Arkansas State

Profile vs. FBS, 2015

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+0.1053rd
  Defense+0.0471st
• 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.
  Offense45.0%70th
  Defense37.9%87th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2055th
  Defense+1.442nd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1376th
  Defense+0.0362nd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0935th
  Defense+0.0672nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.5%69th
  Defense43.0%85th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense34.9%57th
  Defense29.4%79th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.7938th
  Defense2.1999th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense22.9%20th
  Defense27.1%95th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense2.4%24th
  Defense3.0%92nd

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, 2015

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 Arkansas 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
   USC
2. L
   MIZ
3. W
   MOST
4. L
   TOL
5. W
   IDHO
6. W
   USA
7. W
   UL
8. W
   GAST
9. W
   APP
10. W
    ULM
11. W
    NMSU
12. W
    TXST
13. L
    LT

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

Players, 2015

1. Fredi KnightenQB318 plays · +0.201 pts/play · 80th of 205 QBs
   1.19WAR0.70 to 1.75
2. Michael GordonRB114 plays · +0.127 pts/play · 93rd of 333 RBs
   0.27WAR0.17 to 0.36
3. Warren WandRB97 plays · +0.114 pts/play · 122nd of 333 RBs
   0.21WAR0.13 to 0.28
4. Johnston WhiteRB55 plays · +0.171 pts/play · 139th of 333 RBs
   0.18WAR0.13 to 0.22
5. J.D. McKissicWR57 plays · +0.126 pts/play · 143rd of 411 WRs
   0.13WAR0.08 to 0.19
6. Luke FergusonPK53 plays · +0.118 pts/play · 60th of 115 kickers
   0.12WAR0.04 to 0.20
7. Tres HoustonWR36 plays · +0.172 pts/play · 172nd of 411 WRs
   0.12WAR0.06 to 0.18
8. Dijon PaschalWR28 plays · +0.214 pts/play · 183rd of 411 WRs
   0.11WAR0.07 to 0.17

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 Arkansas 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

What it had and what it did, 2015

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  40840884th of 128Roster talent: 408, 84th of 128 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  12112193rd of 128Recruiting: 121, 93rd of 128 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  99%99%3rd of 127Returning production: 99%, 3rd of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +0.5+0.572nd of 128SP+ rating: +0.5, 72nd of 128 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 128 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, 2015

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 Arkansas State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 2 clear-cut ones account for 0.04 of the 0.13 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 USAQ3 12:01 4th & 2 at USA 6, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it2.1 pts
2. vs LTQ2 3:24 4th & 3 at LT 41, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it1.6 pts
3. at TOLQ3 14:56 4th & 2 at TOL 47, down 20Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.8 pts
4. vs MIZQ2 7:53 4th & 3 at MIZ 3, up 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.8 pts
5. vs LTQ4 12:54 4th & 2 at ARST 38, down 17Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.8 pts
6. at ULMQ3 11:09 4th & 6 at ULM 39, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.8 pts
7. at USAQ2 0:53 4th & 7 at USA 43, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.6 pts
8. at USAQ2 13:16 4th & 4 at USA 42, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2015

35th of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   USC
2. L

   MIZ
3. W

   MOST
4. L

   TOL
5. W

   IDHO
6. W

   USA
7. W

   UL
8. W

   GAST
9. W

   APP
10. W

    ULM
11. W

    NMSU
12. W

    TXST
13. L

    LT

What moved it, 2015

Every game starts at Arkansas 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+1.06
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.04
• Timeouts−0.03
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.19

Game by game

• USCL 6-55 at USC4% → 0%Before kickoff −46 · On the field −4: Scoreboard −6
• MIZL 20-27 vs MIZ18% → 4%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −14: Scoreboard −28, Clock −2
• MOSTW 70-7 vs MOST94% → 100%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +8
• TOLL 7-37 at TOL27% → 0%Before kickoff −23 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −29
• IDHOW 49-35 vs IDHO93% → 99%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +12
• USAW 49-31 at USA71% → 99%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +36, Clock +2
• ULW 37-27 vs UL70% → 98%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +32
• GASTW 48-34 vs GAST89% → 99%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +16
• APPW 40-27 at APP21% → 99%Before kickoff −29 · On the field +78: Scoreboard +62, Clock +3
• ULMW 59-21 at ULM84% → 100%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +16: Scoreboard +21, Clock +1
• NMSUW 52-28 at NMSU88% → 100%Before kickoff +38 · On the field +12: Scoreboard +18, Clock +1
• TXSTW 55-17 vs TXST92% → 100%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +11
• LTL 28-47 vs LT57% → 1%Before kickoff +7 · On the field −57: Scoreboard −47, Timeouts −3

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

Closest call

ARST 30-29 APP (2025) - Arkansas State dropped to a 4.3% win probability before pulling it out.