Indiana

Profile vs. FBS, 2021

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−0.012nd
  Defense+0.1926th
• 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.
  Offense35.7%4th
  Defense46.2%20th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2129th
  Defense+1.1494th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0729th
  Defense+0.1149th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense−0.034th
  Defense+0.3416th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense41.2%5th
  Defense50.7%27th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense25.6%8th
  Defense35.8%15th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.688th
  Defense3.0153rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense17.7%39th
  Defense15.4%31st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.4%17th
  Defense13.7%14th

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, 2021

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. L
   IOWA
2. W
   IDHO
3. L
   CIN
4. W
   WKU
5. L
   PSU
6. L
   MSU
7. L
   OSU
8. L
   MD
9. L
   MICH
10. L
    RUTG
11. L
    MINN
12. L
    PUR

Bars above the line: better than expected for Indiana.

Players, 2021

1. Michael Penix Jr.QB143 plays · +0.163 pts/play · 142nd of 219 QBs
   0.44WAR0.12 to 0.72
2. Stephen CarrRB129 plays · +0.134 pts/play · 140th of 387 RBs
   0.32WAR0.22 to 0.43
3. Jack TuttleQB81 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 177th of 219 QBs
   0.21WAR0.05 to 0.37
4. Ty FryfogleWR64 plays · +0.131 pts/play · 118th of 474 WRs
   0.16WAR0.09 to 0.23
5. Miles MarshallWR31 plays · +0.189 pts/play · 209th of 474 WRs
   0.11WAR0.08 to 0.14
6. Charles CampbellPK16 plays · +0.342 pts/play · 30th of 128 kickers
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.15
7. James EvansP50 plays · +0.105 pts/play · 61st of 101 punters
   0.10WAR−0.01 to 0.21
8. Chris ChildersRB7 plays · +0.121 pts/play · 342nd of 387 RBs
   0.02WAR0.01 to 0.02

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, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  66466438th of 130Roster talent: 664, 38th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  18718751st of 130Recruiting: 187, 51st of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  88%88%33rd of 128Returning production: 88%, 33rd of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −7.8−7.8100th of 130SP+ rating: −7.8, 100th of 130 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, 2021

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 4 clear-cut ones account for 0.11 of the 0.15 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 MSUQ4 2:03 4th & 21 at IU 26, up 5Went for it; the numbers favored punting−6.2 pts
2. vs MSUQ3 11:58 4th & 4 at MSU 39, up 5Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
3. at MDQ4 6:36 4th & 3 at IU 27, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
4. at MDQ2 7:12 4th & 1 at IU 39, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
5. at MDQ4 14:12 4th & 3 at MD 11, down 11Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
6. vs MSUQ2 6:55 4th & 4 at MSU 7, down 1Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
7. vs MSUQ2 1:28 4th & 4 at MSU 47, up 2Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
8. vs MSUQ2 14:21 4th & 3 at MSU 26, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

123rd of 130 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. L

   IOWA
2. W

   IDHO
3. L

   CIN
4. W

   WKU
5. L

   PSU
6. L

   MSU
7. L

   OSU
8. L

   MD
9. L

   MICH
10. L

    RUTG
11. L

    MINN
12. L

    PUR

What moved it, 2021

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−2.28
• Possession & field position−0.03
• Clock−0.03
• Timeouts−0.04
• Other−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.21

Game by game

• IOWAL 6-34 at IOWA39% → 0%Before kickoff −11 · On the field −39: Scoreboard −38
• IDHOW 56-14 vs IDHO97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +4
• CINL 24-38 vs CIN38% → 1%Before kickoff −12 · On the field −36: Scoreboard −43, Clock −2
• WKUW 33-31 at WKU80% → 82%Before kickoff +30 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +29, Clock +3
• PSUL 0-24 at PSU18% → 0%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −18: Scoreboard −21
• MSUL 15-20 vs MSU42% → 70%Before kickoff −8 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +10, Timeouts −1
• OSUL 7-54 vs OSU8% → 0%Before kickoff −42 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −12
• MDL 35-38 at MD38% → 5%Before kickoff −12 · On the field −33: Scoreboard −31, Timeouts −2
• MICHL 7-29 at MICH9% → 0%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −13
• RUTGL 3-38 vs RUTG65% → 0%Before kickoff +15 · On the field −65: Scoreboard −61, Clock −2
• MINNL 14-35 vs MINN29% → 0%Before kickoff −21 · On the field −29: Scoreboard −35, Clock −2
• PURL 7-44 at PUR12% → 0%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −12: Scoreboard −16

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.