Texas State

Profile vs. FBS, 2024

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+0.2383rd
  Defense+0.0952nd
• 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.
  Offense48.0%89th
  Defense38.6%76th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1919th
  Defense+1.3717th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1364th
  Defense+0.0947th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3795th
  Defense+0.1359th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense53.3%92nd
  Defense43.7%79th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense35.2%81st
  Defense29.3%67th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.3690th
  Defense2.8666th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense14.8%79th
  Defense21.0%81st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense13.2%82nd
  Defense19.1%80th

Percentiles among the 134 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, 2024

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 Texas State 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
   LAM
2. W
   UTSA
3. L
   ASU
4. L
   SHSU
5. W
   TROY
6. W
   ARST
7. L
   ODU
8. L
   UL
9. W
   ULM
10. W
    USM
11. L
    GAST
12. W
    USA
13. W
    UNT

Bars above the line: better than expected for Texas State.

Players, 2024

1. Jordan McCloudQB309 plays · +0.378 pts/play · 19th of 232 QBs
   2.18WAR1.66 to 2.66
2. Ismail MahdiRB103 plays · +0.149 pts/play · 94th of 373 RBs
   0.29WAR0.21 to 0.36
3. Jaden WilliamsWR40 plays · +0.194 pts/play · 90th of 452 WRs
   0.15WAR0.05 to 0.25
4. Lincoln PareRB66 plays · +0.114 pts/play · 200th of 373 RBs
   0.14WAR0.10 to 0.18
5. Torrance Burgess Jr.RB47 plays · +0.131 pts/play · 227th of 373 RBs
   0.11WAR0.08 to 0.15
6. Mason ShipleyPK11 plays · +0.422 pts/play · 47th of 114 kickers
   0.09WAR0.06 to 0.11
7. Deion HankinsRB28 plays · +0.155 pts/play · 264th of 373 RBs
   0.08WAR0.06 to 0.10
8. Kole WilsonWR26 plays · +0.109 pts/play · 230th of 452 WRs
   0.05WAR−0.01 to 0.11

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 Texas State'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, 2024

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  54054099th of 131Roster talent: 540, 99th of 131 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  8888127th of 131Recruiting: 88, 127th of 131 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  39%39%78th of 130Returning production: 39%, 78th of 130 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +5.4+5.447th of 131SP+ rating: +5.4, 47th of 131 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 131 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, 2024

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 Texas State'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 0.07 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 UNTQ4 0:40 4th & 4 at UNT 46, up 2Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.9 pts
2. at ODUQ4 13:56 4th & 5 at ODU 36, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
3. vs UNTQ3 2:01 4th & 3 at TXST 47, up 9Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
4. vs ULQ2 12:46 4th & 3 at UL 47, down 1Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
5. vs ARSTQ2 1:53 4th & 4 at TXST 41, up 11Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
6. vs USMQ2 5:41 4th & 4 at USM 43, up 24Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
7. vs USMQ2 5:41 4th & 4 at USM 43, up 24Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
8. vs UNTQ1 2:45 4th & 4 at UNT 4, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2024

113th of 134 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   LAM
2. W

   UTSA
3. L

   ASU
4. L

   SHSU
5. W

   TROY
6. W

   ARST
7. L

   ODU
8. L

   UL
9. W

   ULM
10. W

    USM
11. L

    GAST
12. W

    USA
13. W

    UNT

What moved it, 2024

Every game starts at Texas State'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+0.10
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Clock−0.05
• Timeouts+0.13
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−1.28

Game by game

• LAMW 34-27 vs LAM73% → 95%Before kickoff +23 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +23, Timeouts +2
• UTSAW 49-10 vs UTSA56% → 100%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +44: Scoreboard +42
• ASUL 28-31 vs ASU49% → 25%Before kickoff −1 · On the field −23: Scoreboard −33, Clock −2
• SHSUL 39-40 at SHSU76% → 22%Before kickoff +26 · On the field −54: Scoreboard −13, Possession & field position −3
• TROYW 38-17 at TROY84% → 99%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +24, Clock +1
• ARSTW 41-9 vs ARST78% → 100%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +26, Timeouts −1
• ODUL 14-24 at ODU77% → 6%Before kickoff +27 · On the field −71: Scoreboard −39, Clock −2
• ULL 17-23 vs UL60% → 4%Before kickoff +10 · On the field −56: Scoreboard −55, Clock −3
• ULMW 38-17 at ULM76% → 100%Before kickoff +26 · On the field +24: Scoreboard +27, Timeouts +3
• USMW 58-3 vs USM95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +7
• GASTL 44-52 vs GAST93% → 3%Before kickoff +43 · On the field −91: Scoreboard −55, Clock −3
• USAW 45-38 at USA55% → 98%Before kickoff +5 · On the field +42: Scoreboard +36, Timeouts +10
• UNTW 30-28 vs UNT85% → 96%Before kickoff +35 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +19, Possession & field position +1

Points of win probability, from Texas State's side.

Closest call

TXST 42-31 BAY (2023) - Texas State dropped to a 4.4% win probability before pulling it out.