App State

Profile vs. FBS, 2014

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+0.2687th
  Defense+0.1450th
• 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.
  Offense45.1%68th
  Defense39.9%71st
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2883rd
  Defense+1.2529th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1878th
  Defense+0.1333rd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.4087th
  Defense+0.1666th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.6%65th
  Defense43.2%87th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense36.0%69th
  Defense33.5%43rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1276th
  Defense2.8649th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense18.9%57th
  Defense21.4%69th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense2.2%37th
  Defense2.3%69th

Percentiles among the 128 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, 2014

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 App State 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
   MICH
2. W
   CAM
3. L
   USM
4. L
   GASO
5. L
   USA
6. L
   LIB
7. W
   TROY
8. W
   GAST
9. W
   ULM
10. W
    ARST
11. W
    UL
12. W
    IDHO

Bars above the line: better than expected for App State.

Players, 2014

1. Taylor LambQB282 plays · +0.358 pts/play · 34th of 199 QBs
   1.89WAR1.38 to 2.36
2. Marcus CoxRB200 plays · +0.104 pts/play · 39th of 350 RBs
   0.39WAR0.19 to 0.58
3. Malachi JonesWR47 plays · +0.160 pts/play · 133rd of 469 WRs
   0.14WAR0.06 to 0.22
4. Terrence UpshawRB81 plays · +0.079 pts/play · 191st of 350 RBs
   0.12WAR0.05 to 0.18
5. Simms McElfreshWR44 plays · +0.125 pts/play · 197th of 469 WRs
   0.10WAR0.05 to 0.17
6. Bobo BeathardWR21 plays · +0.180 pts/play · 275th of 469 WRs
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.10
7. Bentlee CritcherP29 plays · +0.061 pts/play · 74th of 94 punters
   0.03WAR−0.03 to 0.08
8. Zach MaticsP4 plays · +0.334 pts/play · 79th of 94 punters
   0.03WAR0.01 to 0.04

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 App State'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, 2014

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 App State'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 0.04 of the 0.09 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 ARSTQ4 0:29 4th & 7 at ARST 34, up 5Punted; the numbers favored a field goal−2.0 pts
2. vs ULMQ3 4:11 4th & 4 at ULM 49, down 2Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
3. at USMQ3 11:34 4th & 3 at USM 26, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
4. vs LIBQ2 0:04 4th & 3 at LIB 16, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
5. vs LIBQ3 4:47 4th & 3 at LIB 21, up 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
6. at USMQ3 9:52 4th & 2 at APP 37, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
7. at GASOQ4 6:05 4th & 10 at GASO 12, down 20Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.8 pts
8. vs LIBQ2 11:42 4th & 1 at APP 34, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2014

18th of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   MICH
2. W

   CAM
3. L

   USM
4. L

   GASO
5. L

   USA
6. L

   LIB
7. W

   TROY
8. W

   GAST
9. W

   ULM
10. W

    ARST
11. W

    UL
12. W

    IDHO

What moved it, 2014

Every game starts at App State'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+1.07
• Possession & field position+0.12
• Clock+0.24
• Timeouts−0.21
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.33

Game by game

• MICHL 14-52 at MICH2% → 0%Before kickoff −48 · On the field −2: Scoreboard −4
• CAMW 66-0 vs CAM99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +3
• USML 20-21 at USM41% → 7%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −34: Scoreboard −31, Timeouts −2
• GASOL 14-34 at GASO14% → 0%Before kickoff −36 · On the field −14: Scoreboard −19
• USAL 21-47 vs USA38% → 0%Before kickoff −12 · On the field −38: Scoreboard −45, Possession & field position +2
• LIBL 48-55 vs LIB60% → 28%Before kickoff +10 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −33, Timeouts −21
• TROYW 53-14 at TROY38% → 100%Before kickoff −12 · On the field +62: Scoreboard +60, Clock +1
• GASTW 44-0 vs GAST66% → 100%Before kickoff +16 · On the field +34: Scoreboard +35
• ULMW 31-29 vs ULM58% → 79%Before kickoff +8 · On the field +20: Scoreboard +13, Possession & field position +3
• ARSTW 37-32 at ARST17% → 90%Before kickoff −33 · On the field +74: Scoreboard +46, Clock +4
• ULW 35-16 at UL31% → 99%Before kickoff −19 · On the field +68: Scoreboard +61, Clock +3
• IDHOW 45-28 vs IDHO84% → 99%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +21, Timeouts +1

Points of win probability, from App State's side.

Closest call

MRSH 9-31 APP (2023) - App State dropped to a 4.5% win probability before pulling it out.