The trenches
| Pass rush | sack rate | stopped behind the line | faces | sacks allowed | pairing |
|---|
| UNT pass rush | 4.1% 7388th | 5.9% 185125th | faces CLT | 3.2% 9334th | 3.7% ~1.2 sacks |
| CLT pass rush | 3.7% 10994th | 11.5% 20921st | faces UNT | 1.7% 1168th | 2.7% ~0.9 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.
CLT with the ball
| CLT offence vs UNT defence | CLT offence | UNT defence | rank gap |
|---|
| points added per play | -0.095134th | 0.11992nd | -42 |
| success rate | 0.362126th | 0.445113th | -13 |
| explosiveness (points added on successful plays) | 1.060132nd | 1.22669th | -63 |
| rush: points added per play | -0.155135th | -0.04340th | -95 |
| rush: success rate | 0.365123rd | 0.41277th | -46 |
| rush: explosiveness | 0.760125th | 0.72419th | -106 |
| pass: points added per play | 0.024118th | 0.453130th | +12 |
| pass: success rate | 0.376112th | 0.505131st | +19 |
| pass: explosiveness | 1.288128th | 1.846129th | +1 |
| standard downs: success rate | 0.444112th | 0.48193rd | -19 |
| passing downs: success rate | 0.205133rd | 0.352122nd | -11 |
| line yards per rush (the O-line) | 2.384137th | 2.48329th | -108 |
| rushes stopped at or behind the line | 0.279137th | 0.19674th | -63 |
| short-yardage conversion rate | 0.571123rd | 0.70461st | -62 |
| points per trip inside the 40 | 2.312133rd | 3.875107th | -26 |
| havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play) | 0.173114th | 0.15051st | -63 |
| havoc allowed by the front seven | 0.103103rd | 0.10682nd | -21 |
| havoc allowed by the secondary | 0.070110th | 0.04325th | -85 |
| average starting field position (yards from own goal) | 73.90017th | — | — |
UNT with the ball
| UNT offence vs CLT defence | UNT offence | CLT defence | rank gap |
|---|
| points added per play | 0.31917th | 0.165113th | +96 |
| success rate | 0.50520th | 0.472129th | +109 |
| explosiveness (points added on successful plays) | 1.28048th | 1.18150th | +2 |
| rush: points added per play | 0.18841st | 0.09794th | +53 |
| rush: success rate | 0.44673rd | 0.43394th | +21 |
| rush: explosiveness | 1.05833rd | 1.102119th | +86 |
| pass: points added per play | 0.46721st | 0.343120th | +99 |
| pass: success rate | 0.5728th | 0.520137th | +129 |
| pass: explosiveness | 1.46194th | 1.29412th | -82 |
| standard downs: success rate | 0.55820th | 0.48295th | +75 |
| passing downs: success rate | 0.37628th | 0.449138th | +110 |
| line yards per rush (the O-line) | 3.27146th | 2.79363rd | +17 |
| rushes stopped at or behind the line | 0.16564th | 0.247120th | +56 |
| short-yardage conversion rate | 0.75069th | 0.800107th | +38 |
| points per trip inside the 40 | 4.41938th | 4.037113th | +75 |
| havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play) | 0.11328th | 0.13736th | +8 |
| havoc allowed by the front seven | 0.06929th | 0.10680th | +51 |
| havoc allowed by the secondary | 0.04552nd | 0.0325th | -47 |
| average starting field position (yards from own goal) | 70.10077th | — | — |
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.