THIRD AND DATA
Sign in

Metrics

OhioBobcats

Season
‹
›Current

Mid-American

Mid-American, 2015

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
2015Ohio8–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#56 (of 128 teams · 413.5 yds/g · 5,376 yards)#74 (of 128 teams · 27.5 pts/g · 358 points)#49 (of 128 teams · 377.7 yds/g allowed · 4,910 yards)#46 (of 128 teams · 25.3 pts/g allowed · 329 points)#64 (of 128 teams · +2.2 /g · +29 on the season)#34 (of 128 teams · +5 on the season · 22 taken, 17 given · +0.38 /g)#22 (of 128 teams · 32:16 /g · 7h 00m on the season)#15 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#46 (of 128 teams · 69% of last season's receiving production returning)#18 (of 128 teams · 95% of last season's rushing production returning)#115 (of 128 teams · 330.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#82 (of 128 teams · 0.129 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#49 (of 128 teams · 0.115 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#84 (of 128 teams · 42% of plays successful)#39 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#76 (of 128 teams · 1.181 average PPA on successful plays)#104 (of 128 teams · 1.269 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 13 Mid-American teams in 20150 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)0 (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. 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.)0 (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. 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.)#66 (Total offense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #4–#127. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#88 (Scoring offense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #6–#128. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#81 (Total defense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #15–#123. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#73 (Scoring defense: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #21–#123. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#64 (Point margin: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #19–#121. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#58 (Turnover margin: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #9–#123. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#87 (Possession: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #2–#121. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#15 (Returning passing: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #1–#122. 5 of 13 in the top 10.)#46 (Returning receiving: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #2–#113. 3 of 13 in the top 10.)#44 (Returning rushing: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #1–#117. 2 of 13 in the top 10.)#101 (Team talent: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #76–#118. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#75 (Offensive EPA: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #2–#128. 2 of 13 in the top 10.)#49 (Defensive EPA: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #17–#128. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#84 (Offensive success rate: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #11–#128. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#61 (Defensive success rate: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #15–#124. 0 of 13 in the top 10.)#60 (Offensive explosiveness: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #4–#127. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)#70 (Defensive explosiveness: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range #2–#121. 1 of 13 in the top 10.)
2015Akron8–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#104 (of 128 teams · 357.1 yds/g · 4,642 yards)#99 (of 128 teams · 23.9 pts/g · 311 points)#15 (of 128 teams · 331.6 yds/g allowed · 4,311 yards)#23 (of 128 teams · 21.5 pts/g allowed · 279 points)#61 (of 128 teams · +2.5 /g · +32 on the season)#13 (of 128 teams · +10 on the season · 28 taken, 18 given · +0.77 /g)#15 (of 128 teams · 32:49 /g · 7h 07m on the season)#15 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#98 (of 128 teams · 43% of last season's receiving production returning)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's rushing production returning)#81 (of 128 teams · 412.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#101 (of 128 teams · 0.093 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#25 (of 128 teams · 0.065 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#104 (of 128 teams · 39% of plays successful)#33 (of 128 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#59 (of 128 teams · 1.214 average PPA on successful plays)#49 (of 128 teams · 1.167 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Ball State3–90 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#90 (of 128 teams · 371.6 yds/g · 4,459 yards)#102 (of 128 teams · 23.1 pts/g · 277 points)#122 (of 128 teams · 518.0 yds/g allowed · 6,216 yards)#108 (of 128 teams · 35.8 pts/g allowed · 430 points)#113 (of 128 teams · -12.8 /g · -153 on the season)#58 (of 128 teams · +1 on the season · 16 taken, 15 given · +0.08 /g)#90 (of 128 teams · 28:37 /g · 5h 43m on the season)#77 (of 128 teams · 51% of last season's passing production returning)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 86% of last season's receiving production returning)#116 (of 128 teams · 33% of last season's rushing production returning)#107 (of 128 teams · 349.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#104 (of 128 teams · 0.076 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#123 (of 128 teams · 0.314 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#88 (of 128 teams · 41% of plays successful)#121 (of 128 teams · 48% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#127 (of 128 teams · 1.032 average PPA on successful plays)#102 (of 128 teams · 1.264 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Bowling Green10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 546.8 yds/g · 7,655 yards)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 42.2 pts/g · 591 points)#87 (of 128 teams · 417.8 yds/g allowed · 5,849 yards)#84 (of 128 teams · 28.9 pts/g allowed · 405 points)#22 (of 128 teams · +13.3 /g · +186 on the season)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +12 on the season · 27 taken, 15 given · +0.86 /g)#104 (of 128 teams · 27:55 /g · 6h 31m on the season)#52 (of 128 teams · 94% of last season's passing production returning)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 87% of last season's receiving production returning)#77 (of 128 teams · 63% of last season's rushing production returning)#78 (of 128 teams · 433.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.341 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#57 (of 128 teams · 0.132 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#11 (of 128 teams · 49% of plays successful)#67 (of 128 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.338 average PPA on successful plays)#72 (of 128 teams · 1.210 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Buffalo5–70 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#71 (of 128 teams · 386.4 yds/g · 4,637 yards)#82 (of 128 teams · 26.7 pts/g · 320 points)#81 (of 128 teams · 413.4 yds/g allowed · 4,961 yards)#72 (of 128 teams · 27.6 pts/g allowed · 331 points)#80 (of 128 teams · -0.9 /g · -11 on the season)#66 (of 128 teams · +0 on the season · 20 taken, 20 given · +0.00 /g)#44 (of 128 teams · 31:05 /g · 6h 13m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#26 (of 128 teams · 79% of last season's receiving production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's rushing production returning)#118 (of 128 teams · 316.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#75 (of 128 teams · 0.138 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#39 (of 128 teams · 0.093 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#68 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#76 (of 128 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#115 (of 128 teams · 1.100 average PPA on successful plays)#80 (of 128 teams · 1.220 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Central Michigan7–60 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#63 (of 128 teams · 400.9 yds/g · 5,212 yards)#88 (of 128 teams · 25.9 pts/g · 336 points)#16 (of 128 teams · 332.2 yds/g allowed · 4,319 yards)#28 (of 128 teams · 22.0 pts/g allowed · 286 points)#56 (of 128 teams · +3.9 /g · +50 on the season)#51 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 18 taken, 16 given · +0.15 /g)#13 (of 128 teams · 32:56 /g · 7h 08m on the season)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#106 (of 128 teams · 38% of last season's receiving production returning)#113 (of 128 teams · 34% of last season's rushing production returning)#101 (of 128 teams · 376.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#67 (of 128 teams · 0.153 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#44 (of 128 teams · 0.106 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#73 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#41 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#62 (of 128 teams · 1.208 average PPA on successful plays)#35 (of 128 teams · 1.140 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Eastern Michigan1–110 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#78 (of 128 teams · 380.0 yds/g · 4,560 yards)#91 (of 128 teams · 25.4 pts/g · 305 points)#123 (of 128 teams · 519.3 yds/g allowed · 6,231 yards)#123 (of 128 teams · 42.1 pts/g allowed · 505 points)#121 (of 128 teams · -16.7 /g · -200 on the season)#120 (of 128 teams · -13 on the season · 12 taken, 25 given · -1.08 /g)#116 (of 128 teams · 27:04 /g · 5h 25m on the season)#71 (of 128 teams · 67% of last season's passing production returning)#113 (of 128 teams · 36% of last season's receiving production returning)#104 (of 128 teams · 42% of last season's rushing production returning)#109 (of 128 teams · 341.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#74 (of 128 teams · 0.138 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#128 (of 128 teams · 0.345 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#76 (of 128 teams · 42% of plays successful)#124 (of 128 teams · 50% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#41 (of 128 teams · 1.238 average PPA on successful plays)#110 (of 128 teams · 1.307 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Kent State3–90 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#127 (of 128 teams · 270.8 yds/g · 3,250 yards)#128 (of 128 teams · 13.1 pts/g · 157 points)#27 (of 128 teams · 350.1 yds/g allowed · 4,201 yards)#58 (of 128 teams · 26.1 pts/g allowed · 313 points)#114 (of 128 teams · -13.0 /g · -156 on the season)#89 (of 128 teams · -3 on the season · 18 taken, 21 given · -0.25 /g)#102 (of 128 teams · 28:06 /g · 5h 37m on the season)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#97 (of 128 teams · 44% of last season's receiving production returning)#44 (of 128 teams · 79% of last season's rushing production returning)#110 (of 128 teams · 338.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#128 (of 128 teams · -0.083 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#41 (of 128 teams · 0.102 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#128 (of 128 teams · 30% of plays successful)#15 (of 128 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#103 (of 128 teams · 1.128 average PPA on successful plays)#62 (of 128 teams · 1.195 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Massachusetts3–90 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#65 (of 128 teams · 399.8 yds/g · 4,797 yards)#108 (of 128 teams · 22.2 pts/g · 266 points)#104 (of 128 teams · 447.8 yds/g allowed · 5,374 yards)#92 (of 128 teams · 31.4 pts/g allowed · 377 points)#103 (of 128 teams · -9.3 /g · -111 on the season)#79 (of 128 teams · -1 on the season · 18 taken, 19 given · -0.08 /g)#118 (of 128 teams · 26:59 /g · 5h 24m on the season)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#29 (of 128 teams · 78% of last season's receiving production returning)#34 (of 128 teams · 85% of last season's rushing production returning)#116 (of 128 teams · 323.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#100 (of 128 teams · 0.095 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#92 (of 128 teams · 0.177 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#101 (of 128 teams · 39% of plays successful)#104 (of 128 teams · 46% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#60 (of 128 teams · 1.213 average PPA on successful plays)#29 (of 128 teams · 1.116 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Miami (OH)3–90 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#109 (of 128 teams · 338.2 yds/g · 4,058 yards)#117 (of 128 teams · 17.9 pts/g · 215 points)#68 (of 128 teams · 404.6 yds/g allowed · 4,855 yards)#95 (of 128 teams · 32.0 pts/g allowed · 384 points)#115 (of 128 teams · -14.1 /g · -169 on the season)#123 (of 128 teams · -14 on the season · 17 taken, 31 given · -1.17 /g)#87 (of 128 teams · 28:43 /g · 5h 45m on the season)#122 (of 128 teams · 2% of last season's passing production returning)#69 (of 128 teams · 59% of last season's receiving production returning)#117 (of 128 teams · 32% of last season's rushing production returning)#92 (of 128 teams · 397.1 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#116 (of 128 teams · 0.027 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#59 (of 128 teams · 0.133 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#124 (of 128 teams · 35% of plays successful)#61 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#23 (of 128 teams · 1.271 average PPA on successful plays)#70 (of 128 teams · 1.208 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Northern Illinois8–60 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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)#66 (of 128 teams · 398.5 yds/g · 5,579 yards)#52 (of 128 teams · 31.1 pts/g · 436 points)#86 (of 128 teams · 417.6 yds/g allowed · 5,847 yards)#73 (of 128 teams · 27.6 pts/g allowed · 387 points)#58 (of 128 teams · +3.5 /g · +49 on the season)#57 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 29 taken, 27 given · +0.14 /g)#121 (of 128 teams · 26:25 /g · 6h 10m on the season)#56 (of 128 teams · 94% of last season's passing production returning)#76 (of 128 teams · 56% of last season's receiving production returning)#82 (of 128 teams · 57% of last season's rushing production returning)#97 (of 128 teams · 380.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#71 (of 128 teams · 0.143 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#27 (of 128 teams · 0.072 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#85 (of 128 teams · 41% of plays successful)#72 (of 128 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#65 (of 128 teams · 1.204 average PPA on successful plays)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.029 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Toledo10–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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: #24 Temple)#30 (of 128 teams · 460.9 yds/g · 5,531 yards)#31 (of 128 teams · 35.0 pts/g · 420 points)#46 (of 128 teams · 374.8 yds/g allowed · 4,498 yards)#21 (of 128 teams · 20.8 pts/g allowed · 249 points)#19 (of 128 teams · +14.3 /g · +171 on the season)#21 (of 128 teams · +8 on the season · 22 taken, 14 given · +0.67 /g)#69 (of 128 teams · 29:33 /g · 5h 55m on the season)#46 (of 128 teams · 96% of last season's passing production returning)#15 (of 128 teams · 83% of last season's receiving production returning)#22 (of 128 teams · 93% of last season's rushing production returning)#80 (of 128 teams · 429.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#21 (of 128 teams · 0.244 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#17 (of 128 teams · 0.041 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#45 (of 128 teams · 45% of plays successful)#38 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#44 (of 128 teams · 1.237 average PPA on successful plays)#37 (of 128 teams · 1.141 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2015Western Michigan8–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 13 Mid-American teams in 2015. Range 0–0.)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 · 490.8 yds/g · 6,380 yards)#26 (of 128 teams · 36.0 pts/g · 468 points)#82 (of 128 teams · 413.7 yds/g allowed · 5,378 yards)#79 (of 128 teams · 28.3 pts/g allowed · 368 points)#44 (of 128 teams · +7.7 /g · +100 on the season)#61 (of 128 teams · +1 on the season · 18 taken, 17 given · +0.08 /g)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 34:31 /g · 7h 29m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 97% of last season's receiving production returning)#35 (of 128 teams · 85% of last season's rushing production returning)#76 (of 128 teams · 442.1 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.303 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#104 (of 128 teams · 0.202 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#17 (of 128 teams · 48% of plays successful)#60 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#33 (of 128 teams · 1.254 average PPA on successful plays)#121 (of 128 teams · 1.396 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, 20152015 OhioMid-American medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #66
Total offense. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Bowling Green #4 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #17 of 128; 2015 Toledo #30 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #63 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #65 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #66 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #71 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #78 of 128; 2015 Ball State #90 of 128; 2015 Akron #104 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #109 of 128; 2015 Kent State #127 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 56 of 128. Mid-American median rank 66.
Scoring offensemedian #88
Scoring offense. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Bowling Green #6 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #26 of 128; 2015 Toledo #31 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #52 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #82 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #88 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #91 of 128; 2015 Akron #99 of 128; 2015 Ball State #102 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #108 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #117 of 128; 2015 Kent State #128 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 74 of 128. Mid-American median rank 88.
Total defensemedian #81
Total defense. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Akron #15 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #16 of 128; 2015 Kent State #27 of 128; 2015 Toledo #46 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #68 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #81 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #82 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #86 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #87 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #104 of 128; 2015 Ball State #122 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #123 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 49 of 128. Mid-American median rank 81.
Scoring defensemedian #73
Scoring defense. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Toledo #21 of 128; 2015 Akron #23 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #28 of 128; 2015 Kent State #58 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #72 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #73 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #79 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #84 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #92 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #95 of 128; 2015 Ball State #108 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #123 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 46 of 128. Mid-American median rank 73.
Point marginmedian #64
Point margin. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Toledo #19 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #22 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #44 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #56 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #58 of 128; 2015 Akron #61 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #80 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #103 of 128; 2015 Ball State #113 of 128; 2015 Kent State #114 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #115 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #121 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 64 of 128. Mid-American median rank 64.
Turnover marginmedian #58
Turnover margin. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Bowling Green #9 of 128; 2015 Akron #13 of 128; 2015 Toledo #21 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #51 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #57 of 128; 2015 Ball State #58 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #61 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #66 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #79 of 128; 2015 Kent State #89 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #120 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #123 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 34 of 128. Mid-American median rank 58.
Possessionmedian #87
Possession. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Western Michigan #2 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #13 of 128; 2015 Akron #15 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #44 of 128; 2015 Toledo #69 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #87 of 128; 2015 Ball State #90 of 128; 2015 Kent State #102 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #104 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #116 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #118 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #121 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 22 of 128. Mid-American median rank 87.
Returning passingmedian #15
Returning passing. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Buffalo #1 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #1 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #7 of 128; 2015 Kent State #7 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #7 of 128; 2015 Akron #15 of 128; 2015 Toledo #46 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #52 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #56 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #71 of 128; 2015 Ball State #77 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #122 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 15 of 128. Mid-American median rank 15.
Returning receivingmedian #46
Returning receiving. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Western Michigan #2 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #8 of 128; 2015 Ball State #9 of 128; 2015 Toledo #15 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #26 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #29 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #69 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #76 of 128; 2015 Kent State #97 of 128; 2015 Akron #98 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #106 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #113 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 46 of 128. Mid-American median rank 46.
Returning rushingmedian #44
Returning rushing. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Buffalo #1 of 128; 2015 Akron #5 of 128; 2015 Toledo #22 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #34 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #35 of 128; 2015 Kent State #44 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #77 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #82 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #104 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #113 of 128; 2015 Ball State #116 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #117 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 18 of 128. Mid-American median rank 44.
Team talentmedian #101
Team talent. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Western Michigan #76 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #78 of 128; 2015 Toledo #80 of 128; 2015 Akron #81 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #92 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #97 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #101 of 128; 2015 Ball State #107 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #109 of 128; 2015 Kent State #110 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #116 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #118 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 115 of 128. Mid-American median rank 101.
Offensive EPAmedian #75
Offensive EPA. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Bowling Green #2 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #7 of 128; 2015 Toledo #21 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #67 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #71 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #74 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #75 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #100 of 128; 2015 Akron #101 of 128; 2015 Ball State #104 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #116 of 128; 2015 Kent State #128 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 82 of 128. Mid-American median rank 75.
Defensive EPAmedian #49
Defensive EPA. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Toledo #17 of 128; 2015 Akron #25 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #27 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #39 of 128; 2015 Kent State #41 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #44 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #57 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #59 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #92 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #104 of 128; 2015 Ball State #123 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #128 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 49 of 128. Mid-American median rank 49.
Offensive success ratemedian #84
Offensive success rate. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Bowling Green #11 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #17 of 128; 2015 Toledo #45 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #68 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #73 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #76 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #85 of 128; 2015 Ball State #88 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #101 of 128; 2015 Akron #104 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #124 of 128; 2015 Kent State #128 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 84 of 128. Mid-American median rank 84.
Defensive success ratemedian #61
Defensive success rate. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Kent State #15 of 128; 2015 Akron #33 of 128; 2015 Toledo #38 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #41 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #60 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #61 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #67 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #72 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #76 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #104 of 128; 2015 Ball State #121 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #124 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 39 of 128. Mid-American median rank 61.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #60
Offensive explosiveness. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Bowling Green #4 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #23 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #33 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #41 of 128; 2015 Toledo #44 of 128; 2015 Akron #59 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #60 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #62 of 128; 2015 Northern Illinois #65 of 128; 2015 Kent State #103 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #115 of 128; 2015 Ball State #127 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 76 of 128. Mid-American median rank 60.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #70
Defensive explosiveness. Mid-American, 2015, best rank first: 2015 Northern Illinois #2 of 128; 2015 Massachusetts #29 of 128; 2015 Central Michigan #35 of 128; 2015 Toledo #37 of 128; 2015 Akron #49 of 128; 2015 Kent State #62 of 128; 2015 Miami (OH) #70 of 128; 2015 Bowling Green #72 of 128; 2015 Buffalo #80 of 128; 2015 Ball State #102 of 128; 2015 Eastern Michigan #110 of 128; 2015 Western Michigan #121 of 128. Marked: 2015 Ohio, ranked 104 of 128. Mid-American median rank 70.