South Florida

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+0.1765th
  Defense+0.312nd
• 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.
  Offense44.0%60th
  Defense50.4%2nd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3178th
  Defense+1.3414th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2494th
  Defense+0.264th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1629th
  Defense+0.462nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense51.8%81st
  Defense54.2%5th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.0%18th
  Defense40.0%1st
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.5095th
  Defense3.3414th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense10.4%98th
  Defense18.2%62nd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.6%66th
  Defense12.8%8th

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 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. L
   BYU
2. W
   HOW
3. L
   FLA
4. L
   LOU
5. L
   ECU
6. L
   CIN
7. L
   TULN
8. L
   HOU
9. L
   TEM
10. L
    SMU
11. L
    TLSA
12. L
    UCF

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

Players, 2022

1. Gerry BohanonQB119 plays · +0.245 pts/play · 114th of 234 QBs
   0.55WAR0.31 to 0.80
2. Brian BattieRB140 plays · +0.161 pts/play · 48th of 384 RBs
   0.42WAR0.27 to 0.55
3. Byrum BrownQB59 plays · +0.293 pts/play · 149th of 234 QBs
   0.32WAR0.17 to 0.46
4. Xavier WeaverWR49 plays · +0.125 pts/play · 185th of 455 WRs
   0.11WAR0.03 to 0.20
5. Katravis MarshQB97 plays · +0.056 pts/play · 196th of 234 QBs
   0.10WAR−0.13 to 0.36
6. Jimmy Horn Jr.WR37 plays · +0.103 pts/play · 285th of 455 WRs
   0.07WAR0.02 to 0.12
7. Spencer ShraderPK10 plays · +0.306 pts/play · 66th of 110 kickers
   0.06WAR0.03 to 0.08
8. Jaren ManghamRB12 plays · +0.164 pts/play · 304th of 384 RBs
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.05

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, 2022

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  57457468th of 129Roster talent: 574, 68th of 129 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  15115177th of 129Recruiting: 151, 77th of 129 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  50%50%82nd of 128Returning production: 50%, 82nd of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −17.0−17.0117th of 129SP+ rating: −17.0, 117th 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 Florida's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 2 clear-cut ones account for 0.04 of the 0.06 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 TLSAQ4 14:56 4th & 8 at USF 31, down 3Went for it; the numbers favored punting−2.5 pts
2. vs SMUQ3 6:05 4th & 1 at USF 34, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
3. vs BYUQ3 7:39 4th & 8 at USF 14, down 24Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.9 pts
4. at HOUQ4 7:22 4th & 10 at HOU 31, down 21Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.3 pts
5. at HOUQ4 13:25 4th & 8 at USF 49, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.1 pts
6. vs BYUQ1 1:59 4th & 1 at USF 29, down 28Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
7. at TEMQ4 0:34 4th & 12 at TEM 12, down 26Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts
8. vs HOWQ4 2:23 4th & 4 at HOW 40, up 22Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2022

121st of 131 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. L

   BYU
2. W

   HOW
3. L

   FLA
4. L

   LOU
5. L

   ECU
6. L

   CIN
7. L

   TULN
8. L

   HOU
9. L

   TEM
10. L

    SMU
11. L

    TLSA
12. L

    UCF

What moved it, 2022

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−1.89
• Possession & field position+0.03
• Clock−0.02
• Timeouts−0.04
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+1.25

Game by game

• BYUL 21-50 vs BYU21% → 0%Before kickoff −29 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −27
• HOWW 42-20 vs HOW99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +3
• FLAL 28-31 at FLA6% → 90%Before kickoff −44 · On the field +84: Scoreboard +43, Clock +3
• LOUL 3-41 at LOU13% → 0%Before kickoff −37 · On the field −13: Scoreboard −16
• ECUL 28-48 vs ECU22% → 0%Before kickoff −28 · On the field −22: Scoreboard −28, Clock −1
• CINL 24-28 at CIN5% → 3%Before kickoff −45 · On the field −1: Scoreboard −10, Timeouts −1
• TULNL 31-45 vs TULN17% → 2%Before kickoff −33 · On the field −15: Scoreboard −26, Clock −1
• HOUL 27-42 at HOU10% → 1%Before kickoff −40 · On the field −9: Scoreboard −15
• TEML 28-54 at TEM55% → 0%Before kickoff +5 · On the field −55: Scoreboard −50, Timeouts −1
• SMUL 23-41 vs SMU12% → 1%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −11: Scoreboard −20, Clock −1
• TLSAL 42-48 at TLSA18% → 3%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −15: Scoreboard −21, Timeouts −1
• UCFL 39-46 vs UCF8% → 17%Before kickoff −42 · On the field +9: Scoreboard −22, Possession & field position +2

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.