Florida

Profile vs. FBS, 2021

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+0.2065th
  Defense+0.1258th
• 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.
  Offense46.8%81st
  Defense41.0%63rd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2960th
  Defense+1.2745th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2178th
  Defense+0.1240th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2869th
  Defense+0.1670th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense53.9%85th
  Defense46.5%60th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense30.2%41st
  Defense29.0%64th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.3683rd
  Defense3.1040th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.1%68th
  Defense16.4%42nd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.9%52nd
  Defense16.2%41st

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, 2021

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 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
   FAU
2. W
   USF
3. L
   ALA
4. W
   TENN
5. L
   UK
6. W
   VAN
7. L
   LSU
8. L
   UGA
9. L
   SC
10. W
    SAM
11. L
    MIZ
12. W
    FSU
13. L
    UCF

Bars above the line: better than expected for Florida.

Players, 2021

1. Emory JonesQB332 plays · +0.213 pts/play · 70th of 219 QBs
   1.32WAR0.70 to 1.92
2. Dameon PierceRB81 plays · +0.205 pts/play · 144th of 387 RBs
   0.31WAR0.24 to 0.38
3. Malik DavisRB92 plays · +0.170 pts/play · 156th of 387 RBs
   0.29WAR0.20 to 0.38
4. Anthony RichardsonQB84 plays · +0.174 pts/play · 166th of 219 QBs
   0.27WAR0.11 to 0.43
5. Nay'Quan WrightRB56 plays · +0.155 pts/play · 238th of 387 RBs
   0.16WAR0.12 to 0.21
6. Jeremy CrawshawP39 plays · +0.175 pts/play · 36th of 101 punters
   0.13WAR0.04 to 0.22
7. Justin ShorterWR37 plays · +0.168 pts/play · 193rd of 474 WRs
   0.12WAR0.08 to 0.15
8. Jacob CopelandWR41 plays · +0.142 pts/play · 209th of 474 WRs
   0.11WAR0.06 to 0.16

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'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, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  8868869th of 130Roster talent: 886, 9th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  26826810th of 130Recruiting: 268, 10th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  27%27%124th of 128Returning production: 27%, 124th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +11.0+11.029th of 130SP+ rating: +11.0, 29th 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, 2021

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's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 2 clear-cut ones account for 0.04 of the 0.10 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 FSUQ3 5:42 4th & 1 at FLA 10, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.3 pts
2. vs TENNQ2 9:00 4th & 1 at TENN 49, down 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
3. at MIZQ2 5:44 4th & 1 at FLA 34, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
4. vs UGAQ2 3:39 4th & 13 at UGA 34, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.8 pts
5. vs FSUQ4 3:55 4th & 1 at FLA 43, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
6. vs ALAQ2 9:41 4th & 2 at FLA 29, down 18Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
7. at MIZQ3 3:09 4th & 17 at MIZ 37, up 4Punted; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.5 pts
8. at UKQ3 3:36 4th & 3 at FLA 42, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

128th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   FAU
2. W

   USF
3. L

   ALA
4. W

   TENN
5. L

   UK
6. W

   VAN
7. L

   LSU
8. L

   UGA
9. L

   SC
10. W

    SAM
11. L

    MIZ
12. W

    FSU
13. L

    UCF

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Florida'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−2.12
• Possession & field position−0.06
• Clock−0.17
• Timeouts+0.22
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−1.03

Game by game

• FAUW 35-14 vs FAU92% → 100%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +12
• USFW 42-20 at USF95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +9
• ALAL 29-31 vs ALA18% → 14%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −4: Scoreboard −27, Clock −3
• TENNW 38-14 vs TENN89% → 99%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +16
• UKL 13-20 at UK71% → 3%Before kickoff +21 · On the field −67: Scoreboard −43, Timeouts −3
• VANW 42-0 vs VAN98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• LSUL 42-49 at LSU76% → 3%Before kickoff +26 · On the field −73: Scoreboard −44, Timeouts −3
• UGAL 7-34 vs UGA14% → 0%Before kickoff −36 · On the field −14: Scoreboard −20
• SCL 17-40 at SC91% → 1%Before kickoff +41 · On the field −90: Scoreboard −56, Clock −1
• SAMW 70-52 vs SAM99% → 98%Before kickoff +49 · On the field −1: Scoreboard +5
• MIZL 23-24 at MIZ71% → 14%Before kickoff +21 · On the field −57: Scoreboard −39, Timeouts +24
• FSUW 24-21 vs FSU60% → 95%Before kickoff +10 · On the field +35: Scoreboard +32, Timeouts +3
• UCFL 17-29 vs UCF70% → 2%Before kickoff +20 · On the field −68: Scoreboard −59, Clock −3

Points of win probability, from Florida's side.

Closest call

USF 28-31 FLA (2022) - Florida dropped to a 2.5% win probability before pulling it out.