NC State

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+0.1873rd
  Defense+0.1434th
• 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.
  Offense45.1%73rd
  Defense40.9%56th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3174th
  Defense+1.3421st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1052nd
  Defense+0.1620th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3084th
  Defense+0.1356th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.0%60th
  Defense46.1%60th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense35.6%83rd
  Defense30.3%53rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2475th
  Defense3.0738th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.3%74th
  Defense14.8%20th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense19.9%9th
  Defense20.0%91st

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 NC 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
   WCU
2. L
   TENN
3. W
   LT
4. L
   CLEM
5. W
   NIU
6. L
   WAKE
7. L
   SYR
8. W
   CAL
9. W
   STAN
10. L
    DUKE
11. L
    GT
12. W
    UNC
13. L
    ECU

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

Players, 2024

1. CJ BaileyQB359 plays · +0.226 pts/play · 55th of 232 QBs
   1.52WAR0.75 to 2.15
2. Hollywood SmothersRB92 plays · +0.150 pts/play · 111th of 373 RBs
   0.26WAR0.19 to 0.32
3. Jordan WatersRB81 plays · +0.130 pts/play · 143rd of 373 RBs
   0.20WAR0.14 to 0.26
4. Justin JolyTE36 plays · +0.285 pts/play · 7th of 221 TEs
   0.19WAR0.09 to 0.29
5. Grayson McCallQB46 plays · +0.182 pts/play · 191st of 232 QBs
   0.16WAR0.06 to 0.24
6. Kendrick RaphaelRB65 plays · +0.121 pts/play · 195th of 373 RBs
   0.15WAR0.11 to 0.19
7. Kanoah VinesettPK22 plays · +0.260 pts/play · 27th of 114 kickers
   0.11WAR0.05 to 0.16
8. Caden NoonkesterP40 plays · +0.116 pts/play · 37th of 106 punters
   0.09WAR0.03 to 0.14

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 NC 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, 2024

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  72272240th of 131Roster talent: 722, 40th of 131 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  20120138th of 131Recruiting: 201, 38th of 131 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  34%34%88th of 130Returning production: 34%, 88th 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+3.955th of 131SP+ rating: +3.9, 55th 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 NC State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 7 clear-cut ones account for 0.25 of the 0.29 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 CALQ4 1:09 4th & 1 at NCSU 29, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−6.8 pts
2. at CALQ4 1:09 4th & 1 at NCSU 29, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−6.8 pts
3. vs ECUQ4 1:59 4th & 4 at NCSU 48, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.8 pts
4. at GTQ3 7:29 4th & 1 at NCSU 42, down 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.3 pts
5. vs DUKEQ4 9:01 4th & 8 at DUKE 16, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−2.1 pts
6. vs DUKEQ3 8:57 4th & 2 at DUKE 7, down 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
7. vs NIUQ2 4:55 4th & 1 at NIU 20, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
8. vs SYRQ3 2:53 4th & 12 at SYR 43, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.9 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2024

91st of 134 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   WCU
2. L

   TENN
3. W

   LT
4. L

   CLEM
5. W

   NIU
6. L

   WAKE
7. L

   SYR
8. W

   CAL
9. W

   STAN
10. L

    DUKE
11. L

    GT
12. W

    UNC
13. L

    ECU

What moved it, 2024

Every game starts at NC 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−0.89
• Possession & field position+0.05
• Clock−0.06
• Timeouts−0.01
• Other−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.16

Game by game

• WCUW 38-21 vs WCU98% → 98%Before kickoff +48 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +6
• TENNL 10-51 vs TENN21% → 0%Before kickoff −29 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −27, Clock −1
• LTW 30-20 vs LT91% → 99%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +14
• CLEML 35-59 at CLEM9% → 0%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −9: Scoreboard −14, Timeouts −1
• NIUW 24-17 vs NIU67% → 87%Before kickoff +17 · On the field +20: Scoreboard +20, Clock +2
• WAKEL 30-34 vs WAKE62% → 4%Before kickoff +12 · On the field −58: Scoreboard −54, Clock −3
• SYRL 17-24 vs SYR46% → 4%Before kickoff −4 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −47, Clock −3
• CALW 24-23 at CAL25% → 95%Before kickoff −25 · On the field +70: Scoreboard +56, Clock +2
• STANW 59-28 vs STAN70% → 100%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +30: Scoreboard +32
• DUKEL 19-29 vs DUKE59% → 4%Before kickoff +9 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −53, Clock −3
• GTL 29-30 at GT25% → 28%Before kickoff −25 · On the field +2: Scoreboard −9, Timeouts −2
• UNCW 35-30 at UNC41% → 89%Before kickoff −9 · On the field +48: Scoreboard +45, Possession & field position +3
• ECUL 21-26 vs ECU71% → 3%Before kickoff +21 · On the field −68: Scoreboard −58, Clock −3

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

Closest call

NCSU 30-29 PITT (2020) - NC State dropped to a 4.9% win probability before pulling it out.