Coastal Carolina · Week 4 analysis

Where the team stands

Coastal Carolina ranks No. 109 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -7.32 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 80; this update moves it -29 places and -5.09 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 4 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 1–3. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: +0.628. Prior-season margin: -7.655.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0178; EPA/play net: +0.0015; success-rate net: -0.0451; explosiveness net: +0.1882. 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

Coastal Carolina lost to Liberty by 17 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of +4.83; the result was -21.83 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 Georgia Southern on 2026-10-03. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 292 versus 485; Net passing yards: 213 versus 222; Rushing yards: 79 versus 263; First downs: 18 versus 24

Completions–attempts: 17-35 versus 12-18; Rush attempts: 31 versus 45; Yards per pass: 6.1 versus 12.3; Yards per rush: 2.5 versus 5.8

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 34 points and recorded 485 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 3 versus 4; Tackles for loss: 4 versus 5; Third downs: 5-14 versus 4-9; Fourth downs: 2-4 versus 1-1

Turnovers: 2 versus 2; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 2; Interceptions thrown: 2 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 15-117 versus 9-90; Possession time: 27:19 versus 32:41

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 1–3. The expected final record is 4.0–8.0 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. 108 Florida Atlantic (-7.29); No. 110 New Mexico State (-7.38).

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.