THIRD AND DATA

Metrics

AlabamaCrimson Tide

Season
‹
›Current

SEC

Before 2014: Every figure covers the full season, all opponents and the postseason included; success rate, EPA and explosiveness are the provider's season figures.

SEC, 2003

Rank within the division. Teal is top 10, orange is bottom 10. Sorted by top-10 ranks minus bottom-10 ranks. The three count columns (top-10 classes, top-10 wins, top-25 wins) are not ranks and are not scored. Hover a team for its score, a rank for the numbers.

SeasonTeamTop-10 clsprior 5T10 WregT25 WregTotal offenseScoring offenseTotal defenseScoring defensePoint marginTurnover marginPossessionReturning passingof last yrReturning receivingof last yrReturning rushingof last yrTeam talentOffensive EPADefensive EPAOffensive success rateDefensive success rateOffensive explosivenessDefensive explosiveness
2003Alabama4–90 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#69 (of 117 teams · 25.5 pts/g · 331 points)— (— allowed · —)#61 (of 117 teams · 25.6 pts/g allowed · 333 points)#63 (of 117 teams · -0.1 /g · -2 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 12 SEC teams in 20030 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.)— (No team has a rank for this)#57 (Scoring offense: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range #17–#101. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)— (No team has a rank for this)#35 (Scoring defense: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range #1–#117. 3 of 12 in the top 10.)#26 (Point margin: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range #4–#111. 1 of 12 in the top 10.)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)
2003LSU13–10 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#19 (of 117 teams · 33.9 pts/g · 475 points)— (— allowed · —)#1 — top 10 (of 117 teams · 11.0 pts/g allowed · 154 points)#4 — top 10 (of 117 teams · +22.9 /g · +321 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Auburn8–50 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#66 (of 117 teams · 26.3 pts/g · 342 points)— (— allowed · —)#9 — top 10 (of 117 teams · 16.3 pts/g allowed · 212 points)#25 (of 117 teams · +10.0 /g · +130 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Georgia11–30 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#64 (of 117 teams · 26.5 pts/g · 371 points)— (— allowed · —)#3 — top 10 (of 117 teams · 14.5 pts/g allowed · 203 points)#16 (of 117 teams · +12.0 /g · +168 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Arkansas9–40 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#21 (of 117 teams · 33.5 pts/g · 436 points)— (— allowed · —)#49 (of 117 teams · 23.5 pts/g allowed · 305 points)#24 (of 117 teams · +10.1 /g · +131 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Florida8–50 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#34 (of 117 teams · 30.0 pts/g · 390 points)— (— allowed · —)#28 (of 117 teams · 20.9 pts/g allowed · 271 points)#29 (of 117 teams · +9.2 /g · +119 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Kentucky4–80 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#57 (of 117 teams · 27.3 pts/g · 328 points)— (— allowed · —)#69 (of 117 teams · 26.8 pts/g allowed · 321 points)#61 (of 117 teams · +0.6 /g · +7 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Ole Miss10–30 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#17 (of 117 teams · 34.0 pts/g · 442 points)— (— allowed · —)#35 (of 117 teams · 21.9 pts/g allowed · 285 points)#15 (of 117 teams · +12.1 /g · +157 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003South Carolina5–70 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#82 (of 117 teams · 22.3 pts/g · 268 points)— (— allowed · —)#63 (of 117 teams · 26.2 pts/g allowed · 314 points)#77 (of 117 teams · -3.8 /g · -46 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Tennessee10–30 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#46 (of 117 teams · 28.1 pts/g · 365 points)— (— allowed · —)#17 (of 117 teams · 18.4 pts/g allowed · 239 points)#26 (of 117 teams · +9.7 /g · +126 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Vanderbilt2–100 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#97 (of 117 teams · 19.6 pts/g · 235 points)— (— allowed · —)#82 (of 117 teams · 29.8 pts/g allowed · 358 points)#93 (of 117 teams · -10.3 /g · -123 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2003Mississippi State2–100 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 SEC teams in 2003. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (— · —)#101 (of 117 teams · 18.8 pts/g · 225 points)— (— allowed · —)#117 — bottom 10 (of 117 teams · 39.3 pts/g allowed · 471 points)#111 — bottom 10 (of 117 teams · -20.5 /g · -246 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)

What clusters, and what does not

One dot per team, placed by its rank within that season's division. A tight cluster is something they share; a spread is something they do not.

SEC, 20032003 AlabamaSEC medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offense
Total offense. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Scoring offensemedian #57
Scoring offense. SEC, 2003, best rank first: 2003 Ole Miss #17 of 117; 2003 LSU #19 of 117; 2003 Arkansas #21 of 117; 2003 Florida #34 of 117; 2003 Tennessee #46 of 117; 2003 Kentucky #57 of 117; 2003 Georgia #64 of 117; 2003 Auburn #66 of 117; 2003 South Carolina #82 of 117; 2003 Vanderbilt #97 of 117; 2003 Mississippi State #101 of 117. Marked: 2003 Alabama, ranked 69 of 117. SEC median rank 57.
Total defense
Total defense. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Scoring defensemedian #35
Scoring defense. SEC, 2003, best rank first: 2003 LSU #1 of 117; 2003 Georgia #3 of 117; 2003 Auburn #9 of 117; 2003 Tennessee #17 of 117; 2003 Florida #28 of 117; 2003 Ole Miss #35 of 117; 2003 Arkansas #49 of 117; 2003 South Carolina #63 of 117; 2003 Kentucky #69 of 117; 2003 Vanderbilt #82 of 117; 2003 Mississippi State #117 of 117. Marked: 2003 Alabama, ranked 61 of 117. SEC median rank 35.
Point marginmedian #26
Point margin. SEC, 2003, best rank first: 2003 LSU #4 of 117; 2003 Ole Miss #15 of 117; 2003 Georgia #16 of 117; 2003 Arkansas #24 of 117; 2003 Auburn #25 of 117; 2003 Tennessee #26 of 117; 2003 Florida #29 of 117; 2003 Kentucky #61 of 117; 2003 South Carolina #77 of 117; 2003 Vanderbilt #93 of 117; 2003 Mississippi State #111 of 117. Marked: 2003 Alabama, ranked 63 of 117. SEC median rank 26.
Turnover margin
Turnover margin. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Possession
Possession. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Returning passing
Returning passing. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Returning receiving
Returning receiving. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Returning rushing
Returning rushing. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Team talent
Team talent. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive EPA
Offensive EPA. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive EPA
Defensive EPA. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive success rate
Offensive success rate. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive success rate
Defensive success rate. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive explosiveness
Offensive explosiveness. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive explosiveness
Defensive explosiveness. SEC, 2003, best rank first: . Marked: 2003 Alabama, which has no value for this metric.