South Florida · Week 6 analysis

Where the team stands

South Florida ranks No. 29 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of +7.03 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 24; this update moves it -5 places and -1.23 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: +3.636. Prior-season margin: +18.969.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0269; EPA/play net: +0.0937; success-rate net: +0.0358; explosiveness net: +0.0129. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 2 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 Florida lost to UTSA by 7 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of +3.27; the result was -10.27 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 Kent State on 2026-10-17. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 288 versus 486; Net passing yards: 177 versus 209; Rushing yards: 111 versus 277; First downs: 19 versus 25

Completions–attempts: 16-30 versus 22-32; Rush attempts: 31 versus 43; Yards per pass: 5.9 versus 6.5; Yards per rush: 3.6 versus 6.4

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 31 points and recorded 486 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 2 versus 0; Tackles for loss: 4 versus 2; Third downs: 3-11 versus 8-14; Fourth downs: 2-2 versus 0-1

Turnovers: 0 versus 0; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 0 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 5-35 versus 7-73; Possession time: 27:35 versus 32:25

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 4–2. The expected final record is 8.5–3.5 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. 28 UCLA (+7.52); No. 30 Tennessee (+6.99).

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.