Maryland · Week 5 analysis

Where the team stands

Maryland ranks No. 80 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -2.27 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 75; this update moves it -5 places and -0.76 rating points.

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

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: +0.380. Prior-season margin: +2.857.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0319; EPA/play net: -0.0837; success-rate net: -0.0103; explosiveness net: -0.2257. 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

Maryland lost to Nebraska by 25 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -9.78; the result was -15.22 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 Ohio State on 2026-10-10. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 395 versus 447; Net passing yards: 254 versus 238; Rushing yards: 141 versus 209; First downs: 19 versus 28

Completions–attempts: 23-44 versus 26-39; Rush attempts: 25 versus 36; Yards per pass: 5.8 versus 6.1; Yards per rush: 5.6 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 48 points and recorded 447 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

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

Turnovers: 2 versus 1; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 2 versus 1; Penalties–yards: 12-115 versus 16-132; Possession time: 25:36 versus 34:24

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 2–3. The expected final record is 4.8–7.2 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. 79 Western Michigan (-1.91); No. 81 Georgia Tech (-2.57).

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.