Alabama

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+0.2691st
  Defense−0.0194th
• 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.
  Offense46.7%79th
  Defense38.2%87th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3268th
  Defense+1.2461st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1039th
  Defense−0.0898th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3991st
  Defense+0.0590th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.2%55th
  Defense45.2%76th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense41.4%98th
  Defense25.0%95th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1661st
  Defense2.5698th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense18.1%33rd
  Defense21.8%89th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.0%64th
  Defense20.0%93rd

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 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
   MIA
2. W
   MER
3. W
   FLA
4. W
   USM
5. W
   MISS
6. L
   TA&M
7. W
   MSST
8. W
   TENN
9. W
   LSU
10. W
    NMSU
11. W
    ARK
12. W
    AUB
13. W
    UGA
14. W
    CIN
15. L
    UGA

Bars above the line: better than expected for Alabama.

Players, 2021

1. Bryce YoungQB481 plays · +0.390 pts/play · 2nd of 219 QBs
   3.51WAR2.53 to 4.50
2. Brian Robinson Jr.RB237 plays · +0.213 pts/play · 8th of 387 RBs
   0.94WAR0.78 to 1.11
3. Jameson WilliamsWR90 plays · +0.214 pts/play · 11th of 474 WRs
   0.36WAR0.23 to 0.49
4. John MetchieWR98 plays · +0.151 pts/play · 25th of 474 WRs
   0.28WAR0.15 to 0.41
5. Will ReichardPK21 plays · +0.267 pts/play · 25th of 128 kickers
   0.10WAR0.05 to 0.16
6. Slade BoldenWR47 plays · +0.108 pts/play · 253rd of 474 WRs
   0.09WAR0.05 to 0.13
7. James BurnipP38 plays · +0.093 pts/play · 75th of 101 punters
   0.07WAR0.01 to 0.12
8. Jase McClellanRB8 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 330th of 387 RBs
   0.02WAR0.01 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 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, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  100410041st of 130Roster talent: 1004, 1st of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  3113111st of 130Recruiting: 311, 1st of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  19%19%126th of 128Returning production: 19%, 126th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +26.0+26.03rd of 130SP+ rating: +26.0, 3rd 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 Alabama's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 4 clear-cut ones account for 0.10 of the 0.15 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 UGAQ4 12:59 4th & 3 at UGA 3, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.8 pts
2. at TA&MQ4 8:44 4th & 4 at TA&M 4, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.8 pts
3. at AUBQ3 2:18 4th & 11 at AUB 19, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−2.6 pts
4. at TA&MQ4 14:04 4th & 2 at TA&M 9, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
5. vs UGAQ4 8:16 4th & 1 at ALA 34, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
6. vs LSUQ4 12:36 4th & 2 at ALA 38, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
7. vs UGAQ2 3:28 4th & 2 at UGA 15, up 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
8. vs UGAQ2 1:33 4th & 8 at UGA 41, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

48th 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

   MIA
2. W

   MER
3. W

   FLA
4. W

   USM
5. W

   MISS
6. L

   TA&M
7. W

   MSST
8. W

   TENN
9. W

   LSU
10. W

    NMSU
11. W

    ARK
12. W

    AUB
13. W

    UGA
14. W

    CIN
15. L

    UGA

What moved it, 2021

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+0.94
• Possession & field position+0.05
• Clock−0.17
• Timeouts+0.23
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−1.48

Game by game

• MIAW 44-13 at MIA87% → 100%Before kickoff +37 · On the field +13: Scoreboard +19
• MERW 48-14 vs MER100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• FLAW 31-29 at FLA82% → 86%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +27, Clock +3
• USMW 63-14 vs USM99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +1
• MISSW 42-21 vs MISS82% → 100%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +18: Scoreboard +22, Timeouts +1
• TA&ML 38-41 at TA&M86% → 4%Before kickoff +36 · On the field −83: Scoreboard −42, Possession & field position −1
• MSSTW 49-9 at MSST87% → 100%Before kickoff +37 · On the field +13: Scoreboard +19, Clock +1
• TENNW 52-24 vs TENN95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +8
• LSUW 20-14 vs LSU95% → 82%Before kickoff +45 · On the field −13: Scoreboard +10, Possession & field position −2
• NMSUW 59-3 vs NMSU99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +1
• ARKW 42-35 vs ARK91% → 97%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +14, Timeouts +1
• AUBW 24-22 at AUB90% → 29%Before kickoff +40 · On the field −61: Timeouts +20, Scoreboard −18
• UGAW 41-24 vs UGA28% → 99%Before kickoff −22 · On the field +71: Scoreboard +51, Timeouts +2
• CINW 27-6 vs CIN81% → 100%Before kickoff +31 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +23, Timeouts +1
• UGAL 18-33 vs UGA36% → 1%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −36: Scoreboard −43, Clock −1

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.