Bowling Green

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+0.1239th
  Defense+0.1641st
• 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.
  Offense39.8%20th
  Defense45.3%25th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1950th
  Defense+1.2142nd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1567th
  Defense+0.0954th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1225th
  Defense+0.2343rd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense43.6%19th
  Defense50.0%22nd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense32.0%33rd
  Defense34.8%34th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8342nd
  Defense2.8059th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense20.1%41st
  Defense24.9%93rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense2.1%45th
  Defense1.8%38th

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 Bowling Green 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
   WKU
2. W
   VMI
3. W
   IU
4. L
   WIS
5. W
   MASS
6. W
   BUF
7. W
   OHIO
8. L
   WMU
9. W
   AKR
10. W
    KENT
11. L
    TOL
12. L
    BALL
13. L
    NIU
14. W
    USA

Bars above the line: better than expected for Bowling Green.

Players, 2014

1. James KnapkeQB498 plays · +0.165 pts/play · 56th of 199 QBs
   1.54WAR0.75 to 2.37
2. Travis GreeneRB180 plays · +0.131 pts/play · 25th of 350 RBs
   0.44WAR0.30 to 0.61
3. Roger LewisWR108 plays · +0.205 pts/play · 8th of 469 WRs
   0.41WAR0.21 to 0.63
4. Fred CoppetRB130 plays · +0.161 pts/play · 39th of 350 RBs
   0.39WAR0.28 to 0.51
5. Ronnie MooreWR101 plays · +0.175 pts/play · 19th of 469 WRs
   0.33WAR0.18 to 0.47
6. Tyler TatePK27 plays · +0.374 pts/play · 10th of 114 kickers
   0.19WAR0.12 to 0.28
7. Joe DavidsonP66 plays · +0.151 pts/play · 9th of 94 punters
   0.19WAR0.08 to 0.30
8. Andre GivensRB78 plays · +0.121 pts/play · 131st of 350 RBs
   0.18WAR0.12 to 0.23

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 Bowling Green'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 Bowling Green'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 0.07 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. vs USAQ4 8:25 4th & 1 at USA 1, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−4.1 pts
2. vs KENTQ4 11:59 4th & 3 at KENT 3, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
3. at TOLQ4 3:06 4th & 11 at TOL 30, down 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.1 pts
4. vs WMUQ4 13:34 4th & 3 at BGSU 42, down 5Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
5. vs KENTQ2 11:15 4th & 3 at KENT 4, up 17Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
6. vs BUFQ3 7:31 4th & 6 at BUF 43, up 2Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
7. vs BALLQ4 4:42 4th & 7 at BALL 21, down 17Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.6 pts
8. vs NIUQ2 1:31 4th & 2 at BGSU 20, down 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2014

53rd of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   WKU
2. W

   VMI
3. W

   IU
4. L

   WIS
5. W

   MASS
6. W

   BUF
7. W

   OHIO
8. L

   WMU
9. W

   AKR
10. W

    KENT
11. L

    TOL
12. L

    BALL
13. L

    NIU
14. W

    USA

What moved it, 2014

Every game starts at Bowling Green'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−0.17
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.02
• Timeouts+0.05
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.17

Game by game

• WKUL 31-59 at WKU65% → 0%Before kickoff +15 · On the field −65: Scoreboard −56, Clock −1
• VMIW 48-7 vs VMI99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +3
• IUW 45-42 vs IU51% → 80%Before kickoff +1 · On the field +29: Scoreboard +18, Timeouts +1
• WISL 17-68 at WIS11% → 0%Before kickoff −39 · On the field −11: Scoreboard −14
• MASSW 47-42 at MASS77% → 92%Before kickoff +27 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +32, Clock +2
• BUFW 36-35 vs BUF61% → 82%Before kickoff +11 · On the field +21: Scoreboard +18, Possession & field position +2
• OHIOW 31-13 at OHIO46% → 99%Before kickoff −4 · On the field +53: Scoreboard +53, Clock +2
• WMUL 14-26 vs WMU50% → 2%Before kickoff 0 · On the field −48: Scoreboard −51, Clock −3
• AKRW 27-10 at AKR35% → 98%Before kickoff −15 · On the field +63: Scoreboard +59, Clock +3
• KENTW 30-20 vs KENT79% → 97%Before kickoff +29 · On the field +18: Scoreboard +24, Timeouts +1
• TOLL 20-27 at TOL31% → 2%Before kickoff −19 · On the field −29: Scoreboard −31, Possession & field position −1
• BALLL 24-41 vs BALL76% → 2%Before kickoff +26 · On the field −74: Scoreboard −61, Clock −2
• NIUL 17-51 vs NIU42% → 0%Before kickoff −8 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −46
• USAW 33-28 vs USA53% → 97%Before kickoff +3 · On the field +43: Scoreboard +34, Timeouts +3

Points of win probability, from Bowling Green's side.

Closest call

BGSU 48-27 MD (2015) - Bowling Green dropped to a 2.1% win probability before pulling it out.