Tom Fornelli rolled this out on socials yesterday:

What is this? It’s EPA (Expected Points Added) per dropback.

Well what the hell is Expected Points Added? It’s for Moneyball fans, I suppose, but here’s a breakdown of what it means, thanks to an article from 2022 on Dawgs Central:

EPA is one of the stats which we will reference a lot on this site as we break down not only the X and O’s of the game, but add to the context with some advanced stats.  It stands for “Expected Points Added” and all you need to realize is that is give a number to each and every play’s result based on:

• Down
• Distance
• Field Position

An offense wants a high number for a play and opposite is true for the defense. A play has an “expected value” based on the conditions of the play. A 3rd and 11 from your own 19 isn’t expected to add as much “value” as 2nd and 3 inside the opponent’s red zone. An offense that can convert a 3rd and 11 on a consistent basis will have a higher average EPA and will likely be one of the more explosive offenses. Ohio State ranked #2 in Offensive EPA in 2021 and 1st in Points Per Game (46.3). That is the picture of efficiency. Georgia had a EPA average of .302 which was good for 17th in all of FBS (10th in Power 5) and 11th (38.7) in Points per game. That points to efficiency, high valued plays tend to put points on the board. Teams which you wouldn’t expect to see, but had both high average EPA and PPG.

In other words, Gunner is adding value on plays where he has to drop back. While it might not be pretty, and limited and a lot less than we’d like to see, even with the given struggles with Arkansas he’s adding value on drop backs. Maybe that’s why Bobo called a play action on first and goal from the 1, so shut my mouth. I also doubt Mike gives two craps about stats, so maybe a staffer whispered it to him before he called it.

We love each other and we don’t judge.

If that remains after facing a stout Oklahoma team remains to be seen.

Anyway, in searching around for 2026 team stats, I was able to find a few additional stats:

• Georgia is second in team EPA with a .55, second behind Miami and slightly ahead, um, Florida
• Georgia’s defensive EPA (which you want to be more negative) was only -0.4, and 54th among all defenses. Oklahoma’s defensive EPA is -.33, good for 6th in all of CFB.
• Oklahoma’s offensive EPA is barely .05, or 95th in College Football.

What does it mean?

Well, Georgia’s defensive EPA is being impacted a good bit by a few places where they find themselves in bad field position late in games. Given the short body of work, most of Georgia’s lackluster defensive EPA could be attributed to a lot of minutes by the 2s and 3s.

Oklahoma’s offensive EPA is being hurt by both (a) lousy offense and (b) stalling in places where they should shine. Given that EPA goes up the closer you are to the opposing goal line, the low number reflects that Oklahoma can’t move on the bad side of the field, and what’s worse, they can’t capitalize on short fields, either.

Meanwhile, Oklahoma’s defense could be the real deal, or they’ve played lousy offenses. New Mexico is 75th in Offensive EPA, while Michigan (who Oklahoma lost to) has one that is 86th. Michigan’s defensive EPA is right around Georgia’s at 49th, and New Mexico, thanks to a hapless Oklahoma performance and a solid, veteran defense, is 5th. Don’t overlook the fact that New Mexico has a quasi-NFL defense one the starting side.

In other words, you could likely expect Georgia-Oklahoma to look a little like Michigan-Oklahoma, though I believe Georgia’s got a better quarterback and offensive weapons than does Michigan. So do we worry about this weekend, or are we as good as the stats say?

Yes. We’re Georgia fans, so we worry.

No matter what the “stats” day.