FanBoardHQ

Michigan State

Michigan State University · 2023 · Big Ten

FanBoardHQ CFP
#90
Efficiency
-6.7
91st FBS
Record
4-8
Conf. record
2-7
Conf. finish
13th
of 14
Michigan State Fanboard →

Michigan State went 4-8 and was ranked 90th in the FanBoardHQ CFP Rankings (blended resume and efficiency). Their 70th-ranked defense carried them, with a 92nd-ranked offense. They passed the ball on 56% of offensive plays with an 88th-ranked passing attack and ran the ball on the remaining 44% of plays with a 123rd-ranked rushing attack.

Quadrant record

By opponent strength, adjusted for where the game was played.

Q1
0-4
Q2
0-3
Q3
1-1
Q4
3-0

Projected wins

Per-game win probabilities combined across the full schedule.

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Expected: 4.0 wins
Strength of Record
91st
-3.1 wins above a 25th-ranked team's expectation
Strength of Schedule
to date
15th
full season
15th
AP poll
Unranked
Conf. sched. difficulty
27th
a 25th-ranked team would win ~4.8 conference games on this schedule

The resume

Every game on the schedule. Click a row for the game breakdown (played) or the matchup projection (upcoming).

WkOpponentConfOpp rankResultExp. marginWin probGameScoreQuad
1vs Central MichiganMid-American#107W 317+11.3100%6.2Q4
2vs RichmondCoastal AthleticW 4514+19.2100%8.8Q4
3vs WashingtonPac-12#1L 741-25.60%-21.8Q1
4vs MarylandBig Ten#35L 931-13.40%-15.3Q2
5@ IowaBig Ten#30L 1626-12.80%-2.7Q2
7@ RutgersBig Ten#46L 2427-12.30%1.7Q2
8vs MichiganBig Ten#2L 049-33.20%-16.3Q1
9@ MinnesotaBig Ten#74L 1227-6.80%-13.6Q3
10vs NebraskaBig Ten#79W 2017-3.7100%0.4Q4
11@ Ohio StateBig Ten#7L 338-34.70%-14.2Q1
12@ IndianaBig Ten#104W 2421-4.3100%0.5Q3
13vs Penn StateBig Ten#12L 042-29.10%-14.4Q1

12 played · 4-8. Expected margin and gamescore use the latest ratings — a completed game shows what the model would say now, not that week.

The season

The model’s read on Michigan State, recomputed after every week. Toggle between overall, offensive, and defensive efficiency (each with a dot for that week’s game) or the FanBoardHQ CFP rank.

-19.4-6.5+6.369-22-15-32-16-140-141-14Week 0Week 17
Line = the model's read each week; dots = that week's game (green above the line, red below).

Passing & rushing

Opponent-adjusted, FBS-only. The bar is the blended Eff rank — EPA/play (scoring value), success rate (staying on schedule), and yards/play (explosiveness), each standardized against the FBS field. The three ranks below each bar are those components, so you can see what's driving it.

Offense
PassingEff 88th
SR 94thYPP 88thEPA 87th
RushingEff 123rd
SR 111thYPP 115thEPA 132nd
Defense
Pass defenseEff 67th
SR 98thYPP 61stEPA 58th
Rush defenseEff 67th
SR 78thYPP 40thEPA 73rd
Dropback rate 56%Tempo -6.7 snaps/game vs. averageFaced pass defenses ranked 36th on average
Success rate by down

Their offense vs. what their defense allows.

1st · Offense: 38%1st · Defense allowed: 46%1st2nd · Offense: 38%2nd · Defense allowed: 45%2nd3rd/4th · Offense: 33%3rd/4th · Defense allowed: 37%3rd/4th
OffenseDefense allowed
Points by quarter

Scored vs. allowed, all regular-season games.

Q1 · Scored: 33.0Q1 · Allowed: 58.0Q1Q2 · Scored: 56.0Q2 · Allowed: 124.0Q2Q3 · Scored: 45.0Q3 · Allowed: 40.0Q3Q4 · Scored: 52.0Q4 · Allowed: 89.0Q4
ScoredAllowed

What kind of team is this?

Every team by offensive and defensive efficiency (points/game vs. an average team, higher is better on both). Click a dot for that team.

elite bothdefense-ledrebuildingoffense-ledMichigan StateOffenseDefense
Michigan State Offense vs Defense, 2023
Offensive EffRanked 92nd
-4.2
Field position: -0.1Finishing drives: -4.1
Field position -0.1Finishing drives -4.1= -4.2
Offensive Eff efficiency split into field position and finishing

Field position 67th · Finishing 97th

Defensive EffRanked 70th
-0.7
Field position: +1.0Finishing drives: -1.7
Field position +1.0Finishing drives -1.7= -0.7
Defensive Eff efficiency split into field position and finishing

Field position 33rd · Finishing 80th

1.28 points per drive on offense, 2.22 allowed — starting, on average, at their own 28.

Play-calling & efficiency

What the offense did, by quarter and by down — raw, not opponent-adjusted.

By quarter
Quarter (att.)Pass / rushSuccessYd/play
Q1(171)53% / 47%36%4.6
Q2(212)58% / 42%35%5.0
Q3(188)48% / 52%42%4.6
Q4(161)55% / 45%34%5.0
how play-calling and results shifted through games — (n) = plays, season total
Passing by down
Down (att.)Avg. to goSuccessYd/play
1st(147)10.144%6.8
2nd(130)8.942%5.5
3rd(112)9.021%3.7
4th(5)7.460%12.0
All (394)37%5.5
Rushing by down
Down (att.)Avg. to goSuccessYd/play
1st(168)10.234%3.8
2nd(113)7.934%4.1
3rd(45)5.453%4.5
4th(12)1.350%1.8
All (338)37%3.9

Michigan State, all games.