2013 UTSA

7–⁠5 (6–⁠2 Conference USA), coached by Larry Coker.

Schedule and results

UTSA in 2013, game by game: won at New Mexico 21–13; lost vs. No. 13 Oklahoma State 35–56; lost at Arizona 13–38; won at UTEP 32–13; lost vs. Houston 28–59; lost at Marshall 10–34; lost vs. Rice 21–27; won vs. UAB 52–31; won at Tulsa 34–15; won vs. Tulane 10–7; won at North Texas 21–13; won vs. Louisiana Tech 30–10+21−31Won 21–13 at New Mexico+8New MexicoLost 35–56 vs. No. 13 Oklahoma State-21No. 13 Oklahoma StateLost 13–38 at Arizona-25ArizonaWon 32–13 at UTEP+19UTEPLost 28–59 vs. Houston-31HoustonLost 10–34 at Marshall-24MarshallLost 21–27 vs. Rice-6RiceWon 52–31 vs. UAB+21UABWon 34–15 at Tulsa+19TulsaWon 10–7 vs. Tulane+3TulaneWon 21–13 at North Texas+8North TexasWon 30–10 vs. Louisiana Tech+20Louisiana Tech
Each game’s margin, wins above the line and losses below.

Elo: a pregame chance from scores alone.

How it ended: Beat Louisiana Tech 30–⁠10; unranked in the final AP poll; tied for 3rd in the Conference USA.

In program history: The 7th-best season in program history by end-of-season Elo (of 16 on file).

Record
7–⁠5
Conference
6–⁠2 tied for 3rd in Conference USA
AP final
Unranked
Points
307–⁠316
Coach
Larry Coker
Elo
1498 +90 this season
SP+ rating
-6.6 No. 83 of 125; offense No. 78, defense No. 78, special teams No. 116
SRS
−4.5 No. 81 of 125 in FBS
Recruiting class
No. 103
Offensive coordinator
Kevin Brown
Defensive coordinator
Neal Neathery
Offense
Spread
Defense
4–⁠2–⁠5

How good, play by play

  • Offense28th of 125
  • Defense64th of 125
  • Offense, opponent-adjusted31st of 125
  • Defense, opponent-adjusted78th of 125
EPA per playSuccessExplosivenessFBS rank
Offense0.1345%0.9528th of 125
Defense0.0845%0.8764th of 125
Opponent-adjusted0.11 off
0.09 def
45% off
46% def
—31st off
78th def
How these are measured

Play-weighted averages over games against FBS opponents; raw numbers, not adjusted for the strength of the opponent. EPA (expected points added) measures how much each play changed the expected score; success rate counts plays that kept the offense on schedule; explosiveness is the average EPA on successful plays. Lower is better on defense. Ranked by EPA per play among teams that were FBS that season. The opponent-adjusted row (offense / defense) is CollegeFootballData.com’s WEPA, which accounts for who each team played.

Drives and havoc

Points per trip inside the 40Average startHavoc
Offense-0.3own 252% allowed
Defense-0.2own 322% caused

A trip inside the 40 is a drive that reaches the opponent’s 40-yard line; points per trip is how many it scored on average (allowed, on defense). Average start is where drives began (the defense’s line is where its opponents started). Havoc is the share of plays ending in a tackle for loss, a forced fumble, an interception or a pass broken up. From CollegeFootballData.com.

Leaders

Passing yardsEric Soza QB2,719 yds
Passing touchdownsEric Soza QB12 TD
Rushing yardsDavid Glasco II RB496 yds
Rushing touchdownsEric Soza QB7 TD
Receiving yardsKam Jones WR345 yds
Receiving touchdownsBrandon Armstrong RB2 TD
InterceptionsCody Berry S2 INT

Top recruits in the 2013 class

Jalen Rhodes RB★★★No. 1335
Aneas Henricks CB★★★No. 1456
Austin Robinson PRO★★★No. 1527
Breyun Owens OG★★No. 1939
Jarveon Williams CB★★No. 2069

247Sports composite rankings via CollegeFootballData.com; national rank in the class.

The 2013 class by position

SignedStarsRating
Quarterbacks13.00.815
Running backs13.00.825
Receivers12.00.789
Offensive line42.00.772
Defensive line12.00.760
Linebackers22.00.765
Defensive backs62.20.779
Whole class162.20.780

High-school signees by position group, with their average stars and 247Sports composite rating (out of 1), via CollegeFootballData.com. Athletes are signees with no set position.

Roster 114

The 2013 roster

114 players, with numbers, heights, hometowns and each player’s 2013 line; 34 have a stat line. See the roster

2013 Conference USA standings

TeamConf.OverallAP final
Marshall7–⁠110–⁠4
Rice7–⁠110–⁠4
East Carolina6–⁠210–⁠3
North Texas6–⁠29–⁠4
Middle Tennessee6–⁠28–⁠5
UTSA6–⁠27–⁠5
Tulane5–⁠37–⁠6
Florida Atlantic4–⁠46–⁠6
Louisiana Tech3–⁠54–⁠8
Tulsa2–⁠63–⁠9
UTEP1–⁠72–⁠10
UAB1–⁠72–⁠10
Southern Miss1–⁠71–⁠11
Florida International1–⁠71–⁠11

Ordered by conference winning percentage, then conference wins. Division splits and tiebreakers aren’t applied.