Washington State

Profile vs. FBS, 2019

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+0.1974th
  Defense+0.2017th
• 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.
  Offense51.8%95th
  Defense47.9%9th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1013th
  Defense+1.2150th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense0.0022nd
  Defense+0.1518th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.2566th
  Defense+0.2720th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense55.8%97th
  Defense53.6%4th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense39.6%91st
  Defense35.2%29th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0773rd
  Defense3.373rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense18.5%63rd
  Defense13.3%2nd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.4%61st
  Defense16.8%14th

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, 2019

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 Washington 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
   NMSU
2. W
   UNCO
3. W
   HOU
4. L
   UCLA
5. L
   UTAH
6. L
   ASU
7. W
   COLO
8. L
   ORE
9. L
   CAL
10. W
    STAN
11. W
    ORST
12. L
    WASH
13. L
    AF

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

Players, 2019

1. Anthony GordonQB592 plays · +0.199 pts/play · 10th of 228 QBs
   2.21WAR1.20 to 3.12
2. Max BorghiRB180 plays · +0.148 pts/play · 60th of 349 RBs
   0.50WAR0.36 to 0.64
3. Brandon ArconadoWR79 plays · +0.201 pts/play · 18th of 439 WRs
   0.30WAR0.21 to 0.38
4. Easop Winston Jr.WR86 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 51st of 439 WRs
   0.22WAR0.12 to 0.33
5. Dezmon PatmonWR59 plays · +0.199 pts/play · 53rd of 439 WRs
   0.22WAR0.15 to 0.30
6. Blake MazzaPK15 plays · +0.489 pts/play · 38th of 114 kickers
   0.14WAR0.10 to 0.18
7. Renard BellWR54 plays · +0.113 pts/play · 179th of 439 WRs
   0.11WAR0.06 to 0.17
8. Travell HarrisWR45 plays · +0.085 pts/play · 294th of 439 WRs
   0.07WAR0.03 to 0.12

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 Washington 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, 2019

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  55655670th of 130Roster talent: 556, 70th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  18118153rd of 130Recruiting: 181, 53rd of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  42%42%98th of 130Returning production: 42%, 98th of 130 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +11.1+11.128th of 130SP+ rating: +11.1, 28th 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, 2019

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 Washington State'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 0.03 of the 0.07 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 HOUQ3 3:25 4th & 1 at WSU 34, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
2. vs COLOQ2 0:05 4th & 3 at COLO 3, up 18Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.3 pts
3. at CALQ4 6:15 4th & 15 at WSU 35, down 12Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.7 pts
4. vs COLOQ2 5:22 4th & 2 at WSU 28, up 18Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
5. vs UCLAQ3 1:34 4th & 4 at UCLA 43, up 18Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
6. vs COLOQ3 15:00 4th & 2 at WSU 45, up 21Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
7. vs AFQ4 0:51 4th & 23 at WSU 48, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.4 pts
8. at WASHQ4 3:31 4th & 5 at WASH 15, down 18Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2019

120th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   NMSU
2. W

   UNCO
3. W

   HOU
4. L

   UCLA
5. L

   UTAH
6. L

   ASU
7. W

   COLO
8. L

   ORE
9. L

   CAL
10. W

    STAN
11. W

    ORST
12. L

    WASH
13. L

    AF

What moved it, 2019

Every game starts at Washington 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−1.31
• Possession & field position+0.02
• Clock−0.06
• Timeouts−0.04
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.56

Game by game

• NMSUW 58-7 vs NMSU97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +5
• UNCOW 59-17 vs UNCO99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• HOUW 31-24 at HOU70% → 96%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +26: Scoreboard +37, Clock +2
• UCLAL 63-67 vs UCLA88% → 4%Before kickoff +38 · On the field −84: Scoreboard −56, Clock −3
• UTAHL 13-38 at UTAH29% → 0%Before kickoff −21 · On the field −28: Scoreboard −28, Clock −2
• ASUL 34-38 at ASU53% → 13%Before kickoff +3 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −27, Timeouts −2
• COLOW 41-10 vs COLO78% → 100%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +22: Scoreboard +24
• OREL 35-37 at ORE12% → 5%Before kickoff −38 · On the field −7: Scoreboard −17
• CALL 20-33 at CAL70% → 1%Before kickoff +20 · On the field −69: Scoreboard −49, Timeouts −2
• STANW 49-22 vs STAN72% → 100%Before kickoff +22 · On the field +28: Scoreboard +31, Timeouts −1
• ORSTW 54-53 vs ORST73% → 94%Before kickoff +23 · On the field +21: Scoreboard +26, Possession & field position +1
• WASHL 13-31 at WASH28% → 1%Before kickoff −22 · On the field −27: Scoreboard −30, Possession & field position +1
• AFL 21-31 vs AF43% → 3%Before kickoff −7 · On the field −40: Scoreboard −47, Clock −3

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

Closest call

BOIS 44-47 WSU (2017) - Washington State dropped to a 1.9% win probability before pulling it out.