THIRD AND DATA
Sign in

Metrics

TexasLonghorns

Season
‹
›Current

Big 12

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

CFP Top 25, 2016

Rank within the division. Hover a rank for the season and per-game numbers.

SeasonTeamTop-10 clsprior 5T10 WregT25 WregTotal offenseScoring offenseTotal defenseScoring defensePoint marginTurnover marginPossessionReturning passingof last yrReturning receivingof last yrReturning rushingof last yrTeam talentOffensive EPADefensive EPAOffensive success rateDefensive success rateOffensive explosivenessDefensive explosiveness
2016Texas5–73 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#16 (of 128 teams · 491.3 yds/g · 5,895 yards)#46 (of 128 teams · 31.9 pts/g · 383 points)#94 (of 128 teams · 448.3 yds/g allowed · 5,379 yards)#90 (of 128 teams · 31.5 pts/g allowed · 378 points)#65 (of 128 teams · +0.4 /g · +5 on the season)#85 (of 128 teams · -3 on the season · 20 taken, 23 given · -0.25 /g)#95 (of 128 teams · 28:16 /g · 5h 39m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#78 (of 128 teams · 57% of last season's receiving production returning)#57 (of 128 teams · 73% of last season's rushing production returning)#11 (of 128 teams · 839.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#59 (of 128 teams · 0.168 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#82 (of 128 teams · 0.186 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#22 (of 128 teams · 47% of plays successful)#58 (of 128 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#126 (of 128 teams · 1.009 average PPA on successful plays)#60 (of 128 teams · 1.188 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.)1 (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.)#39 (Total offense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #2–#116. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#24 (Scoring offense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #3–#107. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#22 (Total defense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#101. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#20 (Scoring defense: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#106. 9 of 25 in the top 10.)#19 (Point margin: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#48. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#42 (Turnover margin: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#107. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#38 (Possession: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#108. 3 of 25 in the top 10.)#67 (Returning passing: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#122. 4 of 25 in the top 10.)#55 (Returning receiving: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#125. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#51 (Returning rushing: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #2–#127. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#20 (Team talent: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#117. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#28 (Offensive EPA: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#114. 5 of 25 in the top 10.)#24 (Defensive EPA: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#118. 8 of 25 in the top 10.)#27 (Offensive success rate: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #2–#82. 7 of 25 in the top 10.)#28 (Defensive success rate: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #1–#113. 6 of 25 in the top 10.)#78 (Offensive explosiveness: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #3–#123. 2 of 25 in the top 10.)#71 (Defensive explosiveness: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range #7–#120. 1 of 25 in the top 10.)
2016Alabama14–15 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #9 USC · postseason: #4 Washington)5 (5 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 6 including the postseason — regular: #9 USC, #14 Auburn, #17 Florida, #20 LSU, #21 Tennessee · postseason: #4 Washington)#34 (of 128 teams · 455.3 yds/g · 6,829 yards)#16 (of 128 teams · 38.8 pts/g · 582 points)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 261.8 yds/g allowed · 3,927 yards)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 13.0 pts/g allowed · 195 points)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +25.8 /g · +387 on the season)#17 (of 128 teams · +10 on the season · 29 taken, 19 given · +0.67 /g)#47 (of 128 teams · 30:56 /g · 7h 44m on the season)#101 (of 128 teams · 11% of last season's passing production returning)#54 (of 128 teams · 69% of last season's receiving production returning)#127 (of 128 teams · 12% of last season's rushing production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 982.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#21 (of 128 teams · 0.247 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.102 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#20 (of 128 teams · 48% of plays successful)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 32% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#74 (of 128 teams · 1.187 average PPA on successful plays)#65 (of 128 teams · 1.195 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Clemson14–12 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 2 including the postseason — postseason: #1 Alabama, #3 Ohio State)4 (4 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 6 including the postseason — regular: #11 Florida State, #13 Louisville, #14 Auburn, #22 Virginia Tech · postseason: #1 Alabama, #3 Ohio State)#12 (of 128 teams · 503.7 yds/g · 7,555 yards)#14 (of 128 teams · 39.2 pts/g · 588 points)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 311.5 yds/g allowed · 4,672 yards)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 18.0 pts/g allowed · 270 points)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +21.2 /g · +318 on the season)#71 (of 128 teams · -1 on the season · 27 taken, 28 given · -0.07 /g)#54 (of 128 teams · 30:36 /g · 7h 39m on the season)#25 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#35 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's receiving production returning)#26 (of 128 teams · 90% of last season's rushing production returning)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 846.0 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#33 (of 128 teams · 0.221 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.002 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 50% of plays successful)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#107 (of 128 teams · 1.114 average PPA on successful plays)#63 (of 128 teams · 1.193 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Ohio State11–25 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Michigan, #7 Oklahoma, #8 Wisconsin)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #6 Michigan, #7 Oklahoma, #8 Wisconsin)#31 (of 128 teams · 459.1 yds/g · 5,969 yards)#13 (of 128 teams · 39.4 pts/g · 512 points)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 296.8 yds/g allowed · 3,858 yards)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 15.5 pts/g allowed · 201 points)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +23.9 /g · +311 on the season)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +15 on the season · 27 taken, 12 given · +1.15 /g)#12 (of 128 teams · 33:11 /g · 7h 11m on the season)#86 (of 128 teams · 44% of last season's passing production returning)#125 (of 128 teams · 20% of last season's receiving production returning)#121 (of 128 teams · 23% of last season's rushing production returning)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 902.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#27 (of 128 teams · 0.225 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.051 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 49% of plays successful)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 35% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#123 (of 128 teams · 1.056 average PPA on successful plays)#28 (of 128 teams · 1.139 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Washington12–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #10 Colorado)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #10 Colorado, #18 Stanford, #19 Utah)#32 (of 128 teams · 456.9 yds/g · 6,397 yards)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 41.8 pts/g · 585 points)#12 (of 128 teams · 316.9 yds/g allowed · 4,436 yards)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 17.7 pts/g allowed · 248 points)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +24.1 /g · +337 on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +18 on the season · 33 taken, 15 given · +1.29 /g)#44 (of 128 teams · 31:02 /g · 7h 14m on the season)#30 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#111 (of 128 teams · 41% of last season's receiving production returning)#43 (of 128 teams · 83% of last season's rushing production returning)#24 (of 128 teams · 699.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.321 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.003 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 51% of plays successful)#13 (of 128 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#69 (of 128 teams · 1.200 average PPA on successful plays)#69 (of 128 teams · 1.200 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Penn State11–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #3 Ohio State, #8 Wisconsin)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #3 Ohio State, #8 Wisconsin, #24 Temple)#49 (of 128 teams · 432.6 yds/g · 6,056 yards)#21 (of 128 teams · 37.6 pts/g · 526 points)#37 (of 128 teams · 367.9 yds/g allowed · 5,151 yards)#47 (of 128 teams · 25.4 pts/g allowed · 356 points)#21 (of 128 teams · +12.1 /g · +170 on the season)#64 (of 128 teams · +1 on the season · 21 taken, 20 given · +0.07 /g)#101 (of 128 teams · 27:50 /g · 6h 30m on the season)#102 (of 128 teams · 10% of last season's passing production returning)#28 (of 128 teams · 79% of last season's receiving production returning)#49 (of 128 teams · 77% of last season's rushing production returning)#20 (of 128 teams · 742.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#28 (of 128 teams · 0.225 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#44 (of 128 teams · 0.118 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#62 (of 128 teams · 44% of plays successful)#33 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.339 average PPA on successful plays)#80 (of 128 teams · 1.217 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Michigan10–32 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #5 Penn State, #8 Wisconsin, #10 Colorado)3 (3 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #5 Penn State, #8 Wisconsin, #10 Colorado)#58 (of 128 teams · 424.9 yds/g · 5,524 yards)#11 (of 128 teams · 40.3 pts/g · 524 points)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 261.8 yds/g allowed · 3,403 yards)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 14.1 pts/g allowed · 183 points)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +26.2 /g · +341 on the season)#24 (of 128 teams · +7 on the season · 19 taken, 12 given · +0.54 /g)#14 (of 128 teams · 33:03 /g · 7h 10m on the season)#105 (of 128 teams · 9% of last season's passing production returning)#17 (of 128 teams · 88% of last season's receiving production returning)#72 (of 128 teams · 67% of last season's rushing production returning)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 852.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#45 (of 128 teams · 0.200 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.040 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#28 (of 128 teams · 46% of plays successful)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 31% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#99 (of 128 teams · 1.151 average PPA on successful plays)#97 (of 128 teams · 1.260 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Oklahoma11–20 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #12 Oklahoma State, #16 West Virginia · postseason: #14 Auburn)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 554.8 yds/g · 7,212 yards)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 43.9 pts/g · 571 points)#83 (of 128 teams · 432.0 yds/g allowed · 5,616 yards)#68 (of 128 teams · 28.9 pts/g allowed · 375 points)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +15.1 /g · +196 on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · +0 on the season · 17 taken, 17 given · +0.00 /g)#25 (of 128 teams · 32:16 /g · 7h 00m on the season)#51 (of 128 teams · 90% of last season's passing production returning)#83 (of 128 teams · 55% of last season's receiving production returning)#23 (of 128 teams · 91% of last season's rushing production returning)#18 (of 128 teams · 777.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.376 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#84 (of 128 teams · 0.190 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 51% of plays successful)#45 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#12 (of 128 teams · 1.324 average PPA on successful plays)#104 (of 128 teams · 1.277 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Wisconsin11–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #20 LSU · postseason: #15 Western Michigan)#88 (of 128 teams · 382.1 yds/g · 5,350 yards)#67 (of 128 teams · 28.4 pts/g · 397 points)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 301.4 yds/g allowed · 4,219 yards)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 15.6 pts/g allowed · 218 points)#14 (of 128 teams · +12.8 /g · +179 on the season)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +12 on the season · 28 taken, 16 given · +0.86 /g)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 34:58 /g · 8h 10m on the season)#100 (of 128 teams · 12% of last season's passing production returning)#98 (of 128 teams · 49% of last season's receiving production returning)#27 (of 128 teams · 89% of last season's rushing production returning)#37 (of 128 teams · 643.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#67 (of 128 teams · 0.156 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#11 (of 128 teams · 0.035 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#37 (of 128 teams · 46% of plays successful)#29 (of 128 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#117 (of 128 teams · 1.084 average PPA on successful plays)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.074 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016USC10–34 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #4 Washington, #10 Colorado · postseason: #5 Penn State)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #4 Washington, #10 Colorado · postseason: #5 Penn State)#20 (of 128 teams · 477.1 yds/g · 6,202 yards)#36 (of 128 teams · 34.4 pts/g · 447 points)#36 (of 128 teams · 367.1 yds/g allowed · 4,773 yards)#38 (of 128 teams · 24.2 pts/g allowed · 315 points)#29 (of 128 teams · +10.2 /g · +132 on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · +0 on the season · 20 taken, 20 given · +0.00 /g)#28 (of 128 teams · 31:54 /g · 6h 55m on the season)#114 (of 128 teams · 4% of last season's passing production returning)#11 (of 128 teams · 91% of last season's receiving production returning)#51 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's rushing production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 936.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#24 (of 128 teams · 0.234 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#54 (of 128 teams · 0.134 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#13 (of 128 teams · 48% of plays successful)#24 (of 128 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#94 (of 128 teams · 1.157 average PPA on successful plays)#118 (of 128 teams · 1.337 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Colorado10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #18 Stanford, #19 Utah)#47 (of 128 teams · 437.1 yds/g · 6,120 yards)#51 (of 128 teams · 31.1 pts/g · 435 points)#19 (of 128 teams · 342.5 yds/g allowed · 4,795 yards)#20 (of 128 teams · 21.7 pts/g allowed · 304 points)#35 (of 128 teams · +9.4 /g · +131 on the season)#32 (of 128 teams · +6 on the season · 26 taken, 20 given · +0.43 /g)#48 (of 128 teams · 30:56 /g · 7h 13m on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's passing production returning)#58 (of 128 teams · 66% of last season's receiving production returning)#71 (of 128 teams · 67% of last season's rushing production returning)#62 (of 128 teams · 526.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#71 (of 128 teams · 0.149 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#12 (of 128 teams · 0.035 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#57 (of 128 teams · 44% of plays successful)#28 (of 128 teams · 39% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#112 (of 128 teams · 1.097 average PPA on successful plays)#11 (of 128 teams · 1.093 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Florida State10–34 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #6 Michigan)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · 2 including the postseason — regular: #17 Florida · postseason: #6 Michigan)#25 (of 128 teams · 466.4 yds/g · 6,063 yards)#31 (of 128 teams · 35.1 pts/g · 456 points)#22 (of 128 teams · 349.1 yds/g allowed · 4,538 yards)#44 (of 128 teams · 25.0 pts/g allowed · 325 points)#30 (of 128 teams · +10.1 /g · +131 on the season)#42 (of 128 teams · +3 on the season · 23 taken, 20 given · +0.23 /g)#15 (of 128 teams · 32:55 /g · 7h 08m on the season)#82 (of 128 teams · 48% of last season's passing production returning)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 98% of last season's receiving production returning)#39 (of 128 teams · 85% of last season's rushing production returning)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 906.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#19 (of 128 teams · 0.260 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#36 (of 128 teams · 0.103 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#15 (of 128 teams · 48% of plays successful)#22 (of 128 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#56 (of 128 teams · 1.227 average PPA on successful plays)#111 (of 128 teams · 1.300 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Oklahoma State10–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #10 Colorado)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 3 including the postseason — regular: #16 West Virginia, #23 Pittsburgh · postseason: #10 Colorado)#14 (of 128 teams · 494.8 yds/g · 6,432 yards)#17 (of 128 teams · 38.6 pts/g · 502 points)#92 (of 128 teams · 446.3 yds/g allowed · 5,802 yards)#53 (of 128 teams · 26.5 pts/g allowed · 345 points)#22 (of 128 teams · +12.1 /g · +157 on the season)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +11 on the season · 25 taken, 14 given · +0.85 /g)#84 (of 128 teams · 28:51 /g · 6h 15m on the season)#58 (of 128 teams · 86% of last season's passing production returning)#51 (of 128 teams · 70% of last season's receiving production returning)#70 (of 128 teams · 68% of last season's rushing production returning)#39 (of 128 teams · 631.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#18 (of 128 teams · 0.260 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#76 (of 128 teams · 0.171 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#21 (of 128 teams · 47% of plays successful)#72 (of 128 teams · 44% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#41 (of 128 teams · 1.256 average PPA on successful plays)#71 (of 128 teams · 1.201 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Louisville9–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #11 Florida State)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 532.7 yds/g · 6,925 yards)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 42.5 pts/g · 553 points)#14 (of 128 teams · 322.2 yds/g allowed · 4,189 yards)#31 (of 128 teams · 23.8 pts/g allowed · 309 points)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +18.8 /g · +244 on the season)#107 (of 128 teams · -7 on the season · 25 taken, 32 given · -0.54 /g)#87 (of 128 teams · 28:47 /g · 6h 14m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's receiving production returning)#12 (of 128 teams · 98% of last season's rushing production returning)#32 (of 128 teams · 654.1 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.323 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.029 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 49% of plays successful)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 34% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#20 (of 128 teams · 1.290 average PPA on successful plays)#106 (of 128 teams · 1.283 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Auburn8–54 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #20 LSU)#43 (of 128 teams · 440.8 yds/g · 5,730 yards)#49 (of 128 teams · 31.2 pts/g · 406 points)#28 (of 128 teams · 361.9 yds/g allowed · 4,705 yards)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 17.1 pts/g allowed · 222 points)#12 (of 128 teams · +14.2 /g · +184 on the season)#42 (of 128 teams · +3 on the season · 17 taken, 14 given · +0.23 /g)#76 (of 128 teams · 29:11 /g · 6h 19m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#110 (of 128 teams · 41% of last season's receiving production returning)#122 (of 128 teams · 23% of last season's rushing production returning)#7 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 865.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#40 (of 128 teams · 0.207 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#22 (of 128 teams · 0.079 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#27 (of 128 teams · 47% of plays successful)#34 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#110 (of 128 teams · 1.104 average PPA on successful plays)#41 (of 128 teams · 1.157 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Western Michigan13–10 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#19 (of 128 teams · 480.5 yds/g · 6,727 yards)#9 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 41.6 pts/g · 582 points)#26 (of 128 teams · 353.6 yds/g allowed · 4,951 yards)#15 (of 128 teams · 19.8 pts/g allowed · 277 points)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +21.8 /g · +305 on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · +18 on the season · 26 taken, 8 given · +1.29 /g)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 34:02 /g · 7h 57m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#80 (of 128 teams · 56% of last season's receiving production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's rushing production returning)#81 (of 128 teams · 443.2 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.348 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#51 (of 128 teams · 0.131 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 53% of plays successful)#48 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#111 (of 128 teams · 1.102 average PPA on successful plays)#105 (of 128 teams · 1.279 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016West Virginia10–30 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#17 (of 128 teams · 485.5 yds/g · 6,312 yards)#50 (of 128 teams · 31.1 pts/g · 405 points)#73 (of 128 teams · 425.9 yds/g allowed · 5,537 yards)#35 (of 128 teams · 24.0 pts/g allowed · 312 points)#41 (of 128 teams · +7.2 /g · +93 on the season)#38 (of 128 teams · +4 on the season · 25 taken, 21 given · +0.31 /g)#77 (of 128 teams · 29:07 /g · 6h 18m on the season)#1 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#32 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's receiving production returning)#94 (of 128 teams · 55% of last season's rushing production returning)#31 (of 128 teams · 654.6 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#38 (of 128 teams · 0.208 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#41 (of 128 teams · 0.114 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#50 (of 128 teams · 45% of plays successful)#54 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#53 (of 128 teams · 1.233 average PPA on successful plays)#23 (of 128 teams · 1.122 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Florida9–43 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #20 LSU)#116 (of 128 teams · 344.0 yds/g · 4,472 yards)#107 (of 128 teams · 23.9 pts/g · 311 points)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 293.0 yds/g allowed · 3,809 yards)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 16.8 pts/g allowed · 218 points)#41 (of 128 teams · +7.2 /g · +93 on the season)#49 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 24 taken, 22 given · +0.15 /g)#37 (of 128 teams · 31:14 /g · 6h 46m on the season)#121 (of 128 teams · 2% of last season's passing production returning)#101 (of 128 teams · 48% of last season's receiving production returning)#124 (of 128 teams · 22% of last season's rushing production returning)#16 (of 128 teams · 798.4 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#114 (of 128 teams · 0.065 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · -0.050 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#82 (of 128 teams · 42% of plays successful)#12 (of 128 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#114 (of 128 teams · 1.091 average PPA on successful plays)#43 (of 128 teams · 1.158 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Stanford10–31 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)#103 (of 128 teams · 367.4 yds/g · 4,776 yards)#83 (of 128 teams · 26.3 pts/g · 342 points)#38 (of 128 teams · 368.1 yds/g allowed · 4,785 yards)#18 (of 128 teams · 20.4 pts/g allowed · 265 points)#45 (of 128 teams · +5.9 /g · +77 on the season)#49 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 20 taken, 18 given · +0.15 /g)#16 (of 128 teams · 32:47 /g · 7h 06m on the season)#109 (of 128 teams · 5% of last season's passing production returning)#66 (of 128 teams · 62% of last season's receiving production returning)#77 (of 128 teams · 66% of last season's rushing production returning)#17 (of 128 teams · 778.5 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#69 (of 128 teams · 0.153 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#62 (of 128 teams · 0.148 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#68 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#42 (of 128 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#86 (of 128 teams · 1.169 average PPA on successful plays)#94 (of 128 teams · 1.243 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Utah9–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)1 (1 regular-season win over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #9 USC)#51 (of 128 teams · 430.7 yds/g · 5,599 yards)#60 (of 128 teams · 29.9 pts/g · 388 points)#48 (of 128 teams · 383.0 yds/g allowed · 4,979 yards)#33 (of 128 teams · 23.9 pts/g allowed · 311 points)#45 (of 128 teams · +5.9 /g · +77 on the season)#28 (of 128 teams · +6 on the season · 31 taken, 25 given · +0.46 /g)#11 (of 128 teams · 33:24 /g · 7h 14m on the season)#122 (of 128 teams · 1% of last season's passing production returning)#88 (of 128 teams · 53% of last season's receiving production returning)#123 (of 128 teams · 22% of last season's rushing production returning)#51 (of 128 teams · 580.1 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#77 (of 128 teams · 0.139 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#52 (of 128 teams · 0.132 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#56 (of 128 teams · 44% of plays successful)#36 (of 128 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#104 (of 128 teams · 1.119 average PPA on successful plays)#103 (of 128 teams · 1.276 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016LSU8–44 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · 1 including the postseason — postseason: #13 Louisville)#59 (of 128 teams · 423.1 yds/g · 5,077 yards)#68 (of 128 teams · 28.3 pts/g · 340 points)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 314.4 yds/g allowed · 3,773 yards)#5 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 15.8 pts/g allowed · 189 points)#16 (of 128 teams · +12.6 /g · +151 on the season)#67 (of 128 teams · +0 on the season · 17 taken, 17 given · +0.00 /g)#39 (of 128 teams · 31:08 /g · 6h 14m on the season)#30 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#23 (of 128 teams · 83% of last season's receiving production returning)#2 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's rushing production returning)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 917.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#23 (of 128 teams · 0.240 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.005 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#43 (of 128 teams · 45% of plays successful)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#27 (of 128 teams · 1.276 average PPA on successful plays)#13 (of 128 teams · 1.095 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Tennessee9–42 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #17 Florida, #22 Virginia Tech)#40 (of 128 teams · 443.7 yds/g · 5,768 yards)#24 (of 128 teams · 36.4 pts/g · 473 points)#95 (of 128 teams · 449.2 yds/g allowed · 5,840 yards)#68 (of 128 teams · 28.9 pts/g allowed · 375 points)#38 (of 128 teams · +7.5 /g · +98 on the season)#79 (of 128 teams · -2 on the season · 24 taken, 26 given · -0.15 /g)#108 (of 128 teams · 27:24 /g · 5h 56m on the season)#17 (of 128 teams · 100% of last season's passing production returning)#50 (of 128 teams · 70% of last season's receiving production returning)#16 (of 128 teams · 96% of last season's rushing production returning)#14 (of 128 teams · 813.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#46 (of 128 teams · 0.198 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#72 (of 128 teams · 0.162 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#25 (of 128 teams · 47% of plays successful)#66 (of 128 teams · 44% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#63 (of 128 teams · 1.213 average PPA on successful plays)#51 (of 128 teams · 1.165 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Virginia Tech10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #23 Pittsburgh)#39 (of 128 teams · 444.9 yds/g · 6,229 yards)#33 (of 128 teams · 35.0 pts/g · 490 points)#18 (of 128 teams · 340.7 yds/g allowed · 4,770 yards)#28 (of 128 teams · 22.8 pts/g allowed · 319 points)#19 (of 128 teams · +12.2 /g · +171 on the season)#72 (of 128 teams · -1 on the season · 25 taken, 26 given · -0.07 /g)#36 (of 128 teams · 31:15 /g · 7h 18m on the season)#85 (of 128 teams · 44% of last season's passing production returning)#20 (of 128 teams · 87% of last season's receiving production returning)#54 (of 128 teams · 74% of last season's rushing production returning)#36 (of 128 teams · 646.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#66 (of 128 teams · 0.158 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#24 (of 128 teams · 0.082 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#33 (of 128 teams · 46% of plays successful)#18 (of 128 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#121 (of 128 teams · 1.071 average PPA on successful plays)#74 (of 128 teams · 1.203 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Pittsburgh8–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason — #2 Clemson, #5 Penn State)2 (2 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #2 Clemson, #5 Penn State)#38 (of 128 teams · 446.8 yds/g · 5,808 yards)#10 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 40.9 pts/g · 532 points)#101 (of 128 teams · 452.8 yds/g allowed · 5,886 yards)#106 (of 128 teams · 35.2 pts/g allowed · 458 points)#48 (of 128 teams · +5.7 /g · +74 on the season)#58 (of 128 teams · +1 on the season · 19 taken, 18 given · +0.08 /g)#49 (of 128 teams · 30:53 /g · 6h 42m on the season)#50 (of 128 teams · 91% of last season's passing production returning)#108 (of 128 teams · 43% of last season's receiving production returning)#50 (of 128 teams · 76% of last season's rushing production returning)#35 (of 128 teams · 649.9 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#13 (of 128 teams · 0.296 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#89 (of 128 teams · 0.194 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#42 (of 128 teams · 45% of plays successful)#57 (of 128 teams · 43% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 1.367 average PPA on successful plays)#120 (of 128 teams · 1.363 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Temple10–40 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)1 (1 regular-season win over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason — #25 Navy)#65 (of 128 teams · 413.6 yds/g · 5,790 yards)#43 (of 128 teams · 32.4 pts/g · 453 points)#4 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 282.5 yds/g allowed · 3,955 yards)#11 (of 128 teams · 18.4 pts/g allowed · 258 points)#13 (of 128 teams · +13.9 /g · +195 on the season)#32 (of 128 teams · +6 on the season · 25 taken, 19 given · +0.43 /g)#8 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 33:33 /g · 7h 50m on the season)#34 (of 128 teams · 99% of last season's passing production returning)#104 (of 128 teams · 47% of last season's receiving production returning)#13 (of 128 teams · 97% of last season's rushing production returning)#71 (of 128 teams · 492.7 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#61 (of 128 teams · 0.166 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#16 (of 128 teams · 0.055 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#65 (of 128 teams · 43% of plays successful)#14 (of 128 teams · 37% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#47 (of 128 teams · 1.244 average PPA on successful plays)#59 (of 128 teams · 1.187 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2016Navy9–50 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of the 25 teams in 2016's final CFP poll. Range 0–5.)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-10 teams · none added in the postseason)0 (0 regular-season wins over top-25 teams · none added in the postseason)#46 (of 128 teams · 438.3 yds/g · 6,136 yards)#20 (of 128 teams · 37.9 pts/g · 531 points)#84 (of 128 teams · 434.0 yds/g allowed · 6,076 yards)#84 (of 128 teams · 31.0 pts/g allowed · 434 points)#43 (of 128 teams · +6.9 /g · +97 on the season)#52 (of 128 teams · +2 on the season · 18 taken, 16 given · +0.14 /g)#38 (of 128 teams · 31:11 /g · 7h 17m on the season)#115 (of 128 teams · 4% of last season's passing production returning)#55 (of 128 teams · 69% of last season's receiving production returning)#126 (of 128 teams · 17% of last season's rushing production returning)#117 (of 128 teams · 342.8 composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#6 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 0.340 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#118 (of 128 teams · 0.268 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#3 — top 10 (of 128 teams · 52% of plays successful)#113 (of 128 teams · 47% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#78 (of 128 teams · 1.181 average PPA on successful plays)#93 (of 128 teams · 1.240 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)

What clusters, and what does not

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

CFP Top 25, 20162016 TexasCFP Top 25 medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #39
Total offense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Oklahoma #2 of 128; 2016 Louisville #3 of 128; 2016 Clemson #12 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #14 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #17 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #19 of 128; 2016 USC #20 of 128; 2016 Florida State #25 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #31 of 128; 2016 Washington #32 of 128; 2016 Alabama #34 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #38 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #39 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #40 of 128; 2016 Auburn #43 of 128; 2016 Navy #46 of 128; 2016 Colorado #47 of 128; 2016 Penn State #49 of 128; 2016 Utah #51 of 128; 2016 Michigan #58 of 128; 2016 LSU #59 of 128; 2016 Temple #65 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #88 of 128; 2016 Stanford #103 of 128; 2016 Florida #116 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 16 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 39.
Scoring offensemedian #24
Scoring offense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Oklahoma #3 of 128; 2016 Louisville #6 of 128; 2016 Washington #8 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #9 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #10 of 128; 2016 Michigan #11 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #13 of 128; 2016 Clemson #14 of 128; 2016 Alabama #16 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #17 of 128; 2016 Navy #20 of 128; 2016 Penn State #21 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #24 of 128; 2016 Florida State #31 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #33 of 128; 2016 USC #36 of 128; 2016 Temple #43 of 128; 2016 Auburn #49 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #50 of 128; 2016 Colorado #51 of 128; 2016 Utah #60 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #67 of 128; 2016 LSU #68 of 128; 2016 Stanford #83 of 128; 2016 Florida #107 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 46 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 24.
Total defensemedian #22
Total defense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Alabama #2 of 128; 2016 Temple #4 of 128; 2016 Florida #5 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #6 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #7 of 128; 2016 Clemson #8 of 128; 2016 LSU #10 of 128; 2016 Washington #12 of 128; 2016 Louisville #14 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #18 of 128; 2016 Colorado #19 of 128; 2016 Florida State #22 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #26 of 128; 2016 Auburn #28 of 128; 2016 USC #36 of 128; 2016 Penn State #37 of 128; 2016 Stanford #38 of 128; 2016 Utah #48 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #73 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #83 of 128; 2016 Navy #84 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #92 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #95 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #101 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 94 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 22.
Scoring defensemedian #20
Scoring defense. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Alabama #1 of 128; 2016 Michigan #2 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #3 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #4 of 128; 2016 LSU #5 of 128; 2016 Florida #6 of 128; 2016 Auburn #7 of 128; 2016 Washington #8 of 128; 2016 Clemson #10 of 128; 2016 Temple #11 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #15 of 128; 2016 Stanford #18 of 128; 2016 Colorado #20 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #28 of 128; 2016 Louisville #31 of 128; 2016 Utah #33 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #35 of 128; 2016 USC #38 of 128; 2016 Florida State #44 of 128; 2016 Penn State #47 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #53 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #68 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #68 of 128; 2016 Navy #84 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #106 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 90 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 20.
Point marginmedian #19
Point margin. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Alabama #2 of 128; 2016 Washington #3 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #4 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #5 of 128; 2016 Clemson #6 of 128; 2016 Louisville #8 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #10 of 128; 2016 Auburn #12 of 128; 2016 Temple #13 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #14 of 128; 2016 LSU #16 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #19 of 128; 2016 Penn State #21 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #22 of 128; 2016 USC #29 of 128; 2016 Florida State #30 of 128; 2016 Colorado #35 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #38 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #41 of 128; 2016 Florida #41 of 128; 2016 Navy #43 of 128; 2016 Stanford #45 of 128; 2016 Utah #45 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #48 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 65 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 19.
Turnover marginmedian #42
Turnover margin. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Washington #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #3 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #9 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #10 of 128; 2016 Alabama #17 of 128; 2016 Michigan #24 of 128; 2016 Utah #28 of 128; 2016 Colorado #32 of 128; 2016 Temple #32 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #38 of 128; 2016 Florida State #42 of 128; 2016 Auburn #42 of 128; 2016 Florida #49 of 128; 2016 Stanford #49 of 128; 2016 Navy #52 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #58 of 128; 2016 Penn State #64 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #67 of 128; 2016 USC #67 of 128; 2016 LSU #67 of 128; 2016 Clemson #71 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #72 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #79 of 128; 2016 Louisville #107 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 85 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 42.
Possessionmedian #38
Possession. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Wisconsin #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #4 of 128; 2016 Temple #8 of 128; 2016 Utah #11 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #12 of 128; 2016 Michigan #14 of 128; 2016 Florida State #15 of 128; 2016 Stanford #16 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #25 of 128; 2016 USC #28 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #36 of 128; 2016 Florida #37 of 128; 2016 Navy #38 of 128; 2016 LSU #39 of 128; 2016 Washington #44 of 128; 2016 Alabama #47 of 128; 2016 Colorado #48 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #49 of 128; 2016 Clemson #54 of 128; 2016 Auburn #76 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #77 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #84 of 128; 2016 Louisville #87 of 128; 2016 Penn State #101 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #108 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 95 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 38.
Returning passingmedian #67
Returning passing. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Louisville #1 of 128; 2016 Auburn #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #1 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #17 of 128; 2016 Clemson #25 of 128; 2016 Washington #30 of 128; 2016 LSU #30 of 128; 2016 Temple #34 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #50 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #51 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #58 of 128; 2016 Colorado #67 of 128; 2016 Florida State #82 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #85 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #86 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #100 of 128; 2016 Alabama #101 of 128; 2016 Penn State #102 of 128; 2016 Michigan #105 of 128; 2016 Stanford #109 of 128; 2016 USC #114 of 128; 2016 Navy #115 of 128; 2016 Florida #121 of 128; 2016 Utah #122 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 1 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 67.
Returning receivingmedian #55
Returning receiving. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Louisville #1 of 128; 2016 Florida State #3 of 128; 2016 USC #11 of 128; 2016 Michigan #17 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #20 of 128; 2016 LSU #23 of 128; 2016 Penn State #28 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #32 of 128; 2016 Clemson #35 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #50 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #51 of 128; 2016 Alabama #54 of 128; 2016 Navy #55 of 128; 2016 Colorado #58 of 128; 2016 Stanford #66 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #80 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #83 of 128; 2016 Utah #88 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #98 of 128; 2016 Florida #101 of 128; 2016 Temple #104 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #108 of 128; 2016 Auburn #110 of 128; 2016 Washington #111 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #125 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 78 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 55.
Returning rushingmedian #51
Returning rushing. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Western Michigan #2 of 128; 2016 LSU #2 of 128; 2016 Louisville #12 of 128; 2016 Temple #13 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #16 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #23 of 128; 2016 Clemson #26 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #27 of 128; 2016 Florida State #39 of 128; 2016 Washington #43 of 128; 2016 Penn State #49 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #50 of 128; 2016 USC #51 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #54 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #70 of 128; 2016 Colorado #71 of 128; 2016 Michigan #72 of 128; 2016 Stanford #77 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #94 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #121 of 128; 2016 Auburn #122 of 128; 2016 Utah #123 of 128; 2016 Florida #124 of 128; 2016 Navy #126 of 128; 2016 Alabama #127 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 57 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 51.
Team talentmedian #20
Team talent. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Alabama #1 of 128; 2016 USC #2 of 128; 2016 LSU #3 of 128; 2016 Florida State #4 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #5 of 128; 2016 Auburn #7 of 128; 2016 Michigan #8 of 128; 2016 Clemson #9 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #14 of 128; 2016 Florida #16 of 128; 2016 Stanford #17 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #18 of 128; 2016 Penn State #20 of 128; 2016 Washington #24 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #31 of 128; 2016 Louisville #32 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #35 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #36 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #37 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #39 of 128; 2016 Utah #51 of 128; 2016 Colorado #62 of 128; 2016 Temple #71 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #81 of 128; 2016 Navy #117 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 11 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 20.
Offensive EPAmedian #28
Offensive EPA. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Oklahoma #1 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #4 of 128; 2016 Navy #6 of 128; 2016 Louisville #8 of 128; 2016 Washington #9 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #13 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #18 of 128; 2016 Florida State #19 of 128; 2016 Alabama #21 of 128; 2016 LSU #23 of 128; 2016 USC #24 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #27 of 128; 2016 Penn State #28 of 128; 2016 Clemson #33 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #38 of 128; 2016 Auburn #40 of 128; 2016 Michigan #45 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #46 of 128; 2016 Temple #61 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #66 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #67 of 128; 2016 Stanford #69 of 128; 2016 Colorado #71 of 128; 2016 Utah #77 of 128; 2016 Florida #114 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 59 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 28.
Defensive EPAmedian #24
Defensive EPA. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Alabama #1 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #2 of 128; 2016 Florida #3 of 128; 2016 Michigan #4 of 128; 2016 Clemson #6 of 128; 2016 Washington #7 of 128; 2016 LSU #8 of 128; 2016 Louisville #10 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #11 of 128; 2016 Colorado #12 of 128; 2016 Temple #16 of 128; 2016 Auburn #22 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #24 of 128; 2016 Florida State #36 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #41 of 128; 2016 Penn State #44 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #51 of 128; 2016 Utah #52 of 128; 2016 USC #54 of 128; 2016 Stanford #62 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #72 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #76 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #84 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #89 of 128; 2016 Navy #118 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 82 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 24.
Offensive success ratemedian #27
Offensive success rate. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Western Michigan #2 of 128; 2016 Navy #3 of 128; 2016 Washington #4 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #5 of 128; 2016 Clemson #7 of 128; 2016 Louisville #8 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #9 of 128; 2016 USC #13 of 128; 2016 Florida State #15 of 128; 2016 Alabama #20 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #21 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #25 of 128; 2016 Auburn #27 of 128; 2016 Michigan #28 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #33 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #37 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #42 of 128; 2016 LSU #43 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #50 of 128; 2016 Utah #56 of 128; 2016 Colorado #57 of 128; 2016 Penn State #62 of 128; 2016 Temple #65 of 128; 2016 Stanford #68 of 128; 2016 Florida #82 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 22 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 27.
Defensive success ratemedian #28
Defensive success rate. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Michigan #1 of 128; 2016 Alabama #2 of 128; 2016 Louisville #3 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #5 of 128; 2016 Clemson #7 of 128; 2016 LSU #10 of 128; 2016 Florida #12 of 128; 2016 Washington #13 of 128; 2016 Temple #14 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #18 of 128; 2016 Florida State #22 of 128; 2016 USC #24 of 128; 2016 Colorado #28 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #29 of 128; 2016 Penn State #33 of 128; 2016 Auburn #34 of 128; 2016 Utah #36 of 128; 2016 Stanford #42 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #45 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #48 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #54 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #57 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #66 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #72 of 128; 2016 Navy #113 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 58 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 28.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #78
Offensive explosiveness. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Pittsburgh #3 of 128; 2016 Penn State #9 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #12 of 128; 2016 Louisville #20 of 128; 2016 LSU #27 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #41 of 128; 2016 Temple #47 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #53 of 128; 2016 Florida State #56 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #63 of 128; 2016 Washington #69 of 128; 2016 Alabama #74 of 128; 2016 Navy #78 of 128; 2016 Stanford #86 of 128; 2016 USC #94 of 128; 2016 Michigan #99 of 128; 2016 Utah #104 of 128; 2016 Clemson #107 of 128; 2016 Auburn #110 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #111 of 128; 2016 Colorado #112 of 128; 2016 Florida #114 of 128; 2016 Wisconsin #117 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #121 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #123 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 126 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 78.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #71
Defensive explosiveness. CFP Top 25, 2016, best rank first: 2016 Wisconsin #7 of 128; 2016 Colorado #11 of 128; 2016 LSU #13 of 128; 2016 West Virginia #23 of 128; 2016 Ohio State #28 of 128; 2016 Auburn #41 of 128; 2016 Florida #43 of 128; 2016 Tennessee #51 of 128; 2016 Temple #59 of 128; 2016 Clemson #63 of 128; 2016 Alabama #65 of 128; 2016 Washington #69 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma State #71 of 128; 2016 Virginia Tech #74 of 128; 2016 Penn State #80 of 128; 2016 Navy #93 of 128; 2016 Stanford #94 of 128; 2016 Michigan #97 of 128; 2016 Utah #103 of 128; 2016 Oklahoma #104 of 128; 2016 Western Michigan #105 of 128; 2016 Louisville #106 of 128; 2016 Florida State #111 of 128; 2016 USC #118 of 128; 2016 Pittsburgh #120 of 128. Marked: 2016 Texas, ranked 60 of 128. CFP Top 25 median rank 71.