Marshall

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+0.1458th
  Defense−0.0292nd
• 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.
  Offense43.5%60th
  Defense39.3%79th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2651st
  Defense+0.9499th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1783rd
  Defense−0.1497th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1035th
  Defense+0.1267th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.9%64th
  Defense44.3%75th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense30.7%44th
  Defense29.1%78th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.4094th
  Defense2.6278th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.7%96th
  Defense16.5%20th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense12.0%94th
  Defense15.6%38th

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 Marshall 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
   EKU
2. W
   APP
3. W
   WKU
4. W
   LT
5. W
   FAU
6. W
   MASS
7. W
   MTSU
8. L
   RICE
9. L
   UAB
10. L
    BUF

Bars above the line: better than expected for Marshall.

Players, 2020

1. Brenden KnoxRB132 plays · +0.215 pts/play · 22nd of 338 RBs
   0.53WAR0.41 to 0.64
2. Grant WellsQB229 plays · +0.088 pts/play · 85th of 212 QBs
   0.38WAR0.03 to 0.76
3. Sheldon EvansRB50 plays · +0.181 pts/play · 190th of 338 RBs
   0.17WAR0.14 to 0.20
4. Willie JohnsonWR23 plays · +0.147 pts/play · 240th of 409 WRs
   0.06WAR0.04 to 0.08
5. Corey GammageWR37 plays · +0.078 pts/play · 271st of 409 WRs
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.09
6. Talik KeatonWR18 plays · +0.122 pts/play · 302nd of 409 WRs
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.06
7. Broc ThompsonWR15 plays · +0.143 pts/play · 304th of 409 WRs
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.06
8. Robert LeFevreP28 plays · +0.048 pts/play · 38th of 77 punters
   0.03WAR−0.01 to 0.06

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 Marshall'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.
  40940989th of 127Roster talent: 409, 89th of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  15315379th of 127Recruiting: 153, 79th of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  52%52%88th of 127Returning production: 52%, 88th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +9.5+9.530th of 127SP+ rating: +9.5, 30th 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 Marshall's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 5 clear-cut ones account for 0.21 of the 0.27 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 BUFQ4 0:03 4th & 11 at BUF 21, down 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−9.2 pts
2. at BUFQ4 12:46 4th & 1 at MRSH 19, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it−4.7 pts
3. vs RICEQ4 15:00 4th & 16 at RICE 27, down 20Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−3.4 pts
4. at BUFQ3 8:48 4th & 3 at BUF 3, down 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
5. at BUFQ3 3:23 4th & 3 at BUF 25, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
6. vs RICEQ4 3:40 4th & 6 at RICE 17, down 20Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−1.0 pts
7. vs UABQ2 15:00 4th & 1 at MRSH 37, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
8. vs FAUQ2 5:10 4th & 1 at MRSH 34, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

81st of 127 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   EKU
2. W

   APP
3. W

   WKU
4. W

   LT
5. W

   FAU
6. W

   MASS
7. W

   MTSU
8. L

   RICE
9. L

   UAB
10. L

    BUF

What moved it, 2020

Every game starts at Marshall'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−0.04
• Possession & field position−0.02
• Clock−0.02
• Timeouts+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.33

Game by game

• EKUW 59-0 vs EKU95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +7
• APPW 17-7 vs APP34% → 96%Before kickoff −16 · On the field +62: Scoreboard +43, Timeouts +2
• WKUW 38-14 at WKU70% → 100%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +30: Scoreboard +36, Clock +2
• LTW 35-17 at LT78% → 99%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +21: Scoreboard +31, Clock +1
• FAUW 20-9 vs FAU90% → 99%Before kickoff +40 · On the field +9: Scoreboard +16
• MASSW 51-10 vs MASS99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• MTSUW 42-14 vs MTSU92% → 100%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +11
• RICEL 0-20 vs RICE93% → 1%Before kickoff +43 · On the field −92: Scoreboard −65, Clock −2
• UABL 13-22 vs UAB58% → 3%Before kickoff +8 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −53, Clock −3
• BUFL 10-17 at BUF31% → 2%Before kickoff −19 · On the field −29: Scoreboard −32

Points of win probability, from Marshall's side.

Closest call

MRSH 26-12 JMU (2022) - Marshall dropped to a 2.6% win probability before pulling it out.