Try the model

Oregon State

Beavers · Pac-12 · FBS
5-72014 · 2-7 in conference
SP+
+3.2 (#62)
FPI
+3.2 (#61)
SRS
−1.6 (#69)

Next game

WSU
vs Washington State
Sat, Oct 17 · 6:00 PM EDT
Projected score
ORST32
WSU17
Win chance
82%
ORST 82%WSU 18%
Market: ORST favored by 18.3 · Points model v7, built without betting lines. A model's view, not betting advice.Full projection →

Advanced stats

CollegeFootballData's play-by-play measures of how efficient and explosive a team was, placed against every other FBS team. How it works →

Profile vs. FBS, 2014
Offense
EPAEPA per play: +0.12, 35th percentile among FBSSuccessSuccess rate: 42.7%, 50th percentile among FBSExplosiveExplosiveness: +1.18, 47th percentile among FBSRush EPARushing EPA: +0.06, 31st percentile among FBSPass EPAPassing EPA: +0.17, 35th percentile among FBSStd downsStandard downs: 47.7%, 51st percentile among FBSPass downsPassing downs: 32.0%, 33rd percentile among FBSLine ydsLine yards: 2.67, 28th percentile among FBSStuffsStuff rate: 20.2%, 40th percentile among FBSHavocHavoc: 1.4%, 90th percentile among FBS
Defense
EPAEPA per play: +0.21, 18th percentile among FBSSuccessSuccess rate: 43.1%, 44th percentile among FBSExplosiveExplosiveness: +1.27, 21st percentile among FBSRush EPARushing EPA: +0.27, 3rd percentile among FBSPass EPAPassing EPA: +0.19, 54th percentile among FBSStd downsStandard downs: 47.7%, 46th percentile among FBSPass downsPassing downs: 33.5%, 44th percentile among FBSLine ydsLine yards: 3.17, 18th percentile among FBSStuffsStuff rate: 18.8%, 39th percentile among FBSHavocHavoc: 2.2%, 63rd percentile among FBS

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.
  • 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.
  • Explosiveness
    Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  • Rushing EPA
    EPA per designed run.
  • Passing EPA
    EPA per pass play.
  • Standard downs
    Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  • Passing downs
    Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  • Line yards
    Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  • Stuff rate
    Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  • Havoc
    Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.

Percentiles among the 128 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.

Expected points

YardLine's expected-points model values every snap by what a drive from that spot is worth on average, so a drive can be judged against where it started. How it works →

Drives vs. expectation, 2014
Per drive

Points over expected per drive, from where each drive started.

Offense−0.1277th of 128
Defense+0.32allowed95th of 128
Adjusted for opponents

Per drive against an average FBS opponent, neutral field.

Offense−0.0466th of 128
Defense+0.25allowed85th of 128
Finishing

Points over expected per trip inside the opponent's 40.

Offense−0.553.4 pts/trip90th of 128
Defense+0.144.0 pts/trip allowed90th of 128
Field position

Average expected points where drives started.

Offense1.1464th of 128
Defense1.10opponents58th of 128

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 Oregon State 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
Offense: points over expected per drive
Defense: points kept off the board per drive

Bars above the line: better than expected for Oregon State.

Players

YardLine's player model credits every play's value to the players involved, so each one's season can be measured in wins above a typical backup. How it works →

Players, 2014
The quarterback
Sean Mannion: 1.21 WAR (90% interval 0.61 to 1.86)
88th of 199 FBS QBs in WAR · 134th of 154 in value per play

Quarterback is the most valuable starting slot by a wide margin: the gap between a top-decile and a median FBS quarterback is about twice the gap at any other position.

  1. Sean MannionQB361 plays · +0.178 pts/play · 88th of 199 QBs1.21WAR0.61 to 1.86
  2. Terron WardRB137 plays · +0.128 pts/play · 54th of 350 RBs0.33WAR0.22 to 0.43
  3. Storm WoodsRB114 plays · +0.118 pts/play · 90th of 350 RBs0.25WAR0.16 to 0.34
  4. Jordan VillaminWR40 plays · +0.206 pts/play · 115th of 469 WRs0.15WAR0.08 to 0.22
  5. Victor Bolden Jr.WR89 plays · +0.061 pts/play · 200th of 469 WRs0.10WAR0.00 to 0.20
  6. Keith KostolP51 plays · +0.044 pts/play · 68th of 94 punters0.04WAR−0.03 to 0.11
  7. Garrett OwensPK5 plays · +0.436 pts/play · 102nd of 114 kickers0.04WAR0.03 to 0.05
  8. Richard MullaneyWR25 plays · +0.082 pts/play · 375th of 469 WRs0.04WAR0.01 to 0.06
Every player (13)
  1. Chris BrownRB9 plays · +0.031 pts/play · 300th of 350 RBs0.01WAR−0.01 to 0.02
  2. Tyler AndersonFB7 plays · +0.039 pts/play · 300th of 350 RBs0.01WAR0.00 to 0.01
  3. Ricky OrtizTE12 plays · −0.012 pts/play · 31st of 212 TEs0.00WAR−0.02 to 0.01
  4. Caleb SmithTE20 plays · −0.047 pts/play · 178th of 212 TEs−0.02WAR−0.05 to 0.02
  5. Connor HamlettTE36 plays · −0.035 pts/play · 195th of 212 TEs−0.02WAR−0.09 to 0.03
By position group, against FBS
Quarterback
1.21WAR
103rd of 127
Running backs
0.59WAR
42nd of 127
Receivers
0.29WAR
85th of 127
Tight ends
−0.04WAR
120th of 127
Kicker
0.04WAR
97th of 127
Punter
0.04WAR
68th of 127
Line and defense, points per game vs the median FBS unit
Offensive line
+1.57/game
20th of 127
Front seven
−1.18/game
88th of 127
Secondary
+0.21/game
55th of 127

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 Oregon State'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

Fourth downs

YardLine's fourth-down model values going for it, kicking and punting on every real fourth down, so each call can be checked against the numbers. How it works →

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2014
Made the numbers' call

Calls that matched the option with the best modeled win probability.

74 of 10471%73rd of 128
FBS median 72%
Win probability given up

Summed over every call that differed, in points of win probability.

1.6 ptsper game90th of 128
0.20 expected wins over 12 games, FBS median 1.4 pts
When going was clearly right

Went for it when going beat every other option by a point or more.

5 of 863%
FBS teams went 56%

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 Oregon State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 3 clear-cut ones account for 0.12 of the 0.20 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 ASUQ4 2:52 4th & 1 at ASU 45, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−9.8 pts
  2. vs UTAHQ4 7:41 4th & 7 at UTAH 43, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
  3. vs UTAHQ2 14:09 4th & 1 at ORST 28, down 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
  4. vs CALQ3 14:54 4th & 3 at ORST 48, down 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
  5. vs ASUQ2 10:57 4th & 6 at ASU 35, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
  6. at HAWQ2 6:12 4th & 3 at HAW 10, up 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
  7. vs OREQ2 13:01 4th & 1 at ORST 32, down 16Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
  8. vs OREQ1 3:18 4th & 1 at ORST 46, down 9Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
Every call this season (104)
Wk 1 · vs PRST · W 29-147 of 11 agreed
  1. Q1 15:004th & 11 at ORST 34, tied · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q1 8:044th & 8 at PRST 8, tied · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  3. Q1 1:124th & 5 at PRST 7, up 3 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  4. Q2 5:314th & 13 at ORST 34, down 1 · PuntedAgreed
  5. Q3 10:584th & 9 at PRST 9, down 1 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  6. Q3 8:534th & 30 at PRST 38, up 2 · PuntedAgreed
  7. Q3 8:534th & 10 at PRST 35, up 2 · Went for itClose call
  8. Q3 3:324th & 8 at PRST 14, up 9 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  9. Q3 2:074th & 1 at ORST 24, up 12 · PuntedClose call
  10. Q4 11:444th & 3 at PRST 8, up 12 · Kicked a field goalClose call
  11. Q4 5:284th & 4 at PRST 6, up 12 · Kicked a field goalClose call
Wk 2 · at HAW · W 38-304 of 8 agreed
  1. Q1 4:074th & 17 at HAW 42, up 14 · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q2 6:124th & 3 at HAW 10, up 14 · Kicked a field goalClose call
  3. Q2 0:404th & 10 at HAW 45, up 24 · PuntedClose call
  4. Q3 9:284th & 1 at ORST 45, up 31 · PuntedClose call
  5. Q3 5:224th & 2 at ORST 30, up 31 · PuntedClose call
  6. Q4 14:554th & 10 at ORST 25, up 24 · PuntedAgreed
  7. Q4 10:554th & 6 at ORST 29, up 15 · PuntedAgreed
  8. Q4 2:474th & 13 at ORST 43, up 15 · PuntedAgreed
Wk 4 · vs SDSU · W 28-72 of 4 agreed
  1. Q1 11:274th & 3 at ORST 43, down 7 · PuntedClose call
  2. Q2 11:494th & 3 at ORST 37, tied · PuntedClose call
  3. Q4 13:074th & 6 at ORST 25, up 21 · PuntedAgreed
  4. Q4 6:074th & 1 at SDSU 25, up 21 · Went for itAgreed
Wk 5 · at USC · L 10-359 of 9 agreed
  1. Q1 8:454th & 12 at ORST 49, tied · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q1 1:094th & 26 at ORST 34, tied · PuntedAgreed
  3. Q2 11:144th & 15 at USC 21, tied · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  4. Q3 12:184th & 9 at USC 46, down 11 · PuntedAgreed
  5. Q3 10:454th & 10 at ORST 44, down 11 · PuntedAgreed
  6. Q3 3:554th & 4 at ORST 26, down 11 · PuntedAgreed
  7. Q4 12:244th & 17 at ORST 21, down 18 · PuntedAgreed
  8. Q4 9:004th & 9 at ORST 38, down 18 · PuntedAgreed
  9. Q4 4:274th & 10 at ORST 39, down 25 · PuntedAgreed
Wk 6 · at COLO · W 36-315 of 7 agreed
  1. Q1 13:464th & 5 at ORST 42, tied · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q1 0:174th & 2 at COLO 21, up 7 · Kicked a field goalClose call
  3. Q2 10:484th & 4 at ORST 37, up 3 · PuntedClose call
  4. Q2 2:544th & 5 at COLO 16, up 3 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  5. Q3 15:004th & 10 at COLO 40, down 1 · PuntedAgreed
  6. Q3 6:474th & 19 at COLO 29, down 1 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  7. Q4 2:194th & 6 at ORST 14, up 5 · PuntedAgreed
Wk 8 · vs UTAH · L 23-297 of 10 agreed
  1. Q1 5:024th & 22 at ORST 40, down 3 · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q2 14:094th & 1 at ORST 28, down 6 · Punted−1.1 pts
  3. Q2 7:574th & 1 at ORST 39, down 3 · Went for itAgreed
  4. Q2 1:184th & 10 at ORST 31, down 3 · PuntedAgreed
  5. Q3 12:414th & 4 at ORST 40, tied · PuntedClose call
  6. Q3 8:424th & 19 at ORST 8, down 3 · PuntedAgreed
  7. Q3 6:224th & 9 at ORST 37, down 3 · PuntedAgreed
  8. Q3 1:574th & 4 at UTAH 34, down 3 · Went for itAgreed
  9. Q4 7:414th & 7 at UTAH 43, up 4 · Punted−1.1 pts
  10. Q4 0:004th & 11 at UTAH 32, down 3 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
Wk 9 · at STAN · L 14-3810 of 11 agreed
  1. Q1 11:214th & 20 at ORST 15, down 7 · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q1 3:054th & 3 at ORST 47, down 7 · PuntedClose call
  3. Q2 14:174th & 10 at ORST 25, down 7 · PuntedAgreed
  4. Q2 10:254th & 1 at ORST 34, down 14 · Went for itAgreed
  5. Q2 9:104th & 10 at ORST 35, down 14 · PuntedAgreed
  6. Q2 5:104th & 6 at STAN 40, down 14 · Went for itAgreed
  7. Q2 1:254th & 13 at ORST 27, down 21 · PuntedAgreed
  8. Q3 9:144th & 5 at ORST 39, down 28 · PuntedAgreed
  9. Q3 4:534th & 1 at STAN 5, down 28 · Went for itAgreed
  10. Q3 0:374th & 22 at ORST 37, down 28 · PuntedAgreed
  11. Q4 8:544th & 13 at ORST 42, down 31 · PuntedAgreed
Wk 10 · vs CAL · L 31-454 of 8 agreed
  1. Q1 12:044th & 4 at ORST 38, tied · PuntedClose call
  2. Q1 8:134th & 2 at ORST 28, tied · PuntedClose call
  3. Q1 5:204th & 3 at ORST 49, tied · PuntedClose call
  4. Q2 6:444th & 8 at CAL 13, down 3 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  5. Q2 2:424th & 6 at ORST 32, down 7 · PuntedAgreed
  6. Q3 14:544th & 3 at ORST 48, down 10 · PuntedClose call
  7. Q4 6:074th & 2 at CAL 49, down 6 · Went for itAgreed
  8. Q4 0:404th & 4 at ORST 43, down 14 · Went for itAgreed
Wk 11 · vs WSU · L 32-397 of 8 agreed
  1. Q1 5:504th & 5 at WSU 7, up 7 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  2. Q1 1:134th & 5 at ORST 19, up 3 · PuntedAgreed
  3. Q2 12:134th & 6 at ORST 31, down 4 · PuntedAgreed
  4. Q2 1:524th & 15 at WSU 20, down 4 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  5. Q2 0:044th & 5 at WSU 27, down 8 · Kicked a field goalClose call
  6. Q3 5:104th & 4 at ORST 36, down 2 · PuntedAgreed
  7. Q4 14:154th & 13 at WSU 29, down 2 · Kicked a field goalAgreed
  8. Q4 9:054th & 15 at ORST 24, down 7 · PuntedAgreed
Wk 12 · vs ASU · W 35-276 of 8 agreed
  1. Q1 12:464th & 9 at ORST 30, tied · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q2 12:564th & 1 at ASU 41, up 4 · Went for itAgreed
  3. Q2 10:574th & 6 at ASU 35, up 4 · PuntedClose call
  4. Q2 5:504th & 5 at ORST 34, down 10 · PuntedAgreed
  5. Q2 0:384th & 12 at ORST 18, down 10 · PuntedAgreed
  6. Q3 12:194th & 1 at ASU 19, down 10 · Went for itAgreed
  7. Q4 14:494th & 20 at ORST 28, down 3 · PuntedAgreed
  8. Q4 2:524th & 1 at ASU 45, up 1 · Punted−9.8 pts
Wk 13 · at WASH · L 13-376 of 9 agreed
  1. Q1 15:004th & 7 at ORST 20, tied · PuntedAgreed
  2. Q1 6:324th & 9 at WASH 34, down 7 · PuntedClose call
  3. Q1 4:384th & 3 at WASH 17, down 14 · Went for itAgreed
  4. Q2 10:324th & 9 at ORST 28, down 17 · PuntedAgreed
  5. Q2 0:434th & 1 at ORST 42, down 10 · PuntedClose call
  6. Q3 10:214th & 6 at ORST 35, down 13 · PuntedAgreed
  7. Q3 4:464th & 4 at ORST 29, down 16 · PuntedClose call
  8. Q4 13:074th & 17 at ORST 40, down 17 · PuntedAgreed
  9. Q4 7:094th & 5 at WASH 5, down 24 · Went for itAgreed
Wk 14 · vs ORE · L 19-477 of 11 agreed
  1. Q1 9:244th & 1 at ORE 30, down 6 · Went for itAgreed
  2. Q1 3:184th & 1 at ORST 46, down 9 · PuntedClose call
  3. Q2 13:014th & 1 at ORST 32, down 16 · PuntedClose call
  4. Q2 11:524th & 10 at ORST 28, down 23 · PuntedAgreed
  5. Q2 6:304th & 1 at ORE 45, down 30 · Went for itAgreed
  6. Q2 0:144th & 1 at ORE 20, down 30 · Went for itClose call
  7. Q3 12:054th & 16 at ORST 30, down 27 · PuntedAgreed
  8. Q3 7:054th & 5 at ORE 30, down 30 · Went for itAgreed
  9. Q4 10:304th & 11 at ORST 25, down 23 · PuntedAgreed
  10. Q4 5:304th & 7 at ORST 27, down 30 · PuntedAgreed
  11. Q4 0:274th & 28 at ORE 35, down 28 · Went for itClose call
After touchdowns: kick or go for two?
Made the numbers' call

Tries that matched the option with the better modeled win probability.

32 of 3494%
FBS median 93%
Win probability given up

Summed over every try that differed, in points of win probability.

0.4 ptsthis season
FBS median 0.5 pts
When two was clearly right

Went for two when it beat kicking by a point or more.

-
Went for two 2 times, converted 0
Costliest tries against the numbers
  1. vs WSUQ3 6:41 Touchdown, down 2 before the tryWent for two; the numbers favored kicking (close call)−0.3 pts
  2. at WASHQ3 0:54 Touchdown, down 10 before the tryWent for two; the numbers favored kicking (close call)−0.1 pts

Win probability

YardLine's model estimates each team's chance of winning before kickoff and again after every play, from the score, clock, down, distance and field position. How it works →

Record vs. expectation, 2014
5-7vs. 6.2 expected−1.2 wins

107th of 128 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

  1. W
  2. W
  3. W
  4. L
  5. W
  6. L
  7. L
  8. L
  9. L
  10. W
  11. L
  12. L
What moved it, 2014
+0.2 wins
before kickoff: being favored, vs. coin flips
−1.2 wins
on the field, after the opening snap

Every game starts at Oregon State'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−1.05
  • Possession & field position−0.02
  • Clock+0.14
  • Timeouts−0.16
  • Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.10
Game by game

Points of win probability, from Oregon State's side.

Closest call

ORST 41-34 COLO (2018) - Oregon State dropped to a 0.7% win probability before pulling it out.

Season arc, 2014

Every completed game this season, in order - each tile is Oregon State's own win-probability curve.

Biggest swings of 2014

The largest single-play change in Oregon State's win probability this season - one snap that moved the outcome the most.

Stolen wins

Oregon State's own lowest win probability at any point in a game it went on to win, across the whole archive - the deepest holes it climbed out of.

Let it slip

Oregon State's own highest win probability at any point in a game it went on to lose, across the whole archive - the biggest leads it didn't hold.

Stock & rivalries

Stock

Oregon State's leaguewide Elo rating, tracked like a stock price - built from game results and margins, not the model's own win-probability predictions.

View full history ›
$103.89+22.0% over the past year
Series & rivalries

Oregon State's most-played opponents across the whole archive - open one for the full head-to-head history.

YardLine · model v10Model estimate - not betting advice · Data provided by CollegeFootballData.com