Missouri

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+0.1356th
  Defense+0.2610th
• 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.
  Offense44.1%66th
  Defense47.2%17th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2340th
  Defense+1.2456th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.0124th
  Defense+0.1816th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2767th
  Defense+0.3314th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.5%61st
  Defense52.1%19th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense33.9%63rd
  Defense35.6%21st
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.5514th
  Defense3.3210th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense21.2%37th
  Defense17.3%25th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.4%77th
  Defense15.7%40th

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 Missouri 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. L
   ALA
2. L
   TENN
3. W
   LSU
4. W
   UK
5. L
   FLA
6. W
   SC
7. W
   VAN
8. W
   ARK
9. L
   UGA
10. L
    MSST

Bars above the line: better than expected for Missouri.

Players, 2020

1. Connor BazelakQB274 plays · +0.155 pts/play · 35th of 212 QBs
   0.80WAR0.32 to 1.26
2. Larry Rountree IIIRB174 plays · +0.166 pts/play · 20th of 338 RBs
   0.54WAR0.39 to 0.67
3. Tyler BadieRB67 plays · +0.190 pts/play · 141st of 338 RBs
   0.24WAR0.18 to 0.29
4. Tauskie DoveWR31 plays · +0.139 pts/play · 176th of 409 WRs
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.11
5. Damon HazeltonWR28 plays · +0.152 pts/play · 182nd of 409 WRs
   0.08WAR0.04 to 0.12
6. Jalen KnoxWR38 plays · +0.104 pts/play · 194th of 409 WRs
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.11
7. Keke ChismWR37 plays · +0.095 pts/play · 227th of 409 WRs
   0.07WAR0.03 to 0.10
8. Barrett BanisterWR23 plays · +0.132 pts/play · 261st of 409 WRs
   0.06WAR0.03 to 0.08

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 Missouri'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.
  62762747th of 127Roster talent: 627, 47th of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  19319346th of 127Recruiting: 193, 46th of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  29%29%114th of 127Returning production: 29%, 114th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −1.0−1.075th of 127SP+ rating: −1.0, 75th 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 Missouri's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 4 clear-cut ones account for 0.07 of the 0.11 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 3:07 4th & 1 at UK 1, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.1 pts
2. vs UKQ4 13:14 4th & 1 at MIZ 34, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.1 pts
3. at LSUQ3 8:48 4th & 1 at MIZ 34, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.6 pts
4. at SCQ4 2:52 4th & 6 at SC 39, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
5. vs VANQ2 0:00 4th & 14 at midfield, up 21Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−1.0 pts
6. vs ARKQ3 8:09 4th & 2 at MIZ 26, down 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
7. vs UKQ2 8:24 4th & 4 at MIZ 48, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
8. at TENNQ3 14:53 4th & 4 at MIZ 47, down 15Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

32nd of 127 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   ALA
2. L

   TENN
3. W

   LSU
4. W

   UK
5. L

   FLA
6. W

   SC
7. W

   VAN
8. W

   ARK
9. L

   UGA
10. L

    MSST

What moved it, 2020

Every game starts at Missouri'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+0.52
• Possession & field position+0.02
• Clock+0.04
• Timeouts+0.06
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.02

Game by game

• ALAL 19-38 vs ALA3% → 1%Before kickoff −47 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −8
• TENNL 12-35 at TENN20% → 0%Before kickoff −30 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −24, Timeouts +1
• LSUW 45-41 at LSU79% → 94%Before kickoff +29 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +32, Clock +2
• UKW 20-10 vs UK38% → 97%Before kickoff −12 · On the field +58: Scoreboard +41, Timeouts +2
• FLAL 17-41 at FLA16% → 0%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −15: Scoreboard −20
• SCW 17-10 at SC59% → 95%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +36: Scoreboard +44, Clock +2
• VANW 41-0 vs VAN84% → 100%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +16: Scoreboard +18
• ARKW 50-48 vs ARK53% → 96%Before kickoff +3 · On the field +42: Scoreboard +36, Possession & field position +1
• UGAL 14-49 vs UGA16% → 0%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −16: Scoreboard −22
• MSSTL 32-51 at MSST50% → 1%Before kickoff 0 · On the field −49: Scoreboard −45, Timeouts +1

Points of win probability, from Missouri's side.

Closest call

MIZ 21-20 SC (2014) - Missouri dropped to a 4.5% win probability before pulling it out.