Boise State

Profile vs. FBS, 2025

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+0.1357th
  Defense+0.0567th
• 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.
  Offense41.8%44th
  Defense36.5%90th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2663rd
  Defense+1.385th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1469th
  Defense+0.1422nd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1441st
  Defense−0.0294th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense47.0%43rd
  Defense41.4%92nd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense31.1%58th
  Defense28.1%64th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1172nd
  Defense2.9836th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense16.1%76th
  Defense19.4%56th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.1%64th
  Defense16.6%63rd

Percentiles among the 136 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, 2025

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 Boise 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
   USF
2. W
   EWU
3. W
   AF
4. W
   APP
5. L
   ND
6. W
   UNM
7. W
   UNLV
8. W
   NEV
9. L
   FRES
10. L
    SDSU
11. W
    CSU
12. W
    USU
13. W
    UNLV
14. L
    WASH

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

Players, 2025

1. Maddux MadsenQB279 plays · +0.200 pts/play · 82nd of 231 QBs
   1.04WAR0.61 to 1.54
2. Max CutforthQB113 plays · +0.200 pts/play · 138th of 231 QBs
   0.42WAR0.22 to 0.65
3. Sire GainesRB133 plays · +0.114 pts/play · 53rd of 365 RBs
   0.28WAR0.20 to 0.37
4. Dylan RileyRB169 plays · +0.089 pts/play · 55th of 365 RBs
   0.28WAR0.19 to 0.37
5. Malik SherrodRB90 plays · +0.078 pts/play · 192nd of 365 RBs
   0.13WAR0.07 to 0.21
6. Chase PenryWR28 plays · +0.201 pts/play · 172nd of 451 WRs
   0.11WAR0.06 to 0.16
7. Latrell CaplesWR65 plays · +0.083 pts/play · 178th of 451 WRs
   0.10WAR−0.03 to 0.23
8. Oscar DoyleP46 plays · +0.105 pts/play · 16th of 100 punters
   0.09WAR0.01 to 0.19

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 Boise 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, 2025

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  61161181st of 134Roster talent: 611, 81st of 134 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  18118166th of 134Recruiting: 181, 66th of 134 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  58%58%27th of 132Returning production: 58%, 27th of 132 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +3.1+3.163rd of 134SP+ rating: +3.1, 63rd of 134 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 134 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, 2025

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 Boise 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 0.05 of the 0.11 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 USUQ4 0:24 4th & 3 at USU 26, up 1Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−5.1 pts
2. at USFQ3 0:35 4th & 7 at BOIS 43, down 17Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.8 pts
3. at USFQ2 0:13 4th & 15 at USF 46, down 3Punted; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.8 pts
4. at NEVQ4 14:01 4th & 2 at BOIS 28, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
5. at SDSUQ4 1:20 4th & 8 at SDSU 24, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
6. at NEVQ2 1:02 4th & 11 at BOIS 39, up 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.6 pts
7. at USUQ4 10:29 4th & 14 at USU 38, down 5Punted; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.6 pts
8. vs UNMQ4 7:31 4th & 8 at UNM 10, up 10Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2025

98th of 136 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   USF
2. W

   EWU
3. W

   AF
4. W

   APP
5. L

   ND
6. W

   UNM
7. W

   UNLV
8. W

   NEV
9. L

   FRES
10. L

    SDSU
11. W

    CSU
12. W

    USU
13. W

    UNLV
14. L

    WASH

What moved it, 2025

Every game starts at Boise 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−0.31
• Possession & field position+0.04
• Clock+0.01
• Timeouts−0.03
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.87

Game by game

• USFL 7-34 at USF68% → 0%Before kickoff +18 · On the field −68: Scoreboard −60, Possession & field position +1
• EWUW 51-14 vs EWU98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• AFW 49-37 at AF81% → 98%Before kickoff +31 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +28, Clock +2
• APPW 47-14 vs APP89% → 100%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +14
• NDL 7-28 at ND9% → 0%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −13
• UNMW 41-25 vs UNM91% → 99%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +15, Clock −1
• UNLVW 56-31 vs UNLV85% → 100%Before kickoff +35 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +19, Timeouts −1
• NEVW 24-3 at NEV93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +13, Clock +1
• FRESL 7-30 vs FRES90% → 0%Before kickoff +40 · On the field −90: Scoreboard −67, Clock −3
• SDSUL 7-17 at SDSU51% → 3%Before kickoff +1 · On the field −49: Scoreboard −40, Timeouts −3
• CSUW 49-21 vs CSU89% → 100%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +14
• USUW 25-24 at USU60% → 82%Before kickoff +10 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +35, Clock +4
• UNLVW 38-21 vs UNLV71% → 99%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +29: Scoreboard +34, Clock −3
• WASHL 10-38 at WASH24% → 0%Before kickoff −26 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −28, Clock +1

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

Closest call

BOIS 59-52 CSU (2017) - Boise State dropped to a 2.5% win probability before pulling it out.