Washington

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+0.028th
  Defense+0.1447th
• 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.
  Offense42.3%43rd
  Defense43.3%39th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.133rd
  Defense+1.0799th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0214th
  Defense+0.2315th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1018th
  Defense+0.0887th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense47.8%46th
  Defense49.6%33rd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense29.7%38th
  Defense28.4%70th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0039th
  Defense3.479th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense11.6%97th
  Defense11.5%5th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense17.8%25th
  Defense14.7%23rd

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 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. L
   MONT
2. L
   MICH
3. W
   ARST
4. W
   CAL
5. L
   ORST
6. L
   UCLA
7. W
   ARIZ
8. W
   STAN
9. L
   ORE
10. L
    ASU
11. L
    COLO
12. L
    WSU

Bars above the line: better than expected for Washington.

Players, 2021

1. Dylan MorrisQB348 plays · +0.270 pts/play · 45th of 219 QBs
   1.76WAR1.02 to 2.33
2. Sean McGrewRB107 plays · +0.183 pts/play · 112th of 387 RBs
   0.37WAR0.28 to 0.46
3. Cam DavisRB90 plays · +0.157 pts/play · 175th of 387 RBs
   0.26WAR0.20 to 0.33
4. Kamari PleasantRB68 plays · +0.190 pts/play · 192nd of 387 RBs
   0.24WAR0.18 to 0.31
5. Jalen McMillanWR46 plays · +0.178 pts/play · 126th of 474 WRs
   0.15WAR0.11 to 0.19
6. Rome OdunzeWR58 plays · +0.127 pts/play · 161st of 474 WRs
   0.14WAR0.08 to 0.20
7. Terrell BynumWR36 plays · +0.158 pts/play · 215th of 474 WRs
   0.11WAR0.06 to 0.15
8. Taj DavisWR33 plays · +0.168 pts/play · 231st of 474 WRs
   0.10WAR0.08 to 0.13

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, 2021

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  79079018th of 130Roster talent: 790, 18th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  24224218th of 130Recruiting: 242, 18th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  83%83%51st of 128Returning production: 83%, 51st of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  −0.7−0.783rd of 130SP+ rating: −0.7, 83rd 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 Washington's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 7 clear-cut ones account for 0.19 of the 0.26 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 MONTQ4 0:41 4th & 10 at WASH 32, up 4Went for it; the numbers favored punting−4.4 pts
2. at STANQ4 3:12 4th & 5 at STAN 35, down 1Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−3.3 pts
3. at ORSTQ2 0:00 4th & 2 at ORST 2, down 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−3.1 pts
4. vs ASUQ3 6:32 4th & 9 at WASH 31, up 3Went for it; the numbers favored punting−2.9 pts
5. vs ARSTQ4 8:05 4th & 2 at ARST 20, up 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.1 pts
6. at ARIZQ2 4:12 4th & 1 at WASH 47, down 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
7. at COLOQ2 7:14 4th & 1 at WASH 31, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.0 pts
8. at MICHQ2 12:16 4th & 1 at WASH 36, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

126th of 130 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. L

   MONT
2. L

   MICH
3. W

   ARST
4. W

   CAL
5. L

   ORST
6. L

   UCLA
7. W

   ARIZ
8. W

   STAN
9. L

   ORE
10. L

    ASU
11. L

    COLO
12. L

    WSU

What moved it, 2021

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−1.63
• Clock−0.04
• Timeouts−0.06
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.71

Game by game

• MONTL 7-13 vs MONT94% → 74%Before kickoff +44 · On the field −21: Scoreboard +6, Timeouts −1
• MICHL 10-31 at MICH32% → 0%Before kickoff −18 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −33, Timeouts −1
• ARSTW 52-3 vs ARST90% → 81%Before kickoff +40 · On the field −9: Scoreboard +14, Timeouts −3
• CALW 31-24 vs CAL70% → 95%Before kickoff +20 · On the field +26: Scoreboard +30, Possession & field position −1
• ORSTL 24-27 at ORST48% → 6%Before kickoff −2 · On the field −42: Scoreboard −37, Possession & field position +1
• UCLAL 17-24 vs UCLA56% → 6%Before kickoff +6 · On the field −50: Scoreboard −52, Clock −3
• ARIZW 21-16 at ARIZ89% → 90%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +22, Clock +1
• STANW 20-13 at STAN49% → 95%Before kickoff −1 · On the field +46: Scoreboard +49, Clock +3
• OREL 16-26 vs ORE32% → 4%Before kickoff −18 · On the field −28: Scoreboard −39, Clock −2
• ASUL 30-35 vs ASU34% → 15%Before kickoff −16 · On the field −19: Scoreboard −37, Clock −2
• COLOL 17-20 at COLO71% → 7%Before kickoff +21 · On the field −63: Scoreboard −35, Timeouts −3
• WSUL 13-40 vs WSU50% → 0%Before kickoff 0 · On the field −50: Scoreboard −51, Clock −2

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.