South Carolina

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+0.1456th
  Defense+0.1143rd
• 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.
  Offense41.7%47th
  Defense45.4%18th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3485th
  Defense+1.1581st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0224th
  Defense+0.2211th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2972nd
  Defense+0.1472nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense46.3%35th
  Defense50.3%21st
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense32.1%56th
  Defense34.1%18th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.9425th
  Defense3.476th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense19.6%19th
  Defense10.9%2nd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense19.0%16th
  Defense15.5%40th

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 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
   GAST
2. L
   ARK
3. L
   UGA
4. W
   CLT
5. W
   SCST
6. W
   UK
7. W
   TA&M
8. L
   MIZ
9. W
   VAN
10. L
    FLA
11. W
    TENN
12. W
    CLEM
13. L
    ND

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

Players, 2022

1. Spencer RattlerQB343 plays · +0.157 pts/play · 73rd of 234 QBs
   1.01WAR0.28 to 1.77
2. Antwane Wells Jr.WR66 plays · +0.201 pts/play · 34th of 455 WRs
   0.25WAR0.12 to 0.38
3. MarShawn LloydRB102 plays · +0.113 pts/play · 142nd of 384 RBs
   0.22WAR0.11 to 0.32
4. Juju McDowellRB47 plays · +0.139 pts/play · 233rd of 384 RBs
   0.12WAR0.09 to 0.16
5. Kai KroegerP48 plays · +0.130 pts/play · 21st of 102 punters
   0.12WAR0.05 to 0.19
6. Jaheim BellTE74 plays · +0.074 pts/play · 35th of 214 TEs
   0.10WAR0.01 to 0.19
7. Josh VannWR19 plays · +0.216 pts/play · 273rd of 455 WRs
   0.08WAR0.04 to 0.12
8. Christian Beal-SmithRB28 plays · +0.119 pts/play · 286th of 384 RBs
   0.06WAR0.04 to 0.09

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, 2022

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  76376320th of 129Roster talent: 763, 20th of 129 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  21921926th of 129Recruiting: 219, 26th of 129 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  65%65%50th of 128Returning production: 65%, 50th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +12.7+12.726th of 129SP+ rating: +12.7, 26th 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 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 0.08 of the 0.12 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 UKQ4 9:08 4th & 1 at SC 46, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.1 pts
2. vs TA&MQ1 3:42 4th & 1 at SC 40, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
3. at VANQ3 12:41 4th & 1 at SC 34, up 17Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
4. at CLEMQ4 7:06 4th & 3 at SC 37, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
5. vs TA&MQ3 8:38 4th & 4 at TA&M 44, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
6. vs MIZQ2 9:39 4th & 2 at SC 29, down 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
7. vs NDQ2 2:33 4th & 4 at SC 42, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
8. at UKQ3 2:38 4th & 3 at UK 14, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2022

11th of 131 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

   GAST
2. L

   ARK
3. L

   UGA
4. W

   CLT
5. W

   SCST
6. W

   UK
7. W

   TA&M
8. L

   MIZ
9. W

   VAN
10. L

    FLA
11. W

    TENN
12. W

    CLEM
13. L

    ND

What moved it, 2022

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+0.97
• Possession & field position+0.05
• Clock+0.06
• Timeouts+0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.86

Game by game

• GASTW 35-14 vs GAST81% → 100%Before kickoff +31 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +21, Timeouts +1
• ARKL 30-44 at ARK27% → 1%Before kickoff −23 · On the field −26: Scoreboard −28, Timeouts −1
• UGAL 7-48 vs UGA5% → 0%Before kickoff −45 · On the field −5: Scoreboard −8
• CLTW 56-20 vs CLT93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +9
• SCSTW 50-10 vs SCST99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• UKW 24-14 at UK35% → 98%Before kickoff −15 · On the field +63: Scoreboard +58, Clock +3
• TA&MW 30-24 vs TA&M38% → 87%Before kickoff −12 · On the field +49: Scoreboard +27, Timeouts +2
• MIZL 10-23 vs MIZ61% → 2%Before kickoff +11 · On the field −59: Scoreboard −56, Clock −2
• VANW 38-27 at VAN66% → 98%Before kickoff +16 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +42, Clock +2
• FLAL 6-38 at FLA31% → 0%Before kickoff −19 · On the field −31: Scoreboard −32
• TENNW 63-38 vs TENN7% → 100%Before kickoff −43 · On the field +93: Scoreboard +61, Clock +1
• CLEMW 31-30 at CLEM16% → 86%Before kickoff −34 · On the field +70: Scoreboard +40, Clock +3
• NDL 38-45 vs ND36% → 20%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −16: Scoreboard −38, Possession & field position +3

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.