Louisiana

Profile vs. FBS, 2018

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+0.2288th
  Defense+0.237th
• 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.
  Offense44.4%61st
  Defense46.7%17th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3694th
  Defense+1.2339th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1985th
  Defense+0.189th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2876th
  Defense+0.3212th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense47.7%43rd
  Defense51.7%18th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense36.6%77th
  Defense35.2%26th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1784th
  Defense3.2212th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense17.5%74th
  Defense14.7%5th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.8%54th
  Defense12.0%5th

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, 2018

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 Louisiana 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
   GRAM
2. L
   MSST
3. L
   CCU
4. L
   ALA
5. W
   TXST
6. W
   NMSU
7. L
   APP
8. W
   ARST
9. L
   TROY
10. W
    GAST
11. W
    USA
12. W
    ULM
13. L
    APP
14. L
    TULN

Bars above the line: better than expected for Louisiana.

Players, 2018

1. Andre NunezQB233 plays · +0.194 pts/play · 98th of 225 QBs
   0.85WAR0.50 to 1.26
2. Trey RagasRB188 plays · +0.198 pts/play · 22nd of 351 RBs
   0.70WAR0.55 to 0.84
3. Elijah MitchellRB124 plays · +0.203 pts/play · 63rd of 351 RBs
   0.47WAR0.36 to 0.59
4. Raymond CalaisRB65 plays · +0.212 pts/play · 170th of 351 RBs
   0.26WAR0.21 to 0.31
5. Levi LewisQB54 plays · +0.221 pts/play · 177th of 225 QBs
   0.22WAR0.11 to 0.34
6. Kyle PfauPK17 plays · +0.422 pts/play · 26th of 112 kickers
   0.13WAR0.10 to 0.17
7. Ryheem MaloneWR46 plays · +0.138 pts/play · 144th of 434 WRs
   0.12WAR0.06 to 0.17
8. Jarrod JacksonWR23 plays · +0.193 pts/play · 227th of 434 WRs
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.12

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 Louisiana'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, 2018

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  377377103rd of 130Roster talent: 377, 103rd of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  123123105th of 130Recruiting: 123, 105th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  76%76%38th of 129Returning production: 76%, 38th of 129 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −6.9−6.994th of 130SP+ rating: −6.9, 94th 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, 2018

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 Louisiana's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 1 clear-cut ones account for 0.01 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. at APPQ4 6:01 4th & 7 at APP 7, down 11Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
2. vs USAQ3 5:38 4th & 2 at USA 24, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
3. vs TULNQ4 3:28 4th & 10 at UL 25, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.7 pts
4. vs GASTQ3 7:18 4th & 4 at GAST 4, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
5. at ULMQ3 8:44 4th & 6 at ULM 33, up 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
6. at TROYQ4 1:49 4th & 23 at UL 42, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.6 pts
7. at ULMQ2 4:22 4th & 3 at ULM 20, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
8. vs NMSUQ3 10:32 4th & 5 at NMSU 35, up 21Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2018

43rd of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   GRAM
2. L

   MSST
3. L

   CCU
4. L

   ALA
5. W

   TXST
6. W

   NMSU
7. L

   APP
8. W

   ARST
9. L

   TROY
10. W

    GAST
11. W

    USA
12. W

    ULM
13. L

    APP
14. L

    TULN

What moved it, 2018

Every game starts at Louisiana'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+0.37
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.01
• Timeouts−0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.06

Game by game

• GRAMW 49-17 vs GRAM86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +17
• MSSTL 10-56 at MSST2% → 0%Before kickoff −48 · On the field −2: Scoreboard −3
• CCUL 28-30 vs CCU64% → 6%Before kickoff +14 · On the field −57: Scoreboard −51, Clock −3
• ALAL 14-56 at ALA0% → 0%Before kickoff −50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard −1
• TXSTW 42-27 at TXST62% → 98%Before kickoff +12 · On the field +36: Scoreboard +44, Clock +2
• NMSUW 66-38 vs NMSU74% → 100%Before kickoff +24 · On the field +26: Scoreboard +27
• APPL 17-27 at APP7% → 4%Before kickoff −43 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −13, Timeouts −1
• ARSTW 47-43 vs ARST40% → 95%Before kickoff −10 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +39, Timeouts +2
• TROYL 16-26 at TROY34% → 3%Before kickoff −16 · On the field −31: Scoreboard −32, Timeouts −2
• GASTW 36-22 vs GAST84% → 98%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +21
• USAW 48-38 vs USA91% → 96%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +16
• ULMW 31-28 at ULM46% → 83%Before kickoff −4 · On the field +37: Scoreboard +40, Clock +4
• APPL 19-30 at APP16% → 3%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −13: Scoreboard −20, Timeouts −1
• TULNL 24-41 vs TULN40% → 2%Before kickoff −10 · On the field −39: Scoreboard −46, Clock −2

Points of win probability, from Louisiana's side.

Closest call

MRSH 51-54 UL (2025) - Louisiana dropped to a 4.5% win probability before pulling it out.