Kansas State · Week 6 analysis

Where the team stands

Kansas State ranks No. 46 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of +3.82 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 35; this update moves it -11 places and -1.56 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 5 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 3–2. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: +3.100. Prior-season margin: +9.667.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0334; EPA/play net: -0.0092; success-rate net: +0.0252; explosiveness net: -0.1457. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 4 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

Kansas State lost to Houston by 19 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -4.40; the result was -14.60 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 2026-10-17. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 299 versus 475; Net passing yards: 182 versus 242; Rushing yards: 117 versus 233; First downs: 19 versus 26

Completions–attempts: 16-30 versus 19-30; Rush attempts: 29 versus 43; Yards per pass: 6.1 versus 8.1; Yards per rush: 4.0 versus 5.4

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 35 points and recorded 475 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 0 versus 2; Tackles for loss: 1 versus 5; Third downs: 6-13 versus 7-14; Fourth downs: 0-0 versus 3-3

Turnovers: 1 versus 0; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 1 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 4-49 versus 8-74; Possession time: 25:11 versus 34:49

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 3–2. The expected final record is 6.5–5.5 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. 45 Navy (+4.16); No. 47 UCF (+3.72).

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.