Florida International

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+0.0839th
  Defense+0.0759th
• 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.
  Offense40.7%32nd
  Defense42.6%39th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3074th
  Defense+1.2738th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1160th
  Defense+0.0653rd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1338th
  Defense+0.1359th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense47.3%45th
  Defense49.0%33rd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.1%27th
  Defense28.4%59th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8439th
  Defense3.2113th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense22.5%11th
  Defense15.9%16th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense16.9%25th
  Defense16.4%60th

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 Florida International 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
   BCU
2. L
   PSU
3. W
   FAU
4. L
   DEL
5. L
   CONN
6. W
   WKU
7. L
   KENN
8. L
   MOST
9. W
   MTSU
10. W
    LIB
11. W
    JXST
12. W
    SHSU
13. L
    UTSA

Bars above the line: better than expected for Florida International.

Players, 2025

1. Keyone JenkinsQB201 plays · +0.160 pts/play · 123rd of 231 QBs
   0.60WAR0.20 to 0.98
2. Joe PesanskyQB151 plays · +0.159 pts/play · 134th of 231 QBs
   0.45WAR0.14 to 0.75
3. Kejon OwensRB185 plays · +0.090 pts/play · 39th of 365 RBs
   0.31WAR0.20 to 0.43
4. Alex PerryWR72 plays · +0.228 pts/play · 22nd of 451 WRs
   0.31WAR0.14 to 0.46
5. Anthony CarrieRB75 plays · +0.078 pts/play · 219th of 365 RBs
   0.11WAR0.07 to 0.15
6. Noah GrantPK17 plays · +0.302 pts/play · 41st of 112 kickers
   0.10WAR0.05 to 0.13
7. Dallas PayneTE28 plays · +0.136 pts/play · 57th of 213 TEs
   0.07WAR0.01 to 0.12
8. Kyle McNealWR41 plays · +0.073 pts/play · 292nd of 451 WRs
   0.06WAR−0.01 to 0.12

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 Florida International'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.
  56356398th of 134Roster talent: 563, 98th of 134 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  112112121st of 134Recruiting: 112, 121st of 134 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  42%42%52nd of 132Returning production: 42%, 52nd of 132 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −10.5−10.5105th of 134SP+ rating: −10.5, 105th 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 Florida International'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 UTSAQ2 0:07 4th & 14 at UTSA 39, down 17Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−1.0 pts
2. vs KENNQ2 0:27 4th & 14 at KENN 39, down 10Punted; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.9 pts
3. vs LIBQ4 10:16 4th & 8 at LIB 42, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
4. at PSUQ4 3:40 4th & 4 at PSU 33, down 20Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.3 pts
5. at SHSUQ2 4:19 4th & 8 at SHSU 37, up 15Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
6. at WKUQ4 3:16 4th & 4 at WKU 45, up 19Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
7. at CONNQ1 3:17 4th & 2 at FIU 28, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
8. at WKUQ2 14:56 4th & 4 at WKU 20, up 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2025

52nd of 136 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   BCU
2. L

   PSU
3. W

   FAU
4. L

   DEL
5. L

   CONN
6. W

   WKU
7. L

   KENN
8. L

   MOST
9. W

   MTSU
10. W

    LIB
11. W

    JXST
12. W

    SHSU
13. L

    UTSA

What moved it, 2025

Every game starts at Florida International'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−0.05
• Clock+0.16
• Timeouts−0.22
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.12

Game by game

• BCUW 42-9 vs BCU95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +8
• PSUL 0-34 at PSU1% → 0%Before kickoff −49 · On the field −1: Scoreboard −2
• FAUW 38-28 vs FAU58% → 97%Before kickoff +8 · On the field +39: Scoreboard +35, Timeouts +2
• DELL 16-38 vs DEL67% → 1%Before kickoff +17 · On the field −66: Scoreboard −63, Clock −2
• CONNL 10-51 at CONN31% → 0%Before kickoff −19 · On the field −31: Scoreboard −33, Clock +1
• WKUW 25-6 at WKU28% → 99%Before kickoff −22 · On the field +71: Scoreboard +63, Clock +2
• KENNL 26-45 vs KENN51% → 1%Before kickoff +1 · On the field −50: Scoreboard −52, Clock −2
• MOSTL 21-28 at MOST47% → 4%Before kickoff −3 · On the field −43: Scoreboard −37, Timeouts −2
• MTSUW 56-30 at MTSU45% → 100%Before kickoff −5 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +55, Clock +2
• LIBW 34-27 vs LIB45% → 41%Before kickoff −5 · On the field −4: Timeouts −25, Clock +15
• JXSTW 27-21 vs JXST63% → 97%Before kickoff +13 · On the field +33: Scoreboard +32, Timeouts +2
• SHSUW 56-16 at SHSU78% → 100%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +28
• UTSAL 20-57 at UTSA28% → 0%Before kickoff −22 · On the field −28: Scoreboard −30

Points of win probability, from Florida International's side.

Closest call

FIU 27-26 CLT (2016) - Florida International dropped to a 5.1% win probability before pulling it out.