THIRD AND DATA
Sign in

Metrics

Michigan StateSpartans

Season
‹
›Current

Big Ten

Peers are the 25 teams ranked in the last regular-season College Football Playoff poll of 2019, released in week 16.

CFP Top 25, 2019

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
2019Michigan State7–60 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#95 (of 130 teams · 371.9 yds/g · 4,835 yards)#105 (of 130 teams · 22.4 pts/g · 291 points)#19 (of 130 teams · 321.5 yds/g allowed · 4,179 yards)#37 (of 130 teams · 22.5 pts/g allowed · 293 points)#72 (of 130 teams · -0.1 /g · -2 on the season)#75 (of 130 teams · -2 on the season · 22 taken, 24 given · -0.15 /g)#31 (of 130 teams · 31:23 /g · 6h 48m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#17 (of 130 teams · 78% of last season's receiving production returning)#41 (of 130 teams · 77% of last season's rushing production returning)#31 (of 130 teams · 688.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#113 (of 130 teams · 0.065 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#28 (of 130 teams · 0.080 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#99 (of 130 teams · 40% of plays successful)#20 (of 130 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#103 (of 130 teams · 1.144 average PPA on successful plays)#77 (of 130 teams · 1.229 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. 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.)1 (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. 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 the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#99. 6 of 25 in the top 10.)#21 (Scoring offense: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#88. 7 of 25 in the top 10.)#22 (Total defense: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#82. 7 of 25 in the top 10.)#19 (Scoring defense: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#78. 9 of 25 in the top 10.)#15 (Point margin: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#54. 9 of 25 in the top 10.)#31 (Turnover margin: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #3–#120. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#47 (Possession: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#108. 4 of 25 in the top 10.)#52 (Returning passing: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#125. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#44 (Returning receiving: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#118. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#65 (Returning rushing: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#130. 3 of 25 in the top 10.)#17 (Team talent: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#119. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#21 (Offensive EPA: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#83. 7 of 25 in the top 10.)#21 (Defensive EPA: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#90. 7 of 25 in the top 10.)#26 (Offensive success rate: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#61. 6 of 25 in the top 10.)#27 (Defensive success rate: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#114. 6 of 25 in the top 10.)#49 (Offensive explosiveness: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #5–#123. 4 of 25 in the top 10.)#55 (Defensive explosiveness: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range #1–#128. 4 of 25 in the top 10.)
2019LSU15–04 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 4 including the postseason — regular: #5 Georgia, #9 Florida · postseason: #3 Clemson, #4 Oklahoma)4 (4 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 6 including the postseason — regular: #5 Georgia, #9 Florida, #12 Auburn, #13 Alabama · postseason: #3 Clemson, #4 Oklahoma)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 568.4 yds/g · 8,526 yards)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 48.4 pts/g · 726 points)#31 (of 130 teams · 343.5 yds/g allowed · 5,153 yards)#32 (of 130 teams · 21.9 pts/g allowed · 328 points)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +26.5 /g · +398 on the season)#15 (of 130 teams · +10 on the season · 22 taken, 12 given · +0.67 /g)#60 (of 130 teams · 30:13 /g · 7h 33m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#28 (of 130 teams · 72% of last season's receiving production returning)#87 (of 130 teams · 52% of last season's rushing production returning)#5 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 906.2 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.413 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#31 (of 130 teams · 0.091 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 56% of plays successful)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#49 (of 130 teams · 1.243 average PPA on successful plays)#124 (of 130 teams · 1.343 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Ohio State13–15 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #8 Wisconsin, #8 Wisconsin, #10 Penn State)5 (5 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #8 Wisconsin, #8 Wisconsin, #10 Penn State, #14 Michigan, #21 Cincinnati)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 529.9 yds/g · 7,419 yards)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 46.9 pts/g · 656 points)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 259.7 yds/g allowed · 3,636 yards)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 13.7 pts/g allowed · 192 points)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +33.1 /g · +464 on the season)#17 (of 130 teams · +9 on the season · 25 taken, 16 given · +0.64 /g)#25 (of 130 teams · 31:58 /g · 7h 28m on the season)#124 (of 130 teams · 2% of last season's passing production returning)#80 (of 130 teams · 52% of last season's receiving production returning)#93 (of 130 teams · 48% of last season's rushing production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 973.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.368 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · -0.011 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 51% of plays successful)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 33% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#17 (of 130 teams · 1.297 average PPA on successful plays)#70 (of 130 teams · 1.221 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Clemson14–12 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #2 Ohio State)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #24 Virginia · postseason: #2 Ohio State)#5 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 528.7 yds/g · 7,931 yards)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 43.9 pts/g · 659 points)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 288.3 yds/g allowed · 4,325 yards)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 13.5 pts/g allowed · 203 points)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +30.4 /g · +456 on the season)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +15 on the season · 30 taken, 15 given · +1.00 /g)#58 (of 130 teams · 30:16 /g · 7h 34m on the season)#50 (of 130 teams · 88% of last season's passing production returning)#23 (of 130 teams · 74% of last season's receiving production returning)#65 (of 130 teams · 64% of last season's rushing production returning)#9 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 863.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#5 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.365 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · -0.001 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 51% of plays successful)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 35% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#22 (of 130 teams · 1.290 average PPA on successful plays)#29 (of 130 teams · 1.145 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Oklahoma12–22 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #7 Baylor, #7 Baylor)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #7 Baylor, #7 Baylor, #25 Oklahoma State)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 537.5 yds/g · 7,525 yards)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 42.1 pts/g · 590 points)#38 (of 130 teams · 356.4 yds/g allowed · 4,990 yards)#64 (of 130 teams · 27.3 pts/g allowed · 382 points)#15 (of 130 teams · +14.9 /g · +208 on the season)#109 (of 130 teams · -8 on the season · 11 taken, 19 given · -0.57 /g)#37 (of 130 teams · 30:57 /g · 7h 13m on the season)#120 (of 130 teams · 2% of last season's passing production returning)#72 (of 130 teams · 58% of last season's receiving production returning)#62 (of 130 teams · 65% of last season's rushing production returning)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 869.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.401 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#64 (of 130 teams · 0.154 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 54% of plays successful)#49 (of 130 teams · 41% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#36 (of 130 teams · 1.263 average PPA on successful plays)#97 (of 130 teams · 1.261 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Georgia12–25 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #9 Florida · postseason: #7 Baylor)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 4 including the postseason — regular: #9 Florida, #12 Auburn, #15 Notre Dame · postseason: #7 Baylor)#61 (of 130 teams · 408.1 yds/g · 5,713 yards)#50 (of 130 teams · 30.8 pts/g · 431 points)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 275.8 yds/g allowed · 3,861 yards)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 12.6 pts/g allowed · 176 points)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +18.2 /g · +255 on the season)#49 (of 130 teams · +3 on the season · 16 taken, 13 given · +0.21 /g)#18 (of 130 teams · 32:16 /g · 7h 32m on the season)#57 (of 130 teams · 84% of last season's passing production returning)#118 (of 130 teams · 31% of last season's receiving production returning)#73 (of 130 teams · 61% of last season's rushing production returning)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 960.2 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#59 (of 130 teams · 0.185 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.025 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#22 (of 130 teams · 47% of plays successful)#13 (of 130 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#116 (of 130 teams · 1.105 average PPA on successful plays)#13 (of 130 teams · 1.096 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Oregon12–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #8 Wisconsin)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #11 Utah, #22 USC · postseason: #8 Wisconsin)#39 (of 130 teams · 433.1 yds/g · 6,063 yards)#16 (of 130 teams · 35.4 pts/g · 495 points)#22 (of 130 teams · 329.1 yds/g allowed · 4,607 yards)#9 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 16.5 pts/g allowed · 231 points)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +18.9 /g · +264 on the season)#5 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +16 on the season · 27 taken, 11 given · +1.14 /g)#104 (of 130 teams · 28:14 /g · 6h 35m on the season)#35 (of 130 teams · 98% of last season's passing production returning)#57 (of 130 teams · 62% of last season's receiving production returning)#25 (of 130 teams · 86% of last season's rushing production returning)#17 (of 130 teams · 817.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#18 (of 130 teams · 0.266 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#9 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.031 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#26 (of 130 teams · 47% of plays successful)#24 (of 130 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#57 (of 130 teams · 1.220 average PPA on successful plays)#5 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.066 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Baylor11–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #25 Oklahoma State)#52 (of 130 teams · 421.4 yds/g · 5,900 yards)#27 (of 130 teams · 33.6 pts/g · 471 points)#39 (of 130 teams · 358.9 yds/g allowed · 5,024 yards)#19 (of 130 teams · 19.8 pts/g allowed · 277 points)#19 (of 130 teams · +13.9 /g · +194 on the season)#13 (of 130 teams · +10 on the season · 29 taken, 19 given · +0.71 /g)#103 (of 130 teams · 28:15 /g · 6h 36m on the season)#62 (of 130 teams · 81% of last season's passing production returning)#22 (of 130 teams · 74% of last season's receiving production returning)#30 (of 130 teams · 84% of last season's rushing production returning)#35 (of 130 teams · 668.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#39 (of 130 teams · 0.218 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#25 (of 130 teams · 0.073 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#48 (of 130 teams · 45% of plays successful)#53 (of 130 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#60 (of 130 teams · 1.219 average PPA on successful plays)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.077 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Wisconsin10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #14 Michigan, #16 Iowa, #18 Minnesota)#38 (of 130 teams · 433.1 yds/g · 6,064 yards)#23 (of 130 teams · 34.1 pts/g · 477 points)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 287.1 yds/g allowed · 4,020 yards)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 16.9 pts/g allowed · 237 points)#14 (of 130 teams · +17.1 /g · +240 on the season)#63 (of 130 teams · +0 on the season · 22 taken, 22 given · +0.00 /g)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 35:40 /g · 8h 19m on the season)#91 (of 130 teams · 26% of last season's passing production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 95% of last season's receiving production returning)#47 (of 130 teams · 74% of last season's rushing production returning)#33 (of 130 teams · 675.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#19 (of 130 teams · 0.260 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.035 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#11 (of 130 teams · 50% of plays successful)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#119 (of 130 teams · 1.101 average PPA on successful plays)#123 (of 130 teams · 1.337 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Florida11–21 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #12 Auburn · postseason: #24 Virginia)#44 (of 130 teams · 430.5 yds/g · 5,597 yards)#28 (of 130 teams · 33.2 pts/g · 432 points)#9 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 304.9 yds/g allowed · 3,963 yards)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 15.5 pts/g allowed · 201 points)#12 (of 130 teams · +17.8 /g · +231 on the season)#31 (of 130 teams · +5 on the season · 23 taken, 18 given · +0.38 /g)#62 (of 130 teams · 30:10 /g · 6h 32m on the season)#16 (of 130 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 88% of last season's receiving production returning)#52 (of 130 teams · 73% of last season's rushing production returning)#15 (of 130 teams · 835.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#21 (of 130 teams · 0.256 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#19 (of 130 teams · 0.054 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#41 (of 130 teams · 46% of plays successful)#22 (of 130 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#16 (of 130 teams · 1.301 average PPA on successful plays)#51 (of 130 teams · 1.201 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Penn State11–21 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #14 Michigan, #16 Iowa · postseason: #17 Memphis)#56 (of 130 teams · 412.0 yds/g · 5,356 yards)#15 (of 130 teams · 35.8 pts/g · 465 points)#33 (of 130 teams · 346.5 yds/g allowed · 4,504 yards)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 16.0 pts/g allowed · 208 points)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +19.8 /g · +257 on the season)#19 (of 130 teams · +8 on the season · 22 taken, 14 given · +0.62 /g)#108 (of 130 teams · 27:54 /g · 6h 03m on the season)#113 (of 130 teams · 3% of last season's passing production returning)#83 (of 130 teams · 52% of last season's receiving production returning)#130 (of 130 teams · 13% of last season's rushing production returning)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 857.3 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#30 (of 130 teams · 0.237 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#20 (of 130 teams · 0.065 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#46 (of 130 teams · 45% of plays successful)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#34 (of 130 teams · 1.269 average PPA on successful plays)#91 (of 130 teams · 1.256 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Utah11–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#48 (of 130 teams · 429.0 yds/g · 6,006 yards)#38 (of 130 teams · 32.3 pts/g · 452 points)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 269.2 yds/g allowed · 3,769 yards)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 15.0 pts/g allowed · 210 points)#13 (of 130 teams · +17.3 /g · +242 on the season)#17 (of 130 teams · +9 on the season · 22 taken, 13 given · +0.64 /g)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 34:19 /g · 8h 00m on the season)#12 (of 130 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 88% of last season's receiving production returning)#43 (of 130 teams · 76% of last season's rushing production returning)#47 (of 130 teams · 620.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#12 (of 130 teams · 0.284 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.000 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#14 (of 130 teams · 49% of plays successful)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#68 (of 130 teams · 1.204 average PPA on successful plays)#85 (of 130 teams · 1.244 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Auburn9–44 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Oregon)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Oregon, #13 Alabama)#64 (of 130 teams · 405.8 yds/g · 5,275 yards)#28 (of 130 teams · 33.2 pts/g · 432 points)#28 (of 130 teams · 337.0 yds/g allowed · 4,381 yards)#17 (of 130 teams · 19.5 pts/g allowed · 254 points)#21 (of 130 teams · +13.7 /g · +178 on the season)#31 (of 130 teams · +5 on the season · 22 taken, 17 given · +0.38 /g)#87 (of 130 teams · 29:05 /g · 6h 18m on the season)#122 (of 130 teams · 2% of last season's passing production returning)#96 (of 130 teams · 46% of last season's receiving production returning)#33 (of 130 teams · 80% of last season's rushing production returning)#13 (of 130 teams · 843.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#58 (of 130 teams · 0.193 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#12 (of 130 teams · 0.041 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#40 (of 130 teams · 46% of plays successful)#14 (of 130 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#110 (of 130 teams · 1.128 average PPA on successful plays)#55 (of 130 teams · 1.203 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Alabama11–25 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #14 Michigan)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 510.8 yds/g · 6,640 yards)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 47.2 pts/g · 614 points)#21 (of 130 teams · 324.4 yds/g allowed · 4,217 yards)#13 (of 130 teams · 18.6 pts/g allowed · 242 points)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +28.6 /g · +372 on the season)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +18 on the season · 28 taken, 10 given · +1.38 /g)#67 (of 130 teams · 29:59 /g · 6h 30m on the season)#59 (of 130 teams · 83% of last season's passing production returning)#34 (of 130 teams · 70% of last season's receiving production returning)#102 (of 130 teams · 42% of last season's rushing production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 985.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#3 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.400 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#2 — top 10 (of 130 teams · -0.005 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 53% of plays successful)#33 (of 130 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.335 average PPA on successful plays)#19 (of 130 teams · 1.109 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Michigan9–42 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #15 Notre Dame, #16 Iowa)#68 (of 130 teams · 401.5 yds/g · 5,220 yards)#44 (of 130 teams · 31.7 pts/g · 412 points)#11 (of 130 teams · 307.3 yds/g allowed · 3,995 yards)#25 (of 130 teams · 20.7 pts/g allowed · 269 points)#26 (of 130 teams · +11.0 /g · +143 on the season)#63 (of 130 teams · +0 on the season · 20 taken, 20 given · +0.00 /g)#76 (of 130 teams · 29:32 /g · 6h 24m on the season)#30 (of 130 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#67 (of 130 teams · 59% of last season's receiving production returning)#112 (of 130 teams · 37% of last season's rushing production returning)#11 (of 130 teams · 853.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#63 (of 130 teams · 0.182 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#21 (of 130 teams · 0.069 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#51 (of 130 teams · 45% of plays successful)#19 (of 130 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#80 (of 130 teams · 1.181 average PPA on successful plays)#53 (of 130 teams · 1.201 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Notre Dame11–22 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #22 USC, #23 Navy, #24 Virginia)#46 (of 130 teams · 429.9 yds/g · 5,589 yards)#13 (of 130 teams · 36.8 pts/g · 478 points)#18 (of 130 teams · 320.2 yds/g allowed · 4,163 yards)#12 (of 130 teams · 17.9 pts/g allowed · 233 points)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +18.9 /g · +245 on the season)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +17 on the season · 28 taken, 11 given · +1.31 /g)#99 (of 130 teams · 28:29 /g · 6h 10m on the season)#68 (of 130 teams · 75% of last season's passing production returning)#75 (of 130 teams · 55% of last season's receiving production returning)#82 (of 130 teams · 55% of last season's rushing production returning)#14 (of 130 teams · 843.3 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#28 (of 130 teams · 0.241 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#17 (of 130 teams · 0.047 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#37 (of 130 teams · 46% of plays successful)#28 (of 130 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#31 (of 130 teams · 1.274 average PPA on successful plays)#9 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.085 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Iowa10–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #18 Minnesota · postseason: #22 USC)#99 (of 130 teams · 366.5 yds/g · 4,765 yards)#88 (of 130 teams · 25.8 pts/g · 335 points)#12 (of 130 teams · 308.1 yds/g allowed · 4,006 yards)#5 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 14.0 pts/g allowed · 182 points)#24 (of 130 teams · +11.8 /g · +153 on the season)#19 (of 130 teams · +8 on the season · 20 taken, 12 given · +0.62 /g)#22 (of 130 teams · 32:02 /g · 6h 56m on the season)#29 (of 130 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#103 (of 130 teams · 44% of last season's receiving production returning)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 94% of last season's rushing production returning)#43 (of 130 teams · 637.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#83 (of 130 teams · 0.140 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#18 (of 130 teams · 0.053 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#45 (of 130 teams · 45% of plays successful)#37 (of 130 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#123 (of 130 teams · 1.093 average PPA on successful plays)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.009 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Memphis12–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #21 Cincinnati, #21 Cincinnati, #23 Navy)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 485.1 yds/g · 6,791 yards)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 40.4 pts/g · 566 points)#61 (of 130 teams · 383.5 yds/g allowed · 5,369 yards)#58 (of 130 teams · 26.4 pts/g allowed · 370 points)#18 (of 130 teams · +14.0 /g · +196 on the season)#68 (of 130 teams · -1 on the season · 19 taken, 20 given · -0.07 /g)#47 (of 130 teams · 30:37 /g · 7h 09m on the season)#37 (of 130 teams · 96% of last season's passing production returning)#44 (of 130 teams · 66% of last season's receiving production returning)#95 (of 130 teams · 47% of last season's rushing production returning)#71 (of 130 teams · 552.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.306 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#57 (of 130 teams · 0.140 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#19 (of 130 teams · 47% of plays successful)#35 (of 130 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#5 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.373 average PPA on successful plays)#74 (of 130 teams · 1.228 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Minnesota11–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #10 Penn State)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #10 Penn State · postseason: #12 Auburn)#42 (of 130 teams · 432.0 yds/g · 5,616 yards)#21 (of 130 teams · 34.1 pts/g · 443 points)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 306.5 yds/g allowed · 3,985 yards)#37 (of 130 teams · 22.5 pts/g allowed · 293 points)#25 (of 130 teams · +11.5 /g · +150 on the season)#40 (of 130 teams · +4 on the season · 19 taken, 15 given · +0.31 /g)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 34:08 /g · 7h 24m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 99% of last season's receiving production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 99% of last season's rushing production returning)#46 (of 130 teams · 621.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#11 (of 130 teams · 0.287 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#27 (of 130 teams · 0.079 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#15 (of 130 teams · 48% of plays successful)#44 (of 130 teams · 41% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#47 (of 130 teams · 1.244 average PPA on successful plays)#34 (of 130 teams · 1.162 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Boise State12–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#50 (of 130 teams · 426.6 yds/g · 5,973 yards)#19 (of 130 teams · 34.7 pts/g · 486 points)#34 (of 130 teams · 346.5 yds/g allowed · 4,851 yards)#31 (of 130 teams · 21.9 pts/g allowed · 306 points)#22 (of 130 teams · +12.9 /g · +180 on the season)#68 (of 130 teams · -1 on the season · 18 taken, 19 given · -0.07 /g)#38 (of 130 teams · 30:56 /g · 7h 13m on the season)#117 (of 130 teams · 3% of last season's passing production returning)#102 (of 130 teams · 45% of last season's receiving production returning)#125 (of 130 teams · 23% of last season's rushing production returning)#67 (of 130 teams · 561.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#35 (of 130 teams · 0.223 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#45 (of 130 teams · 0.117 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#50 (of 130 teams · 45% of plays successful)#41 (of 130 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#43 (of 130 teams · 1.247 average PPA on successful plays)#86 (of 130 teams · 1.249 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019App State13–10 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#41 (of 130 teams · 432.5 yds/g · 6,055 yards)#9 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 38.8 pts/g · 543 points)#26 (of 130 teams · 336.1 yds/g allowed · 4,705 yards)#21 (of 130 teams · 20.0 pts/g allowed · 280 points)#9 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +18.8 /g · +263 on the season)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · +15 on the season · 24 taken, 9 given · +1.07 /g)#46 (of 130 teams · 30:38 /g · 7h 09m on the season)#43 (of 130 teams · 92% of last season's passing production returning)#14 (of 130 teams · 81% of last season's receiving production returning)#34 (of 130 teams · 79% of last season's rushing production returning)#101 (of 130 teams · 412.3 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#16 (of 130 teams · 0.269 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#23 (of 130 teams · 0.073 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#61 (of 130 teams · 44% of plays successful)#12 (of 130 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.347 average PPA on successful plays)#128 (of 130 teams · 1.356 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Cincinnati11–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#77 (of 130 teams · 392.1 yds/g · 5,489 yards)#60 (of 130 teams · 29.6 pts/g · 415 points)#40 (of 130 teams · 361.4 yds/g allowed · 5,060 yards)#24 (of 130 teams · 20.6 pts/g allowed · 288 points)#30 (of 130 teams · +9.1 /g · +127 on the season)#29 (of 130 teams · +6 on the season · 26 taken, 20 given · +0.43 /g)#27 (of 130 teams · 31:45 /g · 7h 25m on the season)#52 (of 130 teams · 86% of last season's passing production returning)#29 (of 130 teams · 72% of last season's receiving production returning)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 95% of last season's rushing production returning)#61 (of 130 teams · 576.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#69 (of 130 teams · 0.172 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#30 (of 130 teams · 0.082 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#59 (of 130 teams · 44% of plays successful)#32 (of 130 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#104 (of 130 teams · 1.142 average PPA on successful plays)#38 (of 130 teams · 1.168 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019USC8–55 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #11 Utah)#21 (of 130 teams · 454.2 yds/g · 5,905 yards)#35 (of 130 teams · 32.5 pts/g · 422 points)#77 (of 130 teams · 408.5 yds/g allowed · 5,310 yards)#78 (of 130 teams · 29.4 pts/g allowed · 382 points)#54 (of 130 teams · +3.1 /g · +40 on the season)#120 (of 130 teams · -10 on the season · 16 taken, 26 given · -0.77 /g)#94 (of 130 teams · 28:48 /g · 6h 14m on the season)#41 (of 130 teams · 93% of last season's passing production returning)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 91% of last season's receiving production returning)#60 (of 130 teams · 66% of last season's rushing production returning)#4 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 915.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#22 (of 130 teams · 0.251 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#90 (of 130 teams · 0.195 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#10 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 50% of plays successful)#114 (of 130 teams · 47% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#90 (of 130 teams · 1.162 average PPA on successful plays)#30 (of 130 teams · 1.145 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Navy11–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#20 (of 130 teams · 455.8 yds/g · 5,925 yards)#12 (of 130 teams · 37.1 pts/g · 483 points)#16 (of 130 teams · 313.5 yds/g allowed · 4,076 yards)#34 (of 130 teams · 22.3 pts/g allowed · 290 points)#16 (of 130 teams · +14.8 /g · +193 on the season)#31 (of 130 teams · +5 on the season · 21 taken, 16 given · +0.38 /g)#8 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 33:28 /g · 7h 15m on the season)#93 (of 130 teams · 21% of last season's passing production returning)#46 (of 130 teams · 66% of last season's receiving production returning)#96 (of 130 teams · 46% of last season's rushing production returning)#119 (of 130 teams · 335.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#6 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 0.349 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#32 (of 130 teams · 0.092 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#17 (of 130 teams · 48% of plays successful)#27 (of 130 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#7 — top 10 (of 130 teams · 1.353 average PPA on successful plays)#62 (of 130 teams · 1.211 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Virginia9–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#81 (of 130 teams · 388.9 yds/g · 5,445 yards)#40 (of 130 teams · 32.1 pts/g · 449 points)#47 (of 130 teams · 371.9 yds/g allowed · 5,206 yards)#62 (of 130 teams · 27.1 pts/g allowed · 380 points)#50 (of 130 teams · +4.9 /g · +69 on the season)#85 (of 130 teams · -3 on the season · 18 taken, 21 given · -0.21 /g)#12 (of 130 teams · 33:03 /g · 7h 43m on the season)#16 (of 130 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#84 (of 130 teams · 51% of last season's receiving production returning)#91 (of 130 teams · 50% of last season's rushing production returning)#59 (of 130 teams · 580.3 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#73 (of 130 teams · 0.161 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#78 (of 130 teams · 0.179 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#32 (of 130 teams · 46% of plays successful)#40 (of 130 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#112 (of 130 teams · 1.126 average PPA on successful plays)#125 (of 130 teams · 1.347 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2019Oklahoma State8–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2019's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#18 (of 130 teams · 456.5 yds/g · 5,935 yards)#35 (of 130 teams · 32.5 pts/g · 422 points)#82 (of 130 teams · 412.3 yds/g allowed · 5,360 yards)#61 (of 130 teams · 26.8 pts/g allowed · 348 points)#46 (of 130 teams · +5.7 /g · +74 on the season)#70 (of 130 teams · -1 on the season · 19 taken, 20 given · -0.08 /g)#93 (of 130 teams · 28:51 /g · 6h 15m on the season)#125 (of 130 teams · 1% of last season's passing production returning)#43 (of 130 teams · 66% of last season's receiving production returning)#119 (of 130 teams · 32% of last season's rushing production returning)#39 (of 130 teams · 644.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#43 (of 130 teams · 0.218 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#52 (of 130 teams · 0.133 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#52 (of 130 teams · 45% of plays successful)#62 (of 130 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#55 (of 130 teams · 1.228 average PPA on successful plays)#61 (of 130 teams · 1.211 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.

CFP Top 25, 20192019 Michigan StateCFP Top 25 medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #42
Total offense. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 LSU #1 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #3 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #4 of 130; 2019 Clemson #5 of 130; 2019 Alabama #6 of 130; 2019 Memphis #10 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #18 of 130; 2019 Navy #20 of 130; 2019 USC #21 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #38 of 130; 2019 Oregon #39 of 130; 2019 App State #41 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #42 of 130; 2019 Florida #44 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #46 of 130; 2019 Utah #48 of 130; 2019 Boise State #50 of 130; 2019 Baylor #52 of 130; 2019 Penn State #56 of 130; 2019 Georgia #61 of 130; 2019 Auburn #64 of 130; 2019 Michigan #68 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #77 of 130; 2019 Virginia #81 of 130; 2019 Iowa #99 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 95 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 42.
Scoring offensemedian #21
Scoring offense. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 LSU #1 of 130; 2019 Alabama #2 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #3 of 130; 2019 Clemson #4 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #6 of 130; 2019 Memphis #8 of 130; 2019 App State #9 of 130; 2019 Navy #12 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #13 of 130; 2019 Penn State #15 of 130; 2019 Oregon #16 of 130; 2019 Boise State #19 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #21 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #23 of 130; 2019 Baylor #27 of 130; 2019 Florida #28 of 130; 2019 Auburn #28 of 130; 2019 USC #35 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #35 of 130; 2019 Utah #38 of 130; 2019 Virginia #40 of 130; 2019 Michigan #44 of 130; 2019 Georgia #50 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #60 of 130; 2019 Iowa #88 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 105 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 21.
Total defensemedian #22
Total defense. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Ohio State #1 of 130; 2019 Utah #2 of 130; 2019 Georgia #3 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #4 of 130; 2019 Clemson #6 of 130; 2019 Florida #9 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #10 of 130; 2019 Michigan #11 of 130; 2019 Iowa #12 of 130; 2019 Navy #16 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #18 of 130; 2019 Alabama #21 of 130; 2019 Oregon #22 of 130; 2019 App State #26 of 130; 2019 Auburn #28 of 130; 2019 LSU #31 of 130; 2019 Penn State #33 of 130; 2019 Boise State #34 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #38 of 130; 2019 Baylor #39 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #40 of 130; 2019 Virginia #47 of 130; 2019 Memphis #61 of 130; 2019 USC #77 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #82 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 19 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 22.
Scoring defensemedian #19
Scoring defense. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Georgia #1 of 130; 2019 Clemson #3 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #4 of 130; 2019 Iowa #5 of 130; 2019 Utah #6 of 130; 2019 Florida #7 of 130; 2019 Penn State #8 of 130; 2019 Oregon #9 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #10 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #12 of 130; 2019 Alabama #13 of 130; 2019 Auburn #17 of 130; 2019 Baylor #19 of 130; 2019 App State #21 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #24 of 130; 2019 Michigan #25 of 130; 2019 Boise State #31 of 130; 2019 LSU #32 of 130; 2019 Navy #34 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #37 of 130; 2019 Memphis #58 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #61 of 130; 2019 Virginia #62 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #64 of 130; 2019 USC #78 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 37 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 19.
Point marginmedian #15
Point margin. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Ohio State #1 of 130; 2019 Clemson #2 of 130; 2019 Alabama #3 of 130; 2019 LSU #4 of 130; 2019 Penn State #6 of 130; 2019 Oregon #7 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #8 of 130; 2019 App State #9 of 130; 2019 Georgia #10 of 130; 2019 Florida #12 of 130; 2019 Utah #13 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #14 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #15 of 130; 2019 Navy #16 of 130; 2019 Memphis #18 of 130; 2019 Baylor #19 of 130; 2019 Auburn #21 of 130; 2019 Boise State #22 of 130; 2019 Iowa #24 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #25 of 130; 2019 Michigan #26 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #30 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #46 of 130; 2019 Virginia #50 of 130; 2019 USC #54 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 72 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 15.
Turnover marginmedian #31
Turnover margin. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Alabama #3 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #4 of 130; 2019 Oregon #5 of 130; 2019 App State #7 of 130; 2019 Clemson #8 of 130; 2019 Baylor #13 of 130; 2019 LSU #15 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #17 of 130; 2019 Utah #17 of 130; 2019 Penn State #19 of 130; 2019 Iowa #19 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #29 of 130; 2019 Florida #31 of 130; 2019 Auburn #31 of 130; 2019 Navy #31 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #40 of 130; 2019 Georgia #49 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #63 of 130; 2019 Michigan #63 of 130; 2019 Memphis #68 of 130; 2019 Boise State #68 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #70 of 130; 2019 Virginia #85 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #109 of 130; 2019 USC #120 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 75 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 31.
Possessionmedian #47
Possession. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Wisconsin #1 of 130; 2019 Utah #3 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #4 of 130; 2019 Navy #8 of 130; 2019 Virginia #12 of 130; 2019 Georgia #18 of 130; 2019 Iowa #22 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #25 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #27 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #37 of 130; 2019 Boise State #38 of 130; 2019 App State #46 of 130; 2019 Memphis #47 of 130; 2019 Clemson #58 of 130; 2019 LSU #60 of 130; 2019 Florida #62 of 130; 2019 Alabama #67 of 130; 2019 Michigan #76 of 130; 2019 Auburn #87 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #93 of 130; 2019 USC #94 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #99 of 130; 2019 Baylor #103 of 130; 2019 Oregon #104 of 130; 2019 Penn State #108 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 31 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 47.
Returning passingmedian #52
Returning passing. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 LSU #1 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #1 of 130; 2019 Utah #12 of 130; 2019 Florida #16 of 130; 2019 Virginia #16 of 130; 2019 Iowa #29 of 130; 2019 Michigan #30 of 130; 2019 Oregon #35 of 130; 2019 Memphis #37 of 130; 2019 USC #41 of 130; 2019 App State #43 of 130; 2019 Clemson #50 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #52 of 130; 2019 Georgia #57 of 130; 2019 Alabama #59 of 130; 2019 Baylor #62 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #68 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #91 of 130; 2019 Navy #93 of 130; 2019 Penn State #113 of 130; 2019 Boise State #117 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #120 of 130; 2019 Auburn #122 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #124 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #125 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 1 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 52.
Returning receivingmedian #44
Returning receiving. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Minnesota #1 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #2 of 130; 2019 USC #4 of 130; 2019 Utah #6 of 130; 2019 Florida #7 of 130; 2019 App State #14 of 130; 2019 Baylor #22 of 130; 2019 Clemson #23 of 130; 2019 LSU #28 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #29 of 130; 2019 Alabama #34 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #43 of 130; 2019 Memphis #44 of 130; 2019 Navy #46 of 130; 2019 Oregon #57 of 130; 2019 Michigan #67 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #72 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #75 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #80 of 130; 2019 Penn State #83 of 130; 2019 Virginia #84 of 130; 2019 Auburn #96 of 130; 2019 Boise State #102 of 130; 2019 Iowa #103 of 130; 2019 Georgia #118 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 17 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 44.
Returning rushingmedian #65
Returning rushing. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Minnesota #1 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #6 of 130; 2019 Iowa #8 of 130; 2019 Oregon #25 of 130; 2019 Baylor #30 of 130; 2019 Auburn #33 of 130; 2019 App State #34 of 130; 2019 Utah #43 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #47 of 130; 2019 Florida #52 of 130; 2019 USC #60 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #62 of 130; 2019 Clemson #65 of 130; 2019 Georgia #73 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #82 of 130; 2019 LSU #87 of 130; 2019 Virginia #91 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #93 of 130; 2019 Memphis #95 of 130; 2019 Navy #96 of 130; 2019 Alabama #102 of 130; 2019 Michigan #112 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #119 of 130; 2019 Boise State #125 of 130; 2019 Penn State #130 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 41 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 65.
Team talentmedian #17
Team talent. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Alabama #1 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #2 of 130; 2019 Georgia #3 of 130; 2019 USC #4 of 130; 2019 LSU #5 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #8 of 130; 2019 Clemson #9 of 130; 2019 Penn State #10 of 130; 2019 Michigan #11 of 130; 2019 Auburn #13 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #14 of 130; 2019 Florida #15 of 130; 2019 Oregon #17 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #33 of 130; 2019 Baylor #35 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #39 of 130; 2019 Iowa #43 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #46 of 130; 2019 Utah #47 of 130; 2019 Virginia #59 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #61 of 130; 2019 Boise State #67 of 130; 2019 Memphis #71 of 130; 2019 App State #101 of 130; 2019 Navy #119 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 31 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 17.
Offensive EPAmedian #21
Offensive EPA. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 LSU #1 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #2 of 130; 2019 Alabama #3 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #4 of 130; 2019 Clemson #5 of 130; 2019 Navy #6 of 130; 2019 Memphis #8 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #11 of 130; 2019 Utah #12 of 130; 2019 App State #16 of 130; 2019 Oregon #18 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #19 of 130; 2019 Florida #21 of 130; 2019 USC #22 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #28 of 130; 2019 Penn State #30 of 130; 2019 Boise State #35 of 130; 2019 Baylor #39 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #43 of 130; 2019 Auburn #58 of 130; 2019 Georgia #59 of 130; 2019 Michigan #63 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #69 of 130; 2019 Virginia #73 of 130; 2019 Iowa #83 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 113 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 21.
Defensive EPAmedian #21
Defensive EPA. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Ohio State #1 of 130; 2019 Alabama #2 of 130; 2019 Clemson #3 of 130; 2019 Utah #4 of 130; 2019 Georgia #6 of 130; 2019 Oregon #9 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #10 of 130; 2019 Auburn #12 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #17 of 130; 2019 Iowa #18 of 130; 2019 Florida #19 of 130; 2019 Penn State #20 of 130; 2019 Michigan #21 of 130; 2019 App State #23 of 130; 2019 Baylor #25 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #27 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #30 of 130; 2019 LSU #31 of 130; 2019 Navy #32 of 130; 2019 Boise State #45 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #52 of 130; 2019 Memphis #57 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #64 of 130; 2019 Virginia #78 of 130; 2019 USC #90 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 28 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 21.
Offensive success ratemedian #26
Offensive success rate. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 LSU #1 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #2 of 130; 2019 Alabama #4 of 130; 2019 Clemson #7 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #8 of 130; 2019 USC #10 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #11 of 130; 2019 Utah #14 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #15 of 130; 2019 Navy #17 of 130; 2019 Memphis #19 of 130; 2019 Georgia #22 of 130; 2019 Oregon #26 of 130; 2019 Virginia #32 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #37 of 130; 2019 Auburn #40 of 130; 2019 Florida #41 of 130; 2019 Iowa #45 of 130; 2019 Penn State #46 of 130; 2019 Baylor #48 of 130; 2019 Boise State #50 of 130; 2019 Michigan #51 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #52 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #59 of 130; 2019 App State #61 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 99 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 26.
Defensive success ratemedian #27
Defensive success rate. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Ohio State #1 of 130; 2019 Clemson #4 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #6 of 130; 2019 Utah #7 of 130; 2019 Penn State #8 of 130; 2019 LSU #10 of 130; 2019 App State #12 of 130; 2019 Georgia #13 of 130; 2019 Auburn #14 of 130; 2019 Michigan #19 of 130; 2019 Florida #22 of 130; 2019 Oregon #24 of 130; 2019 Navy #27 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #28 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #32 of 130; 2019 Alabama #33 of 130; 2019 Memphis #35 of 130; 2019 Iowa #37 of 130; 2019 Virginia #40 of 130; 2019 Boise State #41 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #44 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #49 of 130; 2019 Baylor #53 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #62 of 130; 2019 USC #114 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 20 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 27.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #49
Offensive explosiveness. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Memphis #5 of 130; 2019 Navy #7 of 130; 2019 App State #8 of 130; 2019 Alabama #10 of 130; 2019 Florida #16 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #17 of 130; 2019 Clemson #22 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #31 of 130; 2019 Penn State #34 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #36 of 130; 2019 Boise State #43 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #47 of 130; 2019 LSU #49 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #55 of 130; 2019 Oregon #57 of 130; 2019 Baylor #60 of 130; 2019 Utah #68 of 130; 2019 Michigan #80 of 130; 2019 USC #90 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #104 of 130; 2019 Auburn #110 of 130; 2019 Virginia #112 of 130; 2019 Georgia #116 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #119 of 130; 2019 Iowa #123 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 103 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 49.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #55
Defensive explosiveness. CFP Top 25, 2019, best rank first: 2019 Iowa #1 of 130; 2019 Oregon #5 of 130; 2019 Baylor #7 of 130; 2019 Notre Dame #9 of 130; 2019 Georgia #13 of 130; 2019 Alabama #19 of 130; 2019 Clemson #29 of 130; 2019 USC #30 of 130; 2019 Minnesota #34 of 130; 2019 Cincinnati #38 of 130; 2019 Florida #51 of 130; 2019 Michigan #53 of 130; 2019 Auburn #55 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma State #61 of 130; 2019 Navy #62 of 130; 2019 Ohio State #70 of 130; 2019 Memphis #74 of 130; 2019 Utah #85 of 130; 2019 Boise State #86 of 130; 2019 Penn State #91 of 130; 2019 Oklahoma #97 of 130; 2019 Wisconsin #123 of 130; 2019 LSU #124 of 130; 2019 Virginia #125 of 130; 2019 App State #128 of 130. Marked: 2019 Michigan State, ranked 77 of 130. CFP Top 25 median rank 55.