Washington

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+0.2587th
  Defense+0.0572nd
• 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.
  Offense46.1%75th
  Defense46.8%21st
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2235th
  Defense+0.9399th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1674th
  Defense+0.0650th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3890th
  Defense+0.0486th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense48.5%62nd
  Defense54.7%8th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense40.3%93rd
  Defense26.2%90th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense2.8040th
  Defense3.572nd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense19.9%51st
  Defense14.0%7th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense10.2%98th
  Defense14.3%25th

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 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. W
   ARIZ
3. W
   UTAH
4. L
   STAN

Bars above the line: better than expected for Washington.

Players, 2020

1. Dylan MorrisQB119 plays · +0.191 pts/play · 77th of 212 QBs
   0.43WAR0.24 to 0.61
2. Sean McGrewRB45 plays · +0.195 pts/play · 198th of 338 RBs
   0.16WAR0.13 to 0.19
3. Kamari PleasantRB42 plays · +0.161 pts/play · 233rd of 338 RBs
   0.13WAR0.10 to 0.15
4. Richard NewtonRB19 plays · +0.182 pts/play · 270th of 338 RBs
   0.06WAR0.05 to 0.08
5. Cade OttonTE18 plays · +0.108 pts/play · 26th of 191 TEs
   0.04WAR0.00 to 0.06
6. Terrell BynumWR13 plays · +0.122 pts/play · 334th of 409 WRs
   0.03WAR0.02 to 0.04
7. Peyton HenryPK7 plays · +0.197 pts/play · 65th of 97 kickers
   0.03WAR0.01 to 0.04
8. Cam DavisRB6 plays · +0.089 pts/play · 313th of 338 RBs
   0.01WAR0.00 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'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.
  81581518th of 127Roster talent: 815, 18th of 127 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  24724719th of 127Recruiting: 247, 19th of 127 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  28%28%116th of 127Returning production: 28%, 116th of 127 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +11.7+11.724th of 127SP+ rating: +11.7, 24th 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'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. vs UTAHQ4 12:32 4th & 5 at WASH 48, down 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
2. vs ORSTQ2 9:27 4th & 3 at WASH 30, up 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
3. vs STANQ2 11:59 4th & 4 at STAN 4, down 14Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
4. vs ARIZQ1 4:58 4th & 2 at ARIZ 2, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
5. vs STANQ2 3:09 4th & 6 at STAN 49, down 18Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
6. vs STANQ1 6:39 4th & 4 at STAN 46, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
7. vs ARIZQ2 6:04 4th & 10 at ARIZ 39, up 24Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
8. vs ARIZQ1 15:00 4th & 1 at WASH 31, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2020

67th of 127 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   ORST
2. W

   ARIZ
3. W

   UTAH
4. L

   STAN

What moved it, 2020

Every game starts at Washington'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+0.16
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Clock−0.04
• Timeouts+0.03
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.34

Game by game

• ORSTW 27-21 vs ORST83% → 97%Before kickoff +33 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +21, Timeouts +1
• ARIZW 44-27 vs ARIZ80% → 99%Before kickoff +30 · On the field +18: Scoreboard +24, Timeouts +1
• UTAHW 24-21 vs UTAH75% → 95%Before kickoff +25 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +26, Timeouts +2
• STANL 26-31 vs STAN77% → 5%Before kickoff +27 · On the field −72: Scoreboard −55, Clock −3

Points of win probability, from Washington's side.

Closest call

WASH 37-34 ORE (2022) - Washington dropped to a 6.2% win probability before pulling it out.