UMass’ points allowed with T.Y. Harding and without T.Y. Harding
, ,
Against what the season’s ratings expected, UMass was 4.5 points over with T.Y. Harding and 3.0 points over without T.Y. Harding over its last 25 games, 9 games against 11. The plain averages are 29.9 and 37.0, a difference of 7.1. All 5 opponents outside the major colleges were with T.Y. Harding. All 3 of Don Brown’s games were with T.Y. Harding. Both of Shane Montgomery’s games were with T.Y. Harding.
T.Y. Harding, receiver: 493 receiving yards, 43 receptions and 4 receiving touchdowns in 12 of those 25 games.
points allowed a game over expected
with T.Y. Harding
+4.5
without T.Y. Harding
+3.0
-1001020
A +1.5 difference in points allowed over expected with T.Y. Harding vs without T.Y. Harding is about what you’d expect.
plain
29.9
37.0
2040
A −7.1 difference in points allowed with T.Y. Harding vs without T.Y. Harding is about what you’d expect.
The games
with T.Y. Hardingwithout T.Y. Harding
| Side | Date | Game | Result | points allowed | Expected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 26, 2024 | vsWWagner | W | 7 | — | |
| Nov 2, 2024 | @ Mississippi State | L | 45 | 40.3 | |
| Nov 16, 2024 | vs Liberty | L | 35 | 29.7 | |
| Nov 23, 2024 | @ Georgia | L | 59 | 45.5 | |
| Nov 30, 2024 | vs UConn | L | 47 | 31.7 | |
| Aug 30, 2025 | vs Temple | L | 42 | 38.3 | |
| Sep 6, 2025 | vsBBryant | L | 27 | — | |
| Sep 13, 2025 | @ Iowa | L | 47 | 49.1 | |
| Sep 27, 2025 | @ Missouri | L | 42 | 46.4 | |
| Oct 4, 2025 | vs Western Michigan | L | 21 | 37.3 | |
| Oct 11, 2025 | @ Kent State | L | 42 | 37.5 | |
| Oct 18, 2025 | vs Buffalo | L | 28 | 32.4 | |
| Oct 25, 2025 | @ Central Michigan | L | 38 | 34.8 | |
| Nov 4, 2025 | @ Akron | L | 44 | 31.6 | |
| Nov 12, 2025 | vs Northern Illinois | L | 45 | 27.7 | |
| Nov 18, 2025 | @ Ohio | L | 42 | 39.6 | |
| Nov 25, 2025 | vs Bowling Green | L | 45 | 28.8 | |
| Sep 3, 2026 | @ Rutgers | W | 21 | 35.4 | |
| Sep 12, 2026 | vsSSacred Heart | W | 10 | — | |
| Sep 19, 2026 | vsSStonehill | W | 14 | — | |
| Sep 26, 2026 | @SSacramento State | W | 6 | — | |
| Oct 3, 2026 | vs Eastern Michigan | L | 38 | 17.8 | |
| Oct 10, 2026 | vs Miami (OH) | L | 20 | 25.3 | |
| Oct 17, 2026 | @Buffalo | L | 25 | 27.2 | |
| Oct 23, 2026 | @UConn | L | 35 | 30.7 |
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 1.5 in 2024, minus 1.5 in 2025, minus 1.9 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 75% in 2024, 78% in 2025, 66% 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.
- Wagner, Bryant, Sacred Heart, 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 20 of these 25 games; in the other 5 a player is counted as in them when the box score has a stat for him.