Maryland

Profile vs. FBS, 2024

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+0.0419th
  Defense+0.1340th
• 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.
  Offense40.9%32nd
  Defense43.3%37th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2333rd
  Defense+1.2071st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.0311th
  Defense+0.0274th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1029th
  Defense+0.2521st
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense45.2%26th
  Defense48.2%40th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense31.9%53rd
  Defense31.8%33rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8932nd
  Defense2.7380th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense17.8%46th
  Defense19.5%68th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense16.8%36th
  Defense14.2%21st

Percentiles among the 134 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, 2024

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 Maryland 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
   CONN
2. L
   MSU
3. W
   UVA
4. W
   VILL
5. L
   IU
6. L
   NU
7. W
   USC
8. L
   MINN
9. L
   ORE
10. L
    RUTG
11. L
    IOWA
12. L
    PSU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Maryland.

Players, 2024

1. Billy Edwards Jr.QB390 plays · +0.218 pts/play · 49th of 232 QBs
   1.59WAR0.91 to 2.18
2. Roman HembyRB137 plays · +0.118 pts/play · 86th of 373 RBs
   0.30WAR0.19 to 0.41
3. Kaden PratherWR44 plays · +0.229 pts/play · 49th of 452 WRs
   0.19WAR0.07 to 0.29
4. Tai FeltonWR71 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 51st of 452 WRs
   0.19WAR0.02 to 0.37
5. Nolan RayRB59 plays · +0.116 pts/play · 211th of 373 RBs
   0.13WAR0.09 to 0.16
6. Jack HowesPK13 plays · +0.261 pts/play · 81st of 114 kickers
   0.06WAR0.03 to 0.10
7. Dylan WadeTE23 plays · +0.131 pts/play · 49th of 221 TEs
   0.06WAR0.01 to 0.11
8. Octavian Smith Jr.WR26 plays · +0.112 pts/play · 227th of 452 WRs
   0.05WAR0.00 to 0.10

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 Maryland'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, 2024

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  69669651st of 131Roster talent: 696, 51st of 131 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  21521528th of 131Recruiting: 215, 28th of 131 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  37%37%84th of 130Returning production: 37%, 84th of 130 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −3.9−3.984th of 131SP+ rating: −3.9, 84th of 131 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 131 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, 2024

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 Maryland'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 0.18 of the 0.25 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 MSUQ4 2:20 4th & 1 at MD 44, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it−10.9 pts
2. vs RUTGQ4 4:05 4th & 6 at RUTG 19, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−2.5 pts
3. at UVAQ3 7:25 4th & 2 at midfield, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.2 pts
4. vs MSUQ4 4:26 4th & 1 at MSU 23, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
5. vs NUQ4 11:13 4th & 6 at NU 19, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.1 pts
6. vs CONNQ2 10:57 4th & 1 at MD 41, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
7. at MINNQ3 8:42 4th & 8 at MINN 21, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.7 pts
8. vs CONNQ1 1:30 4th & 1 at MD 40, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2024

123rd of 134 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   CONN
2. L

   MSU
3. W

   UVA
4. W

   VILL
5. L

   IU
6. L

   NU
7. W

   USC
8. L

   MINN
9. L

   ORE
10. L

    RUTG
11. L

    IOWA
12. L

    PSU

What moved it, 2024

Every game starts at Maryland'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−1.93
• Clock−0.05
• Timeouts+0.03
• Other−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.11

Game by game

• CONNW 50-7 vs CONN90% → 100%Before kickoff +40 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +12
• MSUL 24-27 vs MSU74% → 11%Before kickoff +24 · On the field −64: Scoreboard −43, Timeouts −5
• UVAW 27-13 at UVA46% → 99%Before kickoff −4 · On the field +53: Scoreboard +51, Clock +3
• VILLW 38-20 vs VILL95% → 99%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +10
• IUL 28-42 at IU31% → 0%Before kickoff −19 · On the field −30: Scoreboard −31, Timeouts −1
• NUL 10-37 vs NU79% → 0%Before kickoff +29 · On the field −79: Scoreboard −69, Clock −2
• USCW 29-28 vs USC33% → 91%Before kickoff −17 · On the field +59: Scoreboard +34, Timeouts +2
• MINNL 23-48 at MINN33% → 1%Before kickoff −17 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −35, Timeouts +2
• OREL 18-39 at ORE6% → 0%Before kickoff −44 · On the field −6: Scoreboard −10
• RUTGL 17-31 vs RUTG62% → 2%Before kickoff +12 · On the field −60: Scoreboard −61, Timeouts +2
• IOWAL 13-29 vs IOWA37% → 1%Before kickoff −13 · On the field −37: Scoreboard −44, Clock −2
• PSUL 7-44 at PSU4% → 0%Before kickoff −46 · On the field −4: Scoreboard −7

Points of win probability, from Maryland's side.

Closest call

MD 20-17 ILL (2021) - Maryland dropped to a 1.0% win probability before pulling it out.