Florida State

Profile vs. FBS, 2024

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−0.036th
  Defense+0.2410th
• 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.
  Offense35.4%5th
  Defense40.8%59th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2544th
  Defense+1.3811th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0121st
  Defense+0.2011th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense−0.065th
  Defense+0.3110th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense41.3%5th
  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.
  Offense26.2%17th
  Defense33.8%18th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.9033rd
  Defense3.0640th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense18.4%36th
  Defense16.4%33rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense22.4%2nd
  Defense15.4%41st

Percentiles among the 134 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, 2024

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 State 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
   GT
2. L
   BC
3. L
   MEM
4. W
   CAL
5. L
   SMU
6. L
   CLEM
7. L
   DUKE
8. L
   MIA
9. L
   UNC
10. L
    ND
11. W
    CHSO
12. L
    FLA

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

Players, 2024

1. DJ UiagaleleiQB183 plays · +0.294 pts/play · 90th of 232 QBs
   1.01WAR0.70 to 1.35
2. Lawrance ToafiliRB119 plays · +0.136 pts/play · 89th of 373 RBs
   0.30WAR0.20 to 0.39
3. Luke KromenhoekQB87 plays · +0.157 pts/play · 163rd of 232 QBs
   0.26WAR0.02 to 0.47
4. Alex MastromannoP51 plays · +0.260 pts/play · 1st of 106 punters
   0.25WAR0.16 to 0.34
5. Ryan FitzgeraldPK13 plays · +0.448 pts/play · 26th of 114 kickers
   0.11WAR0.08 to 0.14
6. Ja'Khi DouglasWR41 plays · +0.141 pts/play · 138th of 452 WRs
   0.11WAR0.02 to 0.22
7. Brock GlennQB108 plays · +0.039 pts/play · 213th of 232 QBs
   0.08WAR−0.15 to 0.31
8. Roydell WilliamsRB32 plays · +0.112 pts/play · 274th of 373 RBs
   0.07WAR0.05 to 0.09

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 State'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, 2024

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  87987913th of 131Roster talent: 879, 13th of 131 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  23823818th of 131Recruiting: 238, 18th of 131 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  21%21%115th of 130Returning production: 21%, 115th of 130 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −3.2−3.281st of 131SP+ rating: −3.2, 81st of 131 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 131 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, 2024

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 State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 8 clear-cut ones account for 0.13 of the 0.16 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 GTQ4 7:14 4th & 8 at GT 20, down 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−3.7 pts
2. vs CALQ3 4:16 4th & 2 at FSU 19, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
3. at DUKEQ3 4:26 4th & 2 at FSU 39, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
4. vs BCQ4 13:05 4th & 16 at BC 39, down 15Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.4 pts
5. at GTQ2 0:00 4th & 11 at GT 41, down 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored punting−1.2 pts
6. vs MEMQ4 8:07 4th & 7 at MEM 7, down 11Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
7. at DUKEQ3 8:04 4th & 2 at FSU 38, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
8. vs UNCQ4 13:57 4th & 11 at FSU 49, down 17Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2024

134th of 134 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   GT
2. L

   BC
3. L

   MEM
4. W

   CAL
5. L

   SMU
6. L

   CLEM
7. L

   DUKE
8. L

   MIA
9. L

   UNC
10. L

    ND
11. W

    CHSO
12. L

    FLA

What moved it, 2024

Every game starts at Florida State'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−3.02
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Clock−0.10
• Timeouts+0.03
• Other−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.07

Game by game

• GTL 21-24 at GT73% → 5%Before kickoff +23 · On the field −68: Scoreboard −42, Timeouts −3
• BCL 13-28 vs BC85% → 1%Before kickoff +35 · On the field −84: Scoreboard −64, Clock −3
• MEML 12-20 vs MEM66% → 5%Before kickoff +16 · On the field −61: Scoreboard −55, Clock −4
• CALW 14-9 vs CAL57% → 96%Before kickoff +7 · On the field +39: Scoreboard +34, Timeouts +3
• SMUL 16-42 at SMU33% → 0%Before kickoff −17 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −36, Timeouts +2
• CLEML 13-29 vs CLEM12% → 1%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −10: Scoreboard −21, Clock −1
• DUKEL 16-23 at DUKE43% → 2%Before kickoff −7 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −39, Clock −1
• MIAL 14-36 at MIA7% → 0%Before kickoff −43 · On the field −6: Scoreboard −10
• UNCL 11-35 vs UNC42% → 0%Before kickoff −8 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −45, Clock −2
• NDL 3-52 at ND6% → 0%Before kickoff −44 · On the field −6: Scoreboard −7
• CHSOW 41-7 vs CHSO97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +4
• FLAL 11-31 vs FLA12% → 3%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −23, Clock −1

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

Closest call

LSU 23-24 FSU (2022) - Florida State dropped to a 4.0% win probability before pulling it out.