Indiana

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+0.0626th
  Defense+0.0286th
• 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.
  Offense39.0%23rd
  Defense39.9%72nd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1615th
  Defense+1.3127th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.0711th
  Defense+0.0846th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1754th
  Defense−0.0294th
• 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
  Defense44.7%71st
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense30.6%43rd
  Defense29.8%73rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.396th
  Defense3.2713th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense19.4%56th
  Defense13.3%5th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense13.7%83rd
  Defense19.0%85th

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 Indiana 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
   PSU
2. W
   RUTG
3. W
   MICH
4. W
   MSU
5. L
   OSU
6. W
   MD
7. W
   WIS
8. L
   MISS

Bars above the line: better than expected for Indiana.

Players, 2020

1. Michael Penix Jr.QB210 plays · +0.185 pts/play · 46th of 212 QBs
   0.73WAR0.30 to 1.09
2. Stevie Scott IIIRB137 plays · +0.185 pts/play · 31st of 338 RBs
   0.48WAR0.37 to 0.58
3. Jack TuttleQB85 plays · +0.120 pts/play · 131st of 212 QBs
   0.19WAR0.06 to 0.33
4. Ty FryfogleWR58 plays · +0.141 pts/play · 50th of 409 WRs
   0.15WAR0.07 to 0.24
5. Sampson JamesRB29 plays · +0.154 pts/play · 257th of 338 RBs
   0.08WAR0.06 to 0.10
6. Miles MarshallWR29 plays · +0.145 pts/play · 182nd of 409 WRs
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.11
7. Whop PhilyorWR82 plays · +0.049 pts/play · 191st of 409 WRs
   0.08WAR−0.02 to 0.20
8. Charles CampbellPK10 plays · +0.232 pts/play · 40th of 97 kickers
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.06

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 Indiana'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.
  61161152nd of 127Roster talent: 611, 52nd of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  18518551st of 127Recruiting: 185, 51st of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  59%59%76th of 127Returning production: 59%, 76th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +11.2+11.226th of 127SP+ rating: +11.2, 26th 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 Indiana's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 2 clear-cut ones account for 0.06 of the 0.12 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 PSUQ4 1:47 4th & 21 at IU 14, down 1Went for it; the numbers favored punting−4.7 pts
2. at MSUQ2 9:22 4th & 3 at MSU 3, up 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
3. vs MICHQ2 13:19 4th & 1 at IU 25, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
4. vs MICHQ2 6:53 4th & 5 at MICH 35, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
5. vs MISSQ3 12:53 4th & 6 at MISS 35, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
6. at RUTGQ2 7:03 4th & 5 at RUTG 43, down 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
7. at RUTGQ3 10:08 4th & 3 at RUTG 13, up 13Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
8. vs MISSQ2 13:17 4th & 2 at IU 40, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

6th of 127 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   PSU
2. W

   RUTG
3. W

   MICH
4. W

   MSU
5. L

   OSU
6. W

   MD
7. W

   WIS
8. L

   MISS

What moved it, 2020

Every game starts at Indiana'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+1.75
• Possession & field position−0.02
• Clock+0.11
• Timeouts−0.23
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.49

Game by game

• PSUW 36-35 vs PSU28% → 83%Before kickoff −22 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +39, Timeouts −24
• RUTGW 37-21 at RUTG75% → 99%Before kickoff +25 · On the field +24: Scoreboard +34
• MICHW 38-21 vs MICH37% → 99%Before kickoff −13 · On the field +62: Scoreboard +49, Timeouts +2
• MSUW 24-0 at MSU71% → 100%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +34, Clock +2
• OSUL 35-42 at OSU7% → 6%Before kickoff −43 · On the field −1: Scoreboard −12, Possession & field position −1
• MDW 27-11 vs MD77% → 99%Before kickoff +27 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +26
• WISW 14-6 at WIS17% → 96%Before kickoff −33 · On the field +79: Scoreboard +58, Clock +4
• MISSL 20-26 vs MISS66% → 5%Before kickoff +16 · On the field −61: Scoreboard −55, Clock −3

Points of win probability, from Indiana's side.

Closest call

PSU 35-36 IU (2020) - Indiana dropped to a 3.1% win probability before pulling it out.