Western Kentucky

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+0.3498th
  Defense+0.1350th
• 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.
  Offense52.6%98th
  Defense44.9%29th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2961st
  Defense+1.2270th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1045th
  Defense+0.0956th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.4495th
  Defense+0.2151st
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense56.0%95th
  Defense50.8%26th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense43.0%99th
  Defense29.8%55th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2572nd
  Defense3.1635th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense14.4%73rd
  Defense14.6%26th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.2%78th
  Defense16.6%50th

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 Western Kentucky 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
   UTM
2. L
   ARMY
3. L
   IU
4. L
   MSU
5. L
   UTSA
6. W
   ODU
7. W
   FIU
8. W
   CLT
9. W
   MTSU
10. W
    RICE
11. W
    FAU
12. W
    MRSH
13. L
    UTSA
14. W
    APP

Bars above the line: better than expected for Western Kentucky.

Players, 2021

1. Bailey ZappeQB559 plays · +0.351 pts/play · 1st of 219 QBs
   3.67WAR2.57 to 4.70
2. Jarreth SternsWR137 plays · +0.182 pts/play · 1st of 474 WRs
   0.47WAR0.30 to 0.65
3. Mitchell TinsleyWR92 plays · +0.198 pts/play · 14th of 474 WRs
   0.34WAR0.23 to 0.46
4. Noah WhittingtonRB92 plays · +0.196 pts/play · 131st of 387 RBs
   0.34WAR0.27 to 0.42
5. Adam CofieldRB59 plays · +0.163 pts/play · 230th of 387 RBs
   0.18WAR0.14 to 0.22
6. Daewood DavisWR46 plays · +0.187 pts/play · 110th of 474 WRs
   0.16WAR0.11 to 0.21
7. Malachi CorleyWR65 plays · +0.120 pts/play · 145th of 474 WRs
   0.15WAR0.07 to 0.22
8. Brayden NarvesonPK20 plays · +0.319 pts/play · 20th of 128 kickers
   0.12WAR0.07 to 0.17

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 Western Kentucky'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.
  52552574th of 130Roster talent: 525, 74th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  129129113th of 130Recruiting: 129, 113th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  51%51%102nd of 128Returning production: 51%, 102nd of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +13.3+13.324th of 130SP+ rating: +13.3, 24th 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 Western Kentucky'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 0.08 of the 0.11 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 IUQ4 11:42 4th & 1 at IU 48, down 2Punted; the numbers favored going for it−6.0 pts
2. vs UTSAQ2 0:00 4th & 3 at UTSA 37, down 4Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−2.2 pts
3. at MSUQ3 6:32 4th & 20 at MSU 20, down 26Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.8 pts
4. vs MTSUQ2 5:24 4th & 2 at MTSU 17, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.5 pts
5. vs IUQ4 4:27 4th & 7 at WKU 28, down 9Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.4 pts
6. vs CLTQ1 6:39 4th & 13 at WKU 22, up 4Went for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.3 pts
7. at UTSAQ2 9:21 4th & 8 at UTSA 35, down 8Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts
8. at ODUQ4 13:19 4th & 3 at WKU 28, up 20Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.3 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2021

34th of 130 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   UTM
2. L

   ARMY
3. L

   IU
4. L

   MSU
5. L

   UTSA
6. W

   ODU
7. W

   FIU
8. W

   CLT
9. W

   MTSU
10. W

    RICE
11. W

    FAU
12. W

    MRSH
13. L

    UTSA
14. W

    APP

What moved it, 2021

Every game starts at Western Kentucky'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+1.23
• Possession & field position+0.01
• Clock+0.01
• Timeouts−0.05
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.02

Game by game

• UTMW 59-21 vs UTM93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +10
• ARMYL 35-38 at ARMY26% → 5%Before kickoff −24 · On the field −21: Scoreboard −26, Timeouts −1
• IUL 31-33 vs IU20% → 18%Before kickoff −30 · On the field −2: Scoreboard −29, Clock −3
• MSUL 31-48 at MSU18% → 1%Before kickoff −32 · On the field −17: Scoreboard −20, Timeouts −2
• UTSAL 46-52 vs UTSA47% → 6%Before kickoff −3 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −49, Clock −3
• ODUW 43-20 at ODU78% → 100%Before kickoff +28 · On the field +21: Scoreboard +28, Clock +1
• FIUW 34-19 at FIU75% → 98%Before kickoff +25 · On the field +23: Scoreboard +35, Clock +2
• CLTW 45-13 vs CLT86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +17
• MTSUW 48-21 vs MTSU85% → 100%Before kickoff +35 · On the field +15: Scoreboard +18
• RICEW 42-21 at RICE86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +13: Scoreboard +21, Clock +1
• FAUW 52-17 vs FAU67% → 100%Before kickoff +17 · On the field +33: Scoreboard +35
• MRSHW 53-21 at MRSH40% → 100%Before kickoff −10 · On the field +60: Scoreboard +60, Clock +1
• UTSAL 41-49 at UTSA47% → 6%Before kickoff −3 · On the field −41: Scoreboard −34, Timeouts −2
• APPW 59-38 at APP43% → 100%Before kickoff −7 · On the field +56: Scoreboard +56, Clock +2

Points of win probability, from Western Kentucky's side.

Closest call

WKU 38-35 ODU (2023) - Western Kentucky dropped to a 2.4% win probability before pulling it out.