THIRD AND DATA

Metrics

Northern IllinoisHuskies

Season
‹
›Current

Mid-American

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.

Mid-American, 2011

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
2011Northern Illinois11–30 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#19 (of 120 teams · 455.6 yds/g · 6,378 yds)#12 (of 120 teams · 38.3 pts/g · 536 points)#74 (of 120 teams · 395.0 yds/g allowed · 5,530 yds)#85 (of 120 teams · 30.3 pts/g allowed · 424 points)#34 (of 120 teams · +8.0 /g · +112 on the season)#19 (of 120 teams · +9 on the season · 27 taken, 18 given · +0.64 /g)#109 (of 120 teams · 16:53 /g · 3h 56m 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)#9 — top 10 (of 120 teams · 0.145 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#74 (of 120 teams · 0.063 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#28 (of 120 teams · 45% of plays successful)#56 (of 120 teams · 41% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#50 (of 120 teams · 0.942 average PPA on successful plays)#88 (of 120 teams · 0.967 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 13 Mid-American teams in 20110 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#70 (Total offense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #19–#120. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#72 (Scoring offense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #8–#118. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#65 (Total defense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #7–#114. 2 of 13 in the top 10.)#77 (Scoring defense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #3–#116. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#78 (Point margin: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #11–#119. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#61 (Turnover margin: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #12–#117. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#80 (Possession: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #41–#114. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)— (No team has a rank for this)#72 (Offensive EPA: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #9–#120. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#65 (Defensive EPA: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #7–#118. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#70 (Offensive success rate: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #18–#120. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#56 (Defensive success rate: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #25–#116. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#54 (Offensive explosiveness: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #5–#115. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#59 (Defensive explosiveness: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range #1–#109. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)
2011Temple9–40 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#79 (of 120 teams · 359.1 yds/g · 4,668 yds)#39 (of 120 teams · 30.6 pts/g · 398 points)#7 — top 10 (of 120 teams · 283.9 yds/g allowed · 3,690 yds)#3 — top 10 (of 120 teams · 13.9 pts/g allowed · 181 points)#11 (of 120 teams · +16.7 /g · +217 on the season)#12 (of 120 teams · +10 on the season · 20 taken, 10 given · +0.77 /g)#46 (of 120 teams · 18:48 /g · 4h 04m 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)#52 (of 120 teams · 0.059 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#28 (of 120 teams · 0.005 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#70 (of 120 teams · 40% of plays successful)#30 (of 120 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#54 (of 120 teams · 0.936 average PPA on successful plays)#75 (of 120 teams · 0.948 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Miami (OH)4–80 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#70 (of 120 teams · 372.9 yds/g · 4,475 yds)#103 (of 120 teams · 21.3 pts/g · 256 points)#49 (of 120 teams · 363.7 yds/g allowed · 4,364 yds)#39 (of 120 teams · 22.9 pts/g allowed · 275 points)#73 (of 120 teams · -1.6 /g · -19 on the season)#79 (of 120 teams · -3 on the season · 18 taken, 21 given · -0.25 /g)#54 (of 120 teams · 18:35 /g · 3h 43m 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)#45 (of 120 teams · 0.070 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#55 (of 120 teams · 0.029 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#75 (of 120 teams · 40% of plays successful)#36 (of 120 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#5 — top 10 (of 120 teams · 1.032 average PPA on successful plays)#109 (of 120 teams · 1.030 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Toledo9–40 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#23 (of 120 teams · 442.3 yds/g · 5,750 yds)#8 — top 10 (of 120 teams · 42.2 pts/g · 549 points)#54 (of 120 teams · 371.1 yds/g allowed · 4,825 yds)#94 (of 120 teams · 31.7 pts/g allowed · 412 points)#24 (of 120 teams · +10.5 /g · +137 on the season)#12 (of 120 teams · +10 on the season · 24 taken, 14 given · +0.77 /g)#80 (of 120 teams · 17:55 /g · 3h 53m 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)#28 (of 120 teams · 0.095 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#65 (of 120 teams · 0.045 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#22 (of 120 teams · 45% of plays successful)#75 (of 120 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#93 (of 120 teams · 0.877 average PPA on successful plays)#38 (of 120 teams · 0.893 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Buffalo3–90 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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 120 teams · 365.2 yds/g · 4,382 yds)#97 (of 120 teams · 22.2 pts/g · 266 points)#65 (of 120 teams · 384.9 yds/g allowed · 4,619 yds)#83 (of 120 teams · 29.4 pts/g allowed · 353 points)#95 (of 120 teams · -7.3 /g · -87 on the season)#83 (of 120 teams · -4 on the season · 11 taken, 15 given · -0.33 /g)#49 (of 120 teams · 18:38 /g · 3h 44m 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)#101 (of 120 teams · -0.005 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#51 (of 120 teams · 0.027 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#95 (of 120 teams · 39% of plays successful)#53 (of 120 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#65 (of 120 teams · 0.916 average PPA on successful plays)#53 (of 120 teams · 0.915 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Eastern Michigan6–60 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#106 (of 120 teams · 321.7 yds/g · 3,860 yds)#104 (of 120 teams · 21.3 pts/g · 255 points)#25 (of 120 teams · 326.5 yds/g allowed · 3,918 yds)#50 (of 120 teams · 24.3 pts/g allowed · 292 points)#80 (of 120 teams · -3.1 /g · -37 on the season)#98 (of 120 teams · -7 on the season · 10 taken, 17 given · -0.58 /g)#78 (of 120 teams · 17:56 /g · 3h 35m 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)#72 (of 120 teams · 0.038 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#50 (of 120 teams · 0.025 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#84 (of 120 teams · 39% of plays successful)#33 (of 120 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#43 (of 120 teams · 0.950 average PPA on successful plays)#72 (of 120 teams · 0.944 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Ohio10–40 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#22 (of 120 teams · 445.4 yds/g · 6,236 yds)#41 (of 120 teams · 30.5 pts/g · 427 points)#47 (of 120 teams · 361.0 yds/g allowed · 5,054 yds)#32 (of 120 teams · 22.1 pts/g allowed · 310 points)#30 (of 120 teams · +8.4 /g · +117 on the season)#53 (of 120 teams · +0 on the season · 27 taken, 27 given · +0.00 /g)#41 (of 120 teams · 18:58 /g · 4h 25m 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)#37 (of 120 teams · 0.083 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#61 (of 120 teams · 0.040 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#27 (of 120 teams · 45% of plays successful)#27 (of 120 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#80 (of 120 teams · 0.897 average PPA on successful plays)#108 (of 120 teams · 1.022 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Western Michigan7–60 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#28 (of 120 teams · 437.0 yds/g · 5,681 yds)#18 (of 120 teams · 35.3 pts/g · 459 points)#86 (of 120 teams · 412.5 yds/g allowed · 5,363 yds)#76 (of 120 teams · 28.7 pts/g allowed · 373 points)#36 (of 120 teams · +6.6 /g · +86 on the season)#61 (of 120 teams · -1 on the season · 30 taken, 31 given · -0.08 /g)#110 (of 120 teams · 16:37 /g · 3h 36m 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)#15 (of 120 teams · 0.125 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#90 (of 120 teams · 0.083 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#18 (of 120 teams · 46% of plays successful)#68 (of 120 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#49 (of 120 teams · 0.944 average PPA on successful plays)#86 (of 120 teams · 0.960 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Bowling Green5–70 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#59 (of 120 teams · 384.5 yds/g · 4,614 yds)#63 (of 120 teams · 26.5 pts/g · 318 points)#80 (of 120 teams · 406.0 yds/g allowed · 4,872 yds)#77 (of 120 teams · 28.8 pts/g allowed · 346 points)#78 (of 120 teams · -2.3 /g · -28 on the season)#117 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · -14 on the season · 14 taken, 28 given · -1.17 /g)#43 (of 120 teams · 18:51 /g · 3h 46m 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)#96 (of 120 teams · 0.005 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#72 (of 120 teams · 0.059 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#58 (of 120 teams · 41% of plays successful)#82 (of 120 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#42 (of 120 teams · 0.952 average PPA on successful plays)#32 (of 120 teams · 0.884 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Central Michigan3–90 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#54 (of 120 teams · 389.9 yds/g · 4,679 yds)#92 (of 120 teams · 22.6 pts/g · 271 points)#100 (of 120 teams · 430.5 yds/g allowed · 5,166 yds)#99 (of 120 teams · 33.3 pts/g allowed · 400 points)#103 (of 120 teams · -10.8 /g · -129 on the season)#114 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · -12 on the season · 11 taken, 23 given · -1.00 /g)#88 (of 120 teams · 17:40 /g · 3h 32m 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)#79 (of 120 teams · 0.024 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#77 (of 120 teams · 0.065 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#73 (of 120 teams · 40% of plays successful)#80 (of 120 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#44 (of 120 teams · 0.949 average PPA on successful plays)#22 (of 120 teams · 0.869 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Kent State5–70 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#120 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 223.3 yds/g · 2,679 yds)#114 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 17.1 pts/g · 205 points)#9 — top 10 (of 120 teams · 298.3 yds/g allowed · 3,580 yds)#49 (of 120 teams · 24.3 pts/g allowed · 291 points)#94 (of 120 teams · -7.2 /g · -86 on the season)#14 (of 120 teams · +9 on the season · 28 taken, 19 given · +0.75 /g)#108 (of 120 teams · 16:56 /g · 3h 23m 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)#120 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · -0.098 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#7 — top 10 (of 120 teams · -0.045 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#120 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 32% of plays successful)#25 (of 120 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#115 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 0.826 average PPA on successful plays)#21 (of 120 teams · 0.868 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Ball State6–60 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. 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.)#90 (of 120 teams · 346.5 yds/g · 4,158 yds)#72 (of 120 teams · 25.3 pts/g · 304 points)#114 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 468.1 yds/g allowed · 5,617 yds)#103 (of 120 teams · 34.7 pts/g allowed · 416 points)#100 (of 120 teams · -9.3 /g · -112 on the season)#40 (of 120 teams · +2 on the season · 17 taken, 15 given · +0.17 /g)#114 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 16:27 /g · 3h 17m 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)#85 (of 120 teams · 0.021 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#118 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 0.163 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#59 (of 120 teams · 41% of plays successful)#116 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 48% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#110 (of 120 teams · 0.844 average PPA on successful plays)#59 (of 120 teams · 0.917 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2011Akron1–110 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2011. Range 0–0.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)— (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#115 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 277.8 yds/g · 3,333 yds)#118 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 14.2 pts/g · 170 points)#97 (of 120 teams · 427.2 yds/g allowed · 5,126 yds)#116 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 38.5 pts/g allowed · 462 points)#119 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · -24.3 /g · -292 on the season)#111 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · -11 on the season · 13 taken, 24 given · -0.92 /g)#99 (of 120 teams · 17:20 /g · 3h 28m 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)#115 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · -0.052 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#92 (of 120 teams · 0.087 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defense)#116 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 35% of plays successful)#113 — bottom 10 (of 120 teams · 47% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#84 (of 120 teams · 0.889 average PPA on successful plays)#1 — top 10 (of 120 teams · 0.797 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)

What clusters, and what does not

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

Mid-American, 20112011 Northern IllinoisMid-American medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #70
Total offense. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Ohio #22 of 120; 2011 Toledo #23 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #28 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #54 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #59 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #70 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #76 of 120; 2011 Temple #79 of 120; 2011 Ball State #90 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #106 of 120; 2011 Akron #115 of 120; 2011 Kent State #120 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 19 of 120. Mid-American median rank 70.
Scoring offensemedian #72
Scoring offense. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Toledo #8 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #18 of 120; 2011 Temple #39 of 120; 2011 Ohio #41 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #63 of 120; 2011 Ball State #72 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #92 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #97 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #103 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #104 of 120; 2011 Kent State #114 of 120; 2011 Akron #118 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 12 of 120. Mid-American median rank 72.
Total defensemedian #65
Total defense. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Temple #7 of 120; 2011 Kent State #9 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #25 of 120; 2011 Ohio #47 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #49 of 120; 2011 Toledo #54 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #65 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #80 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #86 of 120; 2011 Akron #97 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #100 of 120; 2011 Ball State #114 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 74 of 120. Mid-American median rank 65.
Scoring defensemedian #77
Scoring defense. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Temple #3 of 120; 2011 Ohio #32 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #39 of 120; 2011 Kent State #49 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #50 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #76 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #77 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #83 of 120; 2011 Toledo #94 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #99 of 120; 2011 Ball State #103 of 120; 2011 Akron #116 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 85 of 120. Mid-American median rank 77.
Point marginmedian #78
Point margin. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Temple #11 of 120; 2011 Toledo #24 of 120; 2011 Ohio #30 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #36 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #73 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #78 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #80 of 120; 2011 Kent State #94 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #95 of 120; 2011 Ball State #100 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #103 of 120; 2011 Akron #119 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 34 of 120. Mid-American median rank 78.
Turnover marginmedian #61
Turnover margin. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Temple #12 of 120; 2011 Toledo #12 of 120; 2011 Kent State #14 of 120; 2011 Ball State #40 of 120; 2011 Ohio #53 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #61 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #79 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #83 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #98 of 120; 2011 Akron #111 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #114 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #117 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 19 of 120. Mid-American median rank 61.
Possessionmedian #80
Possession. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Ohio #41 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #43 of 120; 2011 Temple #46 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #49 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #54 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #78 of 120; 2011 Toledo #80 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #88 of 120; 2011 Akron #99 of 120; 2011 Kent State #108 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #110 of 120; 2011 Ball State #114 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 109 of 120. Mid-American median rank 80.
Returning passing
Returning passing. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: . Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, which has no value for this metric.
Returning receiving
Returning receiving. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: . Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, which has no value for this metric.
Returning rushing
Returning rushing. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: . Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, which has no value for this metric.
Team talent
Team talent. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: . Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive EPAmedian #72
Offensive EPA. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Western Michigan #15 of 120; 2011 Toledo #28 of 120; 2011 Ohio #37 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #45 of 120; 2011 Temple #52 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #72 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #79 of 120; 2011 Ball State #85 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #96 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #101 of 120; 2011 Akron #115 of 120; 2011 Kent State #120 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 9 of 120. Mid-American median rank 72.
Defensive EPAmedian #65
Defensive EPA. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Kent State #7 of 120; 2011 Temple #28 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #50 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #51 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #55 of 120; 2011 Ohio #61 of 120; 2011 Toledo #65 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #72 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #77 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #90 of 120; 2011 Akron #92 of 120; 2011 Ball State #118 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 74 of 120. Mid-American median rank 65.
Offensive success ratemedian #70
Offensive success rate. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Western Michigan #18 of 120; 2011 Toledo #22 of 120; 2011 Ohio #27 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #58 of 120; 2011 Ball State #59 of 120; 2011 Temple #70 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #73 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #75 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #84 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #95 of 120; 2011 Akron #116 of 120; 2011 Kent State #120 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 28 of 120. Mid-American median rank 70.
Defensive success ratemedian #56
Defensive success rate. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Kent State #25 of 120; 2011 Ohio #27 of 120; 2011 Temple #30 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #33 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #36 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #53 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #68 of 120; 2011 Toledo #75 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #80 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #82 of 120; 2011 Akron #113 of 120; 2011 Ball State #116 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 56 of 120. Mid-American median rank 56.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #54
Offensive explosiveness. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Miami (OH) #5 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #42 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #43 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #44 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #49 of 120; 2011 Temple #54 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #65 of 120; 2011 Ohio #80 of 120; 2011 Akron #84 of 120; 2011 Toledo #93 of 120; 2011 Ball State #110 of 120; 2011 Kent State #115 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 50 of 120. Mid-American median rank 54.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #59
Defensive explosiveness. Mid-American, 2011, best rank first: 2011 Akron #1 of 120; 2011 Kent State #21 of 120; 2011 Central Michigan #22 of 120; 2011 Bowling Green #32 of 120; 2011 Toledo #38 of 120; 2011 Buffalo #53 of 120; 2011 Ball State #59 of 120; 2011 Eastern Michigan #72 of 120; 2011 Temple #75 of 120; 2011 Western Michigan #86 of 120; 2011 Ohio #108 of 120; 2011 Miami (OH) #109 of 120. Marked: 2011 Northern Illinois, ranked 88 of 120. Mid-American median rank 59.