Metrics

RutgersScarlet Knights

Season
Current

Big Ten

Big Ten, 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
2016Rutgers2100 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)#128 (of 128 teams · 283.2 yds/g · 3,398 yards)#127 (of 128 teams · 15.7 pts/g · 188 points)#97 (of 128 teams · 450.7 yds/g allowed · 5,408 yards)#116 (of 128 teams · 37.5 pts/g allowed · 450 points)#127 (of 128 teams · -21.8 /g · -262 on the season)#97 (of 128 teams · -5 on the season · 14 taken, 19 given · -0.42 /g)#110 (of 128 teams · 27:10 /g · 5h 26m on the season)#37 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#46 (of 128 teams · 71% of last season's receiving production returning)#48 (of 128 teams · 77% of last season's rushing production returning)#49 (of 128 teams · 585.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#128 (of 128 teams · -0.034 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#86 (of 128 teams · 0.192 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#127 (of 128 teams · 36% of plays successful)#92 (of 128 teams · 45% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#127 (of 128 teams · 1.008 average PPA on successful plays)#58 (of 128 teams · 1.186 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 14 Big Ten teams in 20160 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range 0–5.)0 (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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.)#79 (Total offense: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #31–#128. 0 of 14 in the top 10.)#87 (Scoring offense: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #11–#127. 0 of 14 in the top 10.)#33 (Total defense: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #1–#97. 3 of 14 in the top 10.)#33 (Scoring defense: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #2–#117. 3 of 14 in the top 10.)#55 (Point margin: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #1–#127. 2 of 14 in the top 10.)#34 (Turnover margin: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #3–#128. 2 of 14 in the top 10.)#62 (Possession: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #1–#122. 1 of 14 in the top 10.)#59 (Returning passing: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #1–#106. 1 of 14 in the top 10.)#44 (Returning receiving: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #8–#125. 1 of 14 in the top 10.)#49 (Returning rushing: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #6–#121. 1 of 14 in the top 10.)#37 (Team talent: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #5–#68. 2 of 14 in the top 10.)#86 (Offensive EPA: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #27–#128. 0 of 14 in the top 10.)#34 (Defensive EPA: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #2–#114. 2 of 14 in the top 10.)#81 (Offensive success rate: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #9–#127. 1 of 14 in the top 10.)#37 (Defensive success rate: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #1–#101. 2 of 14 in the top 10.)#84 (Offensive explosiveness: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #6–#127. 2 of 14 in the top 10.)#58 (Defensive explosiveness: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range #7–#100. 4 of 14 in the top 10.)
2016Illinois390 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)#123 (of 128 teams · 315.1 yds/g · 3,781 yards)#122 (of 128 teams · 19.7 pts/g · 236 points)#62 (of 128 teams · 405.1 yds/g allowed · 4,861 yards)#94 (of 128 teams · 31.9 pts/g allowed · 383 points)#115 (of 128 teams · -12.3 /g · -147 on the season)#83 (of 128 teams · -2 on the season · 18 taken, 20 given · -0.17 /g)#122 (of 128 teams · 25:59 /g · 5h 12m on the season)#25 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#102 (of 128 teams · 48% of last season's receiving production returning)#93 (of 128 teams · 56% of last season's rushing production returning)#64 (of 128 teams · 523.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#115 (of 128 teams · 0.065 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#63 (of 128 teams · 0.148 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#120 (of 128 teams · 37% of plays successful)#96 (of 128 teams · 45% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#50 (of 128 teams · 1.238 average PPA on successful plays)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.076 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Indiana670 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)#56 (of 128 teams · 426.0 yds/g · 5,538 yards)#88 (of 128 teams · 25.8 pts/g · 335 points)#45 (of 128 teams · 380.1 yds/g allowed · 4,941 yards)#57 (of 128 teams · 27.2 pts/g allowed · 354 points)#78 (of 128 teams · -1.5 /g · -19 on the season)#103 (of 128 teams · -6 on the season · 23 taken, 29 given · -0.46 /g)#96 (of 128 teams · 28:08 /g · 6h 06m on the season)#99 (of 128 teams · 12% of last season's passing production returning)#31 (of 128 teams · 77% of last season's receiving production returning)#96 (of 128 teams · 54% of last season's rushing production returning)#53 (of 128 teams · 565.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#102 (of 128 teams · 0.098 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#28 (of 128 teams · 0.088 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#90 (of 128 teams · 41% of plays successful)#25 (of 128 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#49 (of 128 teams · 1.239 average PPA on successful plays)#87 (of 128 teams · 1.230 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Iowa850 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Michigan)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Michigan)#121 (of 128 teams · 325.0 yds/g · 4,225 yards)#95 (of 128 teams · 24.9 pts/g · 324 points)#23 (of 128 teams · 351.1 yds/g allowed · 4,565 yards)#13 (of 128 teams · 18.9 pts/g allowed · 245 points)#44 (of 128 teams · +6.1 /g · +79 on the season)#28 (of 128 teams · +6 on the season · 18 taken, 12 given · +0.46 /g)#62 (of 128 teams · 29:53 /g · 6h 29m on the season)#22 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#74 (of 128 teams · 59% of last season's receiving production returning)#79 (of 128 teams · 64% of last season's rushing production returning)#55 (of 128 teams · 558.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#100 (of 128 teams · 0.101 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#34 (of 128 teams · 0.098 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#88 (of 128 teams · 41% of plays successful)#37 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#113 (of 128 teams · 1.094 average PPA on successful plays)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.092 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Maryland670 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#95 (of 128 teams · 377.8 yds/g · 4,911 yards)#88 (of 128 teams · 25.8 pts/g · 335 points)#77 (of 128 teams · 427.1 yds/g allowed · 5,552 yards)#74 (of 128 teams · 29.5 pts/g allowed · 384 points)#88 (of 128 teams · -3.8 /g · -49 on the season)#107 (of 128 teams · -7 on the season · 12 taken, 19 given · -0.54 /g)#103 (of 128 teams · 27:47 /g · 6h 01m on the season)#46 (of 128 teams · 95% of last season's passing production returning)#22 (of 128 teams · 85% of last season's receiving production returning)#85 (of 128 teams · 62% of last season's rushing production returning)#34 (of 128 teams · 652.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#82 (of 128 teams · 0.131 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#65 (of 128 teams · 0.149 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#110 (of 128 teams · 39% of plays successful)#101 (of 128 teams · 46% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.355 average PPA on successful plays)#32 (of 128 teams · 1.150 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Michigan1032 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)
2016Michigan State390 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)#75 (of 128 teams · 395.0 yds/g · 4,740 yards)#104 (of 128 teams · 24.1 pts/g · 289 points)#33 (of 128 teams · 364.8 yds/g allowed · 4,378 yards)#61 (of 128 teams · 27.8 pts/g allowed · 333 points)#86 (of 128 teams · -3.7 /g · -44 on the season)#97 (of 128 teams · -5 on the season · 13 taken, 18 given · -0.42 /g)#31 (of 128 teams · 31:41 /g · 6h 20m on the season)#106 (of 128 teams · 8% of last season's passing production returning)#115 (of 128 teams · 36% of last season's receiving production returning)#27 (of 128 teams · 89% of last season's rushing production returning)#22 (of 128 teams · 719.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#70 (of 128 teams · 0.152 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#59 (of 128 teams · 0.143 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#81 (of 128 teams · 42% of plays successful)#50 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#91 (of 128 teams · 1.159 average PPA on successful plays)#70 (of 128 teams · 1.200 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Minnesota940 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)#107 (of 128 teams · 357.2 yds/g · 4,644 yards)#63 (of 128 teams · 29.3 pts/g · 381 points)#21 (of 128 teams · 348.8 yds/g allowed · 4,534 yards)#21 (of 128 teams · 22.1 pts/g allowed · 287 points)#40 (of 128 teams · +7.2 /g · +94 on the season)#19 (of 128 teams · +8 on the season · 25 taken, 17 given · +0.62 /g)#41 (of 128 teams · 31:06 /g · 6h 44m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 94% of last season's receiving production returning)#25 (of 128 teams · 90% of last season's rushing production returning)#59 (of 128 teams · 535.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#87 (of 128 teams · 0.117 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#20 (of 128 teams · 0.072 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#69 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#17 (of 128 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#119 (of 128 teams · 1.073 average PPA on successful plays)#92 (of 128 teams · 1.236 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Nebraska940 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)#89 (of 128 teams · 380.9 yds/g · 4,951 yards)#79 (of 128 teams · 26.5 pts/g · 345 points)#30 (of 128 teams · 363.7 yds/g allowed · 4,728 yards)#33 (of 128 teams · 23.9 pts/g allowed · 311 points)#61 (of 128 teams · +2.6 /g · +34 on the season)#34 (of 128 teams · +5 on the season · 19 taken, 14 given · +0.38 /g)#26 (of 128 teams · 32:10 /g · 6h 58m on the season)#12 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#15 (of 128 teams · 88% of last season's receiving production returning)#74 (of 128 teams · 67% of last season's rushing production returning)#26 (of 128 teams · 691.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#86 (of 128 teams · 0.117 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#50 (of 128 teams · 0.130 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#71 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#55 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#84 (of 128 teams · 1.169 average PPA on successful plays)#61 (of 128 teams · 1.189 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Northwestern760 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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: #23 Pittsburgh)#72 (of 128 teams · 398.2 yds/g · 5,177 yards)#87 (of 128 teams · 26.0 pts/g · 338 points)#61 (of 128 teams · 404.4 yds/g allowed · 5,257 yards)#24 (of 128 teams · 22.2 pts/g allowed · 289 points)#55 (of 128 teams · +3.8 /g · +49 on the season)#14 (of 128 teams · +9 on the season · 25 taken, 16 given · +0.69 /g)#91 (of 128 teams · 28:39 /g · 6h 12m on the season)#59 (of 128 teams · 84% of last season's passing production returning)#92 (of 128 teams · 50% of last season's receiving production returning)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's rushing production returning)#45 (of 128 teams · 613.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#89 (of 128 teams · 0.115 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#27 (of 128 teams · 0.086 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#102 (of 128 teams · 40% of plays successful)#52 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#46 (of 128 teams · 1.245 average PPA on successful plays)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.092 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Ohio State1125 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)
2016Penn State1130 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)
2016Purdue390 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)#79 (of 128 teams · 391.1 yds/g · 4,693 yards)#101 (of 128 teams · 24.6 pts/g · 295 points)#91 (of 128 teams · 444.9 yds/g allowed · 5,339 yards)#117 (of 128 teams · 38.3 pts/g allowed · 459 points)#122 (of 128 teams · -13.7 /g · -164 on the season)#128 (of 128 teams · -17 on the season · 16 taken, 33 given · -1.42 /g)#73 (of 128 teams · 29:19 /g · 5h 52m on the season)#77 (of 128 teams · 59% of last season's passing production returning)#44 (of 128 teams · 72% of last season's receiving production returning)#31 (of 128 teams · 88% of last season's rushing production returning)#68 (of 128 teams · 512.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#109 (of 128 teams · 0.083 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#114 (of 128 teams · 0.247 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#96 (of 128 teams · 41% of plays successful)#99 (of 128 teams · 46% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#32 (of 128 teams · 1.270 average PPA on successful plays)#100 (of 128 teams · 1.270 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Wisconsin1130 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 14 Big Ten teams in 2016. 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)

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.

Big Ten, 20162016 RutgersBig Ten medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #79
Total offense. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Ohio State #31 of 128; 2016 Penn State #49 of 128; 2016 Indiana #56 of 128; 2016 Michigan #58 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #72 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #75 of 128; 2016 Purdue #79 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #88 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #89 of 128; 2016 Maryland #95 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #107 of 128; 2016 Iowa #121 of 128; 2016 Illinois #123 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 128 of 128. Big Ten median rank 79.
Scoring offensemedian #87
Scoring offense. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #11 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #13 of 128; 2016 Penn State #21 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #63 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #67 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #79 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #87 of 128; 2016 Indiana #88 of 128; 2016 Maryland #88 of 128; 2016 Iowa #95 of 128; 2016 Purdue #101 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #104 of 128; 2016 Illinois #122 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 127 of 128. Big Ten median rank 87.
Total defensemedian #33
Total defense. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #6 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #7 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #21 of 128; 2016 Iowa #23 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #30 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #33 of 128; 2016 Penn State #37 of 128; 2016 Indiana #45 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #61 of 128; 2016 Illinois #62 of 128; 2016 Maryland #77 of 128; 2016 Purdue #91 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 97 of 128. Big Ten median rank 33.
Scoring defensemedian #33
Scoring defense. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #2 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #3 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #4 of 128; 2016 Iowa #13 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #21 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #24 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #33 of 128; 2016 Penn State #47 of 128; 2016 Indiana #57 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #61 of 128; 2016 Maryland #74 of 128; 2016 Illinois #94 of 128; 2016 Purdue #117 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 116 of 128. Big Ten median rank 33.
Point marginmedian #55
Point margin. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #4 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #14 of 128; 2016 Penn State #21 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #40 of 128; 2016 Iowa #44 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #55 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #61 of 128; 2016 Indiana #78 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #86 of 128; 2016 Maryland #88 of 128; 2016 Illinois #115 of 128; 2016 Purdue #122 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 127 of 128. Big Ten median rank 55.
Turnover marginmedian #34
Turnover margin. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Ohio State #3 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #9 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #14 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #19 of 128; 2016 Michigan #24 of 128; 2016 Iowa #28 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #34 of 128; 2016 Penn State #64 of 128; 2016 Illinois #83 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #97 of 128; 2016 Indiana #103 of 128; 2016 Maryland #107 of 128; 2016 Purdue #128 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 97 of 128. Big Ten median rank 34.
Possessionmedian #62
Possession. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Wisconsin #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #12 of 128; 2016 Michigan #14 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #26 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #31 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #41 of 128; 2016 Iowa #62 of 128; 2016 Purdue #73 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #91 of 128; 2016 Indiana #96 of 128; 2016 Penn State #101 of 128; 2016 Maryland #103 of 128; 2016 Illinois #122 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 110 of 128. Big Ten median rank 62.
Returning passingmedian #59
Returning passing. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Minnesota #1 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #12 of 128; 2016 Iowa #22 of 128; 2016 Illinois #25 of 128; 2016 Maryland #46 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #59 of 128; 2016 Purdue #77 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #86 of 128; 2016 Indiana #99 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #100 of 128; 2016 Penn State #102 of 128; 2016 Michigan #105 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #106 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 37 of 128. Big Ten median rank 59.
Returning receivingmedian #44
Returning receiving. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Minnesota #8 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #15 of 128; 2016 Michigan #17 of 128; 2016 Maryland #22 of 128; 2016 Penn State #28 of 128; 2016 Indiana #31 of 128; 2016 Purdue #44 of 128; 2016 Iowa #74 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #92 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #98 of 128; 2016 Illinois #102 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #115 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #125 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 46 of 128. Big Ten median rank 44.
Returning rushingmedian #49
Returning rushing. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Northwestern #6 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #25 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #27 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #27 of 128; 2016 Purdue #31 of 128; 2016 Penn State #49 of 128; 2016 Michigan #72 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #74 of 128; 2016 Iowa #79 of 128; 2016 Maryland #85 of 128; 2016 Illinois #93 of 128; 2016 Indiana #96 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #121 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 48 of 128. Big Ten median rank 49.
Team talentmedian #37
Team talent. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Ohio State #5 of 128; 2016 Michigan #8 of 128; 2016 Penn State #20 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #22 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #26 of 128; 2016 Maryland #34 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #37 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #45 of 128; 2016 Indiana #53 of 128; 2016 Iowa #55 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #59 of 128; 2016 Illinois #64 of 128; 2016 Purdue #68 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 49 of 128. Big Ten median rank 37.
Offensive EPAmedian #86
Offensive EPA. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Ohio State #27 of 128; 2016 Penn State #28 of 128; 2016 Michigan #45 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #67 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #70 of 128; 2016 Maryland #82 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #86 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #87 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #89 of 128; 2016 Iowa #100 of 128; 2016 Indiana #102 of 128; 2016 Purdue #109 of 128; 2016 Illinois #115 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 128 of 128. Big Ten median rank 86.
Defensive EPAmedian #34
Defensive EPA. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Ohio State #2 of 128; 2016 Michigan #4 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #11 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #20 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #27 of 128; 2016 Indiana #28 of 128; 2016 Iowa #34 of 128; 2016 Penn State #44 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #50 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #59 of 128; 2016 Illinois #63 of 128; 2016 Maryland #65 of 128; 2016 Purdue #114 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 86 of 128. Big Ten median rank 34.
Offensive success ratemedian #81
Offensive success rate. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Ohio State #9 of 128; 2016 Michigan #28 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #37 of 128; 2016 Penn State #62 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #69 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #71 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #81 of 128; 2016 Iowa #88 of 128; 2016 Indiana #90 of 128; 2016 Purdue #96 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #102 of 128; 2016 Maryland #110 of 128; 2016 Illinois #120 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 127 of 128. Big Ten median rank 81.
Defensive success ratemedian #37
Defensive success rate. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #5 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #17 of 128; 2016 Indiana #25 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #29 of 128; 2016 Penn State #33 of 128; 2016 Iowa #37 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #50 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #52 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #55 of 128; 2016 Illinois #96 of 128; 2016 Purdue #99 of 128; 2016 Maryland #101 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 92 of 128. Big Ten median rank 37.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #84
Offensive explosiveness. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Maryland #6 of 128; 2016 Penn State #9 of 128; 2016 Purdue #32 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #46 of 128; 2016 Indiana #49 of 128; 2016 Illinois #50 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #84 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #91 of 128; 2016 Michigan #99 of 128; 2016 Iowa #113 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #117 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #119 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #123 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 127 of 128. Big Ten median rank 84.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #58
Defensive explosiveness. Big Ten, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Wisconsin #7 of 128; 2016 Illinois #8 of 128; 2016 Iowa #9 of 128; 2016 Northwestern #10 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #28 of 128; 2016 Maryland #32 of 128; 2016 Nebraska #61 of 128; 2016 Michigan State #70 of 128; 2016 Penn State #80 of 128; 2016 Indiana #87 of 128; 2016 Minnesota #92 of 128; 2016 Michigan #97 of 128; 2016 Purdue #100 of 128. Marked: 2016 Rutgers, ranked 58 of 128. Big Ten median rank 58.