Louisville

Profile vs. FBS, 2014

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+0.1550th
  Defense−0.0298th
• 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.
  Offense40.1%24th
  Defense34.1%99th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3187th
  Defense+1.1953rd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0839th
  Defense0.0083rd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2357th
  Defense−0.0299th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense47.0%43rd
  Defense38.5%99th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.8%11th
  Defense26.9%93rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.7537th
  Defense2.5084th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense23.8%15th
  Defense22.7%80th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense2.3%30th
  Defense2.6%79th

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, 2014

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 Louisville 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
   MIA
2. W
   MUR
3. L
   UVA
4. W
   FIU
5. W
   WAKE
6. W
   SYR
7. L
   CLEM
8. W
   NCSU
9. L
   FSU
10. W
    BC
11. W
    ND
12. W
    UK
13. L
    UGA

Bars above the line: better than expected for Louisville.

Players, 2014

1. Will GardnerQB202 plays · +0.252 pts/play · 106th of 199 QBs
   0.95WAR0.62 to 1.30
2. Kyle BolinQB66 plays · +0.256 pts/play · 152nd of 199 QBs
   0.32WAR0.20 to 0.43
3. DeVante ParkerWR65 plays · +0.243 pts/play · 30th of 469 WRs
   0.30WAR0.19 to 0.40
4. Brandon RadcliffRB132 plays · +0.117 pts/play · 71st of 350 RBs
   0.29WAR0.17 to 0.40
5. Michael DyerRB104 plays · +0.089 pts/play · 134th of 350 RBs
   0.17WAR0.08 to 0.26
6. Dominique BrownRB90 plays · +0.103 pts/play · 136th of 350 RBs
   0.17WAR0.11 to 0.24
7. Reggie BonnafonRB46 plays · +0.163 pts/play · 166th of 350 RBs
   0.14WAR0.10 to 0.18
8. John WallaceP16 plays · +0.371 pts/play · 36th of 94 punters
   0.11WAR0.06 to 0.16

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 Louisville'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

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2014

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 Louisville'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 0.19 of the 0.23 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 UKQ4 6:30 4th & 1 at UK 18, up 1Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−6.6 pts
2. vs UKQ4 13:31 4th & 1 at LOU 45, up 5Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.5 pts
3. at CLEMQ3 4:23 4th & 1 at LOU 26, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it−3.3 pts
4. at BCQ2 1:49 4th & 1 at LOU 41, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.1 pts
5. vs WAKEQ3 3:32 4th & 9 at LOU 29, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored punting−2.0 pts
6. at CLEMQ4 9:16 4th & 3 at LOU 36, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
7. vs MIAQ3 7:10 4th & 4 at LOU 49, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
8. vs UGAQ2 3:28 4th & 5 at LOU 31, down 13Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2014

28th of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   MIA
2. W

   MUR
3. L

   UVA
4. W

   FIU
5. W

   WAKE
6. W

   SYR
7. L

   CLEM
8. W

   NCSU
9. L

   FSU
10. W

    BC
11. W

    ND
12. W

    UK
13. L

    UGA

What moved it, 2014

Every game starts at Louisville'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+1.18
• Possession & field position−0.06
• Clock+0.07
• Timeouts+0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.28

Game by game

• MIAW 31-13 vs MIA61% → 99%Before kickoff +11 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +39, Possession & field position −3
• MURW 66-21 vs MUR99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• UVAL 21-23 at UVA72% → 9%Before kickoff +22 · On the field −63: Scoreboard −32, Timeouts −3
• FIUW 34-3 at FIU94% → 100%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +10
• WAKEW 20-10 vs WAKE92% → 97%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +14, Timeouts +1
• SYRW 28-6 at SYR56% → 100%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +44: Scoreboard +45, Clock +3
• CLEML 17-23 at CLEM30% → 4%Before kickoff −20 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −31
• NCSUW 30-18 vs NCSU83% → 97%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +21, Timeouts +1
• FSUL 31-42 vs FSU23% → 3%Before kickoff −27 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −33, Clock −2
• BCW 38-19 at BC59% → 99%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +40: Scoreboard +47, Clock +2
• NDW 31-28 at ND24% → 89%Before kickoff −26 · On the field +65: Scoreboard +50, Clock +3
• UKW 44-40 vs UK80% → 96%Before kickoff +30 · On the field +16: Scoreboard +21, Timeouts +2
• UGAL 14-37 vs UGA27% → 1%Before kickoff −23 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −36, Clock −1

Points of win probability, from Louisville's side.

Closest call

LOU 31-27 BC (2024) - Louisville dropped to a 11.5% win probability before pulling it out.