Wake Forest · Week 3 analysis

Where the team stands

Wake Forest ranks No. 62 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of +0.70 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 50; this update moves it -12 places and -2.57 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 3 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 2–1. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: +0.057. Prior-season margin: +9.141.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0093; EPA/play net: +0.0000; success-rate net: +0.0000; explosiveness net: +0.0000. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 0 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

Wake Forest lost to Miami by 13 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -19.76; the result was +6.76 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 Louisville on 2026-09-26. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 334 versus 378; Net passing yards: 312 versus 220; Rushing yards: 22 versus 158; First downs: 20 versus 23

Completions–attempts: 29-46 versus 30-34; Rush attempts: 16 versus 34; Yards per pass: 6.8 versus 6.5; Yards per rush: 1.4 versus 4.6

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 33 points and recorded 378 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 1 versus 3; Tackles for loss: 2 versus 5; Third downs: 4-12 versus 5-13; Fourth downs: 1-3 versus 0-0

Turnovers: 1 versus 0; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 1 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 13-122 versus 7-75; Possession time: 26:36 versus 33:24

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 2–1. The expected final record is 6.6–5.4 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. 61 North Carolina (+0.97); No. 63 Arkansas State (+0.13).

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.