Georgia

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+0.3092nd
  Defense+0.1261st
• 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.
  Offense48.8%88th
  Defense41.1%61st
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2569th
  Defense+1.1763rd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2590th
  Defense+0.1336th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.4089th
  Defense+0.1183rd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense51.6%82nd
  Defense46.3%56th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense42.0%98th
  Defense30.1%76th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.3291st
  Defense2.7169th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense16.6%80th
  Defense17.7%25th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense1.5%81st
  Defense2.5%76th

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 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
   CLEM
2. L
   SC
3. W
   TROY
4. W
   TENN
5. W
   VAN
6. W
   MIZ
7. W
   ARK
8. L
   FLA
9. W
   UK
10. W
    AUB
11. W
    CHSO
12. L
    GT
13. W
    LOU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Georgia.

Players, 2014

1. Hutson MasonQB248 plays · +0.272 pts/play · 84th of 199 QBs
   1.26WAR0.90 to 1.66
2. Nick Chubb?149 plays · +0.171 pts/play
   0.48WAR0.34 to 0.60
3. Todd Gurley II?86 plays · +0.141 pts/play
   0.23WAR0.14 to 0.31
4. Chris Conley?38 plays · +0.182 pts/play
   0.13WAR0.08 to 0.18
5. Marshall MorganPK14 plays · +0.344 pts/play · 73rd of 114 kickers
   0.09WAR0.05 to 0.14
6. Malcolm Mitchell?35 plays · +0.131 pts/play
   0.09WAR0.04 to 0.14
7. Sony Michel?45 plays · +0.096 pts/play
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.12
8. Michael Bennett?39 plays · +0.086 pts/play
   0.06WAR0.02 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'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's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 6 clear-cut ones account for 0.13 of the 0.18 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 GTQ4 11:19 4th & 2 at GT 2, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−4.2 pts
2. vs GTQ4 13:00 4th & 12 at GT 31, tiedWent for it; the numbers favored a field goal−2.6 pts
3. vs TENNQ4 0:30 4th & 3 at TENN 26, up 3Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.9 pts
4. vs TENNQ4 12:45 4th & 3 at TENN 46, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
5. vs CLEMQ3 3:17 4th & 3 at UGA 47, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
6. at MIZQ2 0:23 4th & 1 at MIZ 41, up 20Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
7. vs CLEMQ3 6:31 4th & 5 at CLEM 43, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
8. vs FLAQ2 7:03 4th & 2 at UGA 29, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2014

64th of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   CLEM
2. L

   SC
3. W

   TROY
4. W

   TENN
5. W

   VAN
6. W

   MIZ
7. W

   ARK
8. L

   FLA
9. W

   UK
10. W

    AUB
11. W

    CHSO
12. L

    GT
13. W

    LOU

What moved it, 2014

Every game starts at Georgia'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+1.14
• Possession & field position+0.06
• Clock+0.17
• Timeouts−0.19
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−1.00

Game by game

• CLEMW 45-21 vs CLEM78% → 100%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +25, Timeouts +1
• SCL 35-38 at SC61% → 5%Before kickoff +11 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −38, Timeouts −3
• TROYW 66-0 vs TROY99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• TENNW 35-32 vs TENN86% → 93%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +18, Timeouts +1
• VANW 44-17 vs VAN98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• MIZW 34-0 at MIZ60% → 100%Before kickoff +10 · On the field +40: Scoreboard +44, Clock +1
• ARKW 45-32 at ARK60% → 98%Before kickoff +10 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +44, Clock +2
• FLAL 20-38 vs FLA76% → 1%Before kickoff +26 · On the field −75: Scoreboard −64, Clock −3
• UKW 63-31 at UK81% → 100%Before kickoff +31 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +24, Clock +1
• AUBW 34-7 vs AUB53% → 100%Before kickoff +3 · On the field +47: Scoreboard +45
• CHSOW 55-9 vs CHSO100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• GTL 24-30 vs GT86% → 31%Before kickoff +36 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −27, Timeouts −18
• LOUW 37-14 at LOU73% → 99%Before kickoff +23 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +36, Clock +1

Points of win probability, from Georgia's side.

Closest call

GT 42-44 UGA (2024) - Georgia dropped to a 4.5% win probability before pulling it out.