Troy

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+0.0116th
  Defense+0.0661st
• 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.
  Offense38.2%16th
  Defense39.9%64th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2970th
  Defense+1.2742nd
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.0315th
  Defense+0.0844th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0820th
  Defense+0.0875th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense43.7%16th
  Defense46.2%56th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.7%29th
  Defense27.7%70th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8234th
  Defense3.0130th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense23.4%7th
  Defense19.6%59th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense19.6%6th
  Defense16.4%60th

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 Troy 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
   NICH
2. L
   CLEM
3. L
   MEM
4. W
   BUF
5. W
   USA
6. W
   TXST
7. W
   ULM
8. W
   UL
9. L
   ARST
10. L
    ODU
11. W
    GAST
12. W
    USM
13. L
    JMU
14. L
    JXST

Bars above the line: better than expected for Troy.

Players, 2025

1. Tucker KilcreaseQB316 plays · +0.109 pts/play · 115th of 231 QBs
   0.65WAR−0.02 to 1.21
2. Goose CrowderQB190 plays · +0.119 pts/play · 139th of 231 QBs
   0.42WAR0.06 to 0.76
3. Tae MeadowsRB141 plays · +0.087 pts/play · 92nd of 365 RBs
   0.23WAR0.16 to 0.30
4. Tray TaylorWR53 plays · +0.162 pts/play · 103rd of 451 WRs
   0.16WAR0.06 to 0.26
5. Jordan LovettRB90 plays · +0.070 pts/play · 212th of 365 RBs
   0.12WAR0.07 to 0.17
6. Rara ThomasWR68 plays · +0.080 pts/play · 178th of 451 WRs
   0.10WAR−0.04 to 0.24
7. Ethan ConnerTE36 plays · +0.142 pts/play · 33rd of 213 TEs
   0.10WAR0.03 to 0.17
8. Peyton HigginsWR50 plays · +0.073 pts/play · 261st of 451 WRs
   0.07WAR−0.04 to 0.18

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 Troy'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.
  56256299th of 134Roster talent: 562, 99th of 134 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  134134104th of 134Recruiting: 134, 104th of 134 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  24%24%84th of 132Returning production: 24%, 84th of 132 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −4.8−4.885th of 134SP+ rating: −4.8, 85th 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 Troy's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 5 clear-cut ones account for 0.07 of the 0.11 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 USAQ3 10:03 4th & 1 at TROY 27, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
2. vs USAQ4 6:47 4th & 4 at USA 10, up 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
3. at ULMQ4 14:12 4th & 3 at ULM 8, up 13Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
4. vs GASTQ2 2:05 4th & 1 at TROY 32, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
5. at JXSTQ4 5:34 4th & 6 at JXST 27, down 4Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.1 pts
6. at JMUQ4 3:17 4th & 19 at TROY 32, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.8 pts
7. vs NICHQ3 5:36 4th & 4 at NICH 6, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
8. at ODUQ3 12:58 4th & 1 at TROY 34, down 20Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2025

19th of 136 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   NICH
2. L

   CLEM
3. L

   MEM
4. W

   BUF
5. W

   USA
6. W

   TXST
7. W

   ULM
8. W

   UL
9. L

   ARST
10. L

    ODU
11. W

    GAST
12. W

    USM
13. L

    JMU
14. L

    JXST

What moved it, 2025

Every game starts at Troy'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+1.10
• Possession & field position−0.03
• Clock+0.04
• Timeouts+0.20
• Other+0.02
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.26

Game by game

• NICHW 38-20 vs NICH88% → 100%Before kickoff +38 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +16, Clock −1
• CLEML 16-27 at CLEM3% → 3%Before kickoff −47 · On the field 0: Scoreboard −8
• MEML 7-28 vs MEM39% → 0%Before kickoff −11 · On the field −39: Scoreboard −43, Clock −2
• BUFW 21-17 at BUF29% → 98%Before kickoff −21 · On the field +69: Scoreboard +36, Timeouts +23
• USAW 31-24 vs USA45% → 90%Before kickoff −5 · On the field +45: Scoreboard +28, Clock +4
• TXSTW 48-41 at TXST31% → 75%Before kickoff −19 · On the field +44: Scoreboard +42, Clock −2
• ULMW 37-14 at ULM62% → 100%Before kickoff +12 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +41, Clock +2
• ULW 35-23 vs UL70% → 98%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +29: Scoreboard +31, Timeouts +1
• ARSTL 10-23 vs ARST66% → 2%Before kickoff +16 · On the field −64: Scoreboard −58, Clock −3
• ODUL 0-33 at ODU25% → 0%Before kickoff −25 · On the field −25: Scoreboard −27
• GASTW 31-19 vs GAST72% → 99%Before kickoff +22 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +29, Timeouts +1
• USMW 28-18 at USM34% → 97%Before kickoff −16 · On the field +64: Scoreboard +61, Clock +3
• JMUL 14-31 at JMU6% → 1%Before kickoff −44 · On the field −5: Scoreboard −11
• JXSTL 13-17 at JXST45% → 12%Before kickoff −5 · On the field −33: Scoreboard −26, Timeouts −3

Points of win probability, from Troy's side.

Closest call

USA 24-31 TROY (2021) - Troy dropped to a 2.4% win probability before pulling it out.