Nebraska

Profile vs. FBS, 2021

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+0.2170th
  Defense+0.1261st
• 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.
  Offense44.6%63rd
  Defense44.4%32nd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3371st
  Defense+1.0898th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1971st
  Defense+0.0471st
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2663rd
  Defense+0.2434th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense50.2%66th
  Defense49.7%31st
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense30.4%43rd
  Defense31.7%43rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0546th
  Defense2.9954th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.6%63rd
  Defense14.9%29th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.6%69th
  Defense16.0%36th

Percentiles among the 130 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, 2021

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 Nebraska 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
   ILL
2. W
   FOR
3. W
   BUF
4. L
   OU
5. L
   MSU
6. W
   NU
7. L
   MICH
8. L
   MINN
9. L
   PUR
10. L
    OSU
11. L
    WIS
12. L
    IOWA

Bars above the line: better than expected for Nebraska.

Players, 2021

1. Adrian MartinezQB370 plays · +0.308 pts/play · 26th of 219 QBs
   2.13WAR1.42 to 2.82
2. Rahmir JohnsonRB117 plays · +0.159 pts/play · 122nd of 387 RBs
   0.35WAR0.26 to 0.43
3. Samori ToureWR59 plays · +0.169 pts/play · 78th of 474 WRs
   0.19WAR0.12 to 0.25
4. Logan SmothersQB51 plays · +0.162 pts/play · 186th of 219 QBs
   0.15WAR0.03 to 0.27
5. Zavier BettsWR21 plays · +0.171 pts/play · 327th of 474 WRs
   0.07WAR0.05 to 0.09
6. Markese SteppRB22 plays · +0.141 pts/play · 310th of 387 RBs
   0.06WAR0.04 to 0.08
7. Levi FalckWR17 plays · +0.168 pts/play · 369th of 474 WRs
   0.05WAR0.04 to 0.07
8. Connor CulpPK10 plays · +0.258 pts/play · 95th of 128 kickers
   0.05WAR0.02 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 Nebraska'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, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  74474425th of 130Roster talent: 744, 25th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  23223221st of 130Recruiting: 232, 21st of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  61%61%89th of 128Returning production: 61%, 89th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +10.3+10.335th of 130SP+ rating: +10.3, 35th of 130 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 130 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, 2021

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 Nebraska'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 0.17 of the 0.21 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 WISQ4 0:04 4th & 20 at WIS 21, down 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal11.3 pts
2. vs MICHQ3 8:07 4th & 1 at NEB 33, down 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it1.9 pts
3. at MINNQ4 7:11 4th & 10 at MINN 34, down 5Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal1.4 pts
4. vs PURQ3 13:10 4th & 1 at NEB 34, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it1.4 pts
5. at OUQ4 8:16 4th & 17 at OU 24, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal1.2 pts
6. vs BUFQ3 6:16 4th & 3 at NEB 49, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.7 pts
7. at MINNQ4 14:57 4th & 4 at MINN 9, down 5Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.6 pts
8. vs PURQ3 0:52 4th & 6 at PUR 46, down 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)0.5 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

127th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   ILL
2. W

   FOR
3. W

   BUF
4. L

   OU
5. L

   MSU
6. W

   NU
7. L

   MICH
8. L

   MINN
9. L

   PUR
10. L

    OSU
11. L

    WIS
12. L

    IOWA

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Nebraska'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−2.73
• Possession & field position+0.03
• Clock−0.18
• Timeouts+0.17
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.10

Game by game

• ILLL 22-30 at ILL64% → 2%Before kickoff +14 · On the field −62: Scoreboard −42, Timeouts −3
• FORW 52-7 vs FOR99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• BUFW 28-3 vs BUF82% → 98%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +16: Scoreboard +22
• OUL 16-23 at OU7% → 6%Before kickoff −43 · On the field −1: Scoreboard −12, Possession & field position −1
• MSUL 20-23 at MSU41% → 17%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −36, Timeouts +23
• NUW 56-7 vs NU82% → 100%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +18: Scoreboard +20
• MICHL 29-32 vs MICH41% → 7%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −34: Scoreboard −45, Clock −3
• MINNL 23-30 at MINN60% → 3%Before kickoff +10 · On the field −57: Scoreboard −41, Timeouts −2
• PURL 23-28 vs PUR68% → 27%Before kickoff +18 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −37, Possession & field position +3
• OSUL 17-26 vs OSU16% → 5%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −11: Scoreboard −27, Clock −2
• WISL 28-35 at WIS22% → 3%Before kickoff −28 · On the field −19: Scoreboard −24, Timeouts −1
• IOWAL 21-28 vs IOWA52% → 5%Before kickoff +2 · On the field −46: Scoreboard −52, Clock −3

Points of win probability, from Nebraska's side.

Closest call

MSU 38-39 NEB (2015) - Nebraska dropped to a 6.3% win probability before pulling it out.