Metrics

UCFKnights

Season
Current

Conference USA

Conference USA, 2005

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
2005UCF850 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#33 (of 119 teams · 401.3 yds/g · 5,217 yards)#47 (of 119 teams · 28.7 pts/g · 373 points)#101 (of 119 teams · 420.5 yds/g allowed · 5,466 yards)#76 (of 119 teams · 28.7 pts/g allowed · 373 points)#64 (of 119 teams · +0.0 /g · +0 on the season)#14 (of 119 teams · +12 on the season · 36 taken, 24 given · +0.92 /g)#16 (of 119 teams · 19:18 /g · 4h 11m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#38 (of 119 teams · 0.092 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#109 (of 119 teams · 0.153 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#26 (of 119 teams · 43% of plays successful)#85 (of 119 teams · 42% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#103 (of 119 teams · 0.924 average PPA on successful plays)#105 (of 119 teams · 1.088 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
Medianof 12 Conference USA teams in 20050 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. 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.)#57 (Total offense: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #32–#109. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#52 (Scoring offense: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #23–#103. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#53 (Total defense: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #13–#114. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#60 (Scoring defense: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #33–#118. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#59 (Point margin: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #26–#114. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#45 (Turnover margin: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #4–#118. 2 of 12 in the top 10.)#71 (Possession: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #14–#109. 0 of 12 in the top 10.) (No team has a rank for this) (No team has a rank for this) (No team has a rank for this) (No team has a rank for this)#56 (Offensive EPA: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #12–#101. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#62 (Defensive EPA: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #11–#115. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#49 (Offensive success rate: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #10–#110. 1 of 12 in the top 10.)#71 (Defensive success rate: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #17–#111. 0 of 12 in the top 10.)#81 (Offensive explosiveness: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #6–#109. 1 of 12 in the top 10.)#44 (Defensive explosiveness: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range #5–#105. 2 of 12 in the top 10.)
2005East Carolina560 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#41 (of 119 teams · 393.4 yds/g · 4,328 yards)#73 (of 119 teams · 24.3 pts/g · 267 points)#84 (of 119 teams · 402.6 yds/g allowed · 4,428 yards)#79 (of 119 teams · 28.8 pts/g allowed · 317 points)#83 (of 119 teams · -4.5 /g · -50 on the season)#74 (of 119 teams · -3 on the season · 20 taken, 23 given · -0.27 /g)#108 (of 119 teams · 15:57 /g · 2h 55m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#44 (of 119 teams · 0.086 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#84 (of 119 teams · 0.097 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#28 (of 119 teams · 42% of plays successful)#71 (of 119 teams · 41% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#94 (of 119 teams · 0.953 average PPA on successful plays)#47 (of 119 teams · 0.984 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005Houston660 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#57 (of 119 teams · 363.3 yds/g · 4,359 yards)#51 (of 119 teams · 28.1 pts/g · 337 points)#31 (of 119 teams · 331.3 yds/g allowed · 3,975 yards)#69 (of 119 teams · 27.0 pts/g allowed · 324 points)#59 (of 119 teams · +1.1 /g · +13 on the season)#61 (of 119 teams · -1 on the season · 24 taken, 25 given · -0.08 /g)#88 (of 119 teams · 16:55 /g · 3h 23m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#56 (of 119 teams · 0.055 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#11 (of 119 teams · -0.010 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#55 (of 119 teams · 39% of plays successful)#19 (of 119 teams · 35% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#81 (of 119 teams · 0.971 average PPA on successful plays)#79 (of 119 teams · 1.030 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005Marshall470 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#87 (of 119 teams · 328.7 yds/g · 3,616 yards)#103 (of 119 teams · 18.6 pts/g · 204 points)#42 (of 119 teams · 340.3 yds/g allowed · 3,743 yards)#60 (of 119 teams · 25.9 pts/g allowed · 285 points)#93 (of 119 teams · -7.4 /g · -81 on the season)#107 (of 119 teams · -11 on the season · 20 taken, 31 given · -1.00 /g)#46 (of 119 teams · 18:14 /g · 3h 21m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#80 (of 119 teams · 0.019 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#62 (of 119 teams · 0.067 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#49 (of 119 teams · 41% of plays successful)#64 (of 119 teams · 40% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#107 (of 119 teams · 0.895 average PPA on successful plays)#12 (of 119 teams · 0.895 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005Memphis750 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#36 (of 119 teams · 397.9 yds/g · 4,775 yards)#54 (of 119 teams · 27.2 pts/g · 326 points)#85 (of 119 teams · 405.4 yds/g allowed · 4,865 yards)#36 (of 119 teams · 23.0 pts/g allowed · 276 points)#43 (of 119 teams · +4.2 /g · +50 on the season)#21 (of 119 teams · +9 on the season · 24 taken, 15 given · +0.75 /g)#36 (of 119 teams · 18:31 /g · 3h 42m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#33 (of 119 teams · 0.106 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#66 (of 119 teams · 0.072 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#31 (of 119 teams · 42% of plays successful)#76 (of 119 teams · 41% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#99 (of 119 teams · 0.940 average PPA on successful plays)#35 (of 119 teams · 0.966 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005Rice1100 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#80 (of 119 teams · 337.4 yds/g · 3,712 yards)#87 (of 119 teams · 21.9 pts/g · 241 points)#114 (of 119 teams · 454.6 yds/g allowed · 5,000 yards)#118 (of 119 teams · 40.6 pts/g allowed · 447 points)#114 (of 119 teams · -18.7 /g · -206 on the season)#118 (of 119 teams · -20 on the season · 11 taken, 31 given · -1.82 /g)#20 (of 119 teams · 19:07 /g · 3h 30m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#82 (of 119 teams · 0.017 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#115 (of 119 teams · 0.171 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#63 (of 119 teams · 39% of plays successful)#111 (of 119 teams · 47% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#109 (of 119 teams · 0.886 average PPA on successful plays)#44 (of 119 teams · 0.981 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005SMU560 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#109 (of 119 teams · 286.4 yds/g · 3,150 yards)#95 (of 119 teams · 20.8 pts/g · 229 points)#53 (of 119 teams · 357.0 yds/g allowed · 3,927 yards)#57 (of 119 teams · 25.4 pts/g allowed · 280 points)#84 (of 119 teams · -4.6 /g · -51 on the season)#27 (of 119 teams · +6 on the season · 26 taken, 20 given · +0.55 /g)#109 (of 119 teams · 15:49 /g · 2h 54m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#78 (of 119 teams · 0.024 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#55 (of 119 teams · 0.057 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#77 (of 119 teams · 37% of plays successful)#100 (of 119 teams · 45% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#71 (of 119 teams · 0.984 average PPA on successful plays)#5 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 0.852 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005Southern Miss750 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#66 (of 119 teams · 357.3 yds/g · 4,288 yards)#41 (of 119 teams · 29.6 pts/g · 355 points)#78 (of 119 teams · 394.1 yds/g allowed · 4,729 yards)#33 (of 119 teams · 22.7 pts/g allowed · 272 points)#33 (of 119 teams · +6.9 /g · +83 on the season)#8 — top 10 (of 119 teams · +14 on the season · 34 taken, 20 given · +1.17 /g)#98 (of 119 teams · 16:24 /g · 3h 17m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#66 (of 119 teams · 0.041 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#94 (of 119 teams · 0.117 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#66 (of 119 teams · 38% of plays successful)#77 (of 119 teams · 41% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#41 (of 119 teams · 1.031 average PPA on successful plays)#99 (of 119 teams · 1.076 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005Tulane290 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#95 (of 119 teams · 320.9 yds/g · 3,530 yards)#93 (of 119 teams · 21.3 pts/g · 234 points)#62 (of 119 teams · 372.1 yds/g allowed · 4,093 yards)#101 (of 119 teams · 31.6 pts/g allowed · 348 points)#101 (of 119 teams · -10.4 /g · -114 on the season)#111 (of 119 teams · -12 on the season · 14 taken, 26 given · -1.09 /g)#71 (of 119 teams · 17:32 /g · 3h 13m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#101 (of 119 teams · -0.004 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#49 (of 119 teams · 0.048 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#110 (of 119 teams · 32% of plays successful)#20 (of 119 teams · 36% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#6 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 1.191 average PPA on successful plays)#90 (of 119 teams · 1.056 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005Tulsa940 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#32 (of 119 teams · 402.2 yds/g · 5,229 yards)#23 (of 119 teams · 33.1 pts/g · 430 points)#48 (of 119 teams · 348.3 yds/g allowed · 4,528 yards)#43 (of 119 teams · 23.5 pts/g allowed · 305 points)#26 (of 119 teams · +9.6 /g · +125 on the season)#4 — top 10 (of 119 teams · +19 on the season · 38 taken, 19 given · +1.46 /g)#14 (of 119 teams · 19:21 /g · 4h 12m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#64 (of 119 teams · 0.045 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#12 (of 119 teams · -0.008 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#81 (of 119 teams · 37% of plays successful)#17 (of 119 teams · 35% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#42 (of 119 teams · 1.030 average PPA on successful plays)#82 (of 119 teams · 1.035 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005UAB560 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#34 (of 119 teams · 400.7 yds/g · 4,408 yards)#52 (of 119 teams · 27.9 pts/g · 307 points)#29 (of 119 teams · 328.0 yds/g allowed · 3,608 yards)#49 (of 119 teams · 24.0 pts/g allowed · 264 points)#44 (of 119 teams · +3.9 /g · +43 on the season)#45 (of 119 teams · +2 on the season · 18 taken, 16 given · +0.18 /g)#97 (of 119 teams · 16:27 /g · 3h 01m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#12 (of 119 teams · 0.146 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#64 (of 119 teams · 0.070 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#10 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 47% of plays successful)#103 (of 119 teams · 45% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#88 (of 119 teams · 0.962 average PPA on successful plays)#7 — top 10 (of 119 teams · 0.860 allowed on opponent successes · lower is better)
2005UTEP840 / 1 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 12 Conference USA teams in 2005. Range 0–0.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.)#81 (of 119 teams · 336.3 yds/g · 4,035 yards)#33 (of 119 teams · 31.8 pts/g · 382 points)#13 (of 119 teams · 299.5 yds/g allowed · 3,594 yards)#61 (of 119 teams · 25.9 pts/g allowed · 311 points)#37 (of 119 teams · +5.9 /g · +71 on the season)#107 (of 119 teams · -12 on the season · 21 taken, 33 given · -1.00 /g)#104 (of 119 teams · 16:13 /g · 3h 15m on the season) (— of last season's passing production returning) (— of last season's receiving production returning) (— of last season's rushing production returning) (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons)#17 (of 119 teams · 0.129 predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted)#30 (of 119 teams · 0.021 allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence)#44 (of 119 teams · 41% of plays successful)#47 (of 119 teams · 38% of opponent plays successful · lower is better)#21 (of 119 teams · 1.077 average PPA on successful plays)#18 (of 119 teams · 0.914 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.

Conference USA, 20052005 UCFConference USA medianVertical position is spacing only — it carries no meaning.
Total offensemedian #57
Total offense. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Tulsa #32 of 119; 2005 UAB #34 of 119; 2005 Memphis #36 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #41 of 119; 2005 Houston #57 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #66 of 119; 2005 Rice #80 of 119; 2005 UTEP #81 of 119; 2005 Marshall #87 of 119; 2005 Tulane #95 of 119; 2005 SMU #109 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 33 of 119. Conference USA median rank 57.
Scoring offensemedian #52
Scoring offense. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Tulsa #23 of 119; 2005 UTEP #33 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #41 of 119; 2005 Houston #51 of 119; 2005 UAB #52 of 119; 2005 Memphis #54 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #73 of 119; 2005 Rice #87 of 119; 2005 Tulane #93 of 119; 2005 SMU #95 of 119; 2005 Marshall #103 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 47 of 119. Conference USA median rank 52.
Total defensemedian #53
Total defense. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 UTEP #13 of 119; 2005 UAB #29 of 119; 2005 Houston #31 of 119; 2005 Marshall #42 of 119; 2005 Tulsa #48 of 119; 2005 SMU #53 of 119; 2005 Tulane #62 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #78 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #84 of 119; 2005 Memphis #85 of 119; 2005 Rice #114 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 101 of 119. Conference USA median rank 53.
Scoring defensemedian #60
Scoring defense. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Southern Miss #33 of 119; 2005 Memphis #36 of 119; 2005 Tulsa #43 of 119; 2005 UAB #49 of 119; 2005 SMU #57 of 119; 2005 Marshall #60 of 119; 2005 UTEP #61 of 119; 2005 Houston #69 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #79 of 119; 2005 Tulane #101 of 119; 2005 Rice #118 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 76 of 119. Conference USA median rank 60.
Point marginmedian #59
Point margin. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Tulsa #26 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #33 of 119; 2005 UTEP #37 of 119; 2005 Memphis #43 of 119; 2005 UAB #44 of 119; 2005 Houston #59 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #83 of 119; 2005 SMU #84 of 119; 2005 Marshall #93 of 119; 2005 Tulane #101 of 119; 2005 Rice #114 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 64 of 119. Conference USA median rank 59.
Turnover marginmedian #45
Turnover margin. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Tulsa #4 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #8 of 119; 2005 Memphis #21 of 119; 2005 SMU #27 of 119; 2005 UAB #45 of 119; 2005 Houston #61 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #74 of 119; 2005 Marshall #107 of 119; 2005 UTEP #107 of 119; 2005 Tulane #111 of 119; 2005 Rice #118 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 14 of 119. Conference USA median rank 45.
Possessionmedian #71
Possession. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Tulsa #14 of 119; 2005 Rice #20 of 119; 2005 Memphis #36 of 119; 2005 Marshall #46 of 119; 2005 Tulane #71 of 119; 2005 Houston #88 of 119; 2005 UAB #97 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #98 of 119; 2005 UTEP #104 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #108 of 119; 2005 SMU #109 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 16 of 119. Conference USA median rank 71.
Returning passing
Returning passing. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: . Marked: 2005 UCF, which has no value for this metric.
Returning receiving
Returning receiving. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: . Marked: 2005 UCF, which has no value for this metric.
Returning rushing
Returning rushing. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: . Marked: 2005 UCF, which has no value for this metric.
Team talent
Team talent. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: . Marked: 2005 UCF, which has no value for this metric.
Offensive EPAmedian #56
Offensive EPA. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 UAB #12 of 119; 2005 UTEP #17 of 119; 2005 Memphis #33 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #44 of 119; 2005 Houston #56 of 119; 2005 Tulsa #64 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #66 of 119; 2005 SMU #78 of 119; 2005 Marshall #80 of 119; 2005 Rice #82 of 119; 2005 Tulane #101 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 38 of 119. Conference USA median rank 56.
Defensive EPAmedian #62
Defensive EPA. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Houston #11 of 119; 2005 Tulsa #12 of 119; 2005 UTEP #30 of 119; 2005 Tulane #49 of 119; 2005 SMU #55 of 119; 2005 Marshall #62 of 119; 2005 UAB #64 of 119; 2005 Memphis #66 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #84 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #94 of 119; 2005 Rice #115 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 109 of 119. Conference USA median rank 62.
Offensive success ratemedian #49
Offensive success rate. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 UAB #10 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #28 of 119; 2005 Memphis #31 of 119; 2005 UTEP #44 of 119; 2005 Marshall #49 of 119; 2005 Houston #55 of 119; 2005 Rice #63 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #66 of 119; 2005 SMU #77 of 119; 2005 Tulsa #81 of 119; 2005 Tulane #110 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 26 of 119. Conference USA median rank 49.
Defensive success ratemedian #71
Defensive success rate. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Tulsa #17 of 119; 2005 Houston #19 of 119; 2005 Tulane #20 of 119; 2005 UTEP #47 of 119; 2005 Marshall #64 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #71 of 119; 2005 Memphis #76 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #77 of 119; 2005 SMU #100 of 119; 2005 UAB #103 of 119; 2005 Rice #111 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 85 of 119. Conference USA median rank 71.
Offensive explosivenessmedian #81
Offensive explosiveness. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 Tulane #6 of 119; 2005 UTEP #21 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #41 of 119; 2005 Tulsa #42 of 119; 2005 SMU #71 of 119; 2005 Houston #81 of 119; 2005 UAB #88 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #94 of 119; 2005 Memphis #99 of 119; 2005 Marshall #107 of 119; 2005 Rice #109 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 103 of 119. Conference USA median rank 81.
Defensive explosivenessmedian #44
Defensive explosiveness. Conference USA, 2005, best rank first: 2005 SMU #5 of 119; 2005 UAB #7 of 119; 2005 Marshall #12 of 119; 2005 UTEP #18 of 119; 2005 Memphis #35 of 119; 2005 Rice #44 of 119; 2005 East Carolina #47 of 119; 2005 Houston #79 of 119; 2005 Tulsa #82 of 119; 2005 Tulane #90 of 119; 2005 Southern Miss #99 of 119. Marked: 2005 UCF, ranked 105 of 119. Conference USA median rank 44.