South Florida

Profile vs. FBS, 2020

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.
  Offense0.0013th
  Defense+0.1733rd
• 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.
  Offense40.3%31st
  Defense46.6%25th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1614th
  Defense+1.2551st
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.0126th
  Defense+0.1040th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense0.0017th
  Defense+0.2531st
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.3%58th
  Defense51.6%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.
  Offense25.0%12th
  Defense34.1%33rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8342nd
  Defense2.9444th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense23.6%15th
  Defense18.7%37th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense20.3%8th
  Defense12.5%9th

Percentiles among the 127 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, 2020

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 Florida 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
   CIT
2. L
   ND
3. L
   CIN
4. L
   ECU
5. L
   TEM
6. L
   TLSA
7. L
   MEM
8. L
   HOU
9. L
   UCF

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

Players, 2020

1. Jordan McCloudQB127 plays · +0.080 pts/play · 132nd of 212 QBs
   0.19WAR−0.05 to 0.41
2. Kelley JoinerRB50 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 227th of 338 RBs
   0.13WAR0.09 to 0.17
3. Noah JohnsonQB63 plays · +0.091 pts/play · 159th of 212 QBs
   0.11WAR0.01 to 0.21
4. Bryce MillerWR23 plays · +0.158 pts/play · 221st of 409 WRs
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.09
5. Randall St. FelixWR14 plays · +0.092 pts/play · 350th of 409 WRs
   0.02WAR0.01 to 0.04
6. Mitchell BrinkmanTE18 plays · +0.060 pts/play · 48th of 191 TEs
   0.02WAR−0.01 to 0.05
7. Johnny FordRB10 plays · +0.093 pts/play · 292nd of 338 RBs
   0.02WAR0.00 to 0.03
8. Spencer ShraderPK5 plays · +0.172 pts/play · 81st of 97 kickers
   0.02WAR0.01 to 0.03

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 Florida'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, 2020

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  53853870th of 127Roster talent: 538, 70th of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  15715775th of 127Recruiting: 157, 75th of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  62%62%70th of 127Returning production: 62%, 70th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −11.4−11.4112th of 127SP+ rating: −11.4, 112th of 127 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 127 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, 2020

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 Florida's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 0 clear-cut ones account for 0.00 of the 0.03 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 CITQ3 5:30 4th & 4 at CIT 43, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
2. at MEMQ4 4:36 4th & 4 at MEM 29, up 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
3. at MEMQ4 14:53 4th & 8 at MEM 41, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
4. at CINQ3 1:44 4th & 14 at CIN 20, down 21Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.5 pts
5. vs CITQ2 11:08 4th & 4 at CIT 44, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
6. vs TLSAQ3 4:33 4th & 3 at USF 18, down 22Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
7. at NDQ4 12:03 4th & 10 at ND 19, down 45Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts
8. vs ECUQ4 12:11 4th & 5 at ECU 30, down 21Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

110th of 127 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   CIT
2. L

   ND
3. L

   CIN
4. L

   ECU
5. L

   TEM
6. L

   TLSA
7. L

   MEM
8. L

   HOU
9. L

   UCF

What moved it, 2020

Every game starts at South Florida'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−1.53
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Clock−0.05
• Timeouts−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.53

Game by game

• CITW 27-6 vs CIT86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +13: Scoreboard +17
• NDL 0-52 at ND7% → 0%Before kickoff −43 · On the field −7: Scoreboard −9
• CINL 7-28 at CIN7% → 1%Before kickoff −43 · On the field −6: Scoreboard −11
• ECUL 24-44 vs ECU60% → 1%Before kickoff +10 · On the field −60: Scoreboard −58, Clock −3
• TEML 37-39 at TEM16% → 6%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −9: Scoreboard −20, Timeouts −1
• TLSAL 13-42 vs TLSA20% → 0%Before kickoff −30 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −25
• MEML 33-34 at MEM12% → 12%Before kickoff −38 · On the field 0: Scoreboard −15, Possession & field position −1
• HOUL 21-56 at HOU16% → 0%Before kickoff −34 · On the field −16: Scoreboard −18
• UCFL 46-58 vs UCF5% → 3%Before kickoff −45 · On the field −3: Scoreboard −14, Clock −1

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

Closest call

BYU 23-27 USF (2019) - South Florida dropped to a 1.7% win probability before pulling it out.