San Diego State

Profile vs. FBS, 2017

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+0.2085th
  Defense0.0079th
• 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.
  Offense43.5%58th
  Defense40.1%70th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2983rd
  Defense+1.0987th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1988th
  Defense0.0068th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2368th
  Defense+0.0380th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.5%61st
  Defense45.6%61st
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense33.8%51st
  Defense27.8%89th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.9969th
  Defense2.9244th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense20.5%41st
  Defense16.1%16th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.4%77th
  Defense15.3%41st

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, 2017

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 San Diego 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. W
   UCD
2. W
   ASU
3. W
   STAN
4. W
   AF
5. W
   NIU
6. W
   UNLV
7. L
   BOIS
8. L
   FRES
9. W
   HAW
10. W
    SJSU
11. W
    NEV
12. W
    UNM
13. L
    ARMY

Bars above the line: better than expected for San Diego State.

Players, 2017

1. Rashaad PennyRB283 plays · +0.181 pts/play · 2nd of 352 RBs
   0.96WAR0.66 to 1.25
2. Christian ChapmanQB273 plays · +0.158 pts/play · 97th of 226 QBs
   0.81WAR0.31 to 1.20
3. Juwan WashingtonRB102 plays · +0.128 pts/play · 133rd of 352 RBs
   0.24WAR0.16 to 0.33
4. Mikah HolderWR56 plays · +0.150 pts/play · 75th of 426 WRs
   0.16WAR0.10 to 0.21
5. John Baron IIPK13 plays · +0.554 pts/play · 31st of 110 kickers
   0.13WAR0.10 to 0.17
6. Kahale WarringTE16 plays · +0.053 pts/play · 44th of 199 TEs
   0.02WAR0.00 to 0.04
7. David WellsTE11 plays · +0.061 pts/play · 58th of 199 TEs
   0.01WAR0.00 to 0.03
8. Nick BawdenFB15 plays · +0.017 pts/play · 288th of 352 RBs
   0.00WAR−0.01 to 0.02

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 San Diego 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, 2017

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  41941982nd of 130Roster talent: 419, 82nd of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  15015074th of 130Recruiting: 150, 74th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  72%72%39th of 128Returning production: 72%, 39th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +4.5+4.554th of 128SP+ rating: +4.5, 54th of 128 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, 2017

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 San Diego 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 0.05 of the 0.11 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 NIUQ4 2:04 4th & 1 at SDSU 39, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
2. vs NIUQ4 14:15 4th & 3 at NIU 4, up 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.7 pts
3. vs NIUQ3 5:31 4th & 2 at SDSU 29, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
4. vs NIUQ4 9:29 4th & 2 at SDSU 14, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
5. at UNLVQ2 5:41 4th & 6 at UNLV 38, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
6. at HAWQ3 8:49 4th & 18 at HAW 34, up 14Punted; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.7 pts
7. vs FRESQ3 13:17 4th & 6 at FRES 42, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
8. vs NEVQ3 7:52 4th & 5 at NEV 40, up 11Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2017

31st of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   UCD
2. W

   ASU
3. W

   STAN
4. W

   AF
5. W

   NIU
6. W

   UNLV
7. L

   BOIS
8. L

   FRES
9. W

   HAW
10. W

    SJSU
11. W

    NEV
12. W

    UNM
13. L

    ARMY

What moved it, 2017

Every game starts at San Diego 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
• Possession & field position−0.05
• Clock+0.05
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.51

Game by game

• UCDW 38-17 vs UCD98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +4
• ASUW 30-20 at ASU40% → 97%Before kickoff −10 · On the field +57: Scoreboard +56, Clock +3
• STANW 20-17 vs STAN24% → 94%Before kickoff −26 · On the field +70: Scoreboard +41, Clock +1
• AFW 28-24 at AF55% → 93%Before kickoff +5 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +47, Clock +3
• NIUW 34-28 vs NIU77% → 95%Before kickoff +27 · On the field +18: Scoreboard +25, Timeouts +1
• UNLVW 41-10 at UNLV75% → 100%Before kickoff +25 · On the field +25: Scoreboard +31, Clock +1
• BOISL 14-31 vs BOIS66% → 2%Before kickoff +16 · On the field −64: Scoreboard −59, Possession & field position −1
• FRESL 3-27 vs FRES67% → 1%Before kickoff +17 · On the field −66: Scoreboard −63, Clock −1
• HAWW 28-7 at HAW72% → 99%Before kickoff +22 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +35, Clock +1
• SJSUW 52-7 at SJSU94% → 100%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +10
• NEVW 42-23 vs NEV89% → 99%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +15, Timeouts +1
• UNMW 35-10 vs UNM92% → 100%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +12
• ARMYL 35-42 at ARMY68% → 7%Before kickoff +18 · On the field −61: Scoreboard −33, Possession & field position −3

Points of win probability, from San Diego State's side.

Closest call

TOL 14-17 SDSU (2022) - San Diego State dropped to a 13.4% win probability before pulling it out.