Syracuse

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+0.2064th
  Defense+0.1446th
• 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.
  Offense42.3%43rd
  Defense42.7%45th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2644th
  Defense+1.1690th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2589th
  Defense+0.0953rd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1524th
  Defense+0.2436th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.9%62nd
  Defense48.1%44th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.4%15th
  Defense29.1%63rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2471st
  Defense3.0350th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense17.8%37th
  Defense13.6%19th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense17.2%34th
  Defense17.2%60th

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 Syracuse 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
   OHIO
2. L
   RUTG
3. W
   UALB
4. W
   LIB
5. L
   FSU
6. L
   WAKE
7. L
   CLEM
8. W
   VT
9. W
   BC
10. L
    LOU
11. L
    NCSU
12. L
    PITT

Bars above the line: better than expected for Syracuse.

Players, 2021

1. Garrett ShraderQB329 plays · +0.250 pts/play · 59th of 219 QBs
   1.54WAR0.86 to 2.24
2. Sean TuckerRB194 plays · +0.202 pts/play · 28th of 387 RBs
   0.73WAR0.53 to 0.93
3. Courtney JacksonWR42 plays · +0.125 pts/play · 242nd of 474 WRs
   0.10WAR0.05 to 0.14
4. Tommy DeVitoQB44 plays · +0.117 pts/play · 197th of 219 QBs
   0.10WAR0.03 to 0.16
5. Anthony QueeleyWR24 plays · +0.119 pts/play · 369th of 474 WRs
   0.05WAR0.03 to 0.08
6. Taj HarrisWR12 plays · +0.196 pts/play · 394th of 474 WRs
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.06
7. Devaughn CooperWR18 plays · +0.115 pts/play · 406th of 474 WRs
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.05
8. Andre SzmytPK7 plays · +0.190 pts/play · 117th of 128 kickers
   0.02WAR0.01 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 Syracuse'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.
  56756769th of 130Roster talent: 567, 69th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  18118155th of 130Recruiting: 181, 55th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  85%85%43rd of 128Returning production: 85%, 43rd of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +0.3+0.379th of 130SP+ rating: +0.3, 79th 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 Syracuse's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 3 clear-cut ones account for 0.08 of the 0.13 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 WAKEQ4 7:13 4th & 2 at WAKE 27, up 1Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−3.5 pts
2. at OHIOQ3 6:27 4th & 2 at OHIO 2, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.4 pts
3. vs WAKEQ4 11:39 4th & 2 at SYR 38, up 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
4. vs BCQ2 10:52 4th & 1 at SYR 34, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
5. vs RUTGQ3 13:01 4th & 3 at SYR 8, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
6. vs RUTGQ3 13:01 4th & 3 at SYR 8, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
7. at LOUQ2 5:55 4th & 1 at SYR 31, down 25Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
8. vs RUTGQ4 7:16 4th & 10 at RUTG 41, down 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

59th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   OHIO
2. L

   RUTG
3. W

   UALB
4. W

   LIB
5. L

   FSU
6. L

   WAKE
7. L

   CLEM
8. W

   VT
9. W

   BC
10. L

    LOU
11. L

    NCSU
12. L

    PITT

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Syracuse'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−0.54
• Possession & field position−0.03
• Clock+0.13
• Timeouts−0.14
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.71

Game by game

• OHIOW 29-9 at OHIO44% → 99%Before kickoff −6 · On the field +55: Scoreboard +55, Clock +2
• RUTGL 7-17 vs RUTG41% → 2%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −39: Scoreboard −46, Clock −3
• UALBW 62-24 vs UALB94% → 100%Before kickoff +44 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +9
• LIBW 24-21 vs LIB34% → 96%Before kickoff −16 · On the field +61: Scoreboard +41, Timeouts +3
• FSUL 30-33 at FSU36% → 4%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −30, Timeouts −1
• WAKEL 37-40 vs WAKE35% → 12%Before kickoff −15 · On the field −23: Scoreboard −36, Timeouts −16
• CLEML 14-17 vs CLEM20% → 6%Before kickoff −30 · On the field −14: Scoreboard −32, Clock −2
• VTW 41-36 at VT43% → 88%Before kickoff −7 · On the field +44: Scoreboard +45, Clock +4
• BCW 21-6 vs BC66% → 98%Before kickoff +16 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +32, Timeouts +2
• LOUL 3-41 at LOU41% → 0%Before kickoff −9 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −40
• NCSUL 17-41 at NCSU22% → 0%Before kickoff −28 · On the field −22: Scoreboard −25, Timeouts −1
• PITTL 14-31 vs PITT18% → 1%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −28, Clock −1

Points of win probability, from Syracuse's side.

Closest call

SYR 44-41 UNLV (2024) - Syracuse dropped to a 5.7% win probability before pulling it out.