Washington’s third-down conversion rate with Demond Williams Jr. and without Demond Williams Jr.
, ,
Against what the season’s ratings expected, Washington was 0.4 percentage points under with Demond Williams Jr. and 2.8 percentage points over without Demond Williams Jr. over its last 25 games, 18 games against 5. The plain averages are 44.0% and 38.7%, a difference of 5.3%. Expected was 5.6 percentage points higher with Demond Williams Jr. than without Demond Williams Jr.. Both neutral-site games were with Demond Williams Jr.. Both opponents outside the major colleges were with Demond Williams Jr.. All 3 games while ranked were with Demond Williams Jr..
Demond Williams Jr., quarterback: 5,262 passing yards, 611 pass attempts and 425 completions in 24 of those 25 games.
third-down conversion rate a game over expected
A −3.2% difference in third-down conversion rate over expected with Demond Williams Jr. vs without Demond Williams Jr. is about what you’d expect.
A +5.3% difference in third-down conversion rate with Demond Williams Jr. vs without Demond Williams Jr. is about what you’d expect.
The games
| Side | Date | Game | Result | 3rd downs | Expected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9, 2024 | @ Penn State | L | 30.8% | 36.2% | |
| Nov 15, 2024 | vs UCLA | W | 33.3% | 42.2% | |
| Nov 30, 2024 | @ Oregon | L | 33.3% | 33.8% | |
| Dec 31, 2024 | vs Louisville (neutral) | L | 40.0% | 33.9% | |
| Aug 30, 2025 | vs Colorado State | W | 57.1% | 50.6% | |
| Sep 6, 2025 | vsUUC-Davis | W | 84.6% | — | |
| Sep 20, 2025 | @ Washington State | W | 88.9% | 38.0% | |
| Sep 27, 2025 | vs Ohio State | L | 9.1% | 40.7% | |
| Oct 4, 2025 | @ Maryland | W | 41.7% | 49.5% | |
| Oct 10, 2025 | vs Rutgers | W | 44.4% | 45.1% | |
| Oct 18, 2025 | @ Michigan | L | 41.7% | 42.9% | |
| Oct 25, 2025 | vs Illinois | W | 75.0% | 44.5% | |
| Nov 8, 2025 | @ Wisconsin | L | 31.3% | 41.6% | |
| Nov 15, 2025 | vs Purdue | W | 70.0% | 42.2% | |
| Nov 22, 2025 | @UCLA | W | 36.4% | 51.8% | |
| Nov 29, 2025 | vsOregon | L | 38.5% | 42.5% | |
| Dec 13, 2025 | vs Boise State (neutral) | W | 46.2% | 41.6% | |
| Sep 6, 2026 | vsWashington State | W | 33.3% | 37.8% | |
| Sep 12, 2026 | vs Utah State | W | 35.3% | 37.5% | |
| Sep 19, 2026 | vsEEastern Washington | W | 54.5% | — | |
| Sep 26, 2026 | vs Minnesota | L | 10.0% | 34.8% | |
| Oct 3, 2026 | @ USC | L | 8.3% | 39.1% | |
| Oct 9, 2026 | vs Iowa | L | 38.9% | 34.0% | |
| Oct 16, 2026 | @Purdue | W | 57.1% | 38.1% | |
| Oct 31, 2026 | @ Nebraska | W | 33.3% | 29.2% |
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.
- UC-Davis, Eastern Washington 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.
- 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.