Vanderbilt

Profile vs. FBS, 2024

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+0.1560th
  Defense+0.1822nd
• 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.
  Offense42.2%45th
  Defense46.9%10th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2023rd
  Defense+1.1876th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0632nd
  Defense+0.0752nd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2983rd
  Defense+0.2917th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense47.7%44th
  Defense51.3%14th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense31.1%44th
  Defense36.1%9th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8022nd
  Defense2.9853rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense21.5%13th
  Defense19.5%71st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense15.5%60th
  Defense16.7%56th

Percentiles among the 134 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, 2024

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 Vanderbilt 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
   VT
2. W
   ALCN
3. L
   GAST
4. L
   MIZ
5. W
   ALA
6. W
   UK
7. W
   BALL
8. L
   TEX
9. W
   AUB
10. L
    SC
11. L
    LSU
12. L
    TENN
13. W
    GT

Bars above the line: better than expected for Vanderbilt.

Players, 2024

1. Diego PaviaQB437 plays · +0.306 pts/play · 5th of 232 QBs
   2.50WAR1.80 to 3.14
2. Sedrick AlexanderRB167 plays · +0.109 pts/play · 68th of 373 RBs
   0.34WAR0.23 to 0.45
3. Eli StowersTE53 plays · +0.193 pts/play · 7th of 221 TEs
   0.19WAR0.08 to 0.31
4. Brock TaylorPK18 plays · +0.391 pts/play · 10th of 114 kickers
   0.13WAR0.09 to 0.17
5. Jesse MircoP46 plays · +0.137 pts/play · 18th of 106 punters
   0.12WAR0.05 to 0.18
6. AJ NewberryRB42 plays · +0.126 pts/play · 244th of 373 RBs
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.12
7. Junior SherrillWR36 plays · +0.114 pts/play · 186th of 452 WRs
   0.08WAR0.01 to 0.15
8. Quincy Skinner Jr.WR29 plays · +0.047 pts/play · 313th of 452 WRs
   0.03WAR−0.06 to 0.10

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 Vanderbilt'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, 2024

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  69669650th of 131Roster talent: 696, 50th of 131 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  20020040th of 131Recruiting: 200, 40th of 131 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  16%16%122nd of 130Returning production: 16%, 122nd of 130 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +4.9+4.949th of 131SP+ rating: +4.9, 49th of 131 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 131 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, 2024

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 Vanderbilt's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 3 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 AUBQ3 1:05 4th & 2 at AUB 13, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.2 pts
2. vs VTQ4 7:38 4th & 13 at VT 36, tiedPunted; the numbers favored a field goal−1.5 pts
3. at UKQ3 7:51 4th & 4 at UK 31, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
4. vs TENNQ2 7:09 4th & 1 at VAN 34, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
5. at GASTQ4 7:43 4th & 3 at GAST 25, down 12Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.8 pts
6. at LSUQ3 8:26 4th & 4 at LSU 29, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
7. vs SCQ2 9:47 4th & 2 at VAN 43, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
8. at AUBQ3 4:12 4th & 6 at AUB 46, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2024

13th of 134 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   VT
2. W

   ALCN
3. L

   GAST
4. L

   MIZ
5. W

   ALA
6. W

   UK
7. W

   BALL
8. L

   TEX
9. W

   AUB
10. L

    SC
11. L

    LSU
12. L

    TENN
13. W

    GT

What moved it, 2024

Every game starts at Vanderbilt'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+0.95
• Possession & field position−0.02
• Clock+0.08
• Timeouts−0.04
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+1.57

Game by game

• VTW 34-27 vs VT16% → 91%Before kickoff −34 · On the field +76: Scoreboard +34, Timeouts −18
• ALCNW 55-0 vs ALCN97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +4
• GASTL 32-36 at GAST76% → 17%Before kickoff +26 · On the field −59: Scoreboard −20, Possession & field position −3
• MIZL 27-30 at MIZ8% → 15%Before kickoff −42 · On the field +6: Scoreboard −12, Timeouts +10
• ALAW 40-35 vs ALA5% → 96%Before kickoff −45 · On the field +90: Scoreboard +36, Timeouts +2
• UKW 20-13 at UK18% → 95%Before kickoff −32 · On the field +77: Scoreboard +55, Clock +3
• BALLW 24-14 vs BALL95% → 98%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +11, Timeouts −1
• TEXL 24-27 vs TEX10% → 5%Before kickoff −40 · On the field −5: Scoreboard −22, Clock −1
• AUBW 17-7 at AUB21% → 97%Before kickoff −29 · On the field +76: Scoreboard +59, Clock +3
• SCL 7-28 vs SC34% → 0%Before kickoff −16 · On the field −34: Scoreboard −39, Clock −2
• LSUL 17-24 at LSU22% → 2%Before kickoff −28 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −25, Possession & field position −1
• TENNL 23-36 vs TENN21% → 1%Before kickoff −29 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −30, Clock −1
• GTW 35-27 vs GT35% → 97%Before kickoff −15 · On the field +62: Scoreboard +44, Timeouts +3

Points of win probability, from Vanderbilt's side.

Closest call

VAN 31-30 WKU (2016) - Vanderbilt dropped to a 3.5% win probability before pulling it out.