San José State

Profile vs. FBS, 2022

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+0.1355th
  Defense+0.0671st
• 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.
  Offense45.0%69th
  Defense39.8%72nd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2238th
  Defense+1.2549th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1259th
  Defense+0.0750th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2038th
  Defense+0.2146th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.9%61st
  Defense44.3%78th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense35.7%85th
  Defense29.1%62nd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1662nd
  Defense2.9468th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense20.4%12th
  Defense19.1%69th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.7%18th
  Defense18.6%82nd

Percentiles among the 131 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, 2022

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
   PRST
2. L
   AUB
3. W
   WMU
4. W
   WYO
5. W
   UNLV
6. L
   FRES
7. W
   NEV
8. W
   CSU
9. L
   SDSU
10. L
    USU
11. W
    HAW
12. L
    EMU

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

Players, 2022

1. Chevan CordeiroQB452 plays · +0.227 pts/play · 27th of 234 QBs
   1.92WAR1.17 to 2.70
2. Elijah CooksWR69 plays · +0.260 pts/play · 7th of 455 WRs
   0.34WAR0.21 to 0.44
3. Kairee RobinsonRB151 plays · +0.111 pts/play · 89th of 384 RBs
   0.31WAR0.19 to 0.44
4. Justin LockhartWR34 plays · +0.226 pts/play · 129th of 455 WRs
   0.14WAR0.08 to 0.20
5. Jermaine BraddockWR23 plays · +0.213 pts/play · 227th of 455 WRs
   0.09WAR0.06 to 0.12
6. Dominick MazottiTE18 plays · +0.209 pts/play · 67th of 214 TEs
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.10
7. Sam OlsonTE15 plays · +0.148 pts/play · 112th of 214 TEs
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.06
8. Charles RossWR14 plays · +0.143 pts/play · 364th of 455 WRs
   0.04WAR0.01 to 0.06

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, 2022

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  418418104th of 129Roster talent: 418, 104th of 129 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  134134101st of 129Recruiting: 134, 101st of 129 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  55%55%74th of 128Returning production: 55%, 74th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −4.3−4.382nd of 129SP+ rating: −4.3, 82nd of 129 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 129 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, 2022

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 0.12 of the 0.17 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 FRESQ4 6:48 4th & 2 at SJSU 28, down 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.8 pts
2. at WYOQ4 13:01 4th & 1 at SJSU 29, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.2 pts
3. at USUQ2 4:12 4th & 1 at SJSU 44, down 8Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
4. vs PRSTQ3 11:56 4th & 1 at SJSU 48, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
5. at FRESQ3 8:46 4th & 2 at SJSU 45, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
6. vs HAWQ2 3:16 4th & 3 at midfield, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
7. vs CSUQ3 5:15 4th & 5 at CSU 41, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
8. vs HAWQ4 14:51 4th & 2 at HAW 9, up 15Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2022

106th of 131 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

   PRST
2. L

   AUB
3. W

   WMU
4. W

   WYO
5. W

   UNLV
6. L

   FRES
7. W

   NEV
8. W

   CSU
9. L

   SDSU
10. L

    USU
11. W

    HAW
12. L

    EMU

What moved it, 2022

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−0.25
• Possession & field position−0.04
• Clock−0.01
• Timeouts−0.04
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.86

Game by game

• PRSTW 21-17 vs PRST93% → 87%Before kickoff +43 · On the field −6: Scoreboard +11, Timeouts +1
• AUBL 16-24 at AUB6% → 2%Before kickoff −44 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −11, Timeouts −1
• WMUW 34-6 vs WMU71% → 100%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +29: Scoreboard +31
• WYOW 33-16 at WYO62% → 99%Before kickoff +12 · On the field +37: Scoreboard +45, Clock +3
• UNLVW 40-7 vs UNLV70% → 100%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +30: Scoreboard +31
• FRESL 10-17 at FRES65% → 10%Before kickoff +15 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −32, Clock −1
• NEVW 35-28 vs NEV95% → 97%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +11
• CSUW 28-16 vs CSU94% → 95%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +12, Clock +1
• SDSUL 27-43 at SDSU59% → 1%Before kickoff +9 · On the field −59: Scoreboard −48, Timeouts −2
• USUL 31-35 at USU47% → 4%Before kickoff −3 · On the field −43: Scoreboard −36, Possession & field position −1
• HAWW 27-14 vs HAW88% → 99%Before kickoff +38 · On the field +12: Scoreboard +18
• EMUL 27-41 vs EMU65% → 1%Before kickoff +15 · On the field −63: Scoreboard −58, Clock −3

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.