San José State

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+0.0818th
  Defense+0.0974th
• 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.
  Offense39.9%21st
  Defense41.6%57th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2954th
  Defense+1.1297th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.019th
  Defense+0.0281st
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1733rd
  Defense+0.1962nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense44.6%17th
  Defense47.9%47th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense30.5%46th
  Defense28.0%75th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.7616th
  Defense3.0645th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense24.6%1st
  Defense15.7%36th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense19.0%12th
  Defense17.7%69th

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 San José 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
   SUU
2. L
   USC
3. W
   HAW
4. L
   WMU
5. W
   NMSU
6. L
   CSU
7. L
   SDSU
8. W
   UNLV
9. W
   WYO
10. L
    NEV
11. L
    USU
12. L
    FRES

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

Players, 2021

1. Nick StarkelQB192 plays · +0.116 pts/play · 144th of 219 QBs
   0.42WAR0.05 to 0.83
2. Tyler NevensRB138 plays · +0.111 pts/play · 162nd of 387 RBs
   0.29WAR0.12 to 0.47
3. Kairee RobinsonRB73 plays · +0.121 pts/play · 236th of 387 RBs
   0.16WAR0.10 to 0.23
4. Will HartP49 plays · +0.122 pts/play · 53rd of 101 punters
   0.11WAR0.03 to 0.20
5. Matthew MercurioPK17 plays · +0.315 pts/play · 32nd of 128 kickers
   0.10WAR0.06 to 0.14
6. Jermaine BraddockWR27 plays · +0.194 pts/play · 242nd of 474 WRs
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.13
7. Derrick Deese Jr.TE45 plays · +0.105 pts/play · 2nd of 234 TEs
   0.09WAR0.01 to 0.16
8. Isaiah HamiltonWR30 plays · +0.145 pts/play · 282nd of 474 WRs
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.12

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 José 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, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  411411103rd of 130Roster talent: 411, 103rd of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  130130111th of 130Recruiting: 130, 111th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  74%74%64th of 128Returning production: 74%, 64th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −1.9−1.985th of 130SP+ rating: −1.9, 85th 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 San José State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 5 clear-cut ones account for 0.11 of the 0.16 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 HAWQ4 1:19 4th & 3 at HAW 9, up 1Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.8 pts
2. vs USUQ4 12:31 4th & 1 at SJSU 29, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.4 pts
3. at HAWQ4 12:14 4th & 6 at HAW 40, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.3 pts
4. vs FRESQ3 7:50 4th & 1 at midfield, down 17Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
5. vs USUQ3 5:11 4th & 1 at SJSU 43, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
6. at WMUQ2 4:04 4th & 3 at SJSU 46, down 17Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
7. vs WYOQ3 8:29 4th & 4 at WYO 27, up 9Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
8. at NEVQ2 7:24 4th & 4 at NEV 28, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

100th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   SUU
2. L

   USC
3. W

   HAW
4. L

   WMU
5. W

   NMSU
6. L

   CSU
7. L

   SDSU
8. W

   UNLV
9. W

   WYO
10. L

    NEV
11. L

    USU
12. L

    FRES

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at San José 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−1.25
• Possession & field position−0.04
• Clock−0.02
• Timeouts−0.30
• Other−0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.03

Game by game

• SUUW 45-14 vs SUU96% → 100%Before kickoff +46 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +6
• USCL 7-30 at USC13% → 1%Before kickoff −37 · On the field −13: Scoreboard −18
• HAWW 17-13 at HAW74% → 77%Before kickoff +24 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +32, Clock +3
• WMUL 3-23 at WMU41% → 0%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −38, Timeouts −1
• NMSUW 37-31 vs NMSU92% → 97%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +14, Timeouts +1
• CSUL 14-32 at CSU41% → 2%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −39: Scoreboard −38, Possession & field position +2
• SDSUL 13-19 vs SDSU24% → 71%Before kickoff −26 · On the field +47: Scoreboard +41, Timeouts −28
• UNLVW 27-20 at UNLV66% → 4%Before kickoff +16 · On the field −62: Scoreboard −41, Other −1
• WYOW 27-21 vs WYO56% → 93%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +37: Scoreboard +29, Possession & field position +3
• NEVL 24-27 at NEV19% → 11%Before kickoff −31 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −17, Timeouts −2
• USUL 17-48 vs USU66% → 0%Before kickoff +16 · On the field −65: Scoreboard −62, Clock −3
• FRESL 9-40 vs FRES28% → 0%Before kickoff −22 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −33, Clock −1

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

Closest call

SJSU 38-21 UNM (2020) - San José State dropped to a 0.9% win probability before pulling it out.