Washington State

Profile vs. FBS, 2020

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+0.0733rd
  Defense+0.305th
• 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.
  Offense45.5%72nd
  Defense50.0%6th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.1924th
  Defense+1.2260th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1061st
  Defense+0.1425th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0526th
  Defense+0.432nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense51.5%78th
  Defense57.1%3rd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense30.3%40th
  Defense32.9%44th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.7939th
  Defense3.406th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense25.3%9th
  Defense18.3%36th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense18.3%27th
  Defense17.4%62nd

Percentiles among the 127 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, 2020

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
   ORST
2. L
   ORE
3. L
   USC
4. L
   UTAH

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

Players, 2020

1. Jayden de LauraQB131 plays · +0.106 pts/play · 114th of 212 QBs
   0.26WAR0.02 to 0.49
2. Deon McIntoshRB48 plays · +0.192 pts/play · 184th of 338 RBs
   0.17WAR0.13 to 0.21
3. Renard BellWR39 plays · +0.102 pts/play · 194th of 409 WRs
   0.07WAR0.03 to 0.12
4. Travell HarrisWR35 plays · +0.079 pts/play · 278th of 409 WRs
   0.05WAR0.01 to 0.09
5. Max BorghiRB10 plays · +0.210 pts/play · 279th of 338 RBs
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.05
6. Oscar Draguicevich IIIP17 plays · +0.063 pts/play · 47th of 77 punters
   0.02WAR0.00 to 0.04
7. Blake MazzaPK4 plays · +0.241 pts/play · 76th of 97 kickers
   0.02WAR0.01 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 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, 2020

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  51751774th of 127Roster talent: 517, 74th of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  18418453rd of 127Recruiting: 184, 53rd of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  46%46%99th of 127Returning production: 46%, 99th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +4.2+4.249th of 127SP+ rating: +4.2, 49th of 127 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 127 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, 2020

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 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 UTAHQ2 6:46 4th & 3 at WSU 37, up 14Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
2. at UTAHQ1 3:20 4th & 1 at WSU 43, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
3. at UTAHQ4 2:06 4th & 15 at WSU 20, down 10Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.2 pts
4. at UTAHQ1 15:00 4th & 1 at WSU 32, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
5. at USCQ3 9:48 4th & 2 at WSU 28, down 32Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
6. at ORSTQ2 13:33 4th & 6 at ORST 47, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)<0.1 pts
7. vs OREQ4 9:59 4th & 4 at ORE 7, down 9Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)<0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

62nd of 127 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

   ORST
2. L

   ORE
3. L

   USC
4. L

   UTAH

What moved it, 2020

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−0.25
• Clock+0.02
• Timeouts−0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.16

Game by game

• ORSTW 38-28 at ORST44% → 96%Before kickoff −6 · On the field +52: Scoreboard +53, Clock +3
• OREL 29-43 vs ORE21% → 1%Before kickoff −29 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −30, Clock −2
• USCL 13-38 at USC20% → 0%Before kickoff −30 · On the field −20: Scoreboard −22, Timeouts −1
• UTAHL 28-45 at UTAH23% → 1%Before kickoff −27 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −26, Timeouts −1

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.