%Before kickoff +37 · On the field +12: Scoreboard +18, Clock +1
• MSSTW 24-0 vs MSST93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +11
• CITW 50-17 vs CIT100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• AUBW 52-21 vs AUB95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +7
• UGAW 35-28 at UGA78% → 88%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +32, Clock +2
• OUW 45-34 vs OU85% → 97%Before kickoff +35 · On the field +12: Scoreboard +19, Timeouts +1
• CLEML 16-44 vs CLEM64% → 0%Before kickoff +14 · On the field −64: Scoreboard −63, Clock −2

Points of win probability, from Alabama's side.

Closest call

ALA 24-22 AUB (2021) - Alabama dropped to a 4.4% win probability before pulling it out.