Ohio’s penalty yards with Nick Poulos and without Nick Poulos
, ,
Against what the season’s ratings expected, Ohio was 24.3 yards under with Nick Poulos and 1.8 yards under without Nick Poulos over its last 25 games, 3 games against 19. The plain averages are 34.0 and 48.3, a difference of 14.3. All 3 neutral-site games were without Nick Poulos. All 3 games after a bye were without Nick Poulos. Both bowl and playoff games were without Nick Poulos.
Nick Poulos, quarterback: 824 passing yards, 109 pass attempts and 63 completions in 9 of those 25 games.
penalty yards a game over expected
A −22.5 difference in penalty yards over expected with Nick Poulos vs without Nick Poulos is a bit unusual: shuffle which games were with Nick Poulos and it comes up 12 times in 100.
A −14.3 difference in penalty yards with Nick Poulos vs without Nick Poulos is about what you’d expect.
The games
| Side | Date | Game | Result | penalty yards | Expected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 20, 2024 | @ Toledo | W | 50 | 54.3 | |
| Nov 29, 2024 | vs Ball State | W | 55 | 48.6 | |
| Dec 7, 2024 | vs Miami (OH) (neutral) | W | 20 | 45.5 | |
| Dec 20, 2024 | vs Jacksonville State (neutral) | W | 69 | 50.6 | |
| Aug 28, 2025 | @ Rutgers | L | 37 | 53.0 | |
| Sep 6, 2025 | vs West Virginia | W | 68 | 52.2 | |
| Sep 13, 2025 | @ Ohio State | L | 25 | 43.5 | |
| Sep 20, 2025 | vsGGardner-Webb | W | 35 | — | |
| Sep 27, 2025 | vs Bowling Green | W | 35 | 51.6 | |
| Oct 4, 2025 | @Ball State | L | 90 | 51.8 | |
| Oct 18, 2025 | vs Northern Illinois | W | 75 | 47.9 | |
| Oct 25, 2025 | @ Eastern Michigan | W | 52 | 59.8 | |
| Nov 4, 2025 | vsMiami (OH) | W | 41 | 47.7 | |
| Nov 11, 2025 | @ Western Michigan | L | 20 | 52.1 | |
| Nov 18, 2025 | vs UMass | W | 60 | 48.0 | |
| Nov 28, 2025 | @ Buffalo | W | 40 | 47.9 | |
| Dec 23, 2025 | vs UNLV (neutral) | W | 50 | 59.1 | |
| Sep 5, 2026 | @ Nebraska | L | 30 | 52.2 | |
| Sep 12, 2026 | vsJacksonville State | W | 25 | 58.4 | |
| Sep 19, 2026 | @ South Alabama | L | 52 | 46.0 | |
| Sep 26, 2026 | vsSStonehill | W | 45 | — | |
| Oct 3, 2026 | @ Kent State | W | 70 | 50.4 | |
| Oct 10, 2026 | vs Central Michigan | W | 26 | 47.9 | |
| Oct 17, 2026 | @SSacramento State | W | 55 | — | |
| Oct 24, 2026 | vsEastern Michigan | W | 25 | 53.8 |
Method
- Expected is an offense and a defense a team, fit over every game of its season between two teams in the table with the game being read left out, minus 0.8 in 2024, minus 2.1 in 2025, minus 1.3 in 2026 for the home team (the edge the fit finds once strength is in), nothing at a neutral site.
- Each expected number is then fit to the season’s games: a game bears out about 44% in 2024, 45% in 2025, 27% in 2026 of the difference the model predicts.
- The shuffle keeps the season’s shape: the games are cut in two where one date leaves the least variance, each game is read against its stretch, and the sides are shuffled only inside each stretch.
- Gardner-Webb, Stonehill, Sacramento State have no other game in the table, so those games have no expected number and sit out the second figure.
- Who played is read from the schools’ box scores’ participation lists for 21 of these 25 games; in the other 4 a player is counted as in them when the box score has a stat for him.
- With him means he was the team’s quarterback that game, at least half of its pass attempts; a game he left early or came into late reads as without him.