Illinois

Profile vs. FBS, 2020

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+0.1042nd
  Defense+0.2512th
• 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.
  Offense38.6%18th
  Defense50.4%6th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3479th
  Defense+1.1685th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1367th
  Defense+0.1329th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0630th
  Defense+0.414th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense43.4%17th
  Defense56.5%5th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense29.5%36th
  Defense32.0%55th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.9456th
  Defense3.426th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense20.7%43rd
  Defense16.9%23rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.7%58th
  Defense14.2%23rd

Percentiles among the 127 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, 2020

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. L
   WIS
2. L
   PUR
3. L
   MINN
4. W
   RUTG
5. W
   NEB
6. L
   IOWA
7. L
   NU
8. L
   PSU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Illinois.

Players, 2020

1. Chase BrownRB100 plays · +0.218 pts/play · 53rd of 338 RBs
   0.41WAR0.33 to 0.48
2. Brandon PetersQB85 plays · +0.111 pts/play · 138th of 212 QBs
   0.18WAR0.01 to 0.36
3. Mike EpsteinRB53 plays · +0.163 pts/play · 202nd of 338 RBs
   0.16WAR0.11 to 0.20
4. Isaiah WilliamsWR46 plays · +0.117 pts/play · 122nd of 409 WRs
   0.10WAR0.04 to 0.17
5. Josh ImatorbhebheWR35 plays · +0.152 pts/play · 129th of 409 WRs
   0.10WAR0.05 to 0.15
6. Blake HayesP32 plays · +0.092 pts/play · 17th of 77 punters
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.09
7. Donny Navarro IIIWR14 plays · +0.120 pts/play · 320th of 409 WRs
   0.03WAR0.02 to 0.05
8. Daniel BarkerTE26 plays · +0.064 pts/play · 29th of 191 TEs
   0.03WAR−0.02 to 0.08

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

What it had and what it did, 2020

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  64464439th of 127Roster talent: 644, 39th of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  17717763rd of 127Recruiting: 177, 63rd of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  84%84%18th of 127Returning production: 84%, 18th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −5.4−5.490th of 127SP+ rating: −5.4, 90th of 127 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 127 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, 2020

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 3 clear-cut ones account for 0.11 of the 0.14 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. at RUTGQ4 7:20 4th & 2 at RUTG 36, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−6.8 pts
2. at NEBQ3 14:54 4th & 8 at ILL 31, up 18Went for it; the numbers favored punting−3.0 pts
3. vs IOWAQ4 7:31 4th & 6 at IOWA 12, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.4 pts
4. at NEBQ4 10:14 4th & 3 at NEB 3, up 21Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
5. at NEBQ2 12:53 4th & 2 at ILL 26, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
6. at RUTGQ4 3:07 4th & 5 at RUTG 28, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
7. at NUQ2 14:52 4th & 10 at ILL 40, down 4Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.3 pts
8. at NUQ2 11:36 4th & 5 at NU 35, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

36th of 127 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. L

   WIS
2. L

   PUR
3. L

   MINN
4. W

   RUTG
5. W

   NEB
6. L

   IOWA
7. L

   NU
8. L

   PSU

What moved it, 2020

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−0.40
• Possession & field position+0.04
• Clock+0.01
• Timeouts+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.74

Game by game

• WISL 7-45 at WIS9% → 0%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −9: Scoreboard −12
• PURL 24-31 vs PUR23% → 6%Before kickoff −27 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −34, Clock −2
• MINNL 14-41 vs MINN30% → 0%Before kickoff −20 · On the field −30: Scoreboard −36, Clock −1
• RUTGW 23-20 at RUTG33% → 87%Before kickoff −17 · On the field +54: Scoreboard +43, Clock +4
• NEBW 41-23 at NEB13% → 98%Before kickoff −37 · On the field +86: Scoreboard +62, Clock +1
• IOWAL 21-35 vs IOWA18% → 2%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −28, Clock −1
• NUL 10-28 at NU16% → 1%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −15: Scoreboard −21, Timeouts +1
• PSUL 21-56 at PSU12% → 0%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −12: Scoreboard −14

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.