UCF

Profile vs. FBS, 2022

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+0.1872nd
  Defense+0.1238th
• 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.
  Offense47.8%88th
  Defense40.5%66th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1516th
  Defense+1.2837th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2289th
  Defense+0.0560th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1937th
  Defense+0.2437th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense53.4%89th
  Defense45.8%67th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense33.0%69th
  Defense29.7%58th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.4293rd
  Defense2.9467th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense13.6%86th
  Defense19.1%71st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense12.2%87th
  Defense16.3%53rd

Percentiles among the 131 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, 2022

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 UCF 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
   SCST
2. L
   LOU
3. W
   FAU
4. W
   GT
5. W
   SMU
6. W
   TEM
7. L
   ECU
8. W
   CIN
9. W
   MEM
10. W
    TULN
11. L
    NAVY
12. W
    USF
13. L
    TULN
14. L
    DUKE

Bars above the line: better than expected for UCF.

Players, 2022

1. John Rhys PlumleeQB368 plays · +0.232 pts/play · 41st of 234 QBs
   1.60WAR0.83 to 2.35
2. Isaiah BowserRB172 plays · +0.151 pts/play · 36th of 384 RBs
   0.48WAR0.34 to 0.62
3. RJ HarveyRB118 plays · +0.160 pts/play · 72nd of 384 RBs
   0.35WAR0.26 to 0.46
4. Javon BakerWR62 plays · +0.191 pts/play · 45th of 455 WRs
   0.22WAR0.11 to 0.33
5. Kobe HudsonWR44 plays · +0.260 pts/play · 48th of 455 WRs
   0.21WAR0.13 to 0.29
6. Mikey KeeneQB91 plays · +0.124 pts/play · 174th of 234 QBs
   0.21WAR0.05 to 0.40
7. Johnny RichardsonRB65 plays · +0.123 pts/play · 206th of 384 RBs
   0.15WAR0.10 to 0.21
8. Ryan O'KeefeWR86 plays · +0.075 pts/play · 177th of 455 WRs
   0.12WAR0.00 to 0.23

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 UCF'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, 2022

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  63663653rd of 129Roster talent: 636, 53rd of 129 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  17717761st of 129Recruiting: 177, 61st of 129 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  64%64%55th of 128Returning production: 64%, 55th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +10.3+10.335th of 129SP+ rating: +10.3, 35th of 129 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 129 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, 2022

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 UCF'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 0.05 of the 0.10 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 MEMQ4 8:30 4th & 1 at midfield, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−3.5 pts
2. at DUKEQ4 5:25 4th & 18 at UCF 32, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.2 pts
3. at TULNQ4 0:04 4th & 6 at TULN 39, up 7Punted; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.9 pts
4. vs GTQ4 14:09 4th & 2 at UCF 45, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
5. vs LOUQ2 0:55 4th & 6 at LOU 45, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
6. vs NAVYQ2 12:27 4th & 4 at NAVY 4, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
7. vs SMUQ1 6:04 4th & 1 at UCF 32, down 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
8. at TULNQ4 5:42 4th & 10 at UCF 49, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2022

94th of 131 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   SCST
2. L

   LOU
3. W

   FAU
4. W

   GT
5. W

   SMU
6. W

   TEM
7. L

   ECU
8. W

   CIN
9. W

   MEM
10. W

    TULN
11. L

    NAVY
12. W

    USF
13. L

    TULN
14. L

    DUKE

What moved it, 2022

Every game starts at UCF'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+0.06
• Possession & field position+0.03
• Clock+0.03
• Timeouts−0.01
• Other+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−1.09

Game by game

• SCSTW 56-10 vs SCST99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• LOUL 14-20 vs LOU68% → 6%Before kickoff +18 · On the field −62: Scoreboard −55, Clock −3
• FAUW 40-14 at FAU71% → 100%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +29: Scoreboard +35, Clock +1
• GTW 27-10 vs GT92% → 99%Before kickoff +42 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +12
• SMUW 41-19 vs SMU60% → 99%Before kickoff +10 · On the field +39: Scoreboard +39, Clock +1
• TEMW 70-13 vs TEM93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +9
• ECUL 13-34 at ECU65% → 0%Before kickoff +15 · On the field −65: Scoreboard −54, Timeouts −2
• CINW 25-21 vs CIN59% → 97%Before kickoff +9 · On the field +37: Scoreboard +33, Timeouts +2
• MEMW 35-28 at MEM58% → 95%Before kickoff +8 · On the field +37: Scoreboard +45, Clock +3
• TULNW 38-31 at TULN45% → 91%Before kickoff −5 · On the field +46: Scoreboard +46, Clock +3
• NAVYL 14-17 vs NAVY90% → 5%Before kickoff +40 · On the field −85: Scoreboard −52, Clock −2
• USFW 46-39 at USF92% → 83%Before kickoff +42 · On the field −9: Scoreboard +22, Possession & field position −2
• TULNL 28-45 at TULN39% → 2%Before kickoff −11 · On the field −37: Scoreboard −36, Clock −1
• DUKEL 13-30 at DUKE44% → 1%Before kickoff −6 · On the field −43: Scoreboard −40, Timeouts −2

Points of win probability, from UCF's side.

Closest call

UCF 32-30 ECU (2014) - UCF dropped to a 5.0% win probability before pulling it out.