James Madison

Profile vs. FBS, 2026

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+0.2474th
  Defense−0.0278th
• 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.
  Offense45.1%63rd
  Defense36.6%79th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2240th
  Defense+1.2836th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1666th
  Defense−0.0885th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3676th
  Defense+0.0966th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.5%54th
  Defense40.4%86th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense36.7%79th
  Defense30.4%40th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2266th
  Defense2.8059th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.1%72nd
  Defense15.8%27th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense10.4%91st
  Defense16.5%57th

Percentiles among the 138 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, 2026

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 James Madison 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
   LIB
2. W
   WAG
3. W
   SDSU
4. W
   ODU
5. W
   MRSH
6. W
   GASO

Bars above the line: better than expected for James Madison.

Players, 2026

1. Camden ColemanQB147 plays · +0.108 pts/play · 61st of 192 QBs
   0.30WAR0.09 to 0.48
2. George PettawayRB78 plays · +0.117 pts/play · 20th of 320 RBs
   0.17WAR0.12 to 0.22
3. Corey ScottWR25 plays · +0.181 pts/play · 55th of 364 WRs
   0.08WAR0.06 to 0.12
4. JC EvansQB23 plays · +0.133 pts/play · 161st of 192 QBs
   0.06WAR0.01 to 0.11
5. Braeden WisloskiWR25 plays · +0.112 pts/play · 147th of 364 WRs
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.09
6. Cole KellerTE15 plays · +0.179 pts/play · 15th of 164 TEs
   0.05WAR0.03 to 0.07
7. Morgan SuarezPK9 plays · +0.247 pts/play · 16th of 82 kickers
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.06
8. Michael ScottWR17 plays · +0.090 pts/play · 237th of 364 WRs
   0.03WAR0.01 to 0.05

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 James Madison'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, 2026

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  588588101st of 138Roster talent: 588, 101st of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  123123125th of 138Recruiting: 123, 125th of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  8%8%122nd of 136Returning production: 8%, 122nd of 136 in FBS
• SP+ rating so far

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +9.4+9.440th of 138SP+ rating so far: +9.4, 40th of 138 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 138 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion so far

Conversion by season

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2026

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 James Madison'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 0.07 of the 0.11 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 GASOQ4 1:47 4th & 6 at GASO 42, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.1 pts
2. at GASOQ2 0:00 4th & 2 at GASO 3, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.8 pts
3. at ODUQ3 7:08 4th & 2 at JMU 46, up 16Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
4. vs LIBQ3 1:31 4th & 2 at JMU 9, up 11Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
5. at ODUQ3 2:06 4th & 3 at ODU 9, up 16Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
6. at ODUQ3 10:09 4th & 3 at ODU 18, up 16Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
7. at SDSUQ2 8:01 4th & 3 at JMU 40, up 13Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
8. at ODUQ1 2:26 4th & 2 at ODU 10, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

3rd of 138 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   LIB
2. W

   WAG
3. W

   SDSU
4. W

   ODU
5. W

   MRSH
6. W

   GASO

What moved it, 2026

Every game starts at James Madison'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+1.95
• Clock+0.06
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.24

Game by game

• LIBW 20-13 vs LIB63% → 97%Before kickoff +13 · On the field +33: Scoreboard +32, Timeouts +1
• WAGW 87-3 vs WAG99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +1
• SDSUW 26-13 at SDSU32% → 98%Before kickoff −18 · On the field +66: Scoreboard +58, Clock +4
• ODUW 46-20 at ODU66% → 100%Before kickoff +16 · On the field +34: Scoreboard +39
• MRSHW 45-17 vs MRSH80% → 100%Before kickoff +30 · On the field +20: Scoreboard +23
• GASOW 27-24 at GASO68% → 92%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +25: Scoreboard +43, Clock +2

Points of win probability, from James Madison's side.

Closest call

JMU 32-28 APP (2022) - James Madison dropped to a 7.1% win probability before pulling it out.