Utah State

Profile vs. FBS, 2021

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+0.1753rd
  Defense+0.0975th
• 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.
  Offense39.7%20th
  Defense42.7%46th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.5099th
  Defense+1.2460th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense−0.028th
  Defense+0.0375th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.4294th
  Defense+0.2342nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense43.1%12th
  Defense49.6%34th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense33.1%69th
  Defense29.1%61st
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.676th
  Defense2.6791st
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense21.0%10th
  Defense22.7%94th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense17.7%26th
  Defense19.8%90th

Percentiles among the 130 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, 2021

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 Utah 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
   WSU
2. W
   UND
3. W
   AF
4. L
   BOIS
5. L
   BYU
6. W
   UNLV
7. W
   CSU
8. W
   HAW
9. W
   NMSU
10. W
    SJSU
11. L
    WYO
12. W
    UNM
13. W
    SDSU
14. W
    ORST

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

Players, 2021

1. Logan BonnerQB400 plays · +0.283 pts/play · 28th of 219 QBs
   2.12WAR1.43 to 2.79
2. Calvin Tyler Jr.RB166 plays · +0.161 pts/play · 68th of 387 RBs
   0.50WAR0.31 to 0.67
3. Deven ThompkinsWR100 plays · +0.227 pts/play · 2nd of 474 WRs
   0.43WAR0.30 to 0.55
4. Elelyon NoaRB109 plays · +0.184 pts/play · 107th of 387 RBs
   0.37WAR0.28 to 0.47
5. Andrew PeasleyQB51 plays · +0.262 pts/play · 167th of 219 QBs
   0.25WAR0.14 to 0.36
6. Brandon BowlingWR50 plays · +0.209 pts/play · 70th of 474 WRs
   0.20WAR0.13 to 0.26
7. Derek WrightWR49 plays · +0.192 pts/play · 92nd of 474 WRs
   0.18WAR0.11 to 0.24
8. John GentryRB50 plays · +0.144 pts/play · 262nd of 387 RBs
   0.13WAR0.10 to 0.17

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 Utah 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, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  394394107th of 130Roster talent: 394, 107th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  116116126th of 130Recruiting: 116, 126th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  91%91%25th of 128Returning production: 91%, 25th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +0.1+0.180th of 130SP+ rating: +0.1, 80th 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, 2021

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 Utah State'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 0.12 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 CSUQ4 10:47 4th & 1 at USU 44, up 9Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.2 pts
2. vs BOISQ4 14:03 4th & 3 at BOIS 3, down 17Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.6 pts
3. vs CSUQ4 5:03 4th & 3 at CSU 17, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
4. vs WYOQ3 12:33 4th & 10 at WYO 25, down 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−1.1 pts
5. vs BOISQ3 10:53 4th & 10 at USU 26, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting−1.1 pts
6. vs WYOQ2 10:29 4th & 1 at USU 11, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
7. at AFQ4 5:56 4th & 3 at USU 22, down 1Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.7 pts
8. at WSUQ2 12:01 4th & 4 at WSU 38, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

1st of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   WSU
2. W

   UND
3. W

   AF
4. L

   BOIS
5. L

   BYU
6. W

   UNLV
7. W

   CSU
8. W

   HAW
9. W

   NMSU
10. W

    SJSU
11. L

    WYO
12. W

    UNM
13. W

    SDSU
14. W

    ORST

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Utah 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+2.26
• Possession & field position−0.05
• Clock+0.12
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.75

Game by game

• WSUW 26-23 at WSU10% → 74%Before kickoff −40 · On the field +64: Scoreboard +29, Clock +2
• UNDW 48-24 vs UND69% → 1%Before kickoff +19 · On the field −68: Scoreboard −62, Clock −3
• AFW 49-45 at AF23% → 95%Before kickoff −27 · On the field +72: Scoreboard +57, Clock +4
• BOISL 3-27 vs BOIS22% → 0%Before kickoff −28 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −29, Clock −1
• BYUL 20-34 vs BYU28% → 3%Before kickoff −22 · On the field −25: Scoreboard −37, Clock −1
• UNLVW 28-24 at UNLV65% → 100%Before kickoff +15 · On the field +35: Scoreboard +40, Clock +2
• CSUW 26-24 vs CSU39% → 74%Before kickoff −11 · On the field +35: Scoreboard +16, Possession & field position −5
• HAWW 51-31 vs HAW62% → 98%Before kickoff +12 · On the field +36: Scoreboard +33, Possession & field position +2
• NMSUW 35-13 at NMSU81% → 100%Before kickoff +31 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +26, Clock +1
• SJSUW 48-17 at SJSU34% → 100%Before kickoff −16 · On the field +65: Scoreboard +62, Clock +3
• WYOL 17-44 vs WYO60% → 0%Before kickoff +10 · On the field −59: Scoreboard −59, Clock −1
• UNMW 35-10 at UNM83% → 100%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +24, Clock +1
• SDSUW 46-13 at SDSU27% → 100%Before kickoff −23 · On the field +73: Scoreboard +67, Possession & field position −1
• ORSTW 24-13 at ORST29% → 97%Before kickoff −21 · On the field +68: Scoreboard +61, Clock +4

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

Closest call

SJSU 25-30 USU (2025) - Utah State dropped to a 0.5% win probability before pulling it out.