The trenches
| Pass rush | sack rate | stopped behind the line | faces | sacks allowed | pairing |
|---|
| UNM pass rush | 5.8% 8651st | 13.3% 17310th | faces CMU | 9.3% 54122nd | 7.5% ~2.5 sacks |
| CMU pass rush | 4.3% 9385th | 5.7% 193130th | faces UNM | 14.1% 71134th | 9.2% ~3.0 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.
CMU with the ball
| CMU offence vs UNM defence | CMU offence | UNM defence | rank gap |
|---|
| points added per play | 0.000123rd | -0.1467th | -116 |
| success rate | 0.351129th | 0.32113th | -116 |
| explosiveness (points added on successful plays) | 1.19687th | 1.374116th | +29 |
| rush: points added per play | 0.13568th | -0.14518th | -50 |
| rush: success rate | 0.401102nd | 0.30713th | -89 |
| rush: explosiveness | 1.10722nd | 0.92674th | +52 |
| pass: points added per play | -0.180137th | 0.08658th | -79 |
| pass: success rate | 0.263138th | 0.35128th | -110 |
| pass: explosiveness | 1.423107th | 1.828126th | +19 |
| standard downs: success rate | 0.395131st | 0.36812th | -119 |
| passing downs: success rate | 0.254112th | 0.24736th | -76 |
| line yards per rush (the O-line) | 3.18163rd | 1.9173rd | -60 |
| rushes stopped at or behind the line | 0.12922nd | 0.246119th | +97 |
| short-yardage conversion rate | 0.82625th | 0.5008th | -17 |
| points per trip inside the 40 | 3.000119th | 2.58321st | -98 |
| havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play) | 0.16294th | 0.249137th | +43 |
| havoc allowed by the front seven | 0.09687th | 0.169133rd | +46 |
| havoc allowed by the secondary | 0.06699th | 0.080116th | +17 |
| average starting field position (yards from own goal) | 71.40051st | — | — |
UNM with the ball
| UNM offence vs CMU defence | UNM offence | CMU defence | rank gap |
|---|
| points added per play | 0.16367th | 0.166114th | +47 |
| success rate | 0.41796th | 0.473132nd | +36 |
| explosiveness (points added on successful plays) | 1.23566th | 1.11829th | -37 |
| rush: points added per play | 0.26419th | 0.118104th | +85 |
| rush: success rate | 0.46259th | 0.496133rd | +74 |
| rush: explosiveness | 1.12618th | 0.86243rd | +25 |
| pass: points added per play | -0.021129th | 0.15375th | -54 |
| pass: success rate | 0.337129th | 0.434102nd | -27 |
| pass: explosiveness | 1.54271st | 1.32917th | -54 |
| standard downs: success rate | 0.47390th | 0.522126th | +36 |
| passing downs: success rate | 0.28794th | 0.366126th | +32 |
| line yards per rush (the O-line) | 3.28544th | 3.534137th | +93 |
| rushes stopped at or behind the line | 0.14038th | 0.13514th | -24 |
| short-yardage conversion rate | 0.8898th | 0.933136th | +128 |
| points per trip inside the 40 | 4.27352nd | 3.39370th | +18 |
| havoc allowed (TFL, forced fumbles, breakups per play) | 0.11734th | 0.14442nd | +8 |
| havoc allowed by the front seven | 0.08769th | 0.06814th | -55 |
| havoc allowed by the secondary | 0.03014th | 0.076107th | +93 |
| average starting field position (yards from own goal) | 59.600138th | — | — |
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.