South Carolina

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+0.1027th
  Defense+0.1262nd
• 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.
  Offense40.2%24th
  Defense43.5%37th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2960th
  Defense+1.1981st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.0110th
  Defense+0.1726th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2868th
  Defense+0.1180th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense46.2%30th
  Defense47.7%48th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense28.9%28th
  Defense33.2%30th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8624th
  Defense3.4312th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense18.6%28th
  Defense11.4%4th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.6%16th
  Defense17.6%67th

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 South Carolina 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
   EIU
2. W
   ECU
3. L
   UGA
4. L
   UK
5. W
   TROY
6. L
   TENN
7. W
   VAN
8. L
   TA&M
9. W
   FLA
10. L
    MIZ
11. W
    AUB
12. L
    CLEM
13. W
    UNC

Bars above the line: better than expected for South Carolina.

Players, 2021

1. Kevin HarrisRB128 plays · +0.239 pts/play · 47th of 387 RBs
   0.57WAR0.45 to 0.70
2. Jason BrownQB90 plays · +0.261 pts/play · 139th of 219 QBs
   0.44WAR0.23 to 0.64
3. Zaquandre WhiteRB68 plays · +0.179 pts/play · 199th of 387 RBs
   0.23WAR0.18 to 0.28
4. Zeb NolandQB55 plays · +0.194 pts/play · 178th of 219 QBs
   0.20WAR0.10 to 0.30
5. Josh VannWR46 plays · +0.143 pts/play · 184th of 474 WRs
   0.12WAR0.06 to 0.18
6. Parker WhitePK10 plays · +0.266 pts/play · 92nd of 128 kickers
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.08
7. Kai KroegerP46 plays · +0.051 pts/play · 84th of 101 punters
   0.04WAR−0.06 to 0.14
8. Jalen BrooksWR22 plays · +0.106 pts/play · 394th of 474 WRs
   0.04WAR0.03 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 South Carolina'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.
  74874822nd of 130Roster talent: 748, 22nd of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  22422422nd of 130Recruiting: 224, 22nd of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  66%66%78th of 128Returning production: 66%, 78th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +3.9+3.966th of 130SP+ rating: +3.9, 66th 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 South Carolina'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 0.13 of the 0.19 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 AUBQ4 5:29 4th & 1 at SC 48, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−5.8 pts
2. vs AUBQ3 12:57 4th & 1 at SC 44, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it−2.5 pts
3. vs AUBQ4 2:11 4th & 4 at SC 43, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.8 pts
4. vs FLAQ3 12:16 4th & 6 at FLA 38, up 20Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
5. at ECUQ3 5:21 4th & 6 at ECU 41, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
6. vs UKQ2 11:13 4th & 6 at UK 40, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
7. vs UKQ2 4:39 4th & 2 at SC 38, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
8. vs CLEMQ3 1:05 4th & 14 at CLEM 41, down 20Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.7 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

17th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   EIU
2. W

   ECU
3. L

   UGA
4. L

   UK
5. W

   TROY
6. L

   TENN
7. W

   VAN
8. L

   TA&M
9. W

   FLA
10. L

    MIZ
11. W

    AUB
12. L

    CLEM
13. W

    UNC

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at South Carolina'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+1.01
• Possession & field position+0.03
• Clock+0.02
• Timeouts−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.71

Game by game

• EIUW 46-0 vs EIU97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +5
• ECUW 20-17 at ECU56% → 95%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +39: Scoreboard +46, Clock +3
• UGAL 13-40 at UGA2% → 0%Before kickoff −48 · On the field −2: Scoreboard −4
• UKL 10-16 vs UK39% → 4%Before kickoff −11 · On the field −35: Scoreboard −43, Clock −3
• TROYW 23-14 vs TROY68% → 96%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +30, Possession & field position +1
• TENNL 20-45 at TENN24% → 0%Before kickoff −26 · On the field −24: Scoreboard −26, Timeouts −1
• VANW 21-20 vs VAN86% → 94%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +18, Possession & field position +1
• TA&ML 14-44 at TA&M9% → 0%Before kickoff −41 · On the field −9: Scoreboard −11
• FLAW 40-17 vs FLA9% → 99%Before kickoff −41 · On the field +90: Scoreboard +56, Clock +1
• MIZL 28-31 at MIZ51% → 5%Before kickoff +1 · On the field −46: Scoreboard −37, Clock −1
• AUBW 21-17 vs AUB30% → 94%Before kickoff −20 · On the field +65: Scoreboard +42, Timeouts −1
• CLEML 0-30 vs CLEM21% → 0%Before kickoff −29 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −27
• UNCW 38-21 vs UNC19% → 99%Before kickoff −31 · On the field +80: Scoreboard +53, Possession & field position +2

Points of win probability, from South Carolina's side.

Closest call

SC 23-20 FLA (2014) - South Carolina dropped to a 4.3% win probability before pulling it out.