Bowling Green

Profile vs. FBS, 2020

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−0.211st
  Defense+0.372nd
• 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.
  Offense36.0%9th
  Defense48.2%13th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+0.981st
  Defense+1.426th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.088th
  Defense+0.401st
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense−0.361st
  Defense+0.3217th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense46.7%48th
  Defense49.5%36th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense16.9%1st
  Defense45.1%1st
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0267th
  Defense3.721st
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense16.8%79th
  Defense15.4%13th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.5%24th
  Defense15.5%37th

Percentiles among the 127 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, 2020

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
   TOL
2. L
   KENT
3. L
   BUF
4. L
   OHIO
5. L
   AKR

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

Players, 2020

1. Matt McDonaldQB73 plays · +0.083 pts/play · 156th of 212 QBs
   0.11WAR0.01 to 0.23
2. Andrew ClairRB32 plays · +0.158 pts/play · 252nd of 338 RBs
   0.09WAR0.07 to 0.12
3. Bryson DenleyRB9 plays · +0.210 pts/play · 281st of 338 RBs
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.04
4. Julian Ortega-JonesWR14 plays · +0.127 pts/play · 320th of 409 WRs
   0.03WAR0.02 to 0.05
5. Quintin MorrisTE20 plays · +0.012 pts/play · 137th of 191 TEs
   0.00WAR−0.03 to 0.04
6. Matt NaranjoP6 plays · +0.005 pts/play · 66th of 77 punters
   0.00WAR−0.01 to 0.01

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, 2020

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  215215123rd of 127Roster talent: 215, 123rd of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  13813893rd of 127Recruiting: 138, 93rd of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  83%83%20th of 127Returning production: 83%, 20th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −26.2−26.2126th of 127SP+ rating: −26.2, 126th of 127 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 127 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, 2020

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 0 clear-cut ones account for 0.00 of the 0.03 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 AKRQ3 6:14 4th & 9 at AKR 18, down 21Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.6 pts
2. at AKRQ2 2:04 4th & 3 at BGSU 39, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
3. at TOLQ2 4:41 4th & 6 at TOL 38, down 21Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
4. vs BUFQ2 10:31 4th & 1 at BGSU 32, down 11Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
5. vs BUFQ2 0:24 4th & 2 at BUF 29, down 18Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts
6. vs BUFQ2 14:55 4th & 2 at BUF 16, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
7. vs BUFQ3 11:27 4th & 9 at BUF 45, down 18Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.1 pts
8. vs BUFQ4 8:49 4th & 10 at BUF 45, down 25Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

92nd of 127 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

   TOL
2. L

   KENT
3. L

   BUF
4. L

   OHIO
5. L

   AKR

What moved it, 2020

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−0.82
• Clock−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.14

Game by game

• TOLL 3-38 at TOL7% → 0%Before kickoff −43 · On the field −7: Scoreboard −10
• KENTL 24-62 vs KENT10% → 0%Before kickoff −40 · On the field −10: Scoreboard −15
• BUFL 17-42 vs BUF3% → 0%Before kickoff −47 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −7
• OHIOL 10-52 at OHIO10% → 0%Before kickoff −40 · On the field −10: Scoreboard −13
• AKRL 3-31 at AKR38% → 0%Before kickoff −12 · On the field −38: Scoreboard −38, Clock −1

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.