11-10-2015, 01:27 AM
| Net | Conf. | Plays/10 | Yds/Play | Yds/Dr | Pts/Dr |
| Baylor | Big 12 | 1.6 | 4.2 | 24.0 | 3.31 |
| Clemson | ACC | 9.2 | 2.1 | 15.9 | 1.89 |
| Oklahoma | Big 12 | 2.0 | 2.8 | 15.9 | 1.73 |
| Louisiana St. | SEC | 1.4 | 2.6 | 15.3 | 1.67 |
| Ohio St. | Big Ten | 1.4 | 2.3 | 12.5 | 1.56 |
| Stanford | Pac-12 | 2.6 | 1.3 | 9.4 | 1.52 |
| Michigan | Big Ten | 1.8 | 1.3 | 8.0 | 1.51 |
| Florida St. | ACC | 2.1 | 1.9 | 12.3 | 1.48 |
| Michigan St. | Big Ten | 7.4 | 0.7 | 8.4 | 1.35 |
| TCU | Big 12 | 3.4 | 2.3 | 15.2 | 1.29 |
| Iowa | Big Ten | 3.1 | 1.4 | 9.0 | 1.28 |
| Alabama | SEC | 8.0 | 1.7 | 12.5 | 1.20 |
| Oklahoma St. | Big 12 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 9.0 | 1.17 |
| North Carolina | ACC | -12.0 | 2.2 | 5.9 | 1.14 |
| UDFG | Ind. | 5.2 | 1.7 | 12.4 | 1.11 |
This is not entirely apples to apples (you'll note the Stanford numbers changed) because it includes all games, not just conference games. Still, Stanford acquits itself pretty well compared to other Power-5 teams, especially given that our play has improved since the second half of the second game.
Results are not adjusted for opponents, so the Big 12 looks good, while UDFG, who has played a pretty brutal schedule, doesn't look so good.
BC