Ball State · Week 2 analysis

Where the team stands

Ball State ranks No. 133 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -13.58 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 134; this update moves it +1 places and +2.15 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 2 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 1–1. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: -2.422. Prior-season margin: -10.212.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: -0.0189; EPA/play net: +0.0306; success-rate net: -0.0015; explosiveness net: +0.1092. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 1 eligible games. Excluded games contribute no fabricated EP observation. Opponent results can move a rating even during a bye.

The result and the reconstructed expectation

Ball State beat Stony Brook by 24 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of +15.36; the result was +8.64 points relative to that expectation.

This is a newly reconstructed forecast under the frozen EP model. It is not represented as a prediction published before the game, and it does not replace the original published grade.

Next scheduled test

The next scheduled opponent at this snapshot is Liberty on 2026-09-19. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 482 versus 330; Net passing yards: 256 versus 147; Rushing yards: 226 versus 183; First downs: 23 versus 15

Completions–attempts: 27-32 versus 22-36; Rush attempts: 36 versus 28; Yards per pass: 8.0 versus 4.1; Yards per rush: 6.3 versus 6.5

Read production alongside workload: more attempts can raise a yardage total without raising efficiency. The model uses opponent-adjusted rate signals, not this box score alone.

Defense and possession

The opponent scored 17 points and recorded 330 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 2 versus 4; Tackles for loss: 5 versus 11; Third downs: 3-10 versus 4-15; Fourth downs: 2-2 versus 1-2

Turnovers: 1 versus 2; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 1 versus 2; Penalties–yards: 11-99 versus 5-36; Possession time: 33:07 versus 26:53

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 1–1. The expected final record is 4.4–7.6 over 12 scheduled games.

Expected wins add recorded results to the estimated win probabilities of remaining games. They are not a list of certain winners. Probabilities use a symmetric approximation from historical development residuals; independent calibration has not been established.

The comparison around the ranking

Nearby in this same snapshot: No. 132 UL Monroe (-13.37); No. 134 Stanford (-13.70).

PSR compares predictive strength rather than sorting teams by wins. A team can win and move down, or lose and move up, as its performance and opponents change the adjusted evidence.

How to read this assessment

This is a fresh assessment under the frozen EP model, using this period's eligible inputs. Earlier published releases remain preserved separately; the reconstructed archive is not presented as a prediction published before those games.

Scoring margin, prior-season margin, first-down efficiency, EPA per play, success rate and explosiveness contribute together. Correlated signals should not be interpreted as independent proof of an advantage, and a model disagreement with a betting line is not proof of profit.