Ohio

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+0.1549th
  Defense+0.2320th
• 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%61st
  Defense47.7%9th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.145th
  Defense+1.1691st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2282nd
  Defense+0.1923rd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1630th
  Defense+0.2828th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense51.7%78th
  Defense52.6%11th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense28.8%26th
  Defense33.2%29th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.4691st
  Defense3.3716th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.0%69th
  Defense13.7%20th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.5%55th
  Defense12.0%3rd

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 Ohio 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
   SYR
2. L
   DUQ
3. L
   UL
4. L
   NU
5. W
   AKR
6. L
   CMU
7. L
   BUF
8. L
   KENT
9. W
   M-OH
10. W
    EMU
11. L
    TOL
12. L
    BGSU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Ohio.

Players, 2021

1. Kurtis RourkeQB256 plays · +0.155 pts/play · 105th of 219 QBs
   0.74WAR0.21 to 1.23
2. Armani RogersQB118 plays · +0.307 pts/play · 109th of 219 QBs
   0.68WAR0.40 to 0.95
3. De'Montre TuggleRB114 plays · +0.202 pts/play · 88th of 387 RBs
   0.43WAR0.30 to 0.57
4. O'Shaan AllisonRB70 plays · +0.136 pts/play · 231st of 387 RBs
   0.18WAR0.13 to 0.22
5. Cameron OdomWR28 plays · +0.184 pts/play · 250th of 474 WRs
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.12
6. Isiah CoxWR36 plays · +0.130 pts/play · 264th of 474 WRs
   0.09WAR0.05 to 0.13
7. Stephen JohnsonPK16 plays · +0.242 pts/play · 69th of 128 kickers
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.11
8. Tyler WaltonWR24 plays · +0.154 pts/play · 325th of 474 WRs
   0.07WAR0.05 to 0.09

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 Ohio'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.
  332332117th of 130Roster talent: 332, 117th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  126126118th of 130Recruiting: 126, 118th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  93%93%18th of 128Returning production: 93%, 18th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −11.6−11.6108th of 130SP+ rating: −11.6, 108th 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 Ohio'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 0.15 of the 0.18 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 BUFQ4 6:19 4th & 1 at OHIO 31, up 2Punted; the numbers favored going for it−4.0 pts
2. vs TOLQ3 6:33 4th & 1 at TOL 14, down 5Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−3.6 pts
3. at BGSUQ3 5:51 4th & 8 at OHIO 34, tiedWent for it; the numbers favored punting−2.4 pts
4. at BGSUQ4 3:47 4th & 12 at BGSU 33, down 8Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.3 pts
5. at BGSUQ3 12:40 4th & 2 at OHIO 47, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
6. vs M-OHQ4 4:16 4th & 6 at M-OH 32, up 9Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
7. vs KENTQ3 1:12 4th & 3 at KENT 6, down 17Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
8. vs CMUQ1 0:26 4th & 2 at CMU 12, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

118th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   SYR
2. L

   DUQ
3. L

   UL
4. L

   NU
5. W

   AKR
6. L

   CMU
7. L

   BUF
8. L

   KENT
9. W

   M-OH
10. W

    EMU
11. L

    TOL
12. L

    BGSU

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Ohio'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−1.98
• Possession & field position+0.05
• Clock−0.05
• Timeouts−0.12
• Other+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.05

Game by game

• SYRL 9-29 vs SYR56% → 1%Before kickoff +6 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −55, Clock −2
• DUQL 26-28 vs DUQ97% → 13%Before kickoff +47 · On the field −84: Scoreboard −39, Possession & field position +3
• ULL 14-49 at UL13% → 0%Before kickoff −37 · On the field −13: Scoreboard −16
• NUL 6-35 at NU23% → 0%Before kickoff −27 · On the field −23: Scoreboard −25
• AKRW 34-17 at AKR77% → 100%Before kickoff +27 · On the field +23: Scoreboard +21, Timeouts +8
• CMUL 27-30 vs CMU38% → 2%Before kickoff −12 · On the field −36: Scoreboard −33, Timeouts −9
• BUFL 26-27 at BUF35% → 4%Before kickoff −15 · On the field −31: Scoreboard −29, Timeouts −2
• KENTL 27-34 vs KENT37% → 11%Before kickoff −13 · On the field −26: Scoreboard −36, Timeouts −7
• M-OHW 35-33 vs M-OH31% → 95%Before kickoff −19 · On the field +64: Scoreboard +42
• EMUW 34-26 at EMU34% → 98%Before kickoff −16 · On the field +64: Scoreboard +56, Clock +3
• TOLL 23-35 vs TOL32% → 1%Before kickoff −18 · On the field −30: Scoreboard −37, Clock −2
• BGSUL 10-21 at BGSU72% → 4%Before kickoff +22 · On the field −68: Scoreboard −45, Possession & field position +3

Points of win probability, from Ohio's side.

Closest call

OHIO 30-27 WYO (2022) - Ohio dropped to a 10.5% win probability before pulling it out.