Illinois

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+0.0719th
  Defense+0.1830th
• 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.
  Offense40.3%27th
  Defense43.6%38th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2366th
  Defense+1.2917th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.086th
  Defense+0.1528th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2047th
  Defense+0.2725th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense45.1%28th
  Defense46.9%52nd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense31.3%26th
  Defense35.8%24th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.071st
  Defense2.9738th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense24.9%9th
  Defense19.9%53rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense2.1%45th
  Defense1.8%38th

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 Illinois 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
   YSU
2. W
   WKU
3. L
   WASH
4. W
   TXST
5. L
   NEB
6. L
   PUR
7. L
   WIS
8. W
   MINN
9. L
   OSU
10. L
    IOWA
11. W
    PSU
12. W
    NU
13. L
    LT

Bars above the line: better than expected for Illinois.

Players, 2014

1. Reilly O'TooleQB217 plays · +0.238 pts/play · 105th of 199 QBs
   0.97WAR0.56 to 1.32
2. Wes LuntQB198 plays · +0.210 pts/play · 122nd of 199 QBs
   0.78WAR0.45 to 1.15
3. Josh FergusonRB167 plays · +0.108 pts/play · 52nd of 350 RBs
   0.34WAR0.20 to 0.48
4. Mike DudekWR81 plays · +0.172 pts/play · 40th of 469 WRs
   0.26WAR0.14 to 0.38
5. Justin DuVernoisP56 plays · +0.149 pts/play · 14th of 94 punters
   0.16WAR0.08 to 0.23
6. Donovonn YoungRB83 plays · +0.100 pts/play · 152nd of 350 RBs
   0.16WAR0.11 to 0.21
7. Geronimo AllisonWR46 plays · +0.117 pts/play · 200th of 469 WRs
   0.10WAR0.02 to 0.17
8. Malik TurnerWR23 plays · +0.139 pts/play · 307th of 469 WRs
   0.06WAR0.03 to 0.09

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 Illinois'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 Illinois'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 0.16 of the 0.24 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 TXSTQ4 3:08 4th & 2 at TXST 2, up 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−3.7 pts
2. vs PURQ4 8:23 4th & 2 at PUR 13, down 11Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
3. vs IOWAQ3 2:56 4th & 1 at ILL 34, down 9Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
4. vs PSUQ2 5:26 4th & 4 at PSU 40, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
5. at NUQ3 1:52 4th & 1 at ILL 34, up 16Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.6 pts
6. vs WKUQ2 6:59 4th & 3 at WKU 33, down 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
7. vs TXSTQ4 14:45 4th & 2 at ILL 42, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
8. vs YSUQ2 3:52 4th & 1 at midfield, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2014

23rd of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   YSU
2. W

   WKU
3. L

   WASH
4. W

   TXST
5. L

   NEB
6. L

   PUR
7. L

   WIS
8. W

   MINN
9. L

   OSU
10. L

    IOWA
11. W

    PSU
12. W

    NU
13. L

    LT

What moved it, 2014

Every game starts at Illinois'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+0.09
• Possession & field position+0.07
• Clock−0.01
• Timeouts+0.06
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.79

Game by game

• YSUW 28-17 vs YSU78% → 97%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +24, Timeouts +1
• WKUW 42-34 vs WKU50% → 97%Before kickoff 0 · On the field +48: Scoreboard +39, Timeouts +2
• WASHL 19-44 at WASH16% → 1%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −16: Scoreboard −21, Clock −1
• TXSTW 42-35 vs TXST80% → 97%Before kickoff +30 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +22, Timeouts +1
• NEBL 14-45 at NEB9% → 0%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −9: Scoreboard −12
• PURL 27-38 vs PUR72% → 3%Before kickoff +22 · On the field −69: Scoreboard −59, Clock −4
• WISL 28-38 at WIS6% → 4%Before kickoff −44 · On the field −2: Scoreboard −12, Timeouts −1
• MINNW 28-24 vs MINN30% → 86%Before kickoff −20 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +25, Clock +1
• OSUL 14-55 at OSU3% → 0%Before kickoff −47 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −5
• IOWAL 14-30 vs IOWA36% → 1%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −35: Scoreboard −42, Clock −2
• PSUW 16-14 vs PSU32% → 87%Before kickoff −18 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +24, Timeouts +3
• NUW 47-33 at NU23% → 98%Before kickoff −27 · On the field +76: Scoreboard +61, Clock +3
• LTL 18-35 at LT38% → 1%Before kickoff −12 · On the field −37: Scoreboard −36, Timeouts −2

Points of win probability, from Illinois's side.

Closest call

IU 45-48 ILL (2023) - Illinois dropped to a 0.7% win probability before pulling it out.