Northern Illinois

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+0.0217th
  Defense+0.2121st
• 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.
  Offense40.7%35th
  Defense46.9%20th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1819th
  Defense+1.2452nd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.097th
  Defense+0.0652nd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1240th
  Defense+0.407th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense46.5%43rd
  Defense50.6%28th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense28.7%29th
  Defense38.2%6th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.6929th
  Defense2.7467th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense23.0%24th
  Defense19.5%45th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.7%22nd
  Defense16.7%52nd

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 Northern Illinois 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
   BUF
2. L
   CMU
3. L
   BALL
4. L
   WMU
5. L
   TOL
6. L
   EMU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Northern Illinois.

Players, 2020

1. Ross BowersQB194 plays · +0.093 pts/play · 95th of 212 QBs
   0.34WAR−0.05 to 0.71
2. Harrison WayleeRB97 plays · +0.153 pts/play · 114th of 338 RBs
   0.28WAR0.21 to 0.35
3. Tyrice RichieWR66 plays · +0.143 pts/play · 32nd of 409 WRs
   0.18WAR0.11 to 0.25
4. Erin CollinsRB48 plays · +0.165 pts/play · 216th of 338 RBs
   0.15WAR0.10 to 0.19
5. Cole TuckerWR26 plays · +0.147 pts/play · 194th of 409 WRs
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.10
6. John RichardsonPK7 plays · +0.214 pts/play · 63rd of 97 kickers
   0.03WAR0.02 to 0.04
7. Matt FerenceP30 plays · +0.039 pts/play · 44th of 77 punters
   0.02WAR−0.01 to 0.05
8. Daniel CrawfordTE22 plays · +0.035 pts/play · 60th of 191 TEs
   0.01WAR−0.02 to 0.05

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 Northern Illinois'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.
  263263116th of 127Roster talent: 263, 116th of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  13713794th of 127Recruiting: 137, 94th of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  60%60%73rd of 127Returning production: 60%, 73rd of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −18.4−18.4121st of 127SP+ rating: −18.4, 121st 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 Northern Illinois'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 0.03 of the 0.06 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 WMUQ3 5:35 4th & 1 at NIU 34, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.2 pts
2. at WMUQ4 10:28 4th & 4 at WMU 22, up 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
3. vs CMUQ3 2:29 4th & 8 at NIU 46, down 19Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.8 pts
4. at WMUQ4 9:12 4th & 4 at NIU 37, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
5. vs CMUQ2 0:02 4th & 3 at NIU 45, down 9Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
6. vs TOLQ4 4:41 4th & 7 at NIU 20, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.3 pts
7. at WMUQ2 6:08 4th & 8 at WMU 41, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
8. vs BUFQ4 12:14 4th & 10 at BUF 33, down 26Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.2 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

112th of 127 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   BUF
2. L

   CMU
3. L

   BALL
4. L

   WMU
5. L

   TOL
6. L

   EMU

What moved it, 2020

Every game starts at Northern Illinois'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−1.61
• Possession & field position−0.02
• Clock−0.04
• Timeouts−0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.49

Game by game

• BUFL 30-49 vs BUF16% → 1%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −15: Scoreboard −24, Clock −1
• CMUL 10-40 vs CMU33% → 0%Before kickoff −17 · On the field −33: Scoreboard −38, Clock −1
• BALLL 25-31 at BALL16% → 3%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −13: Scoreboard −21, Timeouts −1
• WMUL 27-30 at WMU13% → 7%Before kickoff −37 · On the field −6: Scoreboard −17, Timeouts −1
• TOLL 24-41 vs TOL25% → 1%Before kickoff −25 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −33, Clock −2
• EMUL 33-41 at EMU36% → 6%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −30: Scoreboard −28, Possession & field position −2

Points of win probability, from Northern Illinois's side.

Closest call

NIU 55-14 AKR (2023) - Northern Illinois dropped to a 4.2% win probability before pulling it out.