Metrics

LouisvilleCardinals

Season
Current

Big East

Big East, 2006

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
2006Louisville1210 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#1 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 475.3 yds/g · 6,179 yards)#4 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 37.8 pts/g · 491 points)#46 (of 119 teams · 320.5 yds/g allowed · 4,166 yards)#17 (of 119 teams · 16.3 pts/g allowed · 212 points)#5 — top 10 (of 119 teams · +21.5 /g · +279 on the season)#47 (of 119 teams · +3 on the season · 27 taken, 24 given · +0.23 /g)#25 (of 119 teams · 19:00 /g · 4h 07m 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)#2 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 0.183 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#22 (of 119 teams · -0.009 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#3 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 49% of plays successful)#22 (of 119 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#55 (of 119 teams · 0.942 average PPA on successful plays)#103 (of 119 teams · 1.025 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 8 Big East teams in 20060 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#42 (Total offense: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #1–#108. 2 of 8 in the top 10.)#22 (Scoring offense: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #3–#102. 2 of 8 in the top 10.)#46 (Total defense: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #6–#107. 1 of 8 in the top 10.)#36 (Scoring defense: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #8–#93. 1 of 8 in the top 10.)#27 (Point margin: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #5–#93. 2 of 8 in the top 10.)#24 (Turnover margin: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #5–#95. 1 of 8 in the top 10.)#54 (Possession: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #18–#94. 0 of 8 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)#48 (Offensive EPA: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #2–#97. 2 of 8 in the top 10.)#27 (Defensive EPA: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #10–#87. 1 of 8 in the top 10.)#49 (Offensive success rate: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #3–#96. 1 of 8 in the top 10.)#22 (Defensive success rate: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #8–#105. 1 of 8 in the top 10.)#55 (Offensive explosiveness: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #47–#106. 0 of 8 in the top 10.)#89 (Defensive explosiveness: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. Range #8–#114. 1 of 8 in the top 10.)
2006Cincinnati850 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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 119 teams · 340.5 yds/g · 4,426 yards)#82 (of 119 teams · 21.1 pts/g · 274 points)#34 (of 119 teams · 309.1 yds/g allowed · 4,019 yards)#36 (of 119 teams · 19.6 pts/g allowed · 255 points)#59 (of 119 teams · +1.5 /g · +19 on the season)#95 (of 119 teams · -7 on the season · 23 taken, 30 given · -0.54 /g)#18 (of 119 teams · 19:13 /g · 4h 10m 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)#74 (of 119 teams · 0.013 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#10 — top 10 (of 119 teams · -0.048 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#72 (of 119 teams · 39% of plays successful)#16 (of 119 teams · 35% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#77 (of 119 teams · 0.909 average PPA on successful plays)#98 (of 119 teams · 1.005 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2006Pittsburgh660 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#35 (of 119 teams · 372.3 yds/g · 4,467 yards)#14 (of 119 teams · 31.8 pts/g · 381 points)#91 (of 119 teams · 363.1 yds/g allowed · 4,357 yards)#60 (of 119 teams · 22.8 pts/g allowed · 274 points)#27 (of 119 teams · +8.9 /g · +107 on the season)#11 (of 119 teams · +11 on the season · 29 taken, 18 given · +0.92 /g)#94 (of 119 teams · 17:29 /g · 3h 30m 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)#29 (of 119 teams · 0.077 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#72 (of 119 teams · 0.052 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#49 (of 119 teams · 41% of plays successful)#56 (of 119 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#54 (of 119 teams · 0.945 average PPA on successful plays)#60 (of 119 teams · 0.938 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2006Rutgers1120 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#54 (of 119 teams · 345.1 yds/g · 4,486 yards)#22 (of 119 teams · 29.8 pts/g · 387 points)#6 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 252.2 yds/g allowed · 3,279 yards)#8 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 14.3 pts/g allowed · 186 points)#13 (of 119 teams · +15.5 /g · +201 on the season)#5 — top 10 (of 119 teams · +15 on the season · 34 taken, 19 given · +1.15 /g)#19 (of 119 teams · 19:08 /g · 4h 09m 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)#60 (of 119 teams · 0.031 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#24 (of 119 teams · -0.002 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#46 (of 119 teams · 41% of plays successful)#8 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 33% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#106 (of 119 teams · 0.844 average PPA on successful plays)#89 (of 119 teams · 0.986 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2006South Florida940 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#42 (of 119 teams · 361.6 yds/g · 4,701 yards)#64 (of 119 teams · 23.0 pts/g · 299 points)#29 (of 119 teams · 298.5 yds/g allowed · 3,880 yards)#18 (of 119 teams · 16.9 pts/g allowed · 220 points)#43 (of 119 teams · +6.1 /g · +79 on the season)#74 (of 119 teams · -3 on the season · 26 taken, 29 given · -0.23 /g)#79 (of 119 teams · 17:50 /g · 3h 52m 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)#48 (of 119 teams · 0.053 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#27 (of 119 teams · 0.004 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#56 (of 119 teams · 40% of plays successful)#13 (of 119 teams · 34% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#49 (of 119 teams · 0.952 average PPA on successful plays)#114 (of 119 teams · 1.083 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2006Syracuse480 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#108 (of 119 teams · 264.0 yds/g · 3,168 yards)#102 (of 119 teams · 17.4 pts/g · 209 points)#107 (of 119 teams · 399.3 yds/g allowed · 4,792 yards)#72 (of 119 teams · 24.6 pts/g allowed · 295 points)#93 (of 119 teams · -7.2 /g · -86 on the season)#14 (of 119 teams · +10 on the season · 29 taken, 19 given · +0.83 /g)#67 (of 119 teams · 18:00 /g · 3h 36m 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)#90 (of 119 teams · -0.002 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#87 (of 119 teams · 0.080 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#93 (of 119 teams · 37% of plays successful)#105 (of 119 teams · 45% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#60 (of 119 teams · 0.933 average PPA on successful plays)#8 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 0.815 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2006UConn480 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#72 (of 119 teams · 323.9 yds/g · 3,887 yards)#81 (of 119 teams · 21.4 pts/g · 257 points)#86 (of 119 teams · 358.1 yds/g allowed · 4,297 yards)#93 (of 119 teams · 27.0 pts/g allowed · 324 points)#87 (of 119 teams · -5.6 /g · -67 on the season)#69 (of 119 teams · -2 on the season · 20 taken, 22 given · -0.17 /g)#54 (of 119 teams · 18:14 /g · 3h 39m 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)#97 (of 119 teams · -0.016 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#63 (of 119 teams · 0.039 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#96 (of 119 teams · 37% of plays successful)#36 (of 119 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#79 (of 119 teams · 0.908 average PPA on successful plays)#88 (of 119 teams · 0.986 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2006West Virginia1120 / 2 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 8 Big East teams in 2006. 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.)#4 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 461.4 yds/g · 5,998 yards)#3 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 38.9 pts/g · 505 points)#65 (of 119 teams · 336.6 yds/g allowed · 4,376 yards)#49 (of 119 teams · 21.7 pts/g allowed · 282 points)#8 — top 10 (of 119 teams · +17.1 /g · +223 on the season)#24 (of 119 teams · +7 on the season · 25 taken, 18 given · +0.54 /g)#56 (of 119 teams · 18:11 /g · 3h 56m 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)#8 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 0.149 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#37 (of 119 teams · 0.016 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#12 (of 119 teams · 45% of plays successful)#43 (of 119 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#47 (of 119 teams · 0.961 average PPA on successful plays)#90 (of 119 teams · 0.990 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.

Big East, 20062006 LouisvilleBig East medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #42
Total offense. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 West Virginia #4 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #35 of 119; 2006 South Florida #42 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #54 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #57 of 119; 2006 UConn #72 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #108 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 1 of 119. Big East median rank 42.
Scoring offensemedian #22
Scoring offense. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 West Virginia #3 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #14 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #22 of 119; 2006 South Florida #64 of 119; 2006 UConn #81 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #82 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #102 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 4 of 119. Big East median rank 22.
Total defensemedian #46
Total defense. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 Rutgers #6 of 119; 2006 South Florida #29 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #34 of 119; 2006 West Virginia #65 of 119; 2006 UConn #86 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #91 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #107 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 46 of 119. Big East median rank 46.
Scoring defensemedian #36
Scoring defense. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 Rutgers #8 of 119; 2006 South Florida #18 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #36 of 119; 2006 West Virginia #49 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #60 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #72 of 119; 2006 UConn #93 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 17 of 119. Big East median rank 36.
Point marginmedian #27
Point margin. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 West Virginia #8 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #13 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #27 of 119; 2006 South Florida #43 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #59 of 119; 2006 UConn #87 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #93 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 5 of 119. Big East median rank 27.
Turnover marginmedian #24
Turnover margin. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 Rutgers #5 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #11 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #14 of 119; 2006 West Virginia #24 of 119; 2006 UConn #69 of 119; 2006 South Florida #74 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #95 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 47 of 119. Big East median rank 24.
Possessionmedian #54
Possession. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 Cincinnati #18 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #19 of 119; 2006 UConn #54 of 119; 2006 West Virginia #56 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #67 of 119; 2006 South Florida #79 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #94 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 25 of 119. Big East median rank 54.
Returning passing
Returning passing. Big East, 2006, best rank first: . Marked: 2006 Louisville, which has no value for this metric.
Returning receiving
Returning receiving. Big East, 2006, best rank first: . Marked: 2006 Louisville, which has no value for this metric.
Returning rushing
Returning rushing. Big East, 2006, best rank first: . Marked: 2006 Louisville, which has no value for this metric.
Team talent
Team talent. Big East, 2006, best rank first: . Marked: 2006 Louisville, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive EPAmedian #48
Offensive EPA. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 West Virginia #8 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #29 of 119; 2006 South Florida #48 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #60 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #74 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #90 of 119; 2006 UConn #97 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 2 of 119. Big East median rank 48.
Defensive EPAmedian #27
Defensive EPA. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 Cincinnati #10 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #24 of 119; 2006 South Florida #27 of 119; 2006 West Virginia #37 of 119; 2006 UConn #63 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #72 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #87 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 22 of 119. Big East median rank 27.
Offensive success ratemedian #49
Offensive success rate. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 West Virginia #12 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #46 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #49 of 119; 2006 South Florida #56 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #72 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #93 of 119; 2006 UConn #96 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 3 of 119. Big East median rank 49.
Defensive success ratemedian #22
Defensive success rate. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 Rutgers #8 of 119; 2006 South Florida #13 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #16 of 119; 2006 UConn #36 of 119; 2006 West Virginia #43 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #56 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #105 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 22 of 119. Big East median rank 22.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #55
Offensive explosiveness. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 West Virginia #47 of 119; 2006 South Florida #49 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #54 of 119; 2006 Syracuse #60 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #77 of 119; 2006 UConn #79 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #106 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 55 of 119. Big East median rank 55.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #89
Defensive explosiveness. Big East, 2006, best rank first: 2006 Syracuse #8 of 119; 2006 Pittsburgh #60 of 119; 2006 UConn #88 of 119; 2006 Rutgers #89 of 119; 2006 West Virginia #90 of 119; 2006 Cincinnati #98 of 119; 2006 South Florida #114 of 119. Marked: 2006 Louisville, ranked 103 of 119. Big East median rank 89.