East Carolina

Profile vs. FBS, 2025

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+0.0182nd
• 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.
  Offense46.4%84th
  Defense38.3%81st
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1510th
  Defense+1.2643rd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0541st
  Defense−0.0995th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3179th
  Defense+0.1163rd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.5%64th
  Defense44.3%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.
  Offense37.2%92nd
  Defense27.8%68th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0461st
  Defense2.5193rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.9%92nd
  Defense28.5%99th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense12.9%81st
  Defense19.1%93rd

Percentiles among the 136 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, 2025

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 East Carolina 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
   NCSU
2. W
   CAM
3. W
   CCU
4. L
   BYU
5. W
   ARMY
6. L
   TULN
7. W
   TLSA
8. W
   TEM
9. W
   CLT
10. W
    MEM
11. L
    UTSA
12. W
    FAU
13. W
    PITT

Bars above the line: better than expected for East Carolina.

Players, 2025

1. Katin HouserQB336 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 91st of 231 QBs
   0.88WAR0.24 to 1.48
2. Anthony SmithWR66 plays · +0.225 pts/play · 30th of 451 WRs
   0.28WAR0.13 to 0.44
3. London MontgomeryRB140 plays · +0.103 pts/play · 59th of 365 RBs
   0.27WAR0.20 to 0.34
4. Yannick SmithWR33 plays · +0.235 pts/play · 123rd of 451 WRs
   0.15WAR0.08 to 0.21
5. Marlon Gunn Jr.RB74 plays · +0.086 pts/play · 211th of 365 RBs
   0.12WAR0.08 to 0.16
6. Brock SpaldingWR48 plays · +0.132 pts/play · 153rd of 451 WRs
   0.12WAR0.03 to 0.20
7. Nick MazziePK15 plays · +0.295 pts/play · 59th of 112 kickers
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.11
8. Desirrio RilesTE34 plays · +0.126 pts/play · 48th of 213 TEs
   0.08WAR0.02 to 0.14

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 East Carolina'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, 2025

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  61261278th of 134Roster talent: 612, 78th of 134 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  16716776th of 134Recruiting: 167, 76th of 134 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  51%51%38th of 132Returning production: 51%, 38th of 132 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +8.0+8.038th of 134SP+ rating: +8.0, 38th of 134 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 134 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, 2025

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 East Carolina'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 0.05 of the 0.08 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 TULNQ4 11:01 4th & 1 at ECU 24, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.9 pts
2. at TULNQ2 2:08 4th & 2 at ECU 44, down 9Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
3. vs PITTQ2 7:03 4th & 7 at ECU 34, up 3Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.1 pts
4. at NCSUQ3 9:57 4th & 8 at ECU 19, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.7 pts
5. vs CLTQ2 0:02 4th & 1 at ECU 34, up 21Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
6. vs TLSAQ4 10:51 4th & 4 at TLSA 14, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
7. at UTSAQ1 3:51 4th & 3 at ECU 27, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
8. vs BYUQ4 1:26 4th & 4 at BYU 15, down 21Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.2 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2025

39th of 136 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   NCSU
2. W

   CAM
3. W

   CCU
4. L

   BYU
5. W

   ARMY
6. L

   TULN
7. W

   TLSA
8. W

   TEM
9. W

   CLT
10. W

    MEM
11. L

    UTSA
12. W

    FAU
13. W

    PITT

What moved it, 2025

Every game starts at East Carolina'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+0.85
• Possession & field position+0.03
• Clock+0.01
• Timeouts+0.02
• Other+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.17

Game by game

• NCSUL 17-24 at NCSU16% → 4%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −12: Scoreboard −20, Timeouts −2
• CAMW 56-3 vs CAM97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +4
• CCUW 38-0 at CCU72% → 100%Before kickoff +22 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +33
• BYUL 13-34 vs BYU34% → 1%Before kickoff −16 · On the field −33: Scoreboard −40, Clock −1
• ARMYW 28-6 vs ARMY68% → 100%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +31: Scoreboard +35, Timeouts −1
• TULNL 19-26 at TULN38% → 11%Before kickoff −12 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −27, Possession & field position +1
• TLSAW 41-27 vs TLSA88% → 99%Before kickoff +38 · On the field +12: Scoreboard +17
• TEMW 45-14 at TEM68% → 100%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +36, Clock +1
• CLTW 48-22 vs CLT97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +5
• MEMW 31-27 vs MEM62% → 89%Before kickoff +12 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +24, Timeouts +2
• UTSAL 24-58 at UTSA53% → 0%Before kickoff +3 · On the field −53: Scoreboard −48, Possession & field position −1
• FAUW 42-3 at FAU70% → 100%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +30: Scoreboard +35, Clock +1
• PITTW 23-17 vs PITT23% → 91%Before kickoff −27 · On the field +69: Scoreboard +31, Timeouts +3

Points of win probability, from East Carolina's side.

Closest call

ECU 42-38 MRSH (2021) - East Carolina dropped to a 0.6% win probability before pulling it out.