Georgia State

Profile vs. FBS, 2022

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+0.1145th
  Defense+0.0765th
• 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.
  Offense40.2%31st
  Defense42.9%39th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3280th
  Defense+1.2357th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0642nd
  Defense+0.0464th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2765th
  Defense+0.2339th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense45.6%31st
  Defense48.5%37th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense29.3%35th
  Defense30.3%52nd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1864th
  Defense3.0352nd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense16.0%62nd
  Defense17.7%55th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense17.0%35th
  Defense16.1%50th

Percentiles among the 131 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, 2022

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
   SC
2. L
   UNC
3. L
   CLT
4. L
   CCU
5. W
   ARMY
6. W
   GASO
7. L
   APP
8. W
   ODU
9. W
   USM
10. L
    ULM
11. L
    JMU
12. L
    MRSH

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

Players, 2022

1. Darren GraingerQB405 plays · +0.302 pts/play · 16th of 234 QBs
   2.29WAR1.62 to 3.05
2. Tucker GreggRB146 plays · +0.161 pts/play · 41st of 384 RBs
   0.44WAR0.30 to 0.58
3. Marcus CarrollRB115 plays · +0.137 pts/play · 99th of 384 RBs
   0.30WAR0.21 to 0.38
4. Jamari ThrashWR56 plays · +0.279 pts/play · 17th of 455 WRs
   0.29WAR0.20 to 0.39
5. Jamyest WilliamsRB65 plays · +0.152 pts/play · 168th of 384 RBs
   0.18WAR0.13 to 0.24
6. Michael Hayes IIPK52 plays · +0.094 pts/play · 27th of 110 kickers
   0.09WAR0.02 to 0.16
7. Ja'Cyais CredleWR30 plays · +0.148 pts/play · 255th of 455 WRs
   0.08WAR0.04 to 0.13
8. Robert LewisWR22 plays · +0.159 pts/play · 300th of 455 WRs
   0.07WAR0.03 to 0.10

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, 2022

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  47247286th of 129Roster talent: 472, 86th of 129 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  13513598th of 129Recruiting: 135, 98th of 129 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  84%84%10th of 128Returning production: 84%, 10th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −3.3−3.378th of 129SP+ rating: −3.3, 78th of 129 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 129 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, 2022

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 11 clear-cut ones account for 0.26 of the 0.29 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 CLTQ3 1:44 4th & 1 at GAST 38, down 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.4 pts
2. vs UNCQ4 8:44 4th & 2 at UNC 49, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.3 pts
3. vs ULMQ4 3:34 4th & 16 at GAST 24, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored punting−3.2 pts
4. vs CLTQ3 3:34 4th & 1 at GAST 38, down 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.1 pts
5. vs UNCQ3 7:31 4th & 1 at GAST 35, down 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.6 pts
6. vs UNCQ3 7:31 4th & 1 at GAST 35, down 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.6 pts
7. vs UNCQ4 13:06 4th & 7 at UNC 37, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
8. vs UNCQ4 3:51 4th & 11 at UNC 46, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2022

114th of 131 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.

1. L

   SC
2. L

   UNC
3. L

   CLT
4. L

   CCU
5. W

   ARMY
6. W

   GASO
7. L

   APP
8. W

   ODU
9. W

   USM
10. L

    ULM
11. L

    JMU
12. L

    MRSH

What moved it, 2022

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−0.92
• Possession & field position−0.02
• Clock−0.06
• Timeouts−0.09
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.09

Game by game

• SCL 14-35 at SC19% → 0%Before kickoff −31 · On the field −19: Scoreboard −21, Timeouts −1
• UNCL 28-35 vs UNC29% → 8%Before kickoff −21 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −38, Clock −1
• CLTL 41-42 vs CLT89% → 13%Before kickoff +39 · On the field −76: Scoreboard −36, Clock −3
• CCUL 24-41 vs CCU43% → 1%Before kickoff −7 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −48, Clock −2
• ARMYW 31-14 at ARMY34% → 99%Before kickoff −16 · On the field +65: Scoreboard +60, Clock +3
• GASOW 41-33 vs GASO59% → 95%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +36: Scoreboard +35, Timeouts −2
• APPL 17-42 at APP25% → 0%Before kickoff −25 · On the field −25: Scoreboard −27
• ODUW 31-17 vs ODU59% → 99%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +40: Scoreboard +37, Timeouts +2
• USMW 42-14 at USM42% → 100%Before kickoff −8 · On the field +58: Scoreboard +57, Clock +2
• ULML 28-31 vs ULM84% → 6%Before kickoff +34 · On the field −78: Scoreboard −55, Clock −4
• JMUL 40-42 at JMU29% → 4%Before kickoff −21 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −26, Timeouts −2
• MRSHL 23-28 at MRSH33% → 3%Before kickoff −17 · On the field −30: Scoreboard −28, 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.