Sacramento State

Profile vs. FBS, 2026

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−0.103rd
  Defense+0.1529th
• 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.
  Offense39.7%25th
  Defense38.4%69th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.001st
  Defense+1.434th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.143rd
  Defense+0.0745th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense−0.018th
  Defense+0.3516th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense46.4%31st
  Defense46.0%50th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense23.9%11th
  Defense21.3%93rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.301st
  Defense3.2121st
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense28.9%1st
  Defense15.4%21st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense17.2%16th
  Defense11.3%6th

Percentiles among the 138 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, 2026

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 Sacramento 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

1. L
   EMU
2. W
   MVSU
3. L
   FRES
4. L
   NDSU
5. L
   MASS
6. L
   BGSU

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

Players, 2026

1. Jackson SharmanQB79 plays · +0.078 pts/play · 127th of 192 QBs
   0.11WAR0.01 to 0.20
2. Onterrio Smith Jr.WR26 plays · +0.107 pts/play · 150th of 364 WRs
   0.05WAR0.03 to 0.08
3. Matt ColemanWR26 plays · +0.096 pts/play · 164th of 364 WRs
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.07
4. Carson ConklinQB42 plays · +0.035 pts/play · 183rd of 192 QBs
   0.03WAR−0.02 to 0.08
5. Jordan WilliamsTE14 plays · +0.086 pts/play · 60th of 164 TEs
   0.02WAR0.00 to 0.04

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 Sacramento 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

What it had and what it did, 2026

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  561561114th of 138Roster talent: 561, 114th of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  9090130th of 138Recruiting: 90, 130th of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  No data
• SP+ rating so far

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −24.7−24.7135th of 138SP+ rating so far: −24.7, 135th of 138 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 138 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion so far

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2026

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 Sacramento State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 1 clear-cut ones account for 0.01 of the 0.02 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 MASSQ2 14:48 4th & 2 at MASS 2, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
2. at FRESQ1 7:36 4th & 1 at SAC 40, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
3. at BGSUQ3 3:51 4th & 3 at SAC 44, down 21Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
4. vs NDSUQ1 5:36 4th & 3 at SAC 47, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
5. vs MVSUQ2 2:58 4th & 3 at MVSU 3, up 24Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
6. vs NDSUQ3 10:51 4th & 7 at NDSU 43, down 25Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
7. at FRESQ4 13:02 4th & 9 at FRES 21, down 43Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts
8. vs MVSUQ1 4:59 4th & 2 at SAC 46, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

124th of 138 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   EMU
2. W

   MVSU
3. L

   FRES
4. L

   NDSU
5. L

   MASS
6. L

   BGSU

What moved it, 2026

Every game starts at Sacramento 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−1.19
• Clock−0.01
• Timeouts−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.20

Game by game

• EMUL 17-28 at EMU26% → 1%Before kickoff −24 · On the field −25: Scoreboard −28, Timeouts −1
• MVSUW 52-0 vs MVSU99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• FRESL 3-49 at FRES12% → 0%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −12: Scoreboard −14
• NDSUL 10-31 vs NDSU6% → 0%Before kickoff −44 · On the field −5: Scoreboard −11
• MASSL 6-35 vs MASS36% → 0%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −36: Scoreboard −40
• BGSUL 10-38 at BGSU25% → 0%Before kickoff −25 · On the field −25: Scoreboard −27

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

Closest call

SAC 30-23 STAN (2023) - Sacramento State dropped to a 19.3% win probability before pulling it out.