Washington

Profile vs. FBS, 2023

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+0.2894th
  Defense+0.1146th
• 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.
  Offense51.2%97th
  Defense44.2%24th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2333rd
  Defense+1.1974th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1780th
  Defense+0.292nd
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.4187th
  Defense+0.0395th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense56.1%98th
  Defense50.1%20th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense38.0%92nd
  Defense29.7%58th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2570th
  Defense3.711st
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense15.4%63rd
  Defense11.0%3rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense12.1%95th
  Defense15.8%41st

Percentiles among the 133 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, 2023

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
   BOIS
2. W
   TLSA
3. W
   MSU
4. W
   CAL
5. W
   ARIZ
6. W
   ORE
7. W
   ASU
8. W
   STAN
9. W
   USC
10. W
    UTAH
11. W
    ORST
12. W
    WSU
13. W
    ORE
14. W
    TEX
15. L
    MICH

Bars above the line: better than expected for Washington.

Players, 2023

1. Michael Penix Jr.QB495 plays · +0.260 pts/play · 5th of 250 QBs
   2.41WAR1.40 to 3.46
2. Dillon JohnsonRB235 plays · +0.145 pts/play · 5th of 383 RBs
   0.64WAR0.43 to 0.83
3. Rome OdunzeWR104 plays · +0.266 pts/play · 1st of 457 WRs
   0.52WAR0.31 to 0.75
4. Ja'Lynn PolkWR70 plays · +0.221 pts/play · 22nd of 457 WRs
   0.29WAR0.11 to 0.50
5. Jack WestoverTE45 plays · +0.230 pts/play · 14th of 212 TEs
   0.19WAR0.11 to 0.28
6. Grady GrossPK17 plays · +0.357 pts/play · 25th of 113 kickers
   0.11WAR0.07 to 0.16
7. Jack McCallisterP40 plays · +0.128 pts/play · 48th of 103 punters
   0.10WAR0.05 to 0.14
8. Jalen McMillanWR46 plays · +0.097 pts/play · 210th of 457 WRs
   0.08WAR−0.01 to 0.19

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, 2023

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  75175126th of 130Roster talent: 751, 26th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  20220234th of 130Recruiting: 202, 34th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  89%89%7th of 128Returning production: 89%, 7th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +16.4+16.413th of 130SP+ rating: +16.4, 13th 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, 2023

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 1 clear-cut ones account for 0.03 of the 0.06 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 OREQ4 9:15 4th & 6 at ORE 16, down 4Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal−2.6 pts
2. at MICHQ4 4:29 4th & 13 at MICH 30, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−1.0 pts
3. vs ASUQ4 3:17 4th & 4 at ASU 7, up 5Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.9 pts
4. at MICHQ3 8:58 4th & 4 at MICH 28, down 10Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts
5. at MICHQ4 13:29 4th & 4 at WASH 29, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.4 pts
6. at ARIZQ4 0:09 4th & 1 at ARIZ 35, up 7Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.4 pts
7. vs WSUQ1 0:38 4th & 4 at WASH 40, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
8. at MICHQ2 10:27 4th & 7 at MICH 47, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2023

1st of 133 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

   BOIS
2. W

   TLSA
3. W

   MSU
4. W

   CAL
5. W

   ARIZ
6. W

   ORE
7. W

   ASU
8. W

   STAN
9. W

   USC
10. W

    UTAH
11. W

    ORST
12. W

    WSU
13. W

    ORE
14. W

    TEX
15. L

    MICH

What moved it, 2023

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+2.75
• Clock+0.11
• Timeouts+0.06
• Other+0.01
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.36

Game by game

• BOISW 56-19 vs BOIS84% → 100%Before kickoff +34 · On the field +16: Scoreboard +20
• TLSAW 43-10 vs TLSA98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• MSUW 41-7 at MSU86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +18, Clock +1
• CALW 59-32 vs CAL93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +10
• ARIZW 31-24 at ARIZ89% → 95%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +23, Clock +1
• OREW 36-33 vs ORE55% → 74%Before kickoff +5 · On the field +19: Scoreboard +15, Possession & field position −2
• ASUW 15-7 vs ASU96% → 97%Before kickoff +46 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +9
• STANW 42-33 at STAN96% → 96%Before kickoff +46 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +13, Clock +1
• USCW 52-42 at USC57% → 96%Before kickoff +7 · On the field +39: Scoreboard +46, Clock +3
• UTAHW 35-28 vs UTAH75% → 97%Before kickoff +25 · On the field +21: Scoreboard +26, Timeouts +2
• ORSTW 22-20 at ORST53% → 94%Before kickoff +3 · On the field +41: Scoreboard +47, Clock +3
• WSUW 24-21 vs WSU86% → 96%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +19, Timeouts +1
• OREW 34-31 vs ORE24% → 95%Before kickoff −26 · On the field +72: Scoreboard +39, Timeouts +3
• TEXW 37-31 vs TEX40% → 85%Before kickoff −10 · On the field +45: Scoreboard +24, Clock +2
• MICHL 13-34 at MICH36% → 0%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −36: Scoreboard −37

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.