Clemson

Profile vs. FBS, 2022

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+0.1355th
  Defense0.0085th
• 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.
  Offense45.0%71st
  Defense37.7%85th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1413th
  Defense+1.2642nd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1470th
  Defense−0.0592nd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1425th
  Defense+0.0592nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense51.6%79th
  Defense44.1%79th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense29.9%40th
  Defense25.2%88th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2878th
  Defense2.5796th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.9%83rd
  Defense25.5%98th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.0%69th
  Defense20.8%94th

Percentiles among the 131 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, 2022

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 Clemson 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
   GT
2. W
   FUR
3. W
   LT
4. W
   WAKE
5. W
   NCSU
6. W
   BC
7. W
   FSU
8. W
   SYR
9. L
   ND
10. W
    LOU
11. W
    MIA
12. L
    SC
13. W
    UNC
14. L
    TENN

Bars above the line: better than expected for Clemson.

Players, 2022

1. DJ UiagaleleiQB365 plays · +0.131 pts/play · 88th of 234 QBs
   0.89WAR0.27 to 1.55
2. Will ShipleyRB193 plays · +0.192 pts/play · 10th of 384 RBs
   0.69WAR0.55 to 0.84
3. Cade KlubnikQB95 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 164th of 234 QBs
   0.25WAR0.07 to 0.45
4. Phil MafahRB82 plays · +0.154 pts/play · 128th of 384 RBs
   0.24WAR0.18 to 0.29
5. B.T. PotterPK20 plays · +0.418 pts/play · 4th of 110 kickers
   0.16WAR0.10 to 0.22
6. Joseph NgataWR43 plays · +0.177 pts/play · 133rd of 455 WRs
   0.14WAR0.07 to 0.21
7. Antonio WilliamsWR53 plays · +0.138 pts/play · 140th of 455 WRs
   0.14WAR0.06 to 0.21
8. Davis AllenTE35 plays · +0.143 pts/play · 40th of 214 TEs
   0.09WAR0.03 to 0.15

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 Clemson'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, 2022

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  9439435th of 129Roster talent: 943, 5th of 129 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  2842845th of 129Recruiting: 284, 5th of 129 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  46%46%86th of 128Returning production: 46%, 86th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +17.6+17.613th of 129SP+ rating: +17.6, 13th of 129 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 129 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, 2022

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 Clemson'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 0.02 of the 0.09 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 SYRQ4 1:33 4th & 2 at SYR 27, up 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.1 pts
2. vs NCSUQ4 10:08 4th & 2 at CLEM 40, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
3. vs LOUQ2 12:11 4th & 1 at CLEM 34, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
4. at WAKEQ4 4:01 4th & 4 at WAKE 35, down 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
5. vs LOUQ1 2:25 4th & 2 at LOU 2, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
6. at GTQ4 12:59 4th & 6 at GT 41, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
7. at BCQ2 4:43 4th & 2 at CLEM 44, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
8. vs TENNQ4 7:37 4th & 8 at CLEM 33, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.5 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2022

65th of 131 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   GT
2. W

   FUR
3. W

   LT
4. W

   WAKE
5. W

   NCSU
6. W

   BC
7. W

   FSU
8. W

   SYR
9. L

   ND
10. W

    LOU
11. W

    MIA
12. L

    SC
13. W

    UNC
14. L

    TENN

What moved it, 2022

Every game starts at Clemson'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+0.81
• Possession & field position−0.02
• Clock−0.16
• Timeouts+0.18
• Other+0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−1.08

Game by game

• GTW 41-10 at GT94% → 100%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +9
• FURW 35-12 vs FUR100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +2
• LTW 48-20 vs LT98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• WAKEW 51-45 at WAKE71% → 78%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +30, Timeouts +17
• NCSUW 30-20 vs NCSU71% → 97%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +26: Scoreboard +29, Timeouts +2
• BCW 31-3 at BC91% → 100%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +9: Scoreboard +14
• FSUW 34-28 at FSU62% → 97%Before kickoff +12 · On the field +35: Scoreboard +44, Clock +2
• SYRW 27-21 vs SYR84% → 96%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +12: Scoreboard +21
• NDL 14-35 at ND60% → 0%Before kickoff +10 · On the field −60: Scoreboard −50, Timeouts −2
• LOUW 31-16 vs LOU70% → 99%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +29: Scoreboard +30, Possession & field position +1
• MIAW 40-10 vs MIA89% → 100%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +13
• SCL 30-31 vs SC84% → 14%Before kickoff +34 · On the field −70: Scoreboard −40, Clock −3
• UNCW 39-10 at UNC70% → 100%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +30: Scoreboard +35
• TENNL 14-31 vs TENN61% → 2%Before kickoff +11 · On the field −60: Scoreboard −58, Clock −3

Points of win probability, from Clemson's side.

Closest call

CLEM 38-35 UK (2023) - Clemson dropped to a 1.0% win probability before pulling it out.