Mississippi State

Profile vs. FBS, 2015

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+0.2081st
  Defense+0.0951st
• 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.
  Offense47.8%87th
  Defense44.3%35th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1843rd
  Defense+1.1183rd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0857th
  Defense+0.0741st
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3077th
  Defense+0.1157th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense53.2%88th
  Defense50.5%21st
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense35.7%61st
  Defense31.6%65th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0879th
  Defense2.7265th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense19.3%55th
  Defense22.6%73rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense1.3%95th
  Defense2.7%84th

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, 2015

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 Mississippi State 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
   USM
2. L
   LSU
3. W
   NWST
4. W
   AUB
5. L
   TA&M
6. W
   TROY
7. W
   LT
8. W
   UK
9. W
   MIZ
10. L
    ALA
11. W
    ARK
12. L
    MISS
13. W
    NCSU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Mississippi State.

Players, 2015

1. Dak PrescottQB562 plays · +0.329 pts/play · 2nd of 205 QBs
   3.46WAR2.68 to 4.27
2. Fred RossWR107 plays · +0.207 pts/play · 7th of 411 WRs
   0.41WAR0.28 to 0.58
3. De'Runnya WilsonWR86 plays · +0.206 pts/play · 21st of 411 WRs
   0.33WAR0.20 to 0.44
4. Brandon HollowayRB110 plays · +0.105 pts/play · 113th of 333 RBs
   0.22WAR0.14 to 0.30
5. Westin GravesPK17 plays · +0.440 pts/play · 36th of 115 kickers
   0.14WAR0.10 to 0.18
6. Fred BrownWR38 plays · +0.120 pts/play · 249th of 411 WRs
   0.09WAR0.05 to 0.13
7. Ashton ShumpertRB57 plays · +0.060 pts/play · 234th of 333 RBs
   0.06WAR0.02 to 0.11
8. Darrion HutchersonTE15 plays · −0.034 pts/play · 136th of 189 TEs
   −0.01WAR−0.04 to 0.01

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 Mississippi State'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, 2015

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  68068028th of 128Roster talent: 680, 28th of 128 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  21921925th of 128Recruiting: 219, 25th of 128 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  74%74%42nd of 127Returning production: 74%, 42nd of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +15.1+15.121st of 128SP+ rating: +15.1, 21st of 128 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 128 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, 2015

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 Mississippi State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 2 clear-cut ones account for 0.03 of the 0.09 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 AUBQ4 10:18 4th & 2 at AUB 44, up 11Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
2. at AUBQ3 1:11 4th & 2 at AUB 27, up 8Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
3. at USMQ2 7:18 4th & 2 at MSST 49, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
4. vs ALAQ2 0:15 4th & 12 at ALA 37, down 18Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.8 pts
5. at ARKQ2 11:47 4th & 3 at ARK 3, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
6. at AUBQ4 3:24 4th & 5 at AUB 40, up 11Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
7. vs NCSUQ4 11:57 4th & 5 at NCSU 41, up 16Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
8. at ARKQ2 0:03 4th & 6 at ARK 49, up 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2015

41st of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   USM
2. L

   LSU
3. W

   NWST
4. W

   AUB
5. L

   TA&M
6. W

   TROY
7. W

   LT
8. W

   UK
9. W

   MIZ
10. L

    ALA
11. W

    ARK
12. L

    MISS
13. W

    NCSU

What moved it, 2015

Every game starts at Mississippi State'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+0.76
• Possession & field position−0.09
• Clock+0.04
• Timeouts+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.07

Game by game

• USMW 34-16 at USM83% → 99%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +16: Scoreboard +27
• LSUL 19-21 vs LSU39% → 15%Before kickoff −11 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −35, Possession & field position −3
• NWSTW 62-13 vs NWST99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +1
• AUBW 17-9 at AUB47% → 97%Before kickoff −3 · On the field +50: Scoreboard +51, Clock +3
• TA&ML 17-30 at TA&M34% → 1%Before kickoff −16 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −33, Possession & field position −1
• TROYW 45-17 vs TROY97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +4
• LTW 45-20 vs LT88% → 100%Before kickoff +38 · On the field +12: Scoreboard +15, Clock +1
• UKW 42-16 vs UK79% → 100%Before kickoff +29 · On the field +21: Scoreboard +24, Clock +1
• MIZW 31-13 at MIZ71% → 99%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +38, Clock +2
• ALAL 6-31 vs ALA33% → 0%Before kickoff −17 · On the field −33: Scoreboard −39, Clock −1
• ARKW 51-50 at ARK40% → 77%Before kickoff −10 · On the field +37: Scoreboard +38, Clock +4
• MISSL 27-38 vs MISS46% → 3%Before kickoff −4 · On the field −43: Scoreboard −48, Clock −3
• NCSUW 51-28 vs NCSU68% → 100%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +33, Timeouts +1

Points of win probability, from Mississippi State's side.

Closest call

MSST 38-35 ARK (2025) - Mississippi State dropped to a 6.1% win probability before pulling it out.