Iowa

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+0.1145th
  Defense−0.0798th
• 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.
  Offense45.4%71st
  Defense38.3%83rd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.054th
  Defense+1.1784th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1062nd
  Defense−0.0890th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1139th
  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.
  Offense53.4%85th
  Defense41.9%90th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.4%22nd
  Defense30.5%65th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8344th
  Defense2.5285th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense19.9%50th
  Defense22.3%75th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense13.6%85th
  Defense17.4%62nd

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 Iowa 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
   PUR
2. L
   NU
3. W
   MSU
4. W
   MINN
5. W
   PSU
6. W
   NEB
7. W
   ILL
8. W
   WIS

Bars above the line: better than expected for Iowa.

Players, 2020

1. Spencer PetrasQB263 plays · +0.112 pts/play · 67th of 212 QBs
   0.55WAR0.16 to 1.03
2. Tyler GoodsonRB150 plays · +0.151 pts/play · 43rd of 338 RBs
   0.42WAR0.29 to 0.54
3. Mekhi SargentRB62 plays · +0.197 pts/play · 143rd of 338 RBs
   0.23WAR0.18 to 0.28
4. Ihmir Smith-MarsetteWR41 plays · +0.163 pts/play · 79th of 409 WRs
   0.13WAR0.08 to 0.17
5. Brandon SmithWR33 plays · +0.142 pts/play · 159th of 409 WRs
   0.09WAR0.05 to 0.12
6. Tory TaylorP35 plays · +0.131 pts/play · 5th of 77 punters
   0.09WAR0.04 to 0.14
7. Keith DuncanPK18 plays · +0.231 pts/play · 4th of 97 kickers
   0.08WAR0.04 to 0.11
8. Tyrone Tracy Jr.RB16 plays · +0.147 pts/play · 277th of 338 RBs
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.07

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'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.
  63263243rd of 127Roster talent: 632, 43rd of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  19919938th of 127Recruiting: 199, 38th of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  58%58%78th of 127Returning production: 58%, 78th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +16.3+16.313th of 127SP+ rating: +16.3, 13th 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 Iowa'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 0.04 of the 0.08 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 NUQ1 1:43 4th & 2 at NU 3, up 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
2. vs WISQ4 7:44 4th & 8 at IOWA 21, up 14Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.2 pts
3. vs NEBQ4 2:02 4th & 2 at NEB 32, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
4. at ILLQ3 1:05 4th & 9 at ILL 36, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
5. vs NUQ2 0:00 4th & 6 at NU 34, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
6. at ILLQ2 2:54 4th & 3 at ILL 22, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
7. at PURQ2 15:00 4th & 2 at IOWA 47, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
8. vs NEBQ2 3:48 4th & 3 at NEB 15, up 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

19th of 127 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   PUR
2. L

   NU
3. W

   MSU
4. W

   MINN
5. W

   PSU
6. W

   NEB
7. W

   ILL
8. W

   WIS

What moved it, 2020

Every game starts at Iowa'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+1.68
• Possession & field position−0.03
• Clock−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.17

Game by game

• PURL 20-24 at PUR55% → 7%Before kickoff +5 · On the field −48: Scoreboard −36, Timeouts −2
• NUL 20-21 vs NU43% → 16%Before kickoff −7 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −35, Clock −4
• MSUW 49-7 vs MSU69% → 100%Before kickoff +19 · On the field +31: Scoreboard +32
• MINNW 35-7 at MINN57% → 100%Before kickoff +7 · On the field +43: Scoreboard +46
• PSUW 41-21 at PSU41% → 99%Before kickoff −9 · On the field +58: Scoreboard +59, Clock +1
• NEBW 26-20 vs NEB78% → 95%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +24, Timeouts +1
• ILLW 35-21 at ILL82% → 98%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +28, Clock +1
• WISW 28-7 vs WIS43% → 100%Before kickoff −7 · On the field +57: Scoreboard +49, Timeouts +1

Points of win probability, from Iowa's side.

Closest call

NU 14-40 IOWA (2024) - Iowa dropped to a 3.7% win probability before pulling it out.