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 54% of the time at a number like ours.
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%)
TULN
Games
4
Plays per game
61.2
Drives per game
11.5
SP+
-7.3 (97th, offence 109th, defence 80th)
Returning production
21% (pass 0%, rush 60%, receiving 28%)
What each side chooses to do
Offence
UNT
TULN
pass rate, all downs
51%43rd
49%61st
pass rate, passing downs
60%87th
61%82nd
no-huddle share
62%68th
69%62nd
pass rate, standard downs
48%23rd
41%73rd
pass rate, 1st down
45%52nd
44%61st
pass rate, red zone
46%29th
32%101st
seconds per play (own drives)
29.656th
26.4113th
choices, from CFBD play-by-play; a choice repeats within a season, a result mostly does not Rank 1 = highest rate / fastest among FBS.
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
TULN offence
TULN offence
value
plays
FBS rank
points added per play
0.103
245
92 of 138
success rate
0.343
245
131 of 138
explosiveness (points added on successful plays)
1.513
245
3 of 138
rush: points added per play
0.161
245
51 of 138
rush: success rate
0.379
245
118 of 138
rush: explosiveness
1.346
245
1 of 138
pass: points added per play
0.020
245
120 of 138
pass: success rate
0.304
245
134 of 138
pass: explosiveness
1.703
245
34 of 138
standard downs: success rate
0.408
245
128 of 138
passing downs: success rate
0.237
245
122 of 138
line yards per rush (the O-line)
2.573
245
129 of 138
rushes stopped at or behind the line
0.218
245
120 of 138
short-yardage conversion rate
0.750
245
72 of 138
points per trip inside the 40
2.474
245
132 of 138
havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play)
0.200
245
133 of 138
havoc allowed by the front seven
0.135
245
133 of 138
havoc allowed by the secondary
0.065
245
98 of 138
average starting field position (yards from own goal)
75.100
245
6 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
TULN defence
TULN defence
value
plays
FBS rank
points added per play
0.171
283
115 of 138
success rate
0.396
283
72 of 138
explosiveness (points added on successful plays)
1.306
283
97 of 138
rush: points added per play
0.112
283
101 of 138
rush: success rate
0.370
283
48 of 138
rush: explosiveness
1.074
283
112 of 138
pass: points added per play
0.300
283
110 of 138
pass: success rate
0.443
283
107 of 138
pass: explosiveness
1.546
283
69 of 138
standard downs: success rate
0.441
283
62 of 138
passing downs: success rate
0.317
283
104 of 138
line yards per rush (the O-line)
3.086
283
106 of 138
rushes stopped (by this defence) at or behind the line
0.162
283
33 of 138
short-yardage conversion rate
0.769
283
97 of 138
points per trip inside the 40
3.308
283
65 of 138
havoc created (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play)
0.110
283
6 of 138
havoc created by the front seven
0.067
283
11 of 138
havoc created by the secondary
0.042
283
24 of 138
opponent average starting field position
72.700
283
86 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