Buffalo

Profile vs. FBS, 2018

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+0.1669th
  Defense+0.0856th
• 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.
  Offense44.1%55th
  Defense39.8%74th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2774th
  Defense+1.2436th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1369th
  Defense+0.1230th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2158th
  Defense+0.0578th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.9%58th
  Defense44.2%77th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense34.2%57th
  Defense30.9%68th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.9860th
  Defense2.9936th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense18.6%62nd
  Defense15.9%12th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense13.2%82nd
  Defense16.3%53rd

Percentiles among the 130 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, 2018

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 Buffalo 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. W
   DSU
2. W
   TEM
3. W
   EMU
4. W
   RUTG
5. L
   ARMY
6. W
   CMU
7. W
   AKR
8. W
   TOL
9. W
   M-OH
10. W
    KENT
11. L
    OHIO
12. W
    BGSU
13. L
    NIU
14. L
    TROY

Bars above the line: better than expected for Buffalo.

Players, 2018

1. Tyree JacksonQB399 plays · +0.280 pts/play · 19th of 225 QBs
   2.09WAR1.40 to 2.71
2. Jaret PattersonRB156 plays · +0.209 pts/play · 35th of 351 RBs
   0.61WAR0.48 to 0.74
3. Kevin MarksRB161 plays · +0.181 pts/play · 49th of 351 RBs
   0.55WAR0.42 to 0.66
4. Anthony JohnsonWR76 plays · +0.171 pts/play · 25th of 434 WRs
   0.24WAR0.12 to 0.36
5. K.J. OsbornWR90 plays · +0.106 pts/play · 57th of 434 WRs
   0.18WAR0.05 to 0.30
6. Emmanuel ReedRB43 plays · +0.156 pts/play · 261st of 351 RBs
   0.13WAR0.09 to 0.16
7. Adam MitchesonPK12 plays · +0.226 pts/play · 99th of 112 kickers
   0.05WAR0.01 to 0.09
8. Tyler MabryTE33 plays · +0.075 pts/play · 34th of 204 TEs
   0.05WAR0.00 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 Buffalo'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, 2018

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  369369106th of 130Roster talent: 369, 106th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  101101124th of 130Recruiting: 101, 124th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  74%74%47th of 129Returning production: 74%, 47th of 129 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −1.1−1.182nd of 130SP+ rating: −1.1, 82nd of 130 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 130 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, 2018

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 Buffalo's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 5 clear-cut ones account for 0.16 of the 0.20 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 NIUQ4 0:21 4th & 10 at NIU 41, down 1Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−10.4 pts
2. vs EMUQ2 7:53 4th & 1 at BUF 17, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
3. vs NIUQ2 0:03 4th & 2 at NIU 7, up 9Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
4. vs EMUQ3 10:23 4th & 1 at BUF 23, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
5. vs ARMYQ2 2:52 4th & 1 at BUF 35, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
6. vs ARMYQ4 9:10 4th & 12 at BUF 31, down 22Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.8 pts
7. at CMUQ2 1:50 4th & 4 at BUF 44, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
8. at CMUQ1 4:34 4th & 1 at BUF 15, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2018

29th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   DSU
2. W

   TEM
3. W

   EMU
4. W

   RUTG
5. L

   ARMY
6. W

   CMU
7. W

   AKR
8. W

   TOL
9. W

   M-OH
10. W

    KENT
11. L

    OHIO
12. W

    BGSU
13. L

    NIU
14. L

    TROY

What moved it, 2018

Every game starts at Buffalo'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+1.52
• Possession & field position+0.02
• Clock+0.04
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.56

Game by game

• DSUW 48-10 vs DSU69% → 100%Before kickoff +19 · On the field +31: Scoreboard +32
• TEMW 36-29 at TEM40% → 96%Before kickoff −10 · On the field +56: Scoreboard +52, Clock +3
• EMUW 35-28 vs EMU61% → 97%Before kickoff +11 · On the field +35: Scoreboard +34, Timeouts +2
• RUTGW 42-13 at RUTG65% → 100%Before kickoff +15 · On the field +35: Scoreboard +40, Clock +2
• ARMYL 13-42 vs ARMY70% → 0%Before kickoff +20 · On the field −70: Scoreboard −65, Clock −1
• CMUW 34-24 at CMU71% → 96%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +25: Scoreboard +37, Clock +2
• AKRW 24-6 vs AKR82% → 99%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +23
• TOLW 31-17 at TOL42% → 98%Before kickoff −8 · On the field +56: Scoreboard +56, Clock +2
• M-OHW 51-42 vs M-OH69% → 96%Before kickoff +19 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +30, Timeouts +2
• KENTW 48-14 vs KENT85% → 100%Before kickoff +35 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +18
• OHIOL 17-52 at OHIO42% → 0%Before kickoff −8 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −41
• BGSUW 44-14 at BGSU84% → 100%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +16: Scoreboard +21, Clock +1
• NIUL 29-30 vs NIU58% → 13%Before kickoff +8 · On the field −46: Scoreboard −43, Clock −3
• TROYL 32-42 at TROY58% → 3%Before kickoff +8 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −42, Timeouts −3

Points of win probability, from Buffalo's side.

Closest call

BALL 48-51 BUF (2024) - Buffalo dropped to a 6.3% win probability before pulling it out.