Hawai'i

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+0.0947th
  Defense+0.246th
• 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.
  Offense43.2%55th
  Defense46.2%19th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1947th
  Defense+1.349th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1274th
  Defense+0.1616th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0830th
  Defense+0.387th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense50.5%81st
  Defense50.5%20th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.0%4th
  Defense36.2%25th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2892nd
  Defense3.0825th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.4%92nd
  Defense15.7%12th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense16.2%47th
  Defense15.0%33rd

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 Hawai'i 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
   MASS
2. W
   WCU
3. L
   UCLA
4. L
   WYO
5. L
   CSU
6. L
   NEV
7. W
   SJSU
8. L
   SDSU
9. L
   UNLV
10. L
    FRES
11. L
    USU
12. L
    BYU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Hawai'i.

Players, 2017

1. Dru BrownQB361 plays · +0.135 pts/play · 86th of 226 QBs
   0.91WAR0.35 to 1.58
2. Diocemy Saint JusteRB242 plays · +0.108 pts/play · 32nd of 352 RBs
   0.49WAR0.27 to 0.69
3. Dylan CollieWR57 plays · +0.138 pts/play · 90th of 426 WRs
   0.15WAR0.09 to 0.20
4. John UrsuaWR46 plays · +0.139 pts/play · 138th of 426 WRs
   0.12WAR0.07 to 0.17
5. Ammon BarkerWR52 plays · +0.083 pts/play · 254th of 426 WRs
   0.08WAR0.03 to 0.13
6. Stan GaudionP48 plays · +0.078 pts/play · 31st of 95 punters
   0.07WAR−0.02 to 0.18
7. Keelan EwalikoWR40 plays · +0.058 pts/play · 355th of 426 WRs
   0.04WAR0.01 to 0.08
8. Metuisela 'UngaTE13 plays · +0.055 pts/play · 54th of 199 TEs
   0.01WAR0.00 to 0.03

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 Hawai'i'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.
  331331110th of 130Roster talent: 331, 110th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  113113113th of 130Recruiting: 113, 113th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  61%61%66th of 128Returning production: 61%, 66th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −19.7−19.7121st of 128SP+ rating: −19.7, 121st 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 Hawai'i's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 3 clear-cut ones account for 0.05 of the 0.11 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 BYUQ3 14:54 4th & 1 at HAW 41, down 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it2.1 pts
2. vs FRESQ2 6:09 4th & 1 at HAW 29, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it1.4 pts
3. at MASSQ4 15:00 4th & 4 at MASS 47, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it1.2 pts
4. at UCLAQ2 6:54 4th & 22 at HAW 29, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)0.8 pts
5. at UNLVQ4 2:15 4th & 10 at UNLV 10, down 11Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.8 pts
6. vs CSUQ2 1:19 4th & 2 at HAW 40, down 24Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.7 pts
7. at UCLAQ2 0:38 4th & 10 at UCLA 24, down 28Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)0.6 pts
8. at USUQ2 9:54 4th & 9 at USU 15, down 21Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)0.5 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2017

127th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   MASS
2. W

   WCU
3. L

   UCLA
4. L

   WYO
5. L

   CSU
6. L

   NEV
7. W

   SJSU
8. L

   SDSU
9. L

   UNLV
10. L

    FRES
11. L

    USU
12. L

    BYU

What moved it, 2017

Every game starts at Hawai'i'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−2.14
• Possession & field position+0.09
• Clock−0.18
• Timeouts+0.15
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.26

Game by game

• MASSW 38-35 at MASS41% → 85%Before kickoff −9 · On the field +44: Scoreboard +41, Clock +4
• WCUW 41-18 vs WCU93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +11
• UCLAL 23-56 at UCLA5% → 0%Before kickoff −45 · On the field −5: Scoreboard −8
• WYOL 21-28 at WYO36% → 20%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −27, Timeouts +20
• CSUL 21-51 vs CSU28% → 0%Before kickoff −22 · On the field −28: Scoreboard −34
• NEVL 21-35 at NEV65% → 2%Before kickoff +15 · On the field −63: Scoreboard −47, Timeouts −2
• SJSUW 37-26 vs SJSU88% → 98%Before kickoff +38 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +18
• SDSUL 7-28 vs SDSU28% → 1%Before kickoff −22 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −35, Clock −1
• UNLVL 23-31 at UNLV32% → 10%Before kickoff −18 · On the field −22: Scoreboard −28, Possession & field position +3
• FRESL 21-31 vs FRES24% → 7%Before kickoff −26 · On the field −16: Scoreboard −34, Clock −2
• USUL 0-38 at USU23% → 0%Before kickoff −27 · On the field −23: Scoreboard −25
• BYUL 20-30 vs BYU45% → 4%Before kickoff −5 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −47, Clock −3

Points of win probability, from Hawai'i's side.

Closest call

STAN 20-23 HAW (2025) - Hawai'i dropped to a 0.3% win probability before pulling it out.