Iowa State

Profile vs. FBS, 2015

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+0.0323rd
  Defense+0.1618th
• 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.
  Offense43.3%49th
  Defense47.1%15th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1217th
  Defense+1.1178th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0126th
  Defense+0.0456th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0624th
  Defense+0.2915th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.7%70th
  Defense53.2%8th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense28.3%17th
  Defense33.9%43rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1083rd
  Defense2.8746th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense17.6%77th
  Defense19.2%40th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense2.4%24th
  Defense1.2%2nd

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, 2015

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 Iowa State 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
   UNI
2. L
   IOWA
3. L
   TOL
4. W
   KU
5. L
   TTU
6. L
   TCU
7. L
   BAY
8. W
   TEX
9. L
   OU
10. L
    OKST
11. L
    KSU
12. L
    WVU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Iowa State.

Players, 2015

1. Sam B. RichardsonQB164 plays · +0.261 pts/play · 105th of 205 QBs
   0.80WAR0.54 to 1.07
2. Mike WarrenRB171 plays · +0.095 pts/play · 64th of 333 RBs
   0.30WAR0.15 to 0.47
3. Allen LazardWR62 plays · +0.204 pts/play · 53rd of 411 WRs
   0.24WAR0.14 to 0.35
4. Quenton BundrageWR42 plays · +0.159 pts/play · 161st of 411 WRs
   0.12WAR0.07 to 0.18
5. Cole NettenPK15 plays · +0.429 pts/play · 51st of 115 kickers
   0.12WAR0.08 to 0.17
6. D'Vario MontgomeryWR32 plays · +0.157 pts/play · 225th of 411 WRs
   0.09WAR0.06 to 0.13
7. Colin DowningP32 plays · +0.120 pts/play · 56th of 92 punters
   0.07WAR0.03 to 0.11
8. Jauan WesleyWR32 plays · +0.070 pts/play · 341st of 411 WRs
   0.04WAR0.00 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 Iowa State'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, 2015

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  52952962nd of 128Roster talent: 529, 62nd of 128 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  16916960th of 128Recruiting: 169, 60th of 128 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  71%71%53rd of 127Returning production: 71%, 53rd of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −0.3−0.377th of 128SP+ rating: −0.3, 77th of 128 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 128 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, 2015

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 Iowa State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 6 clear-cut ones account for 0.09 of the 0.16 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 TEXQ3 11:10 4th & 2 at TEX 41, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.7 pts
2. vs IOWAQ2 8:42 4th & 1 at IOWA 49, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
3. at WVUQ4 11:41 4th & 14 at ISU 16, down 17Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.3 pts
4. at TTUQ3 6:02 4th & 3 at TTU 3, down 17Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
5. vs TCUQ3 3:15 4th & 3 at TCU 45, down 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
6. at KSUQ4 13:08 4th & 15 at KSU 35, up 7Punted; the numbers favored a field goal−1.1 pts
7. vs KUQ2 11:08 4th & 1 at ISU 29, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
8. vs UNIQ2 2:40 4th & 3 at UNI 6, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2015

90th of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   UNI
2. L

   IOWA
3. L

   TOL
4. W

   KU
5. L

   TTU
6. L

   TCU
7. L

   BAY
8. W

   TEX
9. L

   OU
10. L

    OKST
11. L

    KSU
12. L

    WVU

What moved it, 2015

Every game starts at Iowa State'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−0.92
• Possession & field position−0.05
• Clock−0.17
• Timeouts+0.17
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.61

Game by game

• UNIW 31-7 vs UNI77% → 100%Before kickoff +27 · On the field +23: Scoreboard +26
• IOWAL 17-31 vs IOWA43% → 1%Before kickoff −7 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −47, Clock −2
• TOLL 23-30 at TOL33% → 9%Before kickoff −17 · On the field −25: Scoreboard −27, Timeouts +14
• KUW 38-13 vs KU85% → 100%Before kickoff +35 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +17
• TTUL 31-66 at TTU20% → 0%Before kickoff −30 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −23
• TCUL 21-45 vs TCU10% → 0%Before kickoff −40 · On the field −10: Scoreboard −17, Clock −1
• BAYL 27-45 at BAY2% → 1%Before kickoff −48 · On the field −1: Scoreboard −5
• TEXW 24-0 vs TEX25% → 100%Before kickoff −25 · On the field +75: Scoreboard +56, Possession & field position −2
• OUL 16-52 at OU4% → 0%Before kickoff −46 · On the field −4: Scoreboard −6
• OKSTL 31-35 vs OKST18% → 4%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −14: Scoreboard −30, Clock −2
• KSUL 35-38 at KSU37% → 24%Before kickoff −13 · On the field −14: Scoreboard −13, Clock −1
• WVUL 6-30 at WVU19% → 1%Before kickoff −31 · On the field −18: Scoreboard −23

Points of win probability, from Iowa State's side.

Closest call

ISU 38-31 OU (2017) - Iowa State dropped to a 3.3% win probability before pulling it out.