UTEP Miners Football Analytics

← All Teams

UTEP

MinersBalanced

Mountain West Conference0-12#134 (-29.48)

Grades

Percentile grades against every FBS team this season — 99 is best. Curved so an average team reads C, not F.

0· FOverall

Offense

0· FRating

1· FPer play

1· FConsistency

18· DBig plays

Defense

8· FRating

14· FPer play

4· FConsistency

Situational

65· CRed-zone O

1· FRed-zone D

4· F3rd down O

5· F3rd down D

How grades work →2017 is the earliest season the model grades — first-year numbers run a touch noisier than later seasons.

Analytical Fingerprint

SS-native team profile — opponent-adjusted and garbage-filtered EPA, success, and explosiveness.

Opp-Adj Offense

-0.268

Opp-Adj Defense

-0.112

higher = better

Offensive EPA/play

-0.266

Defensive EPA/play

+0.096

lower = better

Off Success Rate

38.9%

Def Success Rate

51.8%

allowed · lower = better

Explosive Rate

21.4%

pass EPA > 1.0 · rush > 0.8

Explosive Allowed

26.7%

lower = better

Net EPA/play

-0.362

net · higher = better

Recent EPA Trend

+0.079

last 3 weeks

Points / Drive

0.89

Special Teams

Opponent-adjusted special-teams component of the Final Rating, in expected points per game — positive = better. The four units sum to the net.

Net ST Rating

-0.82

expected pts/game

Kicking

-0.48

own kicking game

Kick Defense

-0.27

vs opponent kicks

Returns

-0.04

own return game

Return Defense

-0.04

vs opponent returns

Performance vs Perception

Our opponent-adjusted model rank vs. how others rate this team. Descriptive — where the model and the consensus disagree.

Model Rank

#134

opponent-adjusted strength

AP Poll

NR

—

Market (Vegas)

—

unavailable

Recruiting Rank

#75

recruiting 59 spots higher

0 blue-chip recruits

Peer Context

Where UTEP ranks among all FBS teams in 2017 (percentile).

Opp-adjusted offense

1th

Opp-adjusted defense

14th

Offensive EPA/play

2th

Defensive EPA/play

14th

Offensive success rate

2th

Explosiveness

18th

Defensive havoc

8th

Points per drive

1th

Historical Fingerprint

Most statistically similar team-seasons, 2017–2025, by the same 44-feature profile The Archive uses. Descriptive context, not a forecast.

1Colorado2022OA -0.222 / -0.093similar: TD drive rate, run defense, offensive EPA403 2Vanderbilt2023OA -0.121 / -0.060similar: defensive EPA, defensive success rate, run defense379 3Clemson2026OA -0.116 / +0.005similar: offensive EPA, TD drive rate, passing offense372 4UL Monroe2020OA -0.067 / -0.040similar: defensive EPA, turnover rate, havoc rate367 5New Mexico State2018OA -0.133 / -0.120similar: turnover rate, havoc rate, defensive EPA367

2017 Schedule & Results

12 games

Wk	Opponent	Score	W/L	Spread	ATS	Total	O/U
1	@ Oklahoma	7-56	L	+43.0	L	62.5	O
2	vs Rice	14-31	L	-1.5	L	55	U
3	vs Arizona	16-63	L	+25.0	L	58.5	O
4	@ New Mexico State	14-41	L	+17.0	L	59	U
5	@ Army	21-35	L	+21.5	W	49	O
6	vs Western Kentucky	14-15	L	+16.5	W	52.5	U
7	@ Southern Miss	0-24	L	+23.0	L	52.5	U
9	vs UTSA	14-31	L	+16.0	L	47	U
10	@ Middle Tennessee	3-30	L	+20.5	L	50.5	U
11	@ North Texas	10-45	L	+23.5	L	54.5	O
12	vs Louisiana Tech	21-42	L	+17.0	L	48.5	O
13	@ UAB	7-28	L	+21.0	P	47.5	U

Betting Profile

ATS Record

2-9-1

18.2%

O/U Record

5-7

41.7%

Straight Up

0-12

0.0%

Home ATS1-4

Away ATS1-5

Favorite ATS0-1

Underdog ATS2-8

Last 5 ATS

LLLLP

Full ATS log & splits →

Graded against consensus market lines (median across multiple sportsbooks). Games the market never lined — mostly early-season non-FBS matchups — are excluded from ATS and O/U records; individual games may grade differently than closing-line sources.

Situational Profile

Situational EPA percentile across 8 phases (the larger the shape, the more dominant). Within-FBS ranks.

Situation	OFF EPA	OFF Rank	DEF EPA	DEF Rank
Overall	-0.260	2th	+0.083	14th
Red Zone	+0.064	65th	+0.330	2th
Third Down	-0.411	5th	+0.363	5th
No Garbage Time	-0.277	2th	+0.126	8th
First Half	-0.280	1th	+0.076	28th
Second Half	-0.237	6th	+0.090	14th
Early Downs	-0.209	2th	+0.039	23th
Passing Downs	-0.402	1th	+0.061	32th
Standard Downs	-0.172	7th	+0.093	14th
Goal to Go	+0.507	98th	+0.569	2th

Style & Tendencies

Pass 48.8%Rush 51.2%

Havoc/Game

9.4

Havoc Rate

12.8%

TO Margin

-0.5

Explosive/G

9.9

Yards/Game

230.5

Pts/Drive

0.89

3rd Down%

26.9%

3&Out%

35.9%

Team Statistics

2017 season totals across 12 games — UTEP vs. the combined line of every opponent in those games.

Stat	UTEP	Opponents
Scoring
Points	141	441
Points / Game	11.8	36.8
First Downs
Total	146	285
Rushing	69	148
Passing	62	117
Penalty	15	20
Rushing
Attempts	346	520
Yards	1,147	2,812
Yards / Carry	3.3	5.4
Yards / Game	95.6	234.3
Touchdowns	9	32
Passing
Attempts	330	339
Completions	150	215
Completion %	45.5%	63.4%
Yards	1,619	2,547
Yards / Attempt	4.9	7.5
Touchdowns	7	24
Interceptions	14	6
Passer Rating	85.18	146.36
Total Offense
Plays	676	859
Yards	2,766	5,359
Yards / Play	4.1	6.2
Yards / Game	230.5	446.6
Punt Returns
Returns	14	33
Yards	54	315
Average	3.9	9.5
Touchdowns	0	1
Kickoff Returns
Returns	36	11
Yards	777	186
Average	21.6	16.9
Touchdowns	0	0
Punting
Punts	80	46
Yards	3,502	1,824
Average	43.8	39.7
Interception Returns
Returns	6	14
Yards	52	248
Touchdowns	1	3
Fumbles
Fumbles	10	10
Lost	6	8
Penalties
Penalties	70	77
Yards	625	693
Yards / Game	52.1	57.8
Time of Possession
Per Game	27:34	32:26
Third Downs
Attempts	160	162
Conversions	43	84
Conversion %	26.9%	51.9%
Fourth Downs
Attempts	20	17
Conversions	9	11
Conversion %	45.0%	64.7%
Red Zone
Trips	20	51
Scores (TD + FG)	15	47
Score %	75.0%	92.2%
Touchdowns	13	42
TD %	65.0%	82.4%
Field Goals
Attempts	7	8
Made	3	7
Pct	42.9%	87.5%
PAT Kicking
Attempts	19	58
Made	18	56
Pct	94.7%	96.6%
Two-Point Conversions
Attempts	0	2
Made	0	2

Official-stats conventions: rushing includes sacks as negative attempts (NCAA), so Total Offense = rush + pass. Red-zone Score % counts touchdowns and field goals per trip.

Compare to any opponent →Find similar matchups →Team identity →Situational splits →