Northwestern

Profile vs. FBS, 2018

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−0.028th
  Defense+0.0181st
• 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.
  Offense39.5%17th
  Defense42.0%54th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1836th
  Defense+1.0397th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.0314th
  Defense−0.1698th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense0.0013th
  Defense+0.1744th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense45.4%26th
  Defense46.8%53rd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.5%7th
  Defense31.5%62nd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.5212th
  Defense2.4494th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense23.2%12th
  Defense22.8%81st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.7%56th
  Defense16.4%55th

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, 2018

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 Northwestern 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
   PUR
2. L
   DUKE
3. L
   AKR
4. L
   MICH
5. W
   MSU
6. W
   NEB
7. W
   RUTG
8. W
   WIS
9. L
   ND
10. W
    IOWA
11. W
    MINN
12. W
    ILL
13. L
    OSU
14. W
    UTAH

Bars above the line: better than expected for Northwestern.

Players, 2018

1. Clayton ThorsonQB561 plays · +0.199 pts/play · 20th of 225 QBs
   2.09WAR1.18 to 3.02
2. Isaiah BowserRB198 plays · +0.173 pts/play · 30th of 351 RBs
   0.64WAR0.50 to 0.78
3. Jeremy LarkinRB97 plays · +0.146 pts/play · 164th of 351 RBs
   0.26WAR0.19 to 0.33
4. Flynn NagelWR96 plays · +0.144 pts/play · 21st of 434 WRs
   0.26WAR0.12 to 0.38
5. Cameron Green?76 plays · +0.107 pts/play
   0.15WAR0.07 to 0.24
6. Bennett SkowronekWR62 plays · +0.128 pts/play · 100th of 434 WRs
   0.15WAR0.06 to 0.23
7. Jake CollinsP75 plays · +0.081 pts/play · 18th of 91 punters
   0.11WAR0.02 to 0.21
8. Riley LeesWR40 plays · +0.092 pts/play · 265th of 434 WRs
   0.07WAR0.03 to 0.11

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 Northwestern'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, 2018

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  60960944th of 130Roster talent: 609, 44th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  17817853rd of 130Recruiting: 178, 53rd of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  62%62%71st of 129Returning production: 62%, 71st of 129 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +1.9+1.968th of 130SP+ rating: +1.9, 68th 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, 2018

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 Northwestern'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 0.17 of the 0.26 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 MSUQ4 4:08 4th & 8 at MSU 31, up 3Punted; the numbers favored a field goal−5.2 pts
2. at PURQ3 10:31 4th & 1 at NU 29, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.1 pts
3. at RUTGQ3 5:13 4th & 2 at RUTG 4, down 8Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.7 pts
4. at OSUQ4 10:34 4th & 4 at OSU 4, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
5. vs MICHQ2 2:02 4th & 1 at NU 14, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
6. at PURQ2 9:33 4th & 1 at NU 45, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
7. at UTAHQ2 8:42 4th & 3 at UTAH 3, down 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
8. vs NEBQ4 5:12 4th & 10 at NU 25, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−1.0 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2018

4th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   PUR
2. L

   DUKE
3. L

   AKR
4. L

   MICH
5. W

   MSU
6. W

   NEB
7. W

   RUTG
8. W

   WIS
9. L

   ND
10. W

    IOWA
11. W

    MINN
12. W

    ILL
13. L

    OSU
14. W

    UTAH

What moved it, 2018

Every game starts at Northwestern'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+2.32
• Possession & field position+0.03
• Clock+0.16
• Timeouts−0.18
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.39

Game by game

• PURW 31-27 at PUR43% → 96%Before kickoff −7 · On the field +53: Scoreboard +52, Clock +3
• DUKEL 7-21 vs DUKE55% → 1%Before kickoff +5 · On the field −53: Scoreboard −54, Clock −2
• AKRL 34-39 vs AKR92% → 17%Before kickoff +42 · On the field −75: Scoreboard −38, Clock −3
• MICHL 17-20 vs MICH15% → 22%Before kickoff −35 · On the field +7: Scoreboard −24, Clock −2
• MSUW 29-19 at MSU20% → 95%Before kickoff −30 · On the field +75: Scoreboard +56, Clock +4
• NEBW 34-31 vs NEB59% → 79%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +21: Scoreboard +34, Timeouts −23
• RUTGW 18-15 at RUTG91% → 94%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +22, Clock +2
• WISW 31-17 vs WIS36% → 98%Before kickoff −14 · On the field +63: Scoreboard +46, Timeouts +2
• NDL 21-31 vs ND21% → 4%Before kickoff −29 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −32, Clock −2
• IOWAW 14-10 at IOWA21% → 94%Before kickoff −29 · On the field +73: Scoreboard +55, Clock +4
• MINNW 24-14 at MINN41% → 97%Before kickoff −9 · On the field +56: Scoreboard +53, Clock +3
• ILLW 24-16 vs ILL85% → 96%Before kickoff +35 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +19, Timeouts +1
• OSUL 24-45 at OSU11% → 0%Before kickoff −39 · On the field −10: Scoreboard −15
• UTAHW 31-20 at UTAH30% → 97%Before kickoff −20 · On the field +67: Scoreboard +57, Clock +3

Points of win probability, from Northwestern's side.

Closest call

MINN 34-37 NU (2023) - Northwestern dropped to a 3.2% win probability before pulling it out.