Percentile among the 138 FBS teams on each measure this season, offence and defence, both teams. Raw values, plays behind them and ranks are in the tables below.
What actually happens around a number like this
Each bar is how often a college game lands on that margin, from 7,877 FBS games 2015–2025, centred on our card line. The spread misses by 12.3 points on average (37% within a touchdown). UNT wins about 59% of the time at a number like ours.
UNLV
Games
4
Plays per game
70.2
Drives per game
11.8
SP+
-2.4 (78th, offence 75th, defence 89th)
Returning production
15% (pass 4%, rush 31%, receiving 14%)
UNT
Games
4
Plays per game
72.8
Drives per game
11.2
SP+
-5.7 (91st, offence 47th, defence 120th)
Returning production
3% (pass 2%, rush 3%, receiving 2%)
What each side chooses to do
Offence
UNLV
UNT
pass rate, all downs
47%77th
51%43rd
pass rate, standard downs
40%84th
48%23rd
pass rate, 1st down
38%100th
45%52nd
no-huddle share
36%94th
62%68th
pass rate, passing downs
63%71st
60%87th
pass rate, red zone
37%74th
46%29th
seconds per play (own drives)
27.299th
29.656th
choices, from CFBD play-by-play; a choice repeats within a season, a result mostly does not Rank 1 = highest rate / fastest among FBS.
UNLV offence
UNLV offence
value
plays
FBS rank
points added per play
0.053
281
107 of 138
success rate
0.384
281
118 of 138
explosiveness (points added on successful plays)
1.219
281
73 of 138
rush: points added per play
0.061
281
89 of 138
rush: success rate
0.397
281
106 of 138
rush: explosiveness
0.908
281
83 of 138
pass: points added per play
0.135
281
97 of 138
pass: success rate
0.389
281
102 of 138
pass: explosiveness
1.610
281
53 of 138
standard downs: success rate
0.456
281
104 of 138
passing downs: success rate
0.227
281
127 of 138
line yards per rush (the O-line)
3.219
281
56 of 138
rushes stopped at or behind the line
0.130
281
25 of 138
short-yardage conversion rate
0.667
281
108 of 138
points per trip inside the 40
2.955
281
123 of 138
havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play)
0.157
281
91 of 138
havoc allowed by the front seven
0.096
281
89 of 138
havoc allowed by the secondary
0.060
281
83 of 138
average starting field position (yards from own goal)
72.600
281
40 of 138
UNT offence
UNT offence
value
plays
FBS rank
points added per play
0.319
291
17 of 138
success rate
0.505
291
20 of 138
explosiveness (points added on successful plays)
1.280
291
48 of 138
rush: points added per play
0.188
291
41 of 138
rush: success rate
0.446
291
73 of 138
rush: explosiveness
1.058
291
33 of 138
pass: points added per play
0.467
291
21 of 138
pass: success rate
0.572
291
8 of 138
pass: explosiveness
1.461
291
94 of 138
standard downs: success rate
0.558
291
20 of 138
passing downs: success rate
0.376
291
28 of 138
line yards per rush (the O-line)
3.271
291
46 of 138
rushes stopped at or behind the line
0.165
291
64 of 138
short-yardage conversion rate
0.750
291
69 of 138
points per trip inside the 40
4.419
291
38 of 138
havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play)
0.113
291
28 of 138
havoc allowed by the front seven
0.069
291
29 of 138
havoc allowed by the secondary
0.045
291
52 of 138
average starting field position (yards from own goal)
70.100
291
77 of 138
UNLV defence
UNLV defence
value
plays
FBS rank
points added per play
0.076
267
76 of 138
success rate
0.404
267
76 of 138
explosiveness (points added on successful plays)
1.154
267
43 of 138
rush: points added per play
0.124
267
106 of 138
rush: success rate
0.477
267
127 of 138
rush: explosiveness
0.747
267
23 of 138
pass: points added per play
0.118
267
66 of 138
pass: success rate
0.351
267
29 of 138
pass: explosiveness
1.696
267
110 of 138
standard downs: success rate
0.466
267
84 of 138
passing downs: success rate
0.286
267
79 of 138
line yards per rush (the O-line)
3.606
267
138 of 138
rushes stopped (by this defence) at or behind the line
0.133
267
13 of 138
short-yardage conversion rate
0.833
267
117 of 138
points per trip inside the 40
3.478
267
77 of 138
havoc created (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play)
0.161
267
70 of 138
havoc created by the front seven
0.071
267
20 of 138
havoc created by the secondary
0.090
267
128 of 138
opponent average starting field position
74.700
267
115 of 138
UNT defence
UNT defence
value
plays
FBS rank
points added per play
0.119
254
92 of 138
success rate
0.445
254
113 of 138
explosiveness (points added on successful plays)
1.226
254
69 of 138
rush: points added per play
-0.043
254
40 of 138
rush: success rate
0.412
254
77 of 138
rush: explosiveness
0.724
254
19 of 138
pass: points added per play
0.453
254
130 of 138
pass: success rate
0.505
254
131 of 138
pass: explosiveness
1.846
254
129 of 138
standard downs: success rate
0.481
254
93 of 138
passing downs: success rate
0.352
254
122 of 138
line yards per rush (the O-line)
2.483
254
29 of 138
rushes stopped (by this defence) at or behind the line
0.196
254
74 of 138
short-yardage conversion rate
0.704
254
61 of 138
points per trip inside the 40
3.875
254
107 of 138
havoc created (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play)
0.150
254
51 of 138
havoc created by the front seven
0.106
254
82 of 138
havoc created by the secondary
0.043
254
25 of 138
opponent average starting field position
65.700
254
3 of 138
points added per play: CFBD predicted points added (their EPA); positive helps the offence · success rate: share of plays that gain 50% of needed yards on 1st, 70% on 2nd, 100% on 3rd/4th · explosiveness: average points added on the plays that succeeded - big-play size · havoc: tackles for loss, forced fumbles, interceptions and breakups as a share of plays · rank: 1 = best among FBS teams in the direction that helps that side · fei: bcftoys.com FEI: opponent-adjusted possession efficiency, offence/defence/special teams, with FBS rank - theirs · fplus: bcftoys.com F+: FEI and SP+ combined, in standard deviations above average - theirs