Georgia Southern

Profile vs. FBS, 2014

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+0.3295th
  Defense+0.1354th
• 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.
  Offense49.7%93rd
  Defense43.7%36th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2054th
  Defense+1.1666th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.3499th
  Defense+0.1241st
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3176th
  Defense+0.1473rd
• 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%91st
  Defense48.8%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.
  Offense37.4%80th
  Defense33.1%49th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.4497th
  Defense3.1817th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.5%97th
  Defense17.6%24th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense1.5%81st
  Defense2.9%88th

Percentiles among the 128 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, 2014

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 Georgia Southern 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
   SAV
3. L
   GT
4. W
   USA
5. W
   APP
6. W
   NMSU
7. W
   IDHO
8. W
   GAST
9. W
   TROY
10. W
    TXST
11. L
    NAVY
12. W
    ULM

Bars above the line: better than expected for Georgia Southern.

Players, 2014

1. Kevin EllisonQB239 plays · +0.335 pts/play · 62nd of 199 QBs
   1.50WAR0.99 to 2.01
2. Matt BreidaRB125 plays · +0.176 pts/play · 36th of 350 RBs
   0.41WAR0.27 to 0.55
3. Favian UpshawQB34 plays · +0.316 pts/play · 162nd of 199 QBs
   0.20WAR0.07 to 0.33
4. Alfred RamsbyRB85 plays · +0.114 pts/play · 129th of 350 RBs
   0.18WAR0.11 to 0.24
5. Alex HanksPK13 plays · +0.328 pts/play · 84th of 114 kickers
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.12
6. BJ Johnson IIIWR34 plays · +0.074 pts/play · 352nd of 469 WRs
   0.05WAR0.00 to 0.09
7. Zach WalkerWR11 plays · +0.011 pts/play · 453rd of 469 WRs
   0.00WAR−0.01 to 0.02
8. Ryan NowickiP30 plays · −0.047 pts/play · 93rd of 94 punters
   −0.03WAR−0.08 to 0.02

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 Georgia Southern'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

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2014

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 Georgia Southern's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 9 clear-cut ones account for 0.17 of the 0.22 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 NCSUQ4 3:35 4th & 2 at NCSU 14, up 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−3.3 pts
2. at NCSUQ3 3:23 4th & 2 at NCSU 2, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.4 pts
3. at USAQ2 8:29 4th & 1 at GASO 29, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.1 pts
4. vs ULMQ3 2:40 4th & 1 at GASO 34, down 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
5. vs ULMQ4 1:48 4th & 2 at ULM 37, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
6. at USAQ2 3:52 4th & 1 at GASO 45, up 8Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
7. at NMSUQ2 0:02 4th & 3 at NMSU 27, down 5Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
8. vs ULMQ2 2:38 4th & 2 at ULM 11, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2014

13th of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   NCSU
2. W

   SAV
3. L

   GT
4. W

   USA
5. W

   APP
6. W

   NMSU
7. W

   IDHO
8. W

   GAST
9. W

   TROY
10. W

    TXST
11. L

    NAVY
12. W

    ULM

What moved it, 2014

Every game starts at Georgia Southern'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+1.92
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Clock+0.07
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.08

Game by game

• NCSUL 23-24 at NCSU6% → 18%Before kickoff −44 · On the field +12: Scoreboard −10, Timeouts −1
• SAVW 83-9 vs SAV99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• GTL 38-42 at GT6% → 15%Before kickoff −44 · On the field +8: Scoreboard −10, Timeouts −1
• USAW 28-6 at USA45% → 100%Before kickoff −5 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +54, Clock +3
• APPW 34-14 vs APP86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +19
• NMSUW 36-28 at NMSU86% → 97%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +24, Clock +2
• IDHOW 47-24 vs IDHO91% → 100%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +13
• GASTW 69-31 at GAST83% → 100%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +22, Clock +1
• TROYW 42-10 vs TROY11% → 100%Before kickoff −39 · On the field +89: Scoreboard +66
• TXSTW 28-25 at TXST70% → 100%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +30: Scoreboard +35, Clock +1
• NAVYL 19-52 at NAVY41% → 0%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −41, Timeouts +1
• ULMW 22-16 vs ULM83% → 85%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +17, Possession & field position −2

Points of win probability, from Georgia Southern's side.

Closest call

LT 3-38 GASO (2020) - Georgia Southern dropped to a 0.4% win probability before pulling it out.