Ball State

Profile vs. FBS, 2026

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+0.0624th
  Defense+0.321st
• 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.
  Offense35.1%6th
  Defense44.6%23rd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.4496th
  Defense+1.482nd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense0.0021st
  Defense+0.228th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2147th
  Defense+0.454th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense39.3%4th
  Defense48.0%38th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.3%26th
  Defense36.9%12th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.7017th
  Defense3.0733rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense21.6%15th
  Defense18.8%48th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.3%9th
  Defense13.1%18th

Percentiles among the 138 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, 2026

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 Ball 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
   OSU
2. W
   STBK
3. L
   LIB
4. L
   KENT
5. L
   TOL
6. L
   NU

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

Players, 2026

1. Keldric LusterQB51 plays · +0.111 pts/play · 131st of 192 QBs
   0.11WAR0.04 to 0.16
2. Tyler MizzellQB38 plays · +0.095 pts/play · 156th of 192 QBs
   0.07WAR0.02 to 0.11
3. Donovan HamiltonWR21 plays · +0.151 pts/play · 121st of 364 WRs
   0.06WAR0.03 to 0.09
4. TJ HortonRB21 plays · +0.094 pts/play · 222nd of 320 RBs
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.05
5. Jalen BondsRB4 plays · +0.086 pts/play · 297th of 320 RBs
   0.01WAR0.00 to 0.01
6. Corey Thompson Jr.WR16 plays · +0.021 pts/play · 331st of 364 WRs
   0.01WAR−0.01 to 0.02

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 Ball 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, 2026

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  564564113th of 138Roster talent: 564, 113th of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  139139112th of 138Recruiting: 139, 112th of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  6%6%126th of 136Returning production: 6%, 126th of 136 in FBS
• SP+ rating so far

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −25.2−25.2136th of 138SP+ rating so far: −25.2, 136th of 138 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 138 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion so far

Conversion by season

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2026

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 Ball State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 1 clear-cut ones account for 0.02 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 TOLQ3 8:36 4th & 1 at BALL 14, down 5Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
2. at KENTQ4 3:24 4th & 2 at KENT 10, down 13Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.9 pts
3. vs TOLQ4 10:48 4th & 10 at BALL 35, down 12Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.5 pts
4. vs TOLQ2 10:49 4th & 2 at TOL 21, up 1Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
5. vs STBKQ4 10:36 4th & 4 at STBK 20, up 18Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
6. at OSUQ1 12:05 4th & 4 at OSU 43, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
7. at KENTQ2 1:50 4th & 8 at KENT 47, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)<0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

95th of 138 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   OSU
2. W

   STBK
3. L

   LIB
4. L

   KENT
5. L

   TOL
6. L

   NU

What moved it, 2026

Every game starts at Ball 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−0.53
• Clock−0.01
• Timeouts−0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.20

Game by game

• OSUL 3-56 at OSU0% → 0%Before kickoff −50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard −1
• STBKW 41-17 vs STBK81% → 100%Before kickoff +31 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +22, Timeouts +1
• LIBL 15-51 at LIB15% → 0%Before kickoff −35 · On the field −15: Scoreboard −18, Timeouts −1
• KENTL 13-26 at KENT37% → 1%Before kickoff −13 · On the field −36: Scoreboard −33, Timeouts −2
• TOLL 24-39 vs TOL8% → 5%Before kickoff −42 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −21, Possession & field position +1
• NUL 14-45 at NU2% → 0%Before kickoff −48 · On the field −1: Scoreboard −3

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

Closest call

BALL 20-17 NIU (2023) - Ball State dropped to a 6.1% win probability before pulling it out.