Offense vs Defense

Let's talk about some of the questions that are an entrance ramp to one of the biggest circular arguments in college football. If a defense holds an offense to 3 points, is it because they're a good defense, or is it because they played a bad offense? At the same time, if an offense scores 70, is it because they're good or because the D is bad? How do you know whether you're watching good defense or bad offense, or whether you're watching bad defense or good offense? Or is it somewhere in between? Or both?

I'm pretty convinced that statistically, there's no way to definitively tell. But I've started to work towards a method to sort out some of the shades of grey, distinguishing over the course of a whole season where the good and bad offenses and defenses are.

For lack of a better term, I'll call this a team's Off.A and Def.A - Offensive Ability and Defensive Ability. It's based on two easy to study statistics: yards and points. A lot of posts about statistics that use yards and points simply go by the amount of them that teams rack up or allow per game. You know the abbreviations - YPG (yards per game) & PPG (points per game). For my purposes, dYPG and dPPG are the defensive statistics. A lot of people swear by these, and they're easy to calculate and understand, but they have one major flaw - they don't take opponent's strength into account.

A statistic that's just as easy to calculate that DOES take opponent's strength into account is the one I'm presenting here. It's designated by percentage, as in YPG%, PPG%, dYPG%, and dPPG%. What is it? It's the percentage of yards or points that a team gains or allows compared to their opponent's average.

Let's look at a specific and good example from this year - Texas Tech. Here's a breakdown of all their games from this year.

Texas Tech, 2008
oConf	Opponent	dYPG	dPPG	YPG	PPG	Yds	Pts	dYds	dPts	Yds%	Pts%	dYds%	dPts%
zAA	Eastern Washington	452.4	41.8	248.7	11.5	639	49	364	24	141%	117%	146%	209%
WAC	Nevada	393.3	31.2	512.6	39.5	421	35	488	19	107%	112%	95%	48%
CUSA	SMU	460.1	37.7	318.0	22.6	693	43	274	7	151%	114%	86%	31%
zAA	Massachusetts	452.4	41.8	248.7	11.5	538	56	258	14	119%	134%	104%	122%
Big12	Kansas State	465.7	33.8	411.7	35.5	626	58	296	28	134%	172%	72%	79%
Big12	Nebraska	356.1	28.5	457.1	36.6	421	37	471	31	118%	130%	103%	85%
Big12	Texas A&M	452.9	36.9	344.1	25.0	561	43	306	25	124%	117%	89%	100%
Big12	Kansas	388.2	26.5	441.8	33.7	556	63	315	21	143%	238%	71%	62%
Big12	Texas	318.2	16.7	485.7	44.9	579	39	374	33	182%	233%	77%	73%
Big12	Oklahoma State	370.7	24.3	500.3	43.5	629	56	368	20	170%	231%	74%	46%
Big12	Oklahoma	355.2	24.8	556.8	53.1	406	21	625	65	114%	85%	112%	122%
Big12	Baylor	395.7	28.8	381.5	28.0	365	35	320	28	92%	121%	84%	100%
-	Averages	405.1	31.1	408.9	31.1	536.2	44.6	371.6	26.3	133%	150%	93%	90%

Let's look at the Red Raiders' second game of the season, @ Nevada. Against their non-Texas Tech opponents, Nevada's D gave up an average of 393.3 yards per game. Texas Tech gained 421 yards on them, which was 107% of Nevada's average (393.3/421). The Red Raiders scored 35 points, which was 112% of Nevada's average of 31.2 against their other opponents. Texas Tech's D gave up 488 yards, which was 95% of Nevada's average of 512.6, and 19 points, which was just 48% of Nevada's average of 39.5. See how it works? By comparing a team's performance against their opponent's opponent's average, we get a better measure of their overall offensive or defensive ability.

As you might have noticed, on offense a higher percentage is better - you want to score more than your opponent usually allows. On defense, a lower percentage is better - you want to allow less yards and points than your opponent usually gains and scores. In the case of Texas Tech vs Nevada, the Red Raider's offense was decent, gaining just above the average that Nevada allowed to all their other opponents. Their yardage D was average too, allowing 95% of the yards that Nevada gained against their other opponents. But their scoring D was great, allowing only 19 points when Nevada averaged 39.5 against their other opponents (48%).

(A quick note about games against I-AA foes - they had to be included, so I took the average of how they all did against their BCS and non-BCS conference opponents respectively. So the 248.7 YPG and 11.5 PPG for Eastern Washington & Massachusetts was the average of how I-AA teams did against BCS conference teams this year.)

So now that we've got that groundwork set, let's go to the big table. Here's how to read it: in looking at Florida this year, they averaged 442.4 YPG, which was 142% of the yardage per game that their opponents usually allowed. They averaged 45.2 PPG, which was a whopping 219% of what their opponents usually allowed. Their dYPG was decent, but not great - they allowed 83% of what their opponents usually gained, but their dPPG was stellar, allowing only 54% of the points their opponents usually scored. The Off.A column is an average of the YPG% & PPG%, and the Def.A column is an average of the dYPG% & dPPG%. The last column, Total.A, is the difference between offense and defense. So Florida had the offensive ability to gain an average of 180% more offense against their opponents than their opponents usually allowed, and Florida had the defensive ability to allow just 68% of the average offense than their opponents usually gained. Their total of 112% is the biggest difference among teams this season, showing that in any given game, GENERALLY, it was more likely a matter of Florida's offense and defense playing well rather than their opponents defense and offense playing poorly. The closer the Off.A or Def.A percentages is to 100%, the more of a balance between good offense/bad defense and bad offense/good defense there is.

(As usual, the columns are soratable, so click on the headers to sort around. The Total.A column doesn't sort well though, so just refresh the page to get back to the original sort of total ability.)

Offense vs Defense
Year	Conf	Team	YPG	YPG%	PPG	PPG%	dYPG	dYPG%	dPPG	dPPG%	Off.A	Def.A	Total.A
2008	SEC	Florida	442.4	142%	45.2	219%	279.3	083%	12.8	054%	180%	068%	112%
2008	Big12	Oklahoma	562.1	156%	54.0	224%	359.1	087%	24.5	075%	190%	081%	109%
2008	Pac10	USC	453.1	133%	37.5	158%	206.1	059%	7.8	027%	146%	043%	103%
2008	Big10	Penn St	452.2	127%	40.2	165%	263.9	075%	12.4	051%	146%	063%	083%
2008	SEC	Alabama	367.2	116%	31.2	150%	256.9	072%	13.0	047%	133%	059%	074%
2008	Big12	Texas	476.4	119%	43.9	154%	339.9	076%	18.6	051%	136%	064%	073%
2008	MtnWest	TCU	417.1	111%	35.0	126%	215.1	056%	10.9	038%	118%	047%	071%
2008	WAC	Boise St	456.8	119%	39.4	135%	294.5	079%	12.3	043%	127%	061%	066%
2008	Pac10	Oregon	478.2	145%	41.9	186%	383.0	108%	28.0	105%	166%	106%	059%
2008	Pac10	Oregon St	418.3	129%	32.8	159%	323.3	088%	25.0	086%	144%	087%	057%
2008	SEC	Mississippi	398.7	123%	30.8	147%	293.8	086%	17.8	074%	135%	080%	054%
2008	Big10	Ohio St	339.7	100%	28.2	123%	279.3	072%	13.1	044%	111%	058%	053%
2008	Big12	Missouri	497.5	128%	43.2	154%	414.2	099%	27.5	078%	141%	088%	053%
2008	Big10	Iowa	373.9	104%	30.0	123%	289.5	079%	13.3	048%	114%	063%	050%
2008	Big12	Texas Tech	536.2	133%	44.6	150%	371.6	093%	26.3	090%	142%	091%	050%
2008	Big12	Oklahoma St	489.3	127%	41.6	148%	392.3	093%	26.9	084%	137%	089%	049%
2008	MtnWest	Utah	405.3	112%	37.4	141%	295.9	083%	17.3	073%	127%	078%	048%
2008	SEC	Georgia	433.9	139%	32.1	158%	318.3	096%	25.6	106%	148%	101%	047%
2008	MAC	Ball St	459.4	120%	36.6	134%	347.9	096%	18.6	074%	127%	085%	042%
2008	ACC	Florida St	368.7	109%	32.7	142%	291.8	088%	20.8	081%	126%	085%	041%
2008	Big12	Nebraska	458.3	121%	36.2	138%	361.5	091%	29.2	092%	129%	091%	038%
2008	BigEast	Rutgers	395.2	117%	29.0	125%	323.9	093%	18.5	072%	121%	082%	038%
2008	BigEast	Pittsburgh	356.2	107%	29.3	142%	320.8	088%	23.0	090%	125%	089%	036%
2008	Pac10	Arizona	401.3	111%	37.1	136%	302.1	085%	21.3	092%	123%	088%	035%
2008	CUSA	Tulsa	565.1	141%	47.4	158%	391.2	109%	29.1	126%	149%	117%	032%
2008	CUSA	Houston	575.1	145%	41.2	141%	418.6	109%	31.2	114%	143%	111%	032%
2008	Pac10	California	379.2	106%	33.3	122%	315.4	088%	20.2	080%	114%	084%	030%
2008	SunBelt	Troy	421.4	108%	33.3	112%	319.6	086%	20.6	075%	110%	080%	029%
2008	Big10	Illinois	438.8	125%	28.7	127%	350.3	094%	26.6	099%	126%	097%	029%
2008	WAC	Nevada	510.6	136%	37.8	144%	395.6	106%	31.5	117%	140%	111%	029%
2008	MtnWest	BYU	444.8	124%	35.3	129%	350.9	106%	21.2	093%	127%	099%	027%
2008	SEC	LSU	371.8	113%	30.3	131%	326.5	091%	25.9	105%	122%	098%	024%
2008	ACC	Boston College	318.5	096%	25.5	117%	273.4	085%	18.5	079%	106%	082%	024%
2008	BigEast	Cincinnati	375.3	105%	27.3	106%	316.1	085%	20.2	077%	105%	081%	024%
2008	ACC	Georgia Tech	377.3	117%	26.2	114%	312.7	100%	18.8	083%	115%	092%	024%
2008	Big10	Michigan St	352.4	104%	26.2	117%	357.9	096%	21.9	080%	110%	088%	022%
2008	Big12	Kansas	431.3	114%	32.7	117%	402.2	097%	29.5	090%	115%	093%	022%
2008	ACC	Clemson	339.3	100%	25.5	105%	294.8	093%	16.6	072%	102%	082%	020%
2008	BigEast	South Florida	397.4	112%	26.5	098%	291.8	085%	20.5	085%	105%	085%	020%
2008	ACC	Wake Forest	300.3	091%	22.5	104%	300.3	090%	16.1	067%	098%	079%	019%
2008	BigEast	Connecticut	351.8	099%	23.8	099%	281.4	082%	19.8	079%	099%	080%	019%
2008	CUSA	Southern Miss	434.5	113%	30.7	110%	369.3	099%	23.8	089%	112%	094%	018%
2008	MtnWest	Air Force	348.8	093%	26.7	103%	335.3	088%	21.3	074%	098%	081%	017%
2008	Indy	Navy	361.7	101%	27.8	122%	341.8	103%	21.4	090%	111%	096%	015%
2008	BigEast	West Virginia	352.5	102%	24.0	101%	325.5	099%	15.9	074%	101%	086%	015%
2008	ACC	Virginia Tech	296.2	087%	22.2	098%	277.1	083%	17.5	071%	092%	077%	015%
2008	SEC	South Carolina	316.8	094%	21.7	096%	288.9	083%	20.3	079%	095%	081%	014%
2008	Big10	Wisconsin	404.8	113%	28.7	115%	322.3	092%	25.3	109%	114%	100%	014%
2008	MAC	N. Illinois	334.8	087%	25.3	087%	303.7	082%	18.1	068%	087%	075%	013%
2008	MAC	W. Michigan	422.7	110%	29.8	104%	390.3	104%	23.8	087%	107%	095%	012%
2008	ACC	North Carolina	317.3	097%	27.5	135%	357.9	111%	20.3	100%	116%	106%	011%
2008	Pac10	Stanford	351.8	111%	26.3	125%	379.6	110%	27.4	107%	118%	109%	010%
2008	ACC	Miami (FL)	327.1	094%	27.9	119%	315.8	096%	24.2	103%	107%	099%	007%
2008	Big10	Northwestern	357.0	100%	24.5	101%	343.0	104%	19.3	083%	100%	093%	007%
2008	CUSA	Rice	472.3	123%	41.6	142%	466.8	121%	34.9	132%	133%	126%	006%
2008	MAC	Buffalo	380.5	100%	31.1	122%	408.3	108%	27.5	102%	111%	105%	006%
2008	MAC	Bowling Green	359.8	099%	27.7	102%	343.4	094%	23.2	096%	100%	095%	005%
2008	CUSA	Memphis	432.2	114%	28.3	100%	341.9	095%	26.0	108%	107%	102%	005%
2008	MtnWest	New Mexico	339.6	093%	21.1	074%	335.8	085%	22.8	074%	084%	079%	004%
2008	SEC	Tennessee	268.8	081%	17.3	077%	263.5	078%	16.8	072%	079%	075%	004%
2008	CUSA	East Carolina	336.0	091%	23.8	092%	334.8	089%	20.8	087%	091%	088%	003%
2008	SunBelt	Arkansas St	398.8	101%	27.0	084%	336.5	091%	23.8	091%	092%	091%	001%
2008	Big10	Purdue	374.4	107%	24.7	096%	358.1	100%	25.1	103%	101%	102%	000%
2008	Big12	Baylor	376.4	097%	28.0	096%	393.2	098%	29.3	096%	096%	097%	-001%
2008	Indy	Notre Dame	344.8	096%	22.7	088%	327.5	098%	22.3	088%	092%	093%	-001%
2008	SEC	Vanderbilt	260.9	079%	19.4	088%	318.7	092%	20.1	081%	083%	086%	-003%
2008	SEC	Kentucky	298.4	089%	22.4	092%	327.0	099%	21.7	089%	090%	094%	-004%
2008	MAC	C. Michigan	427.1	115%	30.3	116%	424.3	116%	30.8	123%	116%	120%	-004%
2008	ACC	Virginia	299.8	094%	16.1	082%	333.3	100%	21.7	087%	088%	093%	-005%
2008	SEC	Auburn	302.9	089%	17.3	068%	317.8	092%	18.0	078%	078%	085%	-007%
2008	SunBelt	LA-Lafayette	449.2	113%	33.1	111%	429.6	112%	33.7	126%	112%	119%	-007%
2008	MAC	Akron	396.7	109%	30.0	113%	397.6	111%	31.3	125%	111%	118%	-007%
2008	Pac10	Arizona St	309.4	084%	22.8	075%	335.2	093%	22.7	082%	079%	088%	-008%
2008	Big10	Minnesota	322.3	092%	23.4	101%	378.4	110%	23.3	099%	096%	104%	-008%
2008	CUSA	UTEP	406.5	104%	32.9	119%	469.8	117%	37.0	123%	111%	120%	-009%
2008	BigEast	Louisville	376.7	109%	24.7	098%	368.8	105%	29.8	123%	104%	114%	-010%
2008	SEC	Arkansas	373.1	114%	21.9	097%	375.2	105%	31.2	127%	106%	116%	-010%
2008	WAC	Hawaii	344.8	092%	24.9	085%	351.8	095%	27.3	103%	088%	099%	-010%
2008	WAC	Fresno St	383.3	107%	29.2	107%	393.5	111%	30.3	126%	107%	118%	-011%
2008	MAC	Temple	298.1	080%	23.4	084%	388.0	102%	23.1	085%	082%	094%	-011%
2008	Big10	Michigan	290.8	086%	20.3	095%	366.9	099%	28.9	108%	090%	103%	-013%
2008	ACC	Duke	303.8	089%	20.1	095%	356.9	114%	23.4	098%	092%	106%	-014%
2008	ACC	NC State	326.3	101%	23.5	111%	387.1	121%	26.1	119%	106%	120%	-014%
2008	Big12	Kansas St	402.1	098%	34.9	106%	479.1	118%	35.8	114%	102%	116%	-014%
2008	ACC	Maryland	341.9	103%	17.9	078%	355.0	109%	23.6	101%	090%	105%	-015%
2008	WAC	San Jose St	282.8	069%	18.7	061%	311.7	083%	21.6	078%	065%	080%	-015%
2008	MAC	Kent St	400.3	107%	25.7	095%	395.2	110%	31.7	122%	101%	116%	-016%
2008	SunBelt	Florida Intl	316.9	084%	24.7	086%	369.1	097%	28.3	107%	085%	102%	-017%
2008	Pac10	UCLA	283.3	081%	17.7	072%	337.4	090%	29.0	101%	077%	096%	-019%
2008	MtnWest	Colorado St	377.3	105%	23.9	093%	408.1	113%	29.8	123%	099%	118%	-019%
2008	SunBelt	Florida Atl	391.5	101%	25.2	086%	402.1	112%	29.3	114%	094%	113%	-019%
2008	MAC	Ohio	361.4	093%	24.1	084%	348.6	097%	27.3	118%	089%	108%	-019%
2008	WAC	Louisiana Tech	352.0	092%	25.3	080%	379.7	107%	24.8	104%	086%	106%	-020%
2008	MtnWest	UNLV	345.0	096%	25.6	106%	423.2	116%	32.6	127%	101%	121%	-020%
2008	Big12	Colorado	318.5	080%	20.2	071%	381.6	096%	29.3	098%	076%	097%	-021%
2008	SunBelt	Middle TN St	348.6	092%	22.8	077%	366.3	106%	24.9	108%	085%	107%	-022%
2008	WAC	Utah St	334.3	089%	24.0	088%	412.7	106%	34.7	116%	088%	111%	-023%
2008	CUSA	Marshall	330.4	088%	20.5	074%	418.1	107%	27.7	103%	081%	105%	-024%
2008	MAC	Toledo	334.1	089%	22.4	077%	381.4	102%	31.4	114%	083%	108%	-025%
2008	Big12	Texas A&M	340.9	089%	25.0	092%	461.9	116%	37.4	118%	091%	117%	-026%
2008	CUSA	Central Florida	229.5	059%	16.6	060%	333.8	089%	24.1	084%	059%	086%	-027%
2008	MAC	E. Michigan	417.5	111%	25.8	098%	408.6	116%	35.6	155%	104%	135%	-031%
2008	SEC	Mississippi St	274.9	080%	15.3	059%	327.5	097%	24.7	107%	070%	102%	-032%
2008	MtnWest	Wyoming	296.0	084%	12.7	048%	329.7	093%	27.8	104%	066%	099%	-033%
2008	WAC	New Mexico St	355.6	092%	22.2	073%	379.6	101%	34.1	133%	083%	117%	-034%
2008	Big10	Indiana	348.2	097%	20.5	083%	432.2	116%	35.3	134%	090%	125%	-035%
2008	CUSA	UAB	366.2	099%	22.8	078%	429.9	119%	31.3	128%	089%	123%	-035%
2008	Indy	Army	287.7	070%	14.8	046%	339.5	093%	23.7	093%	058%	093%	-035%
2008	Big12	Iowa St	386.8	095%	25.3	079%	452.8	119%	35.8	128%	087%	124%	-036%
2008	CUSA	Tulane	339.7	087%	16.7	056%	391.3	096%	34.5	132%	072%	114%	-042%
2008	BigEast	Syracuse	270.2	078%	18.1	077%	414.5	115%	32.7	130%	078%	122%	-044%
2008	SunBelt	LA-Monroe	337.3	088%	23.7	079%	444.7	124%	31.2	136%	083%	130%	-046%
2008	MAC	Miami (OH)	326.0	089%	18.4	071%	395.5	117%	32.7	143%	080%	130%	-050%
2008	CUSA	SMU	314.3	083%	21.3	072%	479.5	118%	38.2	140%	077%	129%	-052%
2008	Indy	W. Kentucky	286.1	074%	17.5	054%	375.3	110%	27.2	123%	064%	116%	-053%
2008	Pac10	Washington	263.2	077%	13.3	053%	451.8	120%	38.6	132%	065%	126%	-062%
2008	SunBelt	North Texas	363.0	093%	20.0	072%	482.6	127%	47.6	175%	082%	151%	-069%
2008	WAC	Idaho	320.9	084%	19.6	069%	472.0	135%	42.8	174%	076%	154%	-078%
2008	MtnWest	San Diego St	312.4	084%	19.3	069%	460.8	139%	37.2	178%	076%	158%	-082%
2008	Pac10	Washington St	241.1	063%	12.7	042%	443.4	123%	43.8	158%	053%	141%	-088%

Looks pretty similar to the final regular season rankings, huh? Yeah, but I wouldn't trust them too much just yet. This is just a different way of looking at a team and how they performed over the whole season, and is probably most effective when used in conjunction with other stats and rankings.

So how do the teams from this year rank against the teams from past years? Here's the data from the previous 8 seasons. (But remember, the 2008 numbers don't include bowl games yet - the 2000-2007 number include the bowl games. I'll re-post a comparison in January after the bowls.)

The Oklahoma and Florida offenses rank #1 and #3 over the last 9 seasons, so we can probably expect a huge amount of offense in the title game this year. Vince Young's 2005 Texas team is at #2, while the Leinart & Bush USC 2005 team is at #4 - and that was a hell of a game. Another team of note is the Oregon squad from this year, coming in at #3 behind Oklahoma & Florida in 2008 and #10 overall. An amazing stat considering all the QB problems they had this year - they found a way to get it done. When they lost, it was most likely due to their D, which allowed more than 100% of their opponent's average in both yards & points.

The Best Offenses, 2000-2008
Year	Conf	Team	YPG	YPG%	PPG	PPG%	dYPG	dYPG%	dPPG	dPPG%	Off.A	Def.A	Total.A
2008	Big12	Oklahoma	562.1	156%	54.0	224%	359.1	087%	24.5	075%	190%	081%	109%
2005	Big12	Texas	512.1	150%	50.2	227%	302.9	075%	16.4	055%	188%	065%	123%
2008	SEC	Florida	442.4	142%	45.2	219%	279.3	083%	12.8	054%	180%	068%	112%
2005	Pac10	USC	579.8	155%	49.1	203%	360.9	084%	22.8	069%	179%	077%	102%
2006	WAC	Hawaii	559.2	159%	46.9	183%	377.8	110%	24.1	100%	171%	105%	066%
2001	SEC	Florida	536.8	148%	44.8	193%	294.8	072%	14.8	054%	171%	063%	108%
2001	BigEast	Miami (FL)	456.3	138%	42.7	200%	267.8	074%	9.8	033%	169%	053%	115%
2005	BigEast	Louisville	482.1	143%	43.4	194%	324.0	096%	23.8	105%	169%	101%	068%
2006	BigEast	West Virginia	461.4	141%	38.8	192%	336.6	100%	21.7	088%	166%	094%	072%
2008	Pac10	Oregon	478.2	145%	41.9	186%	383.0	108%	28.0	105%	166%	106%	059%
2003	Big12	Texas Tech	582.8	158%	42.5	169%	453.4	119%	34.0	118%	163%	119%	045%
2006	MtnWest	BYU	465.5	150%	36.8	176%	319.2	098%	14.7	064%	163%	081%	082%
2002	BigEast	Miami (FL)	465.8	138%	40.5	186%	285.0	079%	19.1	080%	162%	080%	083%
2006	BigEast	Louisville	475.3	143%	37.8	180%	320.5	098%	16.3	063%	161%	080%	081%
2000	ACC	Florida St	529.8	151%	39.3	171%	275.5	070%	10.5	037%	161%	054%	107%
2000	BigEast	Miami (FL)	459.6	132%	42.2	187%	342.5	089%	15.8	060%	160%	075%	085%
2002	Big12	Texas Tech	488.2	143%	38.4	175%	403.5	109%	31.4	108%	159%	109%	050%
2004	CUSA	Louisville	539.0	138%	49.8	179%	305.9	079%	19.7	064%	159%	071%	087%
2004	MtnWest	Utah	499.8	132%	45.3	179%	343.4	095%	19.5	082%	156%	088%	067%
2004	Pac10	USC	449.1	130%	38.2	182%	279.3	072%	13.0	048%	156%	060%	096%
2007	SEC	LSU	439.4	127%	38.6	183%	288.8	074%	19.9	067%	155%	071%	084%
2003	Pac10	USC	447.5	130%	41.1	177%	336.4	088%	18.4	073%	153%	080%	073%
2007	SEC	Florida	457.2	127%	42.5	179%	361.8	095%	25.5	090%	153%	093%	060%
2000	BigEast	Virginia Tech	423.7	118%	40.3	186%	321.9	081%	22.4	076%	152%	079%	073%
2000	SEC	Florida	420.5	128%	36.0	176%	353.7	090%	21.0	076%	152%	083%	069%
2002	Pac10	USC	449.2	134%	35.8	168%	284.9	073%	18.5	058%	151%	065%	086%
2004	WAC	Boise St	492.7	129%	48.9	171%	357.8	092%	25.7	089%	150%	090%	060%
2003	MAC	Miami (OH)	501.1	134%	43.0	166%	341.1	086%	19.4	073%	150%	080%	070%
2008	CUSA	Tulsa	565.1	141%	47.4	158%	391.2	109%	29.1	126%	149%	117%	032%
2003	Big10	Minnesota	494.6	137%	38.7	162%	340.4	095%	21.9	087%	149%	091%	058%
2007	BigEast	West Virginia	456.2	124%	39.6	173%	301.7	076%	18.1	063%	149%	070%	079%
2000	Big12	Nebraska	474.6	126%	43.5	172%	325.3	087%	19.2	068%	149%	078%	071%
2001	ACC	Florida St	423.6	130%	33.6	167%	349.9	088%	25.3	082%	148%	085%	063%
2004	Big12	Texas Tech	491.7	140%	36.2	157%	357.0	092%	26.2	093%	148%	093%	056%
2003	Big12	Oklahoma	439.4	120%	42.9	177%	259.6	067%	15.3	054%	148%	060%	088%
2008	SEC	Georgia	433.9	139%	32.1	158%	318.3	096%	25.6	106%	148%	101%	047%
2000	Big10	Northwestern	466.3	128%	36.8	167%	427.1	108%	33.3	117%	148%	112%	035%
2000	Big12	Oklahoma	416.0	124%	37.0	171%	280.5	073%	14.9	050%	147%	062%	086%
2001	MtnWest	BYU	521.4	132%	44.1	162%	436.4	116%	30.3	122%	147%	119%	027%
2001	Big12	Nebraska	434.4	128%	35.6	165%	301.4	080%	17.4	060%	146%	070%	076%
2008	Big10	Penn St	452.2	127%	40.2	165%	263.9	075%	12.4	051%	146%	063%	083%
2008	Pac10	USC	453.1	133%	37.5	158%	206.1	059%	7.8	027%	146%	043%	103%
2004	Pac10	California	492.4	138%	36.8	153%	320.9	083%	16.0	056%	145%	070%	076%
2005	Big10	Minnesota	494.8	137%	35.8	152%	412.7	103%	29.0	100%	145%	102%	043%
2007	Pac10	Oregon	467.5	131%	38.2	158%	382.0	096%	23.6	084%	145%	090%	055%
2005	Big12	Texas Tech	495.8	141%	39.4	148%	335.8	097%	18.8	078%	144%	088%	057%
2008	Pac10	Oregon St	418.3	129%	32.8	159%	323.3	088%	25.0	086%	144%	087%	057%
2006	Big10	Ohio St	384.5	118%	34.6	169%	280.5	077%	12.8	050%	144%	063%	080%
2001	MAC	Marshall	513.9	137%	39.4	150%	421.1	114%	28.4	107%	143%	110%	033%
2000	Big12	Kansas St	416.9	118%	39.2	169%	271.9	071%	18.6	065%	143%	068%	075%

As far as defense goes, we knew this year's USC squad was stellar, but they're also the best since 1999, statistically. And it's not even close - their 7.8 dPPG average is 2 whole points less than the second best D, the 2001 Miami (FL) squad, and they're allowing just 27% of the points that their opponents usually score. TCU is at the top too, #2 this year and #5 overall - Boise State is gonna have their hands full, but the Broncos are actually at #3 this year. Penn State is #4, so we might get very low scoring Rose and Poinsettia Bowls. (At least lower than most are expecting...)

The Best Defenses, 2000-2008
Year	Conf	Team	YPG	YPG%	PPG	PPG%	dYPG	dYPG%	dPPG	dPPG%	Off.A	Def.A	Total.A
2008	Pac10	USC	453.1	133%	37.5	158%	206.1	059%	7.8	027%	146%	043%	103%
2008	MtnWest	TCU	417.1	111%	35.0	126%	215.1	056%	10.9	038%	118%	047%	071%
2007	Big10	Ohio St	393.7	104%	31.4	122%	233.0	057%	12.8	043%	113%	050%	063%
2005	Big10	Ohio St	422.3	109%	32.7	129%	281.3	061%	15.3	044%	119%	052%	066%
2001	BigEast	Miami (FL)	456.3	138%	42.7	200%	267.8	074%	9.8	033%	169%	053%	115%
2000	ACC	Florida St	529.8	151%	39.3	171%	275.5	070%	10.5	037%	161%	054%	107%
2000	WAC	TCU	407.1	104%	35.9	125%	250.5	068%	11.2	042%	115%	055%	059%
2005	SEC	Alabama	358.9	107%	21.9	105%	255.1	072%	10.7	040%	106%	056%	050%
2003	SEC	LSU	418.4	116%	33.9	142%	252.0	068%	11.0	044%	129%	056%	073%
2006	ACC	Virginia Tech	295.2	093%	25.8	127%	219.5	069%	11.0	046%	110%	057%	053%
2008	Big10	Ohio St	339.7	100%	28.2	123%	279.3	072%	13.1	044%	111%	058%	053%
2005	ACC	Virginia Tech	380.9	114%	33.8	158%	247.6	068%	12.9	048%	136%	058%	078%
2002	Big12	Kansas St	423.0	109%	44.8	150%	249.0	070%	11.8	046%	129%	058%	071%
2003	BigEast	Miami (FL)	394.9	104%	27.8	111%	257.5	066%	15.1	051%	107%	058%	049%
2008	SEC	Alabama	367.2	116%	31.2	150%	256.9	072%	13.0	047%	133%	059%	074%
2001	Big12	Oklahoma	354.2	102%	30.5	131%	242.2	068%	13.0	052%	117%	060%	057%
2004	Pac10	USC	449.1	130%	38.2	182%	279.3	072%	13.0	048%	156%	060%	096%
2003	Big12	Oklahoma	439.4	120%	42.9	177%	259.6	067%	15.3	054%	148%	060%	088%
2006	SEC	Florida	396.1	123%	29.7	159%	255.4	071%	13.5	050%	141%	060%	081%
2004	ACC	Virginia Tech	365.5	106%	30.8	138%	268.0	072%	12.8	049%	122%	061%	061%
2008	WAC	Boise St	456.8	119%	39.4	135%	294.5	079%	12.3	043%	127%	061%	066%
2004	SEC	Auburn	420.7	122%	32.1	140%	277.6	076%	11.3	046%	131%	061%	069%
2000	Big12	Oklahoma	416.0	124%	37.0	171%	280.5	073%	14.9	050%	147%	062%	086%
2001	BigEast	Virginia Tech	366.2	106%	31.3	148%	251.1	070%	14.8	054%	127%	062%	065%
2006	SEC	LSU	417.5	128%	33.7	153%	242.8	070%	12.6	053%	141%	062%	079%
2002	SEC	Alabama	403.5	125%	28.2	146%	257.3	069%	15.4	056%	135%	062%	073%
2007	Pac10	USC	434.9	114%	32.6	123%	273.2	069%	16.0	056%	119%	062%	056%
2002	Big10	Ohio St	364.5	095%	29.3	108%	320.9	079%	13.1	046%	101%	062%	039%
2003	Big12	Nebraska	345.0	091%	24.8	099%	297.2	078%	14.5	048%	095%	063%	033%
2004	Big12	Oklahoma	462.1	129%	34.8	145%	299.0	073%	16.8	053%	137%	063%	074%
2006	MtnWest	TCU	408.5	122%	29.2	121%	234.9	071%	12.3	055%	122%	063%	059%
2001	SEC	Florida	536.8	148%	44.8	193%	294.8	072%	14.8	054%	171%	063%	108%
2002	Big12	Oklahoma	392.6	106%	38.6	157%	293.1	076%	15.4	050%	132%	063%	069%
2008	Big10	Iowa	373.9	104%	30.0	123%	289.5	079%	13.3	048%	114%	063%	050%
2003	SEC	Georgia	380.3	116%	26.5	134%	276.9	073%	14.5	053%	125%	063%	061%
2008	Big10	Penn St	452.2	127%	40.2	165%	263.9	075%	12.4	051%	146%	063%	083%
2006	Big10	Michigan	370.8	109%	29.2	154%	268.3	072%	15.9	055%	132%	063%	068%
2006	Big10	Ohio St	384.5	118%	34.6	169%	280.5	077%	12.8	050%	144%	063%	080%
2008	Big12	Texas	476.4	119%	43.9	154%	339.9	076%	18.6	051%	136%	064%	073%
2006	Big10	Wisconsin	373.2	106%	29.2	113%	253.1	074%	12.1	054%	110%	064%	046%
2005	Big12	Texas	512.1	150%	50.2	227%	302.9	075%	16.4	055%	188%	065%	123%
2001	Big12	Kansas St	380.3	112%	27.5	127%	255.9	069%	17.1	061%	119%	065%	054%
2007	Big12	Kansas	479.8	116%	42.8	134%	317.3	079%	16.4	052%	125%	065%	060%
2002	Pac10	USC	449.2	134%	35.8	168%	284.9	073%	18.5	058%	151%	065%	086%
2000	MAC	W. Michigan	400.6	110%	29.9	120%	283.3	080%	11.6	052%	115%	066%	049%
2006	BigEast	Rutgers	345.1	102%	29.8	132%	252.2	073%	14.3	058%	117%	066%	051%
2005	SEC	LSU	374.1	111%	29.5	146%	266.8	074%	14.2	058%	129%	066%	063%
2002	SunBelt	North Texas	284.5	079%	19.2	070%	290.6	078%	14.8	054%	074%	066%	008%
2007	SEC	Auburn	335.2	094%	24.2	094%	297.9	077%	16.9	055%	094%	066%	028%
2001	Big12	Texas	426.4	116%	39.8	152%	251.5	068%	15.9	064%	134%	066%	068%