Nebraska

Profile vs. FBS, 2022

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+0.1354th
  Defense+0.1528th
• 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.
  Offense41.1%38th
  Defense47.4%9th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2340th
  Defense+1.0993rd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0435th
  Defense+0.1812th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2974th
  Defense+0.1858th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense47.3%47th
  Defense54.4%4th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense29.2%34th
  Defense30.9%45th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.9934th
  Defense3.3413th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense17.7%37th
  Defense14.4%23rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense16.7%38th
  Defense13.9%18th

Percentiles among the 131 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, 2022

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
   NU
2. W
   UND
3. L
   GASO
4. L
   OU
5. W
   IU
6. W
   RUTG
7. L
   PUR
8. L
   ILL
9. L
   MINN
10. L
    MICH
11. L
    WIS
12. W
    IOWA

Bars above the line: better than expected for Nebraska.

Players, 2022

1. Casey ThompsonQB290 plays · +0.234 pts/play · 58th of 234 QBs
   1.27WAR0.70 to 1.87
2. Anthony GrantRB192 plays · +0.090 pts/play · 83rd of 384 RBs
   0.32WAR0.18 to 0.46
3. Trey PalmerWR78 plays · +0.161 pts/play · 39th of 455 WRs
   0.24WAR0.09 to 0.37
4. Marcus WashingtonWR33 plays · +0.200 pts/play · 165th of 455 WRs
   0.12WAR0.07 to 0.18
5. Brian BuschiniP62 plays · +0.105 pts/play · 18th of 102 punters
   0.12WAR0.02 to 0.21
6. Travis VokolekTE28 plays · +0.163 pts/play · 46th of 214 TEs
   0.09WAR0.04 to 0.13
7. Logan SmothersQB19 plays · +0.236 pts/play · 202nd of 234 QBs
   0.08WAR0.04 to 0.13
8. Chubba PurdyQB36 plays · +0.106 pts/play · 208th of 234 QBs
   0.07WAR0.00 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 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, 2022

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  75275224th of 129Roster talent: 752, 24th of 129 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  22522519th of 129Recruiting: 225, 19th of 129 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  50%50%83rd of 128Returning production: 50%, 83rd of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −1.2−1.270th of 129SP+ rating: −1.2, 70th of 129 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 129 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, 2022

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 6 clear-cut ones account for 0.10 of the 0.15 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 RUTGQ3 6:24 4th & 1 at NEB 26, down 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.8 pts
2. vs GASOQ3 10:57 4th & 1 at NEB 34, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.6 pts
3. at IOWAQ4 3:20 4th & 1 at NEB 34, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.6 pts
4. at NUQ4 6:30 4th & 6 at NEB 47, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
5. at NUQ3 2:47 4th & 2 at NEB 43, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
6. at IOWAQ4 1:05 4th & 11 at IOWA 34, up 7Punted; the numbers favored a field goal−1.2 pts
7. at NUQ2 3:40 4th & 1 at NEB 32, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
8. at IOWAQ3 5:11 4th & 2 at NEB 25, up 17Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2022

111th of 131 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

   NU
2. W

   UND
3. L

   GASO
4. L

   OU
5. W

   IU
6. W

   RUTG
7. L

   PUR
8. L

   ILL
9. L

   MINN
10. L

    MICH
11. L

    WIS
12. W

    IOWA

What moved it, 2022

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−0.75
• Possession & field position+0.02
• Clock−0.04
• Timeouts−0.01

Game by game

• NUL 28-31 at NU79% → 5%Before kickoff +29 · On the field −74: Scoreboard −41, Timeouts −3
• UNDW 38-17 vs UND96% → 99%Before kickoff +46 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +8
• GASOL 42-45 vs GASO93% → 27%Before kickoff +43 · On the field −66: Scoreboard −28, Clock −3
• OUL 14-49 vs OU24% → 0%Before kickoff −26 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −30, Clock −1
• IUW 35-21 vs IU68% → 99%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +31: Scoreboard +32, Timeouts +1
• RUTGW 14-13 at RUTG56% → 93%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +37: Scoreboard +47, Clock +2
• PURL 37-43 at PUR17% → 3%Before kickoff −33 · On the field −14: Scoreboard −20, Timeouts −2
• ILLL 9-26 vs ILL30% → 1%Before kickoff −20 · On the field −29: Scoreboard −38, Clock −2
• MINNL 13-20 vs MINN16% → 5%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −11: Scoreboard −27, Clock −1
• MICHL 3-34 at MICH3% → 0%Before kickoff −47 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −5
• WISL 14-15 vs WIS24% → 17%Before kickoff −26 · On the field −6: Scoreboard −29, Clock −3
• IOWAW 24-17 at IOWA21% → 96%Before kickoff −29 · On the field +75: Scoreboard +55, 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.