Tulane

Profile vs. FBS, 2026

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+0.0729th
  Defense+0.1722nd
• 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.
  Offense33.7%3rd
  Defense41.5%46th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.5799th
  Defense+1.2060th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1458th
  Defense+0.1426th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0415th
  Defense+0.2925th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense37.9%2nd
  Defense46.3%49th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense27.0%23rd
  Defense32.2%28th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.6312th
  Defense3.2418th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense18.9%35th
  Defense14.2%12th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense19.5%4th
  Defense10.6%2nd

Percentiles among the 138 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, 2026

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. L
   DUKE
2. W
   USA
3. L
   KSU
4. W
   USM
5. L
   ARMY

Bars above the line: better than expected for Tulane.

Players, 2026

1. Johnnie DanielsRB49 plays · +0.102 pts/play · 88th of 320 RBs
   0.09WAR0.06 to 0.12
2. Kadin SemonzaQB126 plays · +0.039 pts/play · 137th of 192 QBs
   0.09WAR−0.09 to 0.27
3. Jaylin LucasRB38 plays · +0.108 pts/play · 129th of 320 RBs
   0.08WAR0.05 to 0.10
4. Maurice TurnerRB33 plays · +0.121 pts/play · 131st of 320 RBs
   0.07WAR0.05 to 0.10
5. William HudlowP26 plays · +0.106 pts/play · 1st of 84 punters
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.09
6. Anthony Brown-StephensWR28 plays · +0.066 pts/play · 211th of 364 WRs
   0.03WAR0.00 to 0.08
7. Dawson JohnsonTE12 plays · +0.088 pts/play · 62nd of 164 TEs
   0.02WAR0.00 to 0.03
8. Jamauri McClureRB5 plays · +0.138 pts/play · 265th of 320 RBs
   0.01WAR0.01 to 0.02

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, 2026

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  66566570th of 138Roster talent: 665, 70th of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  18118171st of 138Recruiting: 181, 71st of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  21%21%99th of 136Returning production: 21%, 99th of 136 in FBS
• SP+ rating so far

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −7.6−7.6102nd of 138SP+ rating so far: −7.6, 102nd of 138 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 138 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion so far

Conversion by season

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2026

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 0 clear-cut ones account for 0.00 of the 0.02 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 ARMYQ2 4:52 4th & 3 at ARMY 3, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−1.0 pts
2. at ARMYQ2 1:07 4th & 7 at ARMY 41, down 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
3. vs USAQ4 0:02 4th & 26 at USA 44, up 4Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.3 pts
4. vs USAQ1 4:03 4th & 4 at USA 27, down 3Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
5. at DUKEQ2 11:30 4th & 3 at TULN 24, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
6. vs USAQ2 9:41 4th & 6 at USA 46, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
7. at DUKEQ2 6:47 4th & 6 at DUKE 25, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

86th of 138 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. L

   DUKE
2. W

   USA
3. L

   KSU
4. W

   USM
5. L

   ARMY

What moved it, 2026

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−0.25
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Timeouts+0.02

Game by game

• DUKEL 3-17 at DUKE27% → 1%Before kickoff −23 · On the field −26: Scoreboard −28, Timeouts −1
• USAW 28-24 vs USA68% → 95%Before kickoff +18 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +29, Timeouts +3
• KSUL 20-31 at KSU8% → 2%Before kickoff −42 · On the field −5: Scoreboard −13, Timeouts −1
• USMW 24-21 vs USM84% → 96%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +19, Timeouts +2
• ARMYL 17-20 at ARMY37% → 5%Before kickoff −13 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −33, Possession & field position +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.