Metrics

Eastern MichiganEagles

Season
Current

Mid-American

Mid-American, 2000

Rank within the division. Hover a rank for the season and per-game 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
2000Eastern Michigan380 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#96 (of 116 teams · 19.0 pts/g · 209 points) (— allowed · —)#90 (of 116 teams · 31.8 pts/g allowed · 350 points)#99 (of 116 teams · -12.8 /g · -141 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 13 Mid-American teams in 20000 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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)#64 (Scoring offense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. Range #8–#115. 1 of 13 in the top 10.) (No team has a rank for this)#68 (Scoring defense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. Range #3–#116. 2 of 13 in the top 10.)#64 (Point margin: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. Range #3–#115. 2 of 13 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)
2000Akron650 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#33 (of 116 teams · 30.3 pts/g · 333 points) (— allowed · —)#72 (of 116 teams · 26.8 pts/g allowed · 295 points)#49 (of 116 teams · +3.5 /g · +38 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Ball State560 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#93 (of 116 teams · 19.3 pts/g · 212 points) (— allowed · —)#89 (of 116 teams · 31.7 pts/g allowed · 349 points)#97 (of 116 teams · -12.4 /g · -137 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Bowling Green290 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#106 (of 116 teams · 15.8 pts/g · 174 points) (— allowed · —)#68 (of 116 teams · 26.3 pts/g allowed · 289 points)#94 (of 116 teams · -10.4 /g · -115 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Buffalo290 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#104 (of 116 teams · 16.1 pts/g · 177 points) (— allowed · —)#116 (of 116 teams · 41.1 pts/g allowed · 452 points)#115 (of 116 teams · -25.0 /g · -275 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Central Michigan290 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#114 (of 116 teams · 12.4 pts/g · 137 points) (— allowed · —)#104 (of 116 teams · 34.2 pts/g allowed · 376 points)#112 (of 116 teams · -21.7 /g · -239 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Kent State1100 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#115 (of 116 teams · 11.6 pts/g · 128 points) (— allowed · —)#96 (of 116 teams · 32.6 pts/g allowed · 359 points)#110 (of 116 teams · -21.0 /g · -231 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Marshall850 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#47 (of 116 teams · 28.2 pts/g · 367 points) (— allowed · —)#48 (of 116 teams · 22.9 pts/g allowed · 297 points)#41 (of 116 teams · +5.4 /g · +70 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Miami (OH)650 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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 116 teams · 24.7 pts/g · 272 points) (— allowed · —)#65 (of 116 teams · 26.0 pts/g allowed · 286 points)#64 (of 116 teams · -1.3 /g · -14 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Northern Illinois650 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#8 — top 10 (of 116 teams · 37.2 pts/g · 409 points) (— allowed · —)#59 (of 116 teams · 25.4 pts/g allowed · 280 points)#18 (of 116 teams · +11.7 /g · +129 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Ohio740 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#29 (of 116 teams · 31.2 pts/g · 343 points) (— allowed · —)#18 (of 116 teams · 18.9 pts/g allowed · 208 points)#17 (of 116 teams · +12.3 /g · +135 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Toledo1010 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#11 (of 116 teams · 36.4 pts/g · 400 points) (— allowed · —)#3 — top 10 (of 116 teams · 11.4 pts/g allowed · 125 points)#3 — top 10 (of 116 teams · +25.0 /g · +275 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— of plays successful) (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) (— average PPA on successful plays) (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2000Western Michigan930 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2000. 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.) (— · —)#36 (of 116 teams · 29.9 pts/g · 359 points) (— allowed · —)#4 — top 10 (of 116 teams · 11.6 pts/g allowed · 139 points)#10 — top 10 (of 116 teams · +18.3 /g · +220 on the season) () (— /g · — on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— 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 defence) (— 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.

Mid-American, 20002000 Eastern MichiganMid-American medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offense
Total offense. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Scoring offensemedian #64
Scoring offense. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: 2000 Northern Illinois #8 of 116; 2000 Toledo #11 of 116; 2000 Ohio #29 of 116; 2000 Akron #33 of 116; 2000 Western Michigan #36 of 116; 2000 Marshall #47 of 116; 2000 Miami (OH) #64 of 116; 2000 Ball State #93 of 116; 2000 Buffalo #104 of 116; 2000 Bowling Green #106 of 116; 2000 Central Michigan #114 of 116; 2000 Kent State #115 of 116. Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, ranked 96 of 116. Mid-American median rank 64.
Total defense
Total defense. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Scoring defensemedian #68
Scoring defense. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: 2000 Toledo #3 of 116; 2000 Western Michigan #4 of 116; 2000 Ohio #18 of 116; 2000 Marshall #48 of 116; 2000 Northern Illinois #59 of 116; 2000 Miami (OH) #65 of 116; 2000 Bowling Green #68 of 116; 2000 Akron #72 of 116; 2000 Ball State #89 of 116; 2000 Kent State #96 of 116; 2000 Central Michigan #104 of 116; 2000 Buffalo #116 of 116. Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, ranked 90 of 116. Mid-American median rank 68.
Point marginmedian #64
Point margin. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: 2000 Toledo #3 of 116; 2000 Western Michigan #10 of 116; 2000 Ohio #17 of 116; 2000 Northern Illinois #18 of 116; 2000 Marshall #41 of 116; 2000 Akron #49 of 116; 2000 Miami (OH) #64 of 116; 2000 Bowling Green #94 of 116; 2000 Ball State #97 of 116; 2000 Kent State #110 of 116; 2000 Central Michigan #112 of 116; 2000 Buffalo #115 of 116. Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, ranked 99 of 116. Mid-American median rank 64.
Turnover margin
Turnover margin. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Possession
Possession. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Returning passing
Returning passing. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Returning receiving
Returning receiving. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Returning rushing
Returning rushing. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Team talent
Team talent. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive EPA
Offensive EPA. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive EPA
Defensive EPA. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive success rate
Offensive success rate. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive success rate
Defensive success rate. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive explosiveness
Offensive explosiveness. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive explosiveness
Defensive explosiveness. Mid-American, 2000, best rank first: . Marked: 2000 Eastern Michigan, which has no value for this metric.