Great data. It would be interesting to see data for other ~Top 15 programs over the same period.
I fully agree that there is an element of luck involved, but if luck was the predominant factor, then over time, most teams would see similar data to what you have compiled above. I don't think that is what we would see.
My sense is that gameday coaching (ie scheme, play-calling, clock mgmt, etc) comes into play more than luck, in games like this. For the sake of making the point, let's say that game-day coaching can generally provide a 7 point swing (O or D, etc) or something in that neighborhood, which I don't think is that crazy. Run your data set against that assumption and things look way different. (I've made the comparison before, but I think Florida, under Steve Spurrier, might look similar to Franklin. Loads of talent, but UF generally got beat by teams of similar talent. Bowden certainly outcoached him annually, and Spurrier was exposed in the NFL where there is great parity in talent.)
And before anyone attacks me on the assumption, I don't think this is crazy. It is generally assumed that playing at home is about a 7pt advantage so there are externalities that affect results. Regarding coaching, let me use the NFL to illustrate becuase there is more parity in talent and scheduling than CFB. Some coaches perform better than others. Lots of variables for sure, but at least some of that performance has to be in-game management. If it wasn't, then the coach wouldn't need to be on the sideline, actively participating in decisions. To put it another way, if all coaches are equal, and there is no WAR, then coaches wouldn't command many millions in compensation becuase there would be a much bigger supply of candidates available to fill the 32 available positions. So, if in-game coaching affects results in the NFL, then is certainly does in CFB as well.
So when you say, "In terms of one score games lost, Franklin has been pretty consistent (post-sanctions, non-covid) of having his teams in striking distance of winning every game," I think it is fair to examine why Franklin-coached teams seem to fall just short against opponents of similar talent, more than they win, or why Franklin coached teams don't seem to put an opponent away when they have the chance late in a game (ie get one first down and the game is over, vs 3-&-out and needing defensive heroics to hold on).
IMHO, Franklin excels at all of the things that make a CFB coach special (recruiting, politicking, etc) except actual coaching. At $6M+ a year, is it fair to ask him to be better at executing a game plan and making crucial decisions? Is this something that can be learned, or has he reached his ceiling? These are real questions because it's obvious to anyone watching that PSU football today, isn't performing relative to their talent level in the same way that PSU teams did under JVP or even BOB. This isn't personal. I generally like Franklin, but I think it's a fair and honest assessment. JVP didn't lose many games he was supposed to win, and won a lot of games he was supposed to lose. He also performed very well against teams of similar talent. In short, he didn't get out-coached very often.