Nevada

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+0.2169th
  Defense+0.1349th
• 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.
  Offense42.9%44th
  Defense46.2%19th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3992nd
  Defense+1.1981st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0523rd
  Defense+0.2513th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3581st
  Defense+0.1085th
• 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%38th
  Defense52.9%10th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense33.7%74th
  Defense29.3%59th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.7716th
  Defense3.574th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense19.2%22nd
  Defense9.3%1st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense16.0%51st
  Defense17.9%73rd

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 Nevada 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
   CAL
2. W
   IDST
3. L
   KSU
4. W
   BOIS
5. W
   NMSU
6. W
   HAW
7. L
   FRES
8. W
   UNLV
9. W
   SJSU
10. L
    SDSU
11. L
    AF
12. W
    CSU
13. L
    WMU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Nevada.

Players, 2021

1. Carson StrongQB451 plays · +0.276 pts/play · 20th of 219 QBs
   2.33WAR1.49 to 3.12
2. Toa TauaRB169 plays · +0.175 pts/play · 53rd of 387 RBs
   0.55WAR0.42 to 0.68
3. Romeo DoubsWR85 plays · +0.243 pts/play · 6th of 474 WRs
   0.39WAR0.28 to 0.49
4. Devonte LeeRB93 plays · +0.167 pts/play · 160th of 387 RBs
   0.29WAR0.20 to 0.37
5. Tory HortonWR46 plays · +0.228 pts/play · 70th of 474 WRs
   0.20WAR0.14 to 0.25
6. Brandon TaltonPK24 plays · +0.374 pts/play · 4th of 128 kickers
   0.17WAR0.11 to 0.23
7. Julian DiazPK41 plays · +0.173 pts/play · 12th of 128 kickers
   0.13WAR0.05 to 0.22
8. Justin LockhartWR37 plays · +0.151 pts/play · 227th of 474 WRs
   0.10WAR0.06 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 Nevada'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.
  42242298th of 130Roster talent: 422, 98th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  14514590th of 130Recruiting: 145, 90th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  98%98%7th of 128Returning production: 98%, 7th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +3.6+3.667th of 130SP+ rating: +3.6, 67th 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 Nevada'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 0.02 of the 0.08 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 SJSUQ4 0:35 4th & 9 at SJSU 41, tiedWent for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.3 pts
2. at BOISQ4 10:42 4th & 2 at BOIS 21, up 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
3. at SDSUQ2 1:36 4th & 3 at NEV 49, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
4. at CALQ4 1:55 4th & 7 at CAL 37, up 8Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
5. at FRESQ4 4:21 4th & 5 at FRES 20, down 11Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
6. at CSUQ3 11:26 4th & 3 at NEV 47, up 24Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
7. vs AFQ4 9:23 4th & 10 at NEV 46, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.4 pts
8. at KSUQ2 0:43 4th & 2 at NEV 46, down 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

77th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   CAL
2. W

   IDST
3. L

   KSU
4. W

   BOIS
5. W

   NMSU
6. W

   HAW
7. L

   FRES
8. W

   UNLV
9. W

   SJSU
10. L

    SDSU
11. L

    AF
12. W

    CSU
13. L

    WMU

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Nevada'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+0.57
• Possession & field position+0.07
• Timeouts+0.01
• Other−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.35

Game by game

• CALW 22-17 at CAL38% → 97%Before kickoff −12 · On the field +59: Scoreboard +55, Clock +3
• IDSTW 49-10 vs IDST98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +4
• KSUL 17-38 at KSU55% → 0%Before kickoff +5 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −49, Possession & field position +2
• BOISW 41-31 at BOIS42% → 97%Before kickoff −8 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +52, Clock +3
• NMSUW 55-28 vs NMSU95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +8
• HAWW 34-17 vs HAW86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +13: Scoreboard +17, Timeouts +1
• FRESL 32-34 at FRES39% → 22%Before kickoff −11 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −17, Possession & field position +2
• UNLVW 51-20 vs UNLV91% → 100%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +9: Scoreboard +12
• SJSUW 27-24 vs SJSU81% → 89%Before kickoff +31 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +17, Timeouts +2
• SDSUL 21-23 at SDSU45% → 28%Before kickoff −5 · On the field −16: Scoreboard −7, Timeouts −1
• AFL 39-41 vs AF50% → 45%Before kickoff 0 · On the field −4: Scoreboard −13, Clock −3
• CSUW 52-10 at CSU62% → 100%Before kickoff +12 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +43, Clock +1
• WMUL 24-52 vs WMU69% → 0%Before kickoff +19 · On the field −69: Scoreboard −64, Clock −2

Points of win probability, from Nevada's side.

Closest call

USU 37-38 NEV (2016) - Nevada dropped to a 7.5% win probability before pulling it out.