LSU

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+0.2373rd
  Defense−0.0691st
• 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.
  Offense49.6%88th
  Defense31.0%99th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2446th
  Defense+1.3029th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1561st
  Defense−0.0580th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3978th
  Defense−0.0793rd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense51.9%74th
  Defense34.7%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.
  Offense43.8%97th
  Defense25.2%77th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2164th
  Defense1.8999th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense16.1%65th
  Defense29.7%99th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.7%35th
  Defense21.4%95th

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 LSU 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
   CLEM
2. W
   LT
3. L
   MISS
4. W
   TA&M
5. W
   MCN
6. L
   UK

Bars above the line: better than expected for LSU.

Players, 2026

1. Sam LeavittQB169 plays · +0.144 pts/play · 24th of 192 QBs
   0.46WAR0.19 to 0.69
2. Dilin JonesRB93 plays · +0.089 pts/play · 25th of 320 RBs
   0.15WAR0.09 to 0.21
3. Jackson HarrisWR21 plays · +0.303 pts/play · 23rd of 364 WRs
   0.12WAR0.08 to 0.16
4. Winston Watkins Jr.WR30 plays · +0.183 pts/play · 31st of 364 WRs
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.14
5. Trey'Dez GreenTE15 plays · +0.211 pts/play · 9th of 164 TEs
   0.06WAR0.04 to 0.08
6. Eugene Wilson IIIWR17 plays · +0.080 pts/play · 241st of 364 WRs
   0.03WAR0.01 to 0.04
7. Scott StarzykPK6 plays · +0.194 pts/play · 51st of 82 kickers
   0.02WAR0.01 to 0.04
8. Jayce BrownWR7 plays · +0.163 pts/play · 262nd of 364 WRs
   0.02WAR0.01 to 0.03

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 LSU'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.
  9329328th of 138Roster talent: 932, 8th of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  2802806th of 138Recruiting: 280, 6th of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  21%21%97th of 136Returning production: 21%, 97th 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.
  +21.7+21.79th of 138SP+ rating so far: +21.7, 9th 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 LSU'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 0.06 of the 0.07 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 UKQ4 1:37 4th & 1 at LSU 43, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−5.7 pts
2. vs CLEMQ2 12:15 4th & 3 at CLEM 30, up 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
3. vs CLEMQ2 4:11 4th & 8 at CLEM 39, up 21Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
4. vs LTQ3 2:12 4th & 4 at LT 5, up 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
5. vs CLEMQ4 0:13 4th & 6 at CLEM 36, up 41Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts
6. vs TA&MQ4 0:08 4th & 3 at TA&M 7, up 29Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

107th of 138 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   CLEM
2. W

   LT
3. L

   MISS
4. W

   TA&M
5. W

   MCN
6. L

   UK

What moved it, 2026

Every game starts at LSU'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−0.12
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Clock−0.11
• Timeouts+0.19
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.49

Game by game

• CLEMW 51-10 vs CLEM75% → 100%Before kickoff +25 · On the field +25: Scoreboard +29, Timeouts −1
• LTW 45-14 vs LT98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +4
• MISSL 24-32 at MISS55% → 3%Before kickoff +5 · On the field −53: Scoreboard −40, Timeouts −3
• TA&MW 35-6 vs TA&M66% → 100%Before kickoff +16 · On the field +34: Scoreboard +34
• MCNW 63-14 vs MCN100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• UKL 34-35 at UK76% → 13%Before kickoff +26 · On the field −63: Scoreboard −39, Timeouts +23

Points of win probability, from LSU's side.

Closest call

LSU 37-34 FLA (2020) - LSU dropped to a 6.6% win probability before pulling it out.