South Alabama · Week 2 analysis

Where the team stands

South Alabama ranks No. 88 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -4.16 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 117; this update moves it +29 places and +4.77 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: +2.052. Prior-season margin: -3.738.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0208; EPA/play net: +0.0675; success-rate net: +0.0475; explosiveness net: -0.1109. 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

South Alabama lost to Tulane by 4 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -15.87; the result was +11.87 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 on 2026-09-19. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 478 versus 424; Net passing yards: 296 versus 212; Rushing yards: 182 versus 212; First downs: 25 versus 13

Completions–attempts: 22-32 versus 14-22; Rush attempts: 40 versus 29; Yards per pass: 9.3 versus 9.6; Yards per rush: 4.6 versus 7.3

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 28 points and recorded 424 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 1 versus 1; Tackles for loss: 4 versus 5; Third downs: 10-16 versus 6-12; Fourth downs: 0-2 versus 0-1

Turnovers: 0 versus 0; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 0 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 6-46 versus 4-30; Possession time: 37:40 versus 22:20

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 1–1. The expected final record is 6.3–5.7 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. 87 Georgia State (-3.81); No. 89 Florida International (-4.20).

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.