Bowling Green

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+0.3198th
  Defense+0.0953rd
• 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.
  Offense50.3%96th
  Defense44.2%36th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3497th
  Defense+1.2137th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2494th
  Defense+0.1128th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3692nd
  Defense+0.0769th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense53.6%94th
  Defense45.3%60th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense41.8%96th
  Defense42.0%4th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1887th
  Defense2.9930th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.7%91st
  Defense20.0%50th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense1.5%83rd
  Defense2.2%65th

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 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
   TENN
2. W
   MD
3. L
   MEM
4. W
   PUR
5. W
   BUF
6. W
   MASS
7. W
   AKR
8. W
   KENT
9. W
   OHIO
10. W
    WMU
11. L
    TOL
12. W
    BALL
13. W
    NIU
14. L
    GASO

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

Players, 2015

1. Matt JohnsonQB559 plays · +0.254 pts/play · 13th of 205 QBs
   2.66WAR1.68 to 3.63
2. Travis GreeneRB197 plays · +0.141 pts/play · 16th of 333 RBs
   0.52WAR0.36 to 0.70
3. Roger LewisWR104 plays · +0.205 pts/play · 12th of 411 WRs
   0.40WAR0.20 to 0.61
4. Fred CoppetRB108 plays · +0.156 pts/play · 59th of 333 RBs
   0.32WAR0.23 to 0.41
5. Ronnie MooreWR77 plays · +0.197 pts/play · 31st of 411 WRs
   0.28WAR0.16 to 0.41
6. Gehrig DieterWR108 plays · +0.064 pts/play · 146th of 411 WRs
   0.13WAR−0.02 to 0.30
7. Ryan BurbrinkWR64 plays · +0.085 pts/play · 207th of 411 WRs
   0.10WAR0.01 to 0.19
8. Tyler TatePK10 plays · +0.374 pts/play · 97th of 115 kickers
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.10

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

What it had and what it did, 2015

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  43443478th of 128Roster talent: 434, 78th of 128 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  111111105th of 128Recruiting: 111, 105th of 128 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  98%98%4th of 127Returning production: 98%, 4th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +7.5+7.551st of 128SP+ rating: +7.5, 51st 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 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 4 clear-cut ones account for 0.08 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. vs MEMQ4 3:06 4th & 18 at BGSU 33, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored punting−2.9 pts
2. at BUFQ3 9:39 4th & 1 at BGSU 29, up 15Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.3 pts
3. vs GASOQ3 3:06 4th & 9 at GASO 21, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.9 pts
4. vs MEMQ4 6:23 4th & 3 at BGSU 32, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
5. at WMUQ1 1:26 4th & 1 at BGSU 34, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
6. at MDQ2 1:14 4th & 7 at MD 30, down 17Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.4 pts
7. at KENTQ2 8:45 4th & 4 at KENT 4, up 21Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
8. vs AKRQ3 9:33 4th & 11 at AKR 32, up 25Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2015

31st 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

   TENN
2. W

   MD
3. L

   MEM
4. W

   PUR
5. W

   BUF
6. W

   MASS
7. W

   AKR
8. W

   KENT
9. W

   OHIO
10. W

    WMU
11. L

    TOL
12. W

    BALL
13. W

    NIU
14. L

    GASO

What moved it, 2015

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+0.54
• Possession & field position+0.06
• Clock−0.02
• Timeouts−0.03
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.55

Game by game

• TENNL 30-59 at TENN11% → 0%Before kickoff −39 · On the field −11: Scoreboard −13
• MDW 48-27 at MD29% → 3%Before kickoff −21 · On the field −26: Scoreboard −30, Clock −1
• MEML 41-44 vs MEM41% → 11%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −30: Scoreboard −41, Clock −3
• PURW 35-28 at PUR51% → 92%Before kickoff +1 · On the field +41: Scoreboard +49, Timeouts −4
• BUFW 28-22 at BUF68% → 91%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +23: Scoreboard +37, Possession & field position +2
• MASSW 62-38 vs MASS82% → 100%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +23, Timeouts −1
• AKRW 59-10 vs AKR83% → 100%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +21
• KENTW 48-0 at KENT77% → 99%Before kickoff +27 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +29, Clock +1
• OHIOW 62-24 vs OHIO83% → 100%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +20
• WMUW 41-27 at WMU60% → 99%Before kickoff +10 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +45, Clock +1
• TOLL 28-44 vs TOL74% → 1%Before kickoff +24 · On the field −72: Scoreboard −65, Clock −3
• BALLW 48-10 at BALL92% → 100%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +12
• NIUW 34-14 at NIU73% → 100%Before kickoff +23 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +34, Clock +2
• GASOL 27-58 vs GASO72% → 0%Before kickoff +22 · On the field −72: Scoreboard −66, Clock −2

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.