THIRD AND DATA

Metrics

Middle TennesseeBlue Raiders

Season
‹
›Current

Sun Belt

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

Sun Belt, 2002

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

SeasonTeamTop-10 clsprior 5T10 WregT25 WregTotal offenseScoring offenseTotal defenseScoring defensePoint marginTurnover marginPossessionReturning passingof last yrReturning receivingof last yrReturning rushingof last yrTeam talentOffensive EPADefensive EPAOffensive success rateDefensive success rateOffensive explosivenessDefensive explosiveness
2002Middle Tennessee4–80 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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.)— (— · —)#76 (of 117 teams · 24.8 pts/g · 297 points)— (— allowed · —)#71 (of 117 teams · 27.7 pts/g allowed · 332 points)#74 (of 117 teams · -2.9 /g · -35 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 7 Sun Belt teams in 20020 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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)#99 (Scoring offense: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. Range #60–#114. 0 of 7 in the top 10.)— (No team has a rank for this)#74 (Scoring defense: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. Range #3–#110. 1 of 7 in the top 10.)#89 (Point margin: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. Range #49–#109. 0 of 7 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)
2002North Texas8–50 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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.)— (— · —)#102 (of 117 teams · 19.1 pts/g · 249 points)— (— allowed · —)#3 — top 10 (of 117 teams · 14.8 pts/g allowed · 192 points)#49 (of 117 teams · +4.4 /g · +57 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2002Arkansas State6–70 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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.)— (— · —)#99 (of 117 teams · 19.9 pts/g · 259 points)— (— allowed · —)#74 (of 117 teams · 27.8 pts/g allowed · 361 points)#89 (of 117 teams · -7.8 /g · -102 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2002Idaho2–100 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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.)— (— · —)#83 (of 117 teams · 23.8 pts/g · 285 points)— (— allowed · —)#105 (of 117 teams · 35.7 pts/g allowed · 428 points)#98 (of 117 teams · -11.9 /g · -143 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2002New Mexico State7–50 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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.)— (— · —)#60 (of 117 teams · 27.3 pts/g · 327 points)— (— allowed · —)#68 (of 117 teams · 27.3 pts/g allowed · 328 points)#68 (of 117 teams · -0.1 /g · -1 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2002Louisiana3–90 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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 — bottom 10 (of 117 teams · 16.9 pts/g · 203 points)— (— allowed · —)#81 (of 117 teams · 29.3 pts/g allowed · 352 points)#102 (of 117 teams · -12.4 /g · -149 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2002UL Monroe3–90 / 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 7 Sun Belt teams in 2002. 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.)— (— · —)#100 (of 117 teams · 19.7 pts/g · 236 points)— (— allowed · —)#110 — bottom 10 (of 117 teams · 37.6 pts/g allowed · 451 points)#109 — bottom 10 (of 117 teams · -17.9 /g · -215 on the season)— (—)— (— /g · — on the season)— (— of last season's passing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's receiving plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— of last season's rushing plays returning (CFBD usage, a share of plays, not yards))— (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)— (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)— (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)— (— of plays successful)— (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better)— (— average PPA on successful plays)— (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)

What clusters, and what does not

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

Sun Belt, 20022002 Middle TennesseeSun Belt medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offense
Total offense. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Scoring offensemedian #99
Scoring offense. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: 2002 New Mexico State #60 of 117; 2002 Idaho #83 of 117; 2002 Arkansas State #99 of 117; 2002 UL Monroe #100 of 117; 2002 North Texas #102 of 117; 2002 Louisiana #114 of 117. Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, ranked 76 of 117. Sun Belt median rank 99.
Total defense
Total defense. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Scoring defensemedian #74
Scoring defense. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: 2002 North Texas #3 of 117; 2002 New Mexico State #68 of 117; 2002 Arkansas State #74 of 117; 2002 Louisiana #81 of 117; 2002 Idaho #105 of 117; 2002 UL Monroe #110 of 117. Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, ranked 71 of 117. Sun Belt median rank 74.
Point marginmedian #89
Point margin. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: 2002 North Texas #49 of 117; 2002 New Mexico State #68 of 117; 2002 Arkansas State #89 of 117; 2002 Idaho #98 of 117; 2002 Louisiana #102 of 117; 2002 UL Monroe #109 of 117. Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, ranked 74 of 117. Sun Belt median rank 89.
Turnover margin
Turnover margin. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Possession
Possession. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Returning passing
Returning passing. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Returning receiving
Returning receiving. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Returning rushing
Returning rushing. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Team talent
Team talent. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive EPA
Offensive EPA. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive EPA
Defensive EPA. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive success rate
Offensive success rate. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive success rate
Defensive success rate. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive explosiveness
Offensive explosiveness. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.
Defensive explosiveness
Defensive explosiveness. Sun Belt, 2002, best rank first: . Marked: 2002 Middle Tennessee, which has no value for this metric.