The trenches
| Pass rush | sack rate | stopped behind the line | faces | sacks allowed | pairing |
|---|
| IU pass rush | 5.3% 9463rd | 11.2% 17923rd | faces UNT | 1.7% 1168th | 3.5% ~1.2 sacks |
| UNT pass rush | 4.1% 7388th | 5.9% 185125th | faces IU | 5.5% 7377th | 4.8% ~1.6 sacks |
sacks from CFBD play-by-play; college has no charted pressure, and these rates are not opponent-adjusted Measured on 7,926 team-games 2022–25: a college line's sacks-allowed rate carries +0.27 into its next game and a defence's sack rate only +0.10 — the line is most of this. The pairing predicts the game's sack rate +0.27, yards per dropback −0.16 and points added per play −0.15. Heaviest quarter of pairings against lightest: 7.8% vs 4.2% sack rate, 6.1 vs 7.2 yards per dropback.
UNT with the ball
| UNT offence vs IU defence | UNT offence | IU defence | rank gap |
|---|
| points added per play | 0.31917th | -0.10717th | 0 |
| success rate | 0.50520th | 0.3003rd | -17 |
| explosiveness (points added on successful plays) | 1.28048th | 1.421129th | +81 |
| rush: points added per play | 0.18841st | -0.13421st | -20 |
| rush: success rate | 0.44673rd | 0.2643rd | -70 |
| rush: explosiveness | 1.05833rd | 1.164128th | +95 |
| pass: points added per play | 0.46721st | -0.03521st | 0 |
| pass: success rate | 0.5728th | 0.35631st | +23 |
| pass: explosiveness | 1.46194th | 1.59889th | -5 |
| standard downs: success rate | 0.55820th | 0.3292nd | -18 |
| passing downs: success rate | 0.37628th | 0.25041st | +13 |
| line yards per rush (the O-line) | 3.27146th | 2.26212th | -34 |
| rushes stopped at or behind the line | 0.16564th | 0.236112th | +48 |
| short-yardage conversion rate | 0.75069th | 0.5007th | -62 |
| points per trip inside the 40 | 4.41938th | 2.85738th | 0 |
| havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play) | 0.11328th | 0.198115th | +87 |
| havoc allowed by the front seven | 0.06929th | 0.169132nd | +103 |
| havoc allowed by the secondary | 0.04552nd | 0.0303rd | -49 |
| average starting field position (yards from own goal) | 70.10077th | — | — |
IU with the ball
| IU offence vs UNT defence | IU offence | UNT defence | rank gap |
|---|
| points added per play | 0.4215th | 0.11992nd | +87 |
| success rate | 0.51018th | 0.445113th | +95 |
| explosiveness (points added on successful plays) | 1.38220th | 1.22669th | +49 |
| rush: points added per play | 0.25622nd | -0.04340th | +18 |
| rush: success rate | 0.47443rd | 0.41277th | +34 |
| rush: explosiveness | 1.02246th | 0.72419th | -27 |
| pass: points added per play | 0.6862nd | 0.453130th | +128 |
| pass: success rate | 0.5736th | 0.505131st | +125 |
| pass: explosiveness | 1.87710th | 1.846129th | +119 |
| standard downs: success rate | 0.55819th | 0.48193rd | +74 |
| passing downs: success rate | 0.37926th | 0.352122nd | +96 |
| line yards per rush (the O-line) | 3.50719th | 2.48329th | +10 |
| rushes stopped at or behind the line | 0.11813th | 0.19674th | +61 |
| short-yardage conversion rate | 0.72085th | 0.70461st | -24 |
| points per trip inside the 40 | 5.2417th | 3.875107th | +100 |
| havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play) | 0.10922nd | 0.15051st | +29 |
| havoc allowed by the front seven | 0.08154th | 0.10682nd | +28 |
| havoc allowed by the secondary | 0.02811th | 0.04325th | +14 |
| average starting field position (yards from own goal) | 66.900121st | — | — |
Rank gap = the defence's FBS rank minus the offence's on the same measure: +60 means the offence ranks 60 places better than the defence it faces. Unit against unit only — college has no player charting to name a matchup by.