South Florida

Profile vs. FBS, 2025

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+0.2488th
  Defense+0.0279th
• 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.
  Offense46.5%85th
  Defense37.8%85th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.3176th
  Defense+1.3024th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1367th
  Defense0.0077th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.4094th
  Defense+0.0876th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense53.1%91st
  Defense43.8%80th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense29.9%46th
  Defense27.5%75th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.3391st
  Defense2.6385th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.7%93rd
  Defense22.6%87th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense13.8%67th
  Defense16.1%57th

Percentiles among the 136 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, 2025

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
   BOIS
2. W
   FLA
3. L
   MIA
4. W
   SCST
5. W
   CLT
6. W
   UNT
7. W
   FAU
8. L
   MEM
9. W
   UTSA
10. L
    NAVY
11. W
    UAB
12. W
    RICE
13. L
    ODU

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

Players, 2025

1. Byrum BrownQB329 plays · +0.203 pts/play · 61st of 231 QBs
   1.25WAR0.65 to 1.90
2. Keshaun SingletonWR45 plays · +0.263 pts/play · 54th of 451 WRs
   0.22WAR0.13 to 0.34
3. Nico GramaticaPK16 plays · +0.290 pts/play · 52nd of 112 kickers
   0.09WAR0.05 to 0.13
4. Jeremiah KogerWR38 plays · +0.084 pts/play · 281st of 451 WRs
   0.06WAR−0.03 to 0.14
5. Chas NimrodWR20 plays · +0.135 pts/play · 304th of 451 WRs
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.09
6. Christian NeptuneWR44 plays · +0.060 pts/play · 304th of 451 WRs
   0.05WAR−0.04 to 0.13
7. Wyatt SullivanTE15 plays · +0.096 pts/play · 151st of 213 TEs
   0.03WAR0.00 to 0.05
8. Cartevious NortonRB12 plays · +0.086 pts/play · 322nd of 365 RBs
   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, 2025

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  66766761st of 134Roster talent: 667, 61st of 134 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  17217272nd of 134Recruiting: 172, 72nd of 134 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  30%30%73rd of 132Returning production: 30%, 73rd of 132 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +11.6+11.629th of 134SP+ rating: +11.6, 29th of 134 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 134 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, 2025

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 0.04 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 FLAQ4 2:52 4th & 7 at FLA 40, up 8Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
2. at FLAQ2 5:18 4th & 2 at USF 40, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
3. at NAVYQ2 8:56 4th & 3 at USF 10, down 5Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
4. at FLAQ3 10:11 4th & 2 at USF 34, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
5. vs CLTQ2 6:26 4th & 3 at CLT 43, up 26Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
6. at NAVYQ1 6:40 4th & 3 at NAVY 4, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
7. vs RICEQ3 13:07 4th & 4 at USF 31, up 25Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.1 pts
8. vs SCSTQ4 0:27 4th & 23 at SCST 36, up 49Punted; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2025

54th of 136 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

   BOIS
2. W

   FLA
3. L

   MIA
4. W

   SCST
5. W

   CLT
6. W

   UNT
7. W

   FAU
8. L

   MEM
9. W

   UTSA
10. L

    NAVY
11. W

    UAB
12. W

    RICE
13. L

    ODU

What moved it, 2025

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+1.02
• Possession & field position−0.03
• Timeouts−0.03
• Other−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.23

Game by game

• BOISW 34-7 vs BOIS32% → 100%Before kickoff −18 · On the field +68: Scoreboard +60, Possession & field position −1
• FLAW 18-16 at FLA8% → 95%Before kickoff −42 · On the field +87: Scoreboard +51, Clock +3
• MIAL 12-49 at MIA12% → 0%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −12: Scoreboard −14
• SCSTW 63-14 vs SCST98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• CLTW 54-26 vs CLT97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +5
• UNTW 63-36 at UNT46% → 100%Before kickoff −4 · On the field +54: Scoreboard +54, Clock +1
• FAUW 48-13 vs FAU91% → 100%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +9: Scoreboard +12
• MEML 31-34 at MEM62% → 11%Before kickoff +12 · On the field −51: Scoreboard −26, Possession & field position −3
• UTSAW 55-23 vs UTSA80% → 100%Before kickoff +30 · On the field +20: Scoreboard +23
• NAVYL 38-41 at NAVY72% → 12%Before kickoff +22 · On the field −60: Scoreboard −27, Possession & field position −1
• UABW 48-18 at UAB92% → 100%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +12
• RICEW 52-3 vs RICE96% → 100%Before kickoff +46 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +6
• ODUL 10-24 vs ODU61% → 2%Before kickoff +11 · On the field −60: Scoreboard −57, Clock −3

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.