THIRD AND DATA
Sign in

Metrics

New Mexico StateAggies

Season
‹
›Current

Sun Belt

Peers are the 25 teams ranked in the last regular-season College Football Playoff poll of 2016, released in week 15.

CFP Top 25, 2016

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
2016New Mexico State3–90 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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)#64 (of 128 teams · 414.7 yds/g · 4,976 yards)#97 (of 128 teams · 24.8 pts/g · 298 points)#121 (of 128 teams · 496.7 yds/g allowed · 5,960 yards)#121 (of 128 teams · 38.8 pts/g allowed · 466 points)#123 (of 128 teams · -14.0 /g · -168 on the season)#54 (of 128 teams · +1 on the season · 23 taken, 22 given · +0.08 /g)#118 (of 128 teams · 26:35 /g · 5h 19m on the season)#79 (of 128 teams · 52% of last season's passing production returning)#112 (of 128 teams · 40% of last season's receiving production returning)#45 (of 128 teams · 81% of last season's rushing production returning)#125 (of 128 teams · 267.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#99 (of 128 teams · 0.104 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#95 (of 128 teams · 0.208 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#93 (of 128 teams · 41% of plays successful)#94 (of 128 teams · 45% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#44 (of 128 teams · 1.248 average PPA on successful plays)#82 (of 128 teams · 1.220 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 2016'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 2016'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.)#39 (Total offense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #2–#116. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#24 (Scoring offense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #3–#107. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#22 (Total defense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#101. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#20 (Scoring defense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#106. 9 of 25 in the top 10.)#19 (Point margin: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#48. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#42 (Turnover margin: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#107. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#38 (Possession: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#108. 3 of 25 in the top 10.)#67 (Returning passing: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#122. 4 of 25 in the top 10.)#55 (Returning receiving: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#125. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#51 (Returning rushing: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #2–#127. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#20 (Team talent: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#117. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#28 (Offensive EPA: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#114. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#24 (Defensive EPA: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#118. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#27 (Offensive success rate: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #2–#82. 7 of 25 in the top 10.)#28 (Defensive success rate: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#113. 6 of 25 in the top 10.)#78 (Offensive explosiveness: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #3–#123. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#71 (Defensive explosiveness: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #7–#120. 1 of 25 in the top 10.)
2016Alabama14–15 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #9 USC · postseason: #4 Washington)5 (5 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 6 including the postseason — regular: #9 USC, #14 Auburn, #17 Florida, #20 LSU, #21 Tennessee · postseason: #4 Washington)#34 (of 128 teams · 455.3 yds/g · 6,829 yards)#16 (of 128 teams · 38.8 pts/g · 582 points)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 261.8 yds/g allowed · 3,927 yards)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 13.0 pts/g allowed · 195 points)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +25.8 /g · +387 on the season)#17 (of 128 teams · +10 on the season · 29 taken, 19 given · +0.67 /g)#47 (of 128 teams · 30:56 /g · 7h 44m on the season)#101 (of 128 teams · 11% of last season's passing production returning)#54 (of 128 teams · 69% of last season's receiving production returning)#127 (of 128 teams · 12% of last season's rushing production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 982.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#21 (of 128 teams · 0.247 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.102 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#20 (of 128 teams · 48% of plays successful)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 32% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#74 (of 128 teams · 1.187 average PPA on successful plays)#65 (of 128 teams · 1.195 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Clemson14–12 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 2 including the postseason — postseason: #1 Alabama, #3 Ohio State)4 (4 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 6 including the postseason — regular: #11 Florida State, #13 Louisville, #14 Auburn, #22 Virginia Tech · postseason: #1 Alabama, #3 Ohio State)#12 (of 128 teams · 503.7 yds/g · 7,555 yards)#14 (of 128 teams · 39.2 pts/g · 588 points)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 311.5 yds/g allowed · 4,672 yards)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 18.0 pts/g allowed · 270 points)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +21.2 /g · +318 on the season)#71 (of 128 teams · -1 on the season · 27 taken, 28 given · -0.07 /g)#54 (of 128 teams · 30:36 /g · 7h 39m on the season)#25 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#35 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's receiving production returning)#26 (of 128 teams · 90% of last season's rushing production returning)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 846.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#33 (of 128 teams · 0.221 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.002 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 50% of plays successful)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#107 (of 128 teams · 1.114 average PPA on successful plays)#63 (of 128 teams · 1.193 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Ohio State11–25 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Michigan, #7 Oklahoma, #8 Wisconsin)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Michigan, #7 Oklahoma, #8 Wisconsin)#31 (of 128 teams · 459.1 yds/g · 5,969 yards)#13 (of 128 teams · 39.4 pts/g · 512 points)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 296.8 yds/g allowed · 3,858 yards)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 15.5 pts/g allowed · 201 points)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +23.9 /g · +311 on the season)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +15 on the season · 27 taken, 12 given · +1.15 /g)#12 (of 128 teams · 33:11 /g · 7h 11m on the season)#86 (of 128 teams · 44% of last season's passing production returning)#125 (of 128 teams · 20% of last season's receiving production returning)#121 (of 128 teams · 23% of last season's rushing production returning)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 902.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#27 (of 128 teams · 0.225 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.051 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 49% of plays successful)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 35% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#123 (of 128 teams · 1.056 average PPA on successful plays)#28 (of 128 teams · 1.139 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Washington12–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #10 Colorado)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #10 Colorado, #18 Stanford, #19 Utah)#32 (of 128 teams · 456.9 yds/g · 6,397 yards)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 41.8 pts/g · 585 points)#12 (of 128 teams · 316.9 yds/g allowed · 4,436 yards)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 17.7 pts/g allowed · 248 points)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +24.1 /g · +337 on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +18 on the season · 33 taken, 15 given · +1.29 /g)#44 (of 128 teams · 31:02 /g · 7h 14m on the season)#30 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#111 (of 128 teams · 41% of last season's receiving production returning)#43 (of 128 teams · 83% of last season's rushing production returning)#24 (of 128 teams · 699.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.321 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.003 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 51% of plays successful)#13 (of 128 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#69 (of 128 teams · 1.200 average PPA on successful plays)#69 (of 128 teams · 1.200 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Penn State11–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #3 Ohio State, #8 Wisconsin)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #3 Ohio State, #8 Wisconsin, #24 Temple)#49 (of 128 teams · 432.6 yds/g · 6,056 yards)#21 (of 128 teams · 37.6 pts/g · 526 points)#37 (of 128 teams · 367.9 yds/g allowed · 5,151 yards)#47 (of 128 teams · 25.4 pts/g allowed · 356 points)#21 (of 128 teams · +12.1 /g · +170 on the season)#64 (of 128 teams · +1 on the season · 21 taken, 20 given · +0.07 /g)#101 (of 128 teams · 27:50 /g · 6h 30m on the season)#102 (of 128 teams · 10% of last season's passing production returning)#28 (of 128 teams · 79% of last season's receiving production returning)#49 (of 128 teams · 77% of last season's rushing production returning)#20 (of 128 teams · 742.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#28 (of 128 teams · 0.225 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#44 (of 128 teams · 0.118 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#62 (of 128 teams · 44% of plays successful)#33 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.339 average PPA on successful plays)#80 (of 128 teams · 1.217 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Michigan10–32 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #5 Penn State, #8 Wisconsin, #10 Colorado)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #5 Penn State, #8 Wisconsin, #10 Colorado)#58 (of 128 teams · 424.9 yds/g · 5,524 yards)#11 (of 128 teams · 40.3 pts/g · 524 points)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 261.8 yds/g allowed · 3,403 yards)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 14.1 pts/g allowed · 183 points)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +26.2 /g · +341 on the season)#24 (of 128 teams · +7 on the season · 19 taken, 12 given · +0.54 /g)#14 (of 128 teams · 33:03 /g · 7h 10m on the season)#105 (of 128 teams · 9% of last season's passing production returning)#17 (of 128 teams · 88% of last season's receiving production returning)#72 (of 128 teams · 67% of last season's rushing production returning)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 852.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#45 (of 128 teams · 0.200 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.040 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#28 (of 128 teams · 46% of plays successful)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 31% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#99 (of 128 teams · 1.151 average PPA on successful plays)#97 (of 128 teams · 1.260 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Oklahoma11–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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: #12 Oklahoma State, #16 West Virginia · postseason: #14 Auburn)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 554.8 yds/g · 7,212 yards)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 43.9 pts/g · 571 points)#83 (of 128 teams · 432.0 yds/g allowed · 5,616 yards)#68 (of 128 teams · 28.9 pts/g allowed · 375 points)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +15.1 /g · +196 on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · +0 on the season · 17 taken, 17 given · +0.00 /g)#25 (of 128 teams · 32:16 /g · 7h 00m on the season)#51 (of 128 teams · 90% of last season's passing production returning)#83 (of 128 teams · 55% of last season's receiving production returning)#23 (of 128 teams · 91% of last season's rushing production returning)#18 (of 128 teams · 777.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.376 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#84 (of 128 teams · 0.190 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 51% of plays successful)#45 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#12 (of 128 teams · 1.324 average PPA on successful plays)#104 (of 128 teams · 1.277 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Wisconsin11–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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: #20 LSU · postseason: #15 Western Michigan)#88 (of 128 teams · 382.1 yds/g · 5,350 yards)#67 (of 128 teams · 28.4 pts/g · 397 points)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 301.4 yds/g allowed · 4,219 yards)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 15.6 pts/g allowed · 218 points)#14 (of 128 teams · +12.8 /g · +179 on the season)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +12 on the season · 28 taken, 16 given · +0.86 /g)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 34:58 /g · 8h 10m on the season)#100 (of 128 teams · 12% of last season's passing production returning)#98 (of 128 teams · 49% of last season's receiving production returning)#27 (of 128 teams · 89% of last season's rushing production returning)#37 (of 128 teams · 643.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#67 (of 128 teams · 0.156 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#11 (of 128 teams · 0.035 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#37 (of 128 teams · 46% of plays successful)#29 (of 128 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#117 (of 128 teams · 1.084 average PPA on successful plays)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.074 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016USC10–34 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #4 Washington, #10 Colorado · postseason: #5 Penn State)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #4 Washington, #10 Colorado · postseason: #5 Penn State)#20 (of 128 teams · 477.1 yds/g · 6,202 yards)#36 (of 128 teams · 34.4 pts/g · 447 points)#36 (of 128 teams · 367.1 yds/g allowed · 4,773 yards)#38 (of 128 teams · 24.2 pts/g allowed · 315 points)#29 (of 128 teams · +10.2 /g · +132 on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · +0 on the season · 20 taken, 20 given · +0.00 /g)#28 (of 128 teams · 31:54 /g · 6h 55m on the season)#114 (of 128 teams · 4% of last season's passing production returning)#11 (of 128 teams · 91% of last season's receiving production returning)#51 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's rushing production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 936.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#24 (of 128 teams · 0.234 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#54 (of 128 teams · 0.134 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#13 (of 128 teams · 48% of plays successful)#24 (of 128 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#94 (of 128 teams · 1.157 average PPA on successful plays)#118 (of 128 teams · 1.337 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Colorado10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 — #18 Stanford, #19 Utah)#47 (of 128 teams · 437.1 yds/g · 6,120 yards)#51 (of 128 teams · 31.1 pts/g · 435 points)#19 (of 128 teams · 342.5 yds/g allowed · 4,795 yards)#20 (of 128 teams · 21.7 pts/g allowed · 304 points)#35 (of 128 teams · +9.4 /g · +131 on the season)#32 (of 128 teams · +6 on the season · 26 taken, 20 given · +0.43 /g)#48 (of 128 teams · 30:56 /g · 7h 13m on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's passing production returning)#58 (of 128 teams · 66% of last season's receiving production returning)#71 (of 128 teams · 67% of last season's rushing production returning)#62 (of 128 teams · 526.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#71 (of 128 teams · 0.149 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#12 (of 128 teams · 0.035 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#57 (of 128 teams · 44% of plays successful)#28 (of 128 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#112 (of 128 teams · 1.097 average PPA on successful plays)#11 (of 128 teams · 1.093 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Florida State10–34 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #6 Michigan)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #17 Florida · postseason: #6 Michigan)#25 (of 128 teams · 466.4 yds/g · 6,063 yards)#31 (of 128 teams · 35.1 pts/g · 456 points)#22 (of 128 teams · 349.1 yds/g allowed · 4,538 yards)#44 (of 128 teams · 25.0 pts/g allowed · 325 points)#30 (of 128 teams · +10.1 /g · +131 on the season)#42 (of 128 teams · +3 on the season · 23 taken, 20 given · +0.23 /g)#15 (of 128 teams · 32:55 /g · 7h 08m on the season)#82 (of 128 teams · 48% of last season's passing production returning)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 98% of last season's receiving production returning)#39 (of 128 teams · 85% of last season's rushing production returning)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 906.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#19 (of 128 teams · 0.260 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#36 (of 128 teams · 0.103 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#15 (of 128 teams · 48% of plays successful)#22 (of 128 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#56 (of 128 teams · 1.227 average PPA on successful plays)#111 (of 128 teams · 1.300 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Oklahoma State10–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #10 Colorado)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #16 West Virginia, #23 Pittsburgh · postseason: #10 Colorado)#14 (of 128 teams · 494.8 yds/g · 6,432 yards)#17 (of 128 teams · 38.6 pts/g · 502 points)#92 (of 128 teams · 446.3 yds/g allowed · 5,802 yards)#53 (of 128 teams · 26.5 pts/g allowed · 345 points)#22 (of 128 teams · +12.1 /g · +157 on the season)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +11 on the season · 25 taken, 14 given · +0.85 /g)#84 (of 128 teams · 28:51 /g · 6h 15m on the season)#58 (of 128 teams · 86% of last season's passing production returning)#51 (of 128 teams · 70% of last season's receiving production returning)#70 (of 128 teams · 68% of last season's rushing production returning)#39 (of 128 teams · 631.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#18 (of 128 teams · 0.260 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#76 (of 128 teams · 0.171 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#21 (of 128 teams · 47% of plays successful)#72 (of 128 teams · 44% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#41 (of 128 teams · 1.256 average PPA on successful plays)#71 (of 128 teams · 1.201 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Louisville9–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 Florida State)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 532.7 yds/g · 6,925 yards)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 42.5 pts/g · 553 points)#14 (of 128 teams · 322.2 yds/g allowed · 4,189 yards)#31 (of 128 teams · 23.8 pts/g allowed · 309 points)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +18.8 /g · +244 on the season)#107 (of 128 teams · -7 on the season · 25 taken, 32 given · -0.54 /g)#87 (of 128 teams · 28:47 /g · 6h 14m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's receiving production returning)#12 (of 128 teams · 98% of last season's rushing production returning)#32 (of 128 teams · 654.1 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.323 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.029 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 49% of plays successful)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 34% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#20 (of 128 teams · 1.290 average PPA on successful plays)#106 (of 128 teams · 1.283 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Auburn8–54 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 — #20 LSU)#43 (of 128 teams · 440.8 yds/g · 5,730 yards)#49 (of 128 teams · 31.2 pts/g · 406 points)#28 (of 128 teams · 361.9 yds/g allowed · 4,705 yards)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 17.1 pts/g allowed · 222 points)#12 (of 128 teams · +14.2 /g · +184 on the season)#42 (of 128 teams · +3 on the season · 17 taken, 14 given · +0.23 /g)#76 (of 128 teams · 29:11 /g · 6h 19m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#110 (of 128 teams · 41% of last season's receiving production returning)#122 (of 128 teams · 23% of last season's rushing production returning)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 865.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#40 (of 128 teams · 0.207 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#22 (of 128 teams · 0.079 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#27 (of 128 teams · 47% of plays successful)#34 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#110 (of 128 teams · 1.104 average PPA on successful plays)#41 (of 128 teams · 1.157 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Western Michigan13–10 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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)#19 (of 128 teams · 480.5 yds/g · 6,727 yards)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 41.6 pts/g · 582 points)#26 (of 128 teams · 353.6 yds/g allowed · 4,951 yards)#15 (of 128 teams · 19.8 pts/g allowed · 277 points)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +21.8 /g · +305 on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +18 on the season · 26 taken, 8 given · +1.29 /g)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 34:02 /g · 7h 57m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#80 (of 128 teams · 56% of last season's receiving production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's rushing production returning)#81 (of 128 teams · 443.2 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.348 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#51 (of 128 teams · 0.131 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 53% of plays successful)#48 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#111 (of 128 teams · 1.102 average PPA on successful plays)#105 (of 128 teams · 1.279 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016West Virginia10–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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)#17 (of 128 teams · 485.5 yds/g · 6,312 yards)#50 (of 128 teams · 31.1 pts/g · 405 points)#73 (of 128 teams · 425.9 yds/g allowed · 5,537 yards)#35 (of 128 teams · 24.0 pts/g allowed · 312 points)#41 (of 128 teams · +7.2 /g · +93 on the season)#38 (of 128 teams · +4 on the season · 25 taken, 21 given · +0.31 /g)#77 (of 128 teams · 29:07 /g · 6h 18m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#32 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's receiving production returning)#94 (of 128 teams · 55% of last season's rushing production returning)#31 (of 128 teams · 654.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#38 (of 128 teams · 0.208 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#41 (of 128 teams · 0.114 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#50 (of 128 teams · 45% of plays successful)#54 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#53 (of 128 teams · 1.233 average PPA on successful plays)#23 (of 128 teams · 1.122 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Florida9–43 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 — #20 LSU)#116 (of 128 teams · 344.0 yds/g · 4,472 yards)#107 (of 128 teams · 23.9 pts/g · 311 points)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 293.0 yds/g allowed · 3,809 yards)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 16.8 pts/g allowed · 218 points)#41 (of 128 teams · +7.2 /g · +93 on the season)#49 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 24 taken, 22 given · +0.15 /g)#37 (of 128 teams · 31:14 /g · 6h 46m on the season)#121 (of 128 teams · 2% of last season's passing production returning)#101 (of 128 teams · 48% of last season's receiving production returning)#124 (of 128 teams · 22% of last season's rushing production returning)#16 (of 128 teams · 798.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#114 (of 128 teams · 0.065 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.050 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#82 (of 128 teams · 42% of plays successful)#12 (of 128 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#114 (of 128 teams · 1.091 average PPA on successful plays)#43 (of 128 teams · 1.158 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Stanford10–31 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)#103 (of 128 teams · 367.4 yds/g · 4,776 yards)#83 (of 128 teams · 26.3 pts/g · 342 points)#38 (of 128 teams · 368.1 yds/g allowed · 4,785 yards)#18 (of 128 teams · 20.4 pts/g allowed · 265 points)#45 (of 128 teams · +5.9 /g · +77 on the season)#49 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 20 taken, 18 given · +0.15 /g)#16 (of 128 teams · 32:47 /g · 7h 06m on the season)#109 (of 128 teams · 5% of last season's passing production returning)#66 (of 128 teams · 62% of last season's receiving production returning)#77 (of 128 teams · 66% of last season's rushing production returning)#17 (of 128 teams · 778.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#69 (of 128 teams · 0.153 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#62 (of 128 teams · 0.148 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#68 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#42 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#86 (of 128 teams · 1.169 average PPA on successful plays)#94 (of 128 teams · 1.243 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Utah9–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)#51 (of 128 teams · 430.7 yds/g · 5,599 yards)#60 (of 128 teams · 29.9 pts/g · 388 points)#48 (of 128 teams · 383.0 yds/g allowed · 4,979 yards)#33 (of 128 teams · 23.9 pts/g allowed · 311 points)#45 (of 128 teams · +5.9 /g · +77 on the season)#28 (of 128 teams · +6 on the season · 31 taken, 25 given · +0.46 /g)#11 (of 128 teams · 33:24 /g · 7h 14m on the season)#122 (of 128 teams · 1% of last season's passing production returning)#88 (of 128 teams · 53% of last season's receiving production returning)#123 (of 128 teams · 22% of last season's rushing production returning)#51 (of 128 teams · 580.1 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#77 (of 128 teams · 0.139 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#52 (of 128 teams · 0.132 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#56 (of 128 teams · 44% of plays successful)#36 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#104 (of 128 teams · 1.119 average PPA on successful plays)#103 (of 128 teams · 1.276 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016LSU8–44 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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: #13 Louisville)#59 (of 128 teams · 423.1 yds/g · 5,077 yards)#68 (of 128 teams · 28.3 pts/g · 340 points)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 314.4 yds/g allowed · 3,773 yards)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 15.8 pts/g allowed · 189 points)#16 (of 128 teams · +12.6 /g · +151 on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · +0 on the season · 17 taken, 17 given · +0.00 /g)#39 (of 128 teams · 31:08 /g · 6h 14m on the season)#30 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#23 (of 128 teams · 83% of last season's receiving production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's rushing production returning)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 917.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#23 (of 128 teams · 0.240 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.005 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#43 (of 128 teams · 45% of plays successful)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#27 (of 128 teams · 1.276 average PPA on successful plays)#13 (of 128 teams · 1.095 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Tennessee9–42 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 — #17 Florida, #22 Virginia Tech)#40 (of 128 teams · 443.7 yds/g · 5,768 yards)#24 (of 128 teams · 36.4 pts/g · 473 points)#95 (of 128 teams · 449.2 yds/g allowed · 5,840 yards)#68 (of 128 teams · 28.9 pts/g allowed · 375 points)#38 (of 128 teams · +7.5 /g · +98 on the season)#79 (of 128 teams · -2 on the season · 24 taken, 26 given · -0.15 /g)#108 (of 128 teams · 27:24 /g · 5h 56m on the season)#17 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#50 (of 128 teams · 70% of last season's receiving production returning)#16 (of 128 teams · 96% of last season's rushing production returning)#14 (of 128 teams · 813.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#46 (of 128 teams · 0.198 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#72 (of 128 teams · 0.162 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#25 (of 128 teams · 47% of plays successful)#66 (of 128 teams · 44% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#63 (of 128 teams · 1.213 average PPA on successful plays)#51 (of 128 teams · 1.165 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Virginia Tech10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 — #23 Pittsburgh)#39 (of 128 teams · 444.9 yds/g · 6,229 yards)#33 (of 128 teams · 35.0 pts/g · 490 points)#18 (of 128 teams · 340.7 yds/g allowed · 4,770 yards)#28 (of 128 teams · 22.8 pts/g allowed · 319 points)#19 (of 128 teams · +12.2 /g · +171 on the season)#72 (of 128 teams · -1 on the season · 25 taken, 26 given · -0.07 /g)#36 (of 128 teams · 31:15 /g · 7h 18m on the season)#85 (of 128 teams · 44% of last season's passing production returning)#20 (of 128 teams · 87% of last season's receiving production returning)#54 (of 128 teams · 74% of last season's rushing production returning)#36 (of 128 teams · 646.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#66 (of 128 teams · 0.158 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#24 (of 128 teams · 0.082 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#33 (of 128 teams · 46% of plays successful)#18 (of 128 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#121 (of 128 teams · 1.071 average PPA on successful plays)#74 (of 128 teams · 1.203 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Pittsburgh8–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #2 Clemson, #5 Penn State)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #2 Clemson, #5 Penn State)#38 (of 128 teams · 446.8 yds/g · 5,808 yards)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 40.9 pts/g · 532 points)#101 (of 128 teams · 452.8 yds/g allowed · 5,886 yards)#106 (of 128 teams · 35.2 pts/g allowed · 458 points)#48 (of 128 teams · +5.7 /g · +74 on the season)#58 (of 128 teams · +1 on the season · 19 taken, 18 given · +0.08 /g)#49 (of 128 teams · 30:53 /g · 6h 42m on the season)#50 (of 128 teams · 91% of last season's passing production returning)#108 (of 128 teams · 43% of last season's receiving production returning)#50 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's rushing production returning)#35 (of 128 teams · 649.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#13 (of 128 teams · 0.296 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#89 (of 128 teams · 0.194 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#42 (of 128 teams · 45% of plays successful)#57 (of 128 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.367 average PPA on successful plays)#120 (of 128 teams · 1.363 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Temple10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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 Navy)#65 (of 128 teams · 413.6 yds/g · 5,790 yards)#43 (of 128 teams · 32.4 pts/g · 453 points)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 282.5 yds/g allowed · 3,955 yards)#11 (of 128 teams · 18.4 pts/g allowed · 258 points)#13 (of 128 teams · +13.9 /g · +195 on the season)#32 (of 128 teams · +6 on the season · 25 taken, 19 given · +0.43 /g)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 33:33 /g · 7h 50m on the season)#34 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#104 (of 128 teams · 47% of last season's receiving production returning)#13 (of 128 teams · 97% of last season's rushing production returning)#71 (of 128 teams · 492.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#61 (of 128 teams · 0.166 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#16 (of 128 teams · 0.055 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#65 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#14 (of 128 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#47 (of 128 teams · 1.244 average PPA on successful plays)#59 (of 128 teams · 1.187 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Navy9–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016'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)#46 (of 128 teams · 438.3 yds/g · 6,136 yards)#20 (of 128 teams · 37.9 pts/g · 531 points)#84 (of 128 teams · 434.0 yds/g allowed · 6,076 yards)#84 (of 128 teams · 31.0 pts/g allowed · 434 points)#43 (of 128 teams · +6.9 /g · +97 on the season)#52 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 18 taken, 16 given · +0.14 /g)#38 (of 128 teams · 31:11 /g · 7h 17m on the season)#115 (of 128 teams · 4% of last season's passing production returning)#55 (of 128 teams · 69% of last season's receiving production returning)#126 (of 128 teams · 17% of last season's rushing production returning)#117 (of 128 teams · 342.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.340 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#118 (of 128 teams · 0.268 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 52% of plays successful)#113 (of 128 teams · 47% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#78 (of 128 teams · 1.181 average PPA on successful plays)#93 (of 128 teams · 1.240 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, 20162016 New Mexico StateCFP Top 25 medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #39
Total offense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Oklahoma #2 of 128; 2016 Louisville #3 of 128; 2016 Clemson #12 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #14 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #17 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #19 of 128; 2016 USC #20 of 128; 2016 Florida State #25 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #31 of 128; 2016 Washington #32 of 128; 2016 Alabama #34 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #38 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #39 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #40 of 128; 2016 Auburn #43 of 128; 2016 Navy #46 of 128; 2016 Colorado #47 of 128; 2016 Penn State #49 of 128; 2016 Utah #51 of 128; 2016 Michigan #58 of 128; 2016 LSU #59 of 128; 2016 Temple #65 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #88 of 128; 2016 Stanford #103 of 128; 2016 Florida #116 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 64 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 39.
Scoring offensemedian #24
Scoring offense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Oklahoma #3 of 128; 2016 Louisville #6 of 128; 2016 Washington #8 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #9 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #10 of 128; 2016 Michigan #11 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #13 of 128; 2016 Clemson #14 of 128; 2016 Alabama #16 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #17 of 128; 2016 Navy #20 of 128; 2016 Penn State #21 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #24 of 128; 2016 Florida State #31 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #33 of 128; 2016 USC #36 of 128; 2016 Temple #43 of 128; 2016 Auburn #49 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #50 of 128; 2016 Colorado #51 of 128; 2016 Utah #60 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #67 of 128; 2016 LSU #68 of 128; 2016 Stanford #83 of 128; 2016 Florida #107 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 97 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 24.
Total defensemedian #22
Total defense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Alabama #2 of 128; 2016 Temple #4 of 128; 2016 Florida #5 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #6 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #7 of 128; 2016 Clemson #8 of 128; 2016 LSU #10 of 128; 2016 Washington #12 of 128; 2016 Louisville #14 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #18 of 128; 2016 Colorado #19 of 128; 2016 Florida State #22 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #26 of 128; 2016 Auburn #28 of 128; 2016 USC #36 of 128; 2016 Penn State #37 of 128; 2016 Stanford #38 of 128; 2016 Utah #48 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #73 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #83 of 128; 2016 Navy #84 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #92 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #95 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #101 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 121 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 22.
Scoring defensemedian #20
Scoring defense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Alabama #1 of 128; 2016 Michigan #2 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #3 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #4 of 128; 2016 LSU #5 of 128; 2016 Florida #6 of 128; 2016 Auburn #7 of 128; 2016 Washington #8 of 128; 2016 Clemson #10 of 128; 2016 Temple #11 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #15 of 128; 2016 Stanford #18 of 128; 2016 Colorado #20 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #28 of 128; 2016 Louisville #31 of 128; 2016 Utah #33 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #35 of 128; 2016 USC #38 of 128; 2016 Florida State #44 of 128; 2016 Penn State #47 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #53 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #68 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #68 of 128; 2016 Navy #84 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #106 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 121 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 20.
Point marginmedian #19
Point margin. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Alabama #2 of 128; 2016 Washington #3 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #4 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #5 of 128; 2016 Clemson #6 of 128; 2016 Louisville #8 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #10 of 128; 2016 Auburn #12 of 128; 2016 Temple #13 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #14 of 128; 2016 LSU #16 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #19 of 128; 2016 Penn State #21 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #22 of 128; 2016 USC #29 of 128; 2016 Florida State #30 of 128; 2016 Colorado #35 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #38 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #41 of 128; 2016 Florida #41 of 128; 2016 Navy #43 of 128; 2016 Stanford #45 of 128; 2016 Utah #45 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #48 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 123 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 19.
Turnover marginmedian #42
Turnover margin. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Washington #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #3 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #9 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #10 of 128; 2016 Alabama #17 of 128; 2016 Michigan #24 of 128; 2016 Utah #28 of 128; 2016 Colorado #32 of 128; 2016 Temple #32 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #38 of 128; 2016 Florida State #42 of 128; 2016 Auburn #42 of 128; 2016 Florida #49 of 128; 2016 Stanford #49 of 128; 2016 Navy #52 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #58 of 128; 2016 Penn State #64 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #67 of 128; 2016 USC #67 of 128; 2016 LSU #67 of 128; 2016 Clemson #71 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #72 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #79 of 128; 2016 Louisville #107 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 54 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 42.
Possessionmedian #38
Possession. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Wisconsin #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #4 of 128; 2016 Temple #8 of 128; 2016 Utah #11 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #12 of 128; 2016 Michigan #14 of 128; 2016 Florida State #15 of 128; 2016 Stanford #16 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #25 of 128; 2016 USC #28 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #36 of 128; 2016 Florida #37 of 128; 2016 Navy #38 of 128; 2016 LSU #39 of 128; 2016 Washington #44 of 128; 2016 Alabama #47 of 128; 2016 Colorado #48 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #49 of 128; 2016 Clemson #54 of 128; 2016 Auburn #76 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #77 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #84 of 128; 2016 Louisville #87 of 128; 2016 Penn State #101 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #108 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 118 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 38.
Returning passingmedian #67
Returning passing. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Louisville #1 of 128; 2016 Auburn #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #1 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #17 of 128; 2016 Clemson #25 of 128; 2016 Washington #30 of 128; 2016 LSU #30 of 128; 2016 Temple #34 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #50 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #51 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #58 of 128; 2016 Colorado #67 of 128; 2016 Florida State #82 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #85 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #86 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #100 of 128; 2016 Alabama #101 of 128; 2016 Penn State #102 of 128; 2016 Michigan #105 of 128; 2016 Stanford #109 of 128; 2016 USC #114 of 128; 2016 Navy #115 of 128; 2016 Florida #121 of 128; 2016 Utah #122 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 79 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 67.
Returning receivingmedian #55
Returning receiving. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Louisville #1 of 128; 2016 Florida State #3 of 128; 2016 USC #11 of 128; 2016 Michigan #17 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #20 of 128; 2016 LSU #23 of 128; 2016 Penn State #28 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #32 of 128; 2016 Clemson #35 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #50 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #51 of 128; 2016 Alabama #54 of 128; 2016 Navy #55 of 128; 2016 Colorado #58 of 128; 2016 Stanford #66 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #80 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #83 of 128; 2016 Utah #88 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #98 of 128; 2016 Florida #101 of 128; 2016 Temple #104 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #108 of 128; 2016 Auburn #110 of 128; 2016 Washington #111 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #125 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 112 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 55.
Returning rushingmedian #51
Returning rushing. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Western Michigan #2 of 128; 2016 LSU #2 of 128; 2016 Louisville #12 of 128; 2016 Temple #13 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #16 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #23 of 128; 2016 Clemson #26 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #27 of 128; 2016 Florida State #39 of 128; 2016 Washington #43 of 128; 2016 Penn State #49 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #50 of 128; 2016 USC #51 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #54 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #70 of 128; 2016 Colorado #71 of 128; 2016 Michigan #72 of 128; 2016 Stanford #77 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #94 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #121 of 128; 2016 Auburn #122 of 128; 2016 Utah #123 of 128; 2016 Florida #124 of 128; 2016 Navy #126 of 128; 2016 Alabama #127 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 45 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 51.
Team talentmedian #20
Team talent. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Alabama #1 of 128; 2016 USC #2 of 128; 2016 LSU #3 of 128; 2016 Florida State #4 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #5 of 128; 2016 Auburn #7 of 128; 2016 Michigan #8 of 128; 2016 Clemson #9 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #14 of 128; 2016 Florida #16 of 128; 2016 Stanford #17 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #18 of 128; 2016 Penn State #20 of 128; 2016 Washington #24 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #31 of 128; 2016 Louisville #32 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #35 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #36 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #37 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #39 of 128; 2016 Utah #51 of 128; 2016 Colorado #62 of 128; 2016 Temple #71 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #81 of 128; 2016 Navy #117 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 125 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 20.
Offensive EPAmedian #28
Offensive EPA. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Oklahoma #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #4 of 128; 2016 Navy #6 of 128; 2016 Louisville #8 of 128; 2016 Washington #9 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #13 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #18 of 128; 2016 Florida State #19 of 128; 2016 Alabama #21 of 128; 2016 LSU #23 of 128; 2016 USC #24 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #27 of 128; 2016 Penn State #28 of 128; 2016 Clemson #33 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #38 of 128; 2016 Auburn #40 of 128; 2016 Michigan #45 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #46 of 128; 2016 Temple #61 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #66 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #67 of 128; 2016 Stanford #69 of 128; 2016 Colorado #71 of 128; 2016 Utah #77 of 128; 2016 Florida #114 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 99 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 28.
Defensive EPAmedian #24
Defensive EPA. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Alabama #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #2 of 128; 2016 Florida #3 of 128; 2016 Michigan #4 of 128; 2016 Clemson #6 of 128; 2016 Washington #7 of 128; 2016 LSU #8 of 128; 2016 Louisville #10 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #11 of 128; 2016 Colorado #12 of 128; 2016 Temple #16 of 128; 2016 Auburn #22 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #24 of 128; 2016 Florida State #36 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #41 of 128; 2016 Penn State #44 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #51 of 128; 2016 Utah #52 of 128; 2016 USC #54 of 128; 2016 Stanford #62 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #72 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #76 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #84 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #89 of 128; 2016 Navy #118 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 95 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 24.
Offensive success ratemedian #27
Offensive success rate. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Western Michigan #2 of 128; 2016 Navy #3 of 128; 2016 Washington #4 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #5 of 128; 2016 Clemson #7 of 128; 2016 Louisville #8 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #9 of 128; 2016 USC #13 of 128; 2016 Florida State #15 of 128; 2016 Alabama #20 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #21 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #25 of 128; 2016 Auburn #27 of 128; 2016 Michigan #28 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #33 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #37 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #42 of 128; 2016 LSU #43 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #50 of 128; 2016 Utah #56 of 128; 2016 Colorado #57 of 128; 2016 Penn State #62 of 128; 2016 Temple #65 of 128; 2016 Stanford #68 of 128; 2016 Florida #82 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 93 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 27.
Defensive success ratemedian #28
Defensive success rate. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Alabama #2 of 128; 2016 Louisville #3 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #5 of 128; 2016 Clemson #7 of 128; 2016 LSU #10 of 128; 2016 Florida #12 of 128; 2016 Washington #13 of 128; 2016 Temple #14 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #18 of 128; 2016 Florida State #22 of 128; 2016 USC #24 of 128; 2016 Colorado #28 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #29 of 128; 2016 Penn State #33 of 128; 2016 Auburn #34 of 128; 2016 Utah #36 of 128; 2016 Stanford #42 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #45 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #48 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #54 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #57 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #66 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #72 of 128; 2016 Navy #113 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 94 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 28.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #78
Offensive explosiveness. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Pittsburgh #3 of 128; 2016 Penn State #9 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #12 of 128; 2016 Louisville #20 of 128; 2016 LSU #27 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #41 of 128; 2016 Temple #47 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #53 of 128; 2016 Florida State #56 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #63 of 128; 2016 Washington #69 of 128; 2016 Alabama #74 of 128; 2016 Navy #78 of 128; 2016 Stanford #86 of 128; 2016 USC #94 of 128; 2016 Michigan #99 of 128; 2016 Utah #104 of 128; 2016 Clemson #107 of 128; 2016 Auburn #110 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #111 of 128; 2016 Colorado #112 of 128; 2016 Florida #114 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #117 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #121 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #123 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 44 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 78.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #71
Defensive explosiveness. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Wisconsin #7 of 128; 2016 Colorado #11 of 128; 2016 LSU #13 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #23 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #28 of 128; 2016 Auburn #41 of 128; 2016 Florida #43 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #51 of 128; 2016 Temple #59 of 128; 2016 Clemson #63 of 128; 2016 Alabama #65 of 128; 2016 Washington #69 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #71 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #74 of 128; 2016 Penn State #80 of 128; 2016 Navy #93 of 128; 2016 Stanford #94 of 128; 2016 Michigan #97 of 128; 2016 Utah #103 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #104 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #105 of 128; 2016 Louisville #106 of 128; 2016 Florida State #111 of 128; 2016 USC #118 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #120 of 128. Marked: 2016 New Mexico State, ranked 82 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 71.