Baylor · No. 64 · Week 7 analysis

Where the team stands

Baylor ranks No. 64 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of +1.39 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 49; this update moves it -15 places and -1.76 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 6 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 4–2. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: +4.433. Prior-season margin: +4.734.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0202; EPA/play net: +0.0793; success-rate net: +0.0315; explosiveness net: -0.0221. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 3 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

Baylor lost to TCU by 11 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of +1.22; the result was -12.22 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 Kansas on 2026-10-24. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 314 versus 335; Net passing yards: 260 versus 294; Rushing yards: 54 versus 41; First downs: 23 versus 18

Completions–attempts: 22-52 versus 21-36; Rush attempts: 34 versus 28; Yards per pass: 5.0 versus 8.2; Yards per rush: 1.6 versus 1.5

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 335 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 4 versus 4; Tackles for loss: 10 versus 6; Third downs: 6-22 versus 7-16; Fourth downs: 4-5 versus 0-0

Turnovers: 2 versus 1; Fumbles lost: 1 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 1 versus 1; Penalties–yards: 7-65 versus 8-85; Possession time: 28:18 versus 30:34

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 4–2. The expected final record is 5.8–6.2 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. 63 Michigan (+1.49); No. 65 Louisiana (+1.34).

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.