Tulane

Profile vs. FBS, 2023

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+0.1147th
  Defense+0.0479th
• 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.
  Offense42.5%55th
  Defense41.1%60th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.149th
  Defense+1.1975th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0222nd
  Defense+0.0178th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3066th
  Defense+0.1380th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.3%59th
  Defense47.3%52nd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense28.8%39th
  Defense29.0%63rd
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1556th
  Defense3.0161st
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.8%82nd
  Defense16.8%47th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.8%70th
  Defense18.6%82nd

Percentiles among the 133 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, 2023

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 Tulane 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
   USA
2. L
   MISS
3. W
   USM
4. W
   NICH
5. W
   UAB
6. W
   MEM
7. W
   UNT
8. W
   RICE
9. W
   ECU
10. W
    TLSA
11. W
    FAU
12. W
    UTSA
13. L
    SMU
14. L
    VT

Bars above the line: better than expected for Tulane.

Players, 2023

1. Michael PrattQB305 plays · +0.245 pts/play · 55th of 250 QBs
   1.40WAR0.81 to 2.04
2. Makhi HughesRB235 plays · +0.143 pts/play · 7th of 383 RBs
   0.63WAR0.44 to 0.82
3. Chris Brazzell IIWR50 plays · +0.220 pts/play · 74th of 457 WRs
   0.21WAR0.10 to 0.32
4. Kai HortonQB79 plays · +0.114 pts/play · 194th of 250 QBs
   0.17WAR−0.05 to 0.36
5. Jha'Quan JacksonWR42 plays · +0.215 pts/play · 97th of 457 WRs
   0.17WAR0.09 to 0.26
6. Alex BaumanTE30 plays · +0.229 pts/play · 36th of 212 TEs
   0.13WAR0.07 to 0.19
7. Valentino AmbrosioPK18 plays · +0.306 pts/play · 32nd of 113 kickers
   0.10WAR0.06 to 0.15
8. Lawrence Keys IIIWR47 plays · +0.072 pts/play · 253rd of 457 WRs
   0.06WAR−0.02 to 0.16

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 Tulane'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, 2023

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  53853882nd of 130Roster talent: 538, 82nd of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  16416472nd of 130Recruiting: 164, 72nd of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  59%59%52nd of 128Returning production: 59%, 52nd of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +2.8+2.857th of 130SP+ rating: +2.8, 57th 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, 2023

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 Tulane's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 6 clear-cut ones account for 0.23 of the 0.29 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 RICEQ4 0:04 4th & 14 at RICE 14, up 2Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal14.2 pts
2. at ECUQ2 0:00 4th & 3 at ECU 3, down 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it2.3 pts
3. vs VTQ4 14:56 4th & 2 at VT 2, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it1.8 pts
4. vs VTQ3 8:29 4th & 1 at TULN 34, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it1.5 pts
5. vs SMUQ4 0:08 4th & 13 at SMU 13, down 12Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal1.4 pts
6. vs MISSQ4 2:56 4th & 8 at MISS 8, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it1.4 pts
7. vs SMUQ2 0:16 4th & 5 at SMU 37, down 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)1.0 pts
8. vs MISSQ4 4:06 4th & 10 at TULN 25, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)1.0 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2023

29th of 133 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   USA
2. L

   MISS
3. W

   USM
4. W

   NICH
5. W

   UAB
6. W

   MEM
7. W

   UNT
8. W

   RICE
9. W

   ECU
10. W

    TLSA
11. W

    FAU
12. W

    UTSA
13. L

    SMU
14. L

    VT

What moved it, 2023

Every game starts at Tulane'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+1.72
• Possession & field position+0.05
• Clock+0.02
• Timeouts+0.07
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.79

Game by game

• USAW 37-17 vs USA64% → 100%Before kickoff +14 · On the field +35: Scoreboard +36
• MISSL 20-37 vs MISS22% → 1%Before kickoff −28 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −28, Clock −3
• USMW 21-3 at USM69% → 100%Before kickoff +19 · On the field +30: Scoreboard +36, Clock +2
• NICHW 36-7 vs NICH99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +3
• UABW 35-23 vs UAB92% → 98%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +13, Timeouts +1
• MEMW 31-21 at MEM59% → 97%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +44, Clock +2
• UNTW 35-28 vs UNT91% → 97%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +15, Timeouts +1
• RICEW 30-28 at RICE75% → 87%Before kickoff +25 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +31, Clock +3
• ECUW 13-10 at ECU88% → 95%Before kickoff +38 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +23, Clock +1
• TLSAW 24-22 vs TLSA95% → 95%Before kickoff +45 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +11, Timeouts +1
• FAUW 24-8 at FAU74% → 99%Before kickoff +24 · On the field +25: Scoreboard +33, Clock +2
• UTSAW 29-16 vs UTSA55% → 99%Before kickoff +5 · On the field +43: Scoreboard +39, Clock +1
• SMUL 14-26 vs SMU59% → 2%Before kickoff +9 · On the field −57: Scoreboard −57, Clock −3
• VTL 20-41 vs VT18% → 0%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −18: Scoreboard −26, Clock −1

Points of win probability, from Tulane's side.

Closest call

TULN 46-45 USC (2022) - Tulane dropped to a 2.4% win probability before pulling it out.