Georgia State

Profile vs. FBS, 2017

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+0.0529th
  Defense+0.1048th
• 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.
  Offense41.4%33rd
  Defense40.3%66th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1950th
  Defense+1.2245th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.151st
  Defense−0.0377th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2473rd
  Defense+0.2422nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense45.8%35th
  Defense43.9%74th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense32.1%37th
  Defense33.0%50th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.5510th
  Defense2.6873rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense22.6%17th
  Defense18.5%39th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.5%56th
  Defense15.1%36th

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, 2017

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 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
   TNST
2. L
   PSU
3. W
   CLT
4. W
   CCU
5. W
   ULM
6. L
   TROY
7. W
   USA
8. W
   GASO
9. W
   TXST
10. L
    APP
11. L
    IDHO
12. W
    WKU

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

Players, 2017

1. Conner ManningQB283 plays · +0.266 pts/play · 48th of 226 QBs
   1.41WAR0.87 to 1.93
2. Glenn SmithRB137 plays · +0.076 pts/play · 169th of 352 RBs
   0.19WAR0.11 to 0.29
3. Penny HartWR82 plays · +0.126 pts/play · 43rd of 426 WRs
   0.19WAR0.11 to 0.27
4. Kyler NealRB44 plays · +0.127 pts/play · 238th of 352 RBs
   0.10WAR0.08 to 0.13
5. Demarcus KirkRB18 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 267th of 352 RBs
   0.05WAR0.03 to 0.06
6. Todd BoydWR20 plays · +0.069 pts/play · 378th of 426 WRs
   0.03WAR0.01 to 0.04
7. Ari WertsTE17 plays · +0.043 pts/play · 54th of 199 TEs
   0.01WAR−0.01 to 0.04
8. Aaron WinchesterQB9 plays · +0.061 pts/play · 215th of 226 QBs
   0.01WAR−0.02 to 0.04

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 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, 2017

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  36436497th of 130Roster talent: 364, 97th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  102102120th of 130Recruiting: 102, 120th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  69%69%45th of 128Returning production: 69%, 45th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −14.0−14.0111th of 128SP+ rating: −14.0, 111th of 128 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, 2017

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 State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 5 clear-cut ones account for 0.10 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. vs TNSTQ4 2:45 4th & 6 at GAST 46, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.9 pts
2. vs APPQ2 11:52 4th & 1 at GAST 44, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.6 pts
3. at PSUQ4 6:41 4th & 2 at GAST 26, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
4. at GASOQ3 11:26 4th & 12 at GASO 32, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.5 pts
5. at CCUQ4 15:00 4th & 4 at CCU 44, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
6. vs TNSTQ2 4:07 4th & 3 at TNST 3, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
7. at GASOQ2 10:00 4th & 1 at GAST 42, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
8. vs IDHOQ4 14:25 4th & 2 at GAST 43, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2017

36th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

Expected wins adds up Georgia State's chance of winning each game as the model saw it at kickoff - a 70% favorite counts 0.7. Based on 10 of 12 games; 2 have no play-by-play to score.

1. L

   TNST
2. L

   PSU
3. W

   CLT
4. W

   CCU
5. W

   ULM
6. L

   TROY
7. W

   USA
8. W

   GASO
9. W

   TXST
10. L

    APP
11. L

    IDHO
12. W

    WKU

What moved it, 2017

Every game starts at Georgia 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+1.47
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.02
• Timeouts+0.08
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.07

Game by game

• TNSTL 10-17 vs TNST87% → 5%Before kickoff +37 · On the field −82: Scoreboard −54, Clock −3
• PSUL 0-56 at PSU1% → 98%Before kickoff −49 · On the field +96: Scoreboard +48, Clock +1
• CLTW 28-0 at CLT49% → 100%Before kickoff −1 · On the field +51: Scoreboard +54
• CCUW 27-21 at CCU53% → 95%Before kickoff +3 · On the field +42: Scoreboard +46, Clock +3
• ULMW 47-37 at ULM38% → 98%Before kickoff −12 · On the field +59: Scoreboard +53, Clock +2
• USAW 21-13 vs USA55% → 97%Before kickoff +5 · On the field +42: Scoreboard +37, Timeouts +3
• GASOW 21-17 at GASO70% → 80%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +34, Clock +2
• APPL 10-31 vs APP35% → 1%Before kickoff −15 · On the field −34: Scoreboard −41, Clock −1
• IDHOL 10-24 vs IDHO70% → 3%Before kickoff +20 · On the field −67: Scoreboard −61, Clock −1
• WKUW 27-17 vs WKU65% → 97%Before kickoff +15 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +32, Timeouts +2

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

Closest call

GAST 42-40 CCU (2021) - Georgia State dropped to a 1.4% win probability before pulling it out.