Ohio’s third-down conversion rate with Duncan Brune and without Duncan Brune
, ,
Against what the season’s ratings expected, Ohio was 1.0 percentage points over with Duncan Brune and 19.1 percentage points over without Duncan Brune over its last 25 games, 18 games against 4. The plain averages are 43.3% and 60.1%, a difference of 16.8%. All 4 games after a bye were with Duncan Brune. All 3 of Tim Albin’s games were without Duncan Brune. All 12 of Brian Smith’s games were with Duncan Brune.
Duncan Brune, running back: 1,048 rushing yards, 211 carries and 10 receptions in 20 of those 25 games.
third-down conversion rate a game over expected
A −18.1% difference in third-down conversion rate over expected with Duncan Brune vs without Duncan Brune is a bit unusual: shuffle which games were with Duncan Brune and it comes up 12 times in 100.
A −16.8% difference in third-down conversion rate with Duncan Brune vs without Duncan Brune is a bit unusual: shuffle which games were with Duncan Brune and it comes up 13 times in 100.
The games
| Side | Date | Game | Result | 3rd downs | Expected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 2024 | vs Ball State | W | 70.0% | 47.9% | |
| Dec 7, 2024 | vs Miami (OH) (neutral) | W | 75.0% | 43.1% | |
| Dec 20, 2024 | vs Jacksonville State (neutral) | W | 41.7% | 45.1% | |
| Aug 28, 2025 | @ Rutgers | L | 50.0% | 35.5% | |
| Sep 6, 2025 | vs West Virginia | W | 35.7% | 37.8% | |
| Sep 13, 2025 | @ Ohio State | L | 20.0% | 31.0% | |
| Sep 20, 2025 | vsGGardner-Webb | W | 55.6% | — | |
| Sep 27, 2025 | vs Bowling Green | W | 40.0% | 41.2% | |
| Oct 4, 2025 | @Ball State | L | 50.0% | 42.6% | |
| Oct 18, 2025 | vs Northern Illinois | W | 69.2% | 44.5% | |
| Oct 25, 2025 | @ Eastern Michigan | W | 40.0% | 46.6% | |
| Nov 4, 2025 | vsMiami (OH) | W | 50.0% | 46.5% | |
| Nov 11, 2025 | @ Western Michigan | L | 27.3% | 38.5% | |
| Nov 18, 2025 | vs UMass | W | 42.9% | 49.7% | |
| Nov 28, 2025 | @ Buffalo | W | 41.2% | 39.2% | |
| Dec 23, 2025 | vs UNLV (neutral) | W | 36.4% | 34.6% | |
| Sep 5, 2026 | @ Nebraska | L | 40.0% | 31.9% | |
| Sep 12, 2026 | vsJacksonville State | W | 52.9% | 46.1% | |
| Sep 19, 2026 | @ South Alabama | L | 63.6% | 38.0% | |
| Sep 26, 2026 | vsSStonehill | W | 50.0% | — | |
| Oct 3, 2026 | @ Kent State | W | 40.0% | 41.9% | |
| Oct 10, 2026 | vs Central Michigan | W | 64.3% | 46.3% | |
| Oct 17, 2026 | @SSacramento State | W | 50.0% | — | |
| Oct 24, 2026 | vsEastern Michigan | W | 27.3% | 48.5% | |
| Nov 3, 2026 | @ Akron | W | 33.3% | 40.5% |
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, plus 0.6% in 2024, plus 0.7% in 2025, plus 1.4% 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 50% in 2024, 56% in 2025, 40% 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.