Which college football defenses are built to dominate? A statistical deep dive into all 138 FBS teams for 2026
As we continue our statistical deep dive into college football rosters, Notre Dame continues to stand out, particularly on defense. Whether it's the second-highest percentage of returning defensive snaps or the seventh-most total defensive snaps of any team in the FBS, the Fighting Irish generally show up near the top of the list no matter which experience metric you use. But experience only tells part of the story. Returning snaps don't reveal whether that experience was actually good or how efficiently those players performed on the field.
That's where things get especially interesting for Notre Dame. The Fighting Irish just might have the most complete defense in the country. And they aren't the only team with numbers to back up the hype.
Again, using data from TruMedia, CBS Sports compiled career FBS production for each player across all 138 rosters entering the 2026 season. The data includes only FBS production, which means newcomers North Dakota State and Sacramento State typically appear near the bottom of these rankings, or are excluded due to a lack of qualifying defensive snaps.
This breakdown goes beyond raw snaps to examine what that experience actually produced on defense, from tackling and pass rush to havoc plays and coverage performance.
So, which defense owns the most proven and efficient production entering 2026? Let's take a look.
Defensive production| 1. Texas Tech | 1,621 | 73.5 (1) | 564 (1) | 24 (7) | 305 (1) |
| 2. Virginia | 1,613 | 59.0 (5) | 364 (8) | 27 (2) | 271 (4) |
| 3. Oklahoma State | 1,556 | 51.5 (10) | 378 (4) | 19 (20) | 242 (10) |
| 4. Tennessee | 1,513 | 42.5 (18) | 270 (25) | 22 (11) | 252 (7) |
| 5. Texas A&M | 1,431 | 61.5 (2) | 338 (12) | 13 (39) | 282 (3) |
| 5. Vanderbilt | 1,431 | 44.0 (17) | 368 (6) | 25 (4) | 240 (11) |
| 7. Ole Miss | 1,419 | 56.0 (7) | 421 (2) | 23 (8) | 289 (2) |
| 8. Kansas | 1,365 | 33.5 (38) | 275 (24) | 10 (61) | 205 (22) |
| 9. Texas | 1,330 | 59.0 (5) | 318 (14) | 23 (8) | 248 (9) |
| 10. UCF | 1,323 | 34.0 (36) | 283 (22) | 21 (15) | 227 (12) |
| 11. Notre Dame | 1,322 | 49.0 (12) | 364 (8) | 35 (1) | 268 (6) |
| 12. LSU | 1,290 | 46.0 (14) | 326 (13) | 20 (17) | 214 (18) |
| 13. Arizona State | 1,237 | 35.5 (31) | 285 (21) | 12 (44) | 204 (24) |
| 14. Mississippi State | 1,235 | 32.0 (40) | 216 (54) | 11 (50) | 156 (46) |
| 15. Penn State | 1,234 | 31.5 (42) | 256 (33) | 22 (11) | 217 (16) |
| 16. Florida State | 1,231 | 44.5 (16) | 266 (29) | 8 (74) | 190 (32) |
| 17. Miami | 1,227 | 53.5 (8) | 386 (3) | 25 (4) | 251 (8) |
| 18. Houston | 1,219 | 28.5 (52) | 202 (55) | 12 (44) | 172 (39) |
| 19. Colorado | 1,201 | 42.5 (18) | 296 (20) | 19 (20) | 225 (13) |
| 20. BYU | 1,191 | 35.5 (31) | 303 (19) | 25 (4) | 221 (15) |
| 21. Indiana | 1,190 | 59.5 (4) | 349 (11) | 22 (11) | 270 (5) |
| 22. Baylor | 1,186 | 34.5 (35) | 253 (34) | 20 (17) | 190 (32) |
| 23. Arizona | 1,176 | 40.5 (21) | 276 (23) | 22 (11) | 217 (16) |
| 24. Cincinnati | 1,175 | 19.5 (78) | 135 (90) | 10 (61) | 163 (44) |
| 25. Washington | 1,169 | 39.0 (24) | 372 (5) | 17 (28) | 198 (27) |
| 26. UCLA | 1,145 | 32.0 (40) | 267 (28) | 13 (39) | 223 (14) |
| 27. Wake Forest | 1,137 | 30.5 (47) | 260 (32) | 11 (50) | 177 (37) |
| 28. SMU | 1,135 | 40.0 (23) | 306 (17) | 18 (23) | 208 (21) |
| 29. Georgia | 1,134 | 23.5 (63) | 223 (48) | 27 (2) | 196 (28) |
| 30. Tulsa | 1,129 | 21.0 (69) | 145 (81) | 11 (50) | 148 (52) |
| 31. Virginia Tech | 1,125 | 38.0 (25) | 219 (52) | 16 (29) | 195 (29) |
| 32. Florida | 1,117 | 36.5 (29) | 237 (44) | 14 (35) | 204 (24) |
| 33. Georgia Tech | 1,108 | 31.0 (45) | 268 (27) | 4 (113) | 141 (56) |
| 34. Miami (Ohio) | 1,089 | 38.0 (25) | 307 (16) | 8 (74) | 169 (42) |
| 35. Oregon | 1,063 | 53.5 (8) | 368 (6) | 16 (29) | 211 (20) |
| 36. Michigan State | 1,050 | 41.0 (20) | 221 (51) | 15 (33) | 167 (43) |
| 37. Tulane | 1,048 | 21.0 (69) | 181 (69) | 12 (44) | 133 (62) |
| 38. Maryland | 1,043 | 31.0 (45) | 223 (48) | 18 (23) | 174 (38) |
| 39. Minnesota | 1,038 | 61.0 (3) | 358 (10) | 11 (50) | 214 (18) |
| 40. Auburn | 1,034 | 49.5 (11) | 313 (15) | 14 (35) | 188 (35) |
| 41. Clemson | 1,029 | 37.0 (28) | 231 (45) | 18 (23) | 205 (22) |
| 42. Stanford | 1,021 | 27.0 (54) | 228 (46) | 9 (68) | 136 (60) |
| 43. Louisville | 1,019 | 45.5 (15) | 306 (17) | 10 (61) | 203 (26) |
| 44. South Florida | 1,018 | 21.0 (69) | 241 (41) | 13 (39) | 151 (50) |
| 45. Nebraska | 1,009 | 30.5 (47) | 218 (53) | 8 (74) | 153 (48) |
| 46. Arkansas | 1,002 | 30.0 (51) | 182 (67) | 23 (8) | 170 (40) |
| 47. Northwestern | 989 | 23.5 (63) | 185 (64) | 8 (74) | 139 (57) |
| 48. TCU | 976 | 30.5 (47) | 222 (50) | 18 (23) | 161 (45) |
| 49. West Virginia | 948 | 21.0 (69) | 193 (60) | 11 (50) | 127 (66) |
| 50. Alabama | 941 | 26.0 (56) | 246 (37) | 20 (17) | 178 (36) |
| 51. Ohio State | 933 | 47.0 (13) | 263 (30) | 15 (33) | 170 (40) |
| 52. Michigan | 932 | 25.0 (59) | 227 (47) | 21 (15) | 194 (30) |
| 53. Memphis | 931 | 19.5 (78) | 182 (67) | 18 (23) | 139 (57) |
| 54. Utah State | 922 | 25.5 (57) | 161 (75) | 11 (50) | 120 (71) |
| 55. Pittsburgh | 916 | 34.0 (36) | 270 (25) | 14 (35) | 193 (31) |
| 56. New Mexico | 906 | 16.5 (87) | 120 (95) | 13 (39) | 117 (75) |
| 57. Oklahoma | 896 | 40.5 (21) | 245 (38) | 14 (35) | 190 (32) |
| 58. Purdue | 893 | 28.0 (53) | 244 (39) | 13 (39) | 145 (54) |
| 59. Florida Atlantic | 891 | 36.5 (29) | 248 (36) | 2 (126) | 136 (60) |
| 60. Kennesaw State | 882 | 19.5 (78) | 184 (65) | 7 (83) | 113 (79) |
| 61. Utah | 881 | 37.5 (27) | 242 (40) | 19 (20) | 150 (51) |
| 62. Illinois | 857 | 20.0 (75) | 142 (84) | 16 (29) | 133 (62) |
| 62. Boston College | 857 | 11.5 (109) | 100 (99) | 16 (29) | 94 (92) |
| 64. USC | 854 | 35.0 (34) | 239 (43) | 11 (50) | 138 (59) |
| 65. Arkansas State | 844 | 11.0 (111) | 93 (103) | 7 (83) | 92 (94) |
| 66. San Diego State | 833 | 14.5 (93) | 175 (71) | 9 (68) | 105 (84) |
| 67. Kentucky | 829 | 24.0 (62) | 181 (69) | 10 (61) | 118 (73) |
| 68. Iowa State | 820 | 22.5 (66) | 195 (59) | 12 (44) | 145 (54) |
| 69. FIU | 811 | 25.0 (59) | 160 (77) | 11 (50) | 119 (72) |
| 70. Old Dominion | 810 | 23.5 (63) | 156 (78) | 6 (95) | 122 (69) |
| 71. New Mexico State | 804 | 17.0 (85) | 192 (61) | 11 (50) | 113 (79) |
| 72. Georgia Southern | 793 | 17.0 (85) | 200 (57) | 11 (50) | 116 (77) |
| 73. Liberty | 775 | 14.5 (93) | 151 (79) | 3 (116) | 96 (90) |
| 74. Rutgers | 766 | 31.5 (42) | 261 (31) | 3 (116) | 118 (73) |
| 75. Texas State | 763 | 15.0 (90) | 150 (80) | 8 (74) | 133 (62) |
| 76. Syracuse | 762 | 27.0 (54) | 188 (62) | 7 (83) | 131 (65) |
| 77. Wisconsin | 761 | 30.5 (47) | 197 (58) | 5 (102) | 111 (81) |
| 78. California | 760 | 20.5 (73) | 183 (66) | 3 (116) | 105 (84) |
| 79. North Texas | 736 | 16.5 (87) | 144 (83) | 5 (102) | 122 (69) |
| 80. Duke | 729 | 10.0 (116) | 137 (87) | 8 (74) | 105 (84) |
| 81. Kansas State | 722 | 32.5 (39) | 202 (55) | 9 (68) | 154 (47) |
| 82. South Carolina | 718 | 35.5 (31) | 253 (34) | 9 (68) | 148 (52) |
| 83. Eastern Michigan | 714 | 14.5 (93) | 88 (110) | 5 (102) | 84 (97) |
| 84. Colorado State | 704 | 18.0 (83) | 162 (73) | 9 (68) | 89 (95) |
| 85. UConn | 687 | 25.0 (59) | 188 (62) | 4 (113) | 98 (89) |
| 86. Boise State | 669 | 31.5 (42) | 240 (42) | 6 (95) | 153 (48) |
| 86. NC State | 669 | 18.5 (82) | 118 (96) | 9 (68) | 96 (90) |
| 88. North Carolina | 668 | 20.0 (75) | 139 (85) | 7 (83) | 88 (96) |
| 89. Air Force | 666 | 13.0 (100) | 97 (100) | 7 (83) | 68 (111) |
| 90. Rice | 660 | 10.5 (113) | 97 (100) | 3 (116) | 76 (102) |
| 91. Jacksonville State | 654 | 19.0 (81) | 175 (71) | 12 (44) | 123 (68) |
| 92. Missouri | 640 | 13.0 (100) | 132 (92) | 8 (74) | 109 (83) |
| 93. Fresno State | 637 | 20.5 (73) | 161 (75) | 12 (44) | 110 (82) |
| 94. Coastal Carolina | 616 | 22.5 (66) | 162 (73) | 8 (74) | 117 (75) |
| 95. Navy | 615 | 11.5 (109) | 70 (120) | 7 (83) | 67 (112) |
| 96. East Carolina | 603 | 25.5 (57) | 145 (81) | 5 (102) | 114 (78) |
| 97. UNLV | 601 | 11.0 (111) | 92 (106) | 5 (102) | 100 (88) |
| 98. UTSA | 579 | 20.0 (75) | 139 (85) | 7 (83) | 124 (67) |
| 99. UMass | 561 | 6.5 (125) | 40 (133) | 5 (102) | 51 (124) |
| 100. Troy | 547 | 21.5 (68) | 124 (93) | 10 (61) | 76 (102) |
| 101. Hawaii | 539 | 14.0 (96) | 105 (98) | 7 (83) | 103 (87) |
| 102. UTEP | 524 | 10.0 (116) | 73 (118) | 3 (116) | 74 (106) |
| 103. Marshall | 511 | 13.5 (98) | 75 (117) | 11 (50) | 93 (93) |
| 104. Delaware | 507 | 12.0 (105) | 134 (91) | 7 (83) | 78 (100) |
| 105. Louisiana | 505 | 6.5 (125) | 68 (121) | 6 (95) | 56 (117) |
| 106. Ohio | 500 | 10.5 (113) | 93 (103) | 6 (95) | 76 (102) |
| 107. Washington State | 489 | 17.5 (84) | 137 (87) | 4 (113) | 72 (108) |
| 107. Oregon State | 489 | 8.5 (120) | 82 (114) | 5 (102) | 77 (101) |
| 109. Akron | 485 | 15.0 (90) | 83 (112) | 3 (116) | 69 (109) |
| 110. Western Michigan | 483 | 7.5 (124) | 57 (128) | 7 (83) | 69 (109) |
| 110. Charlotte | 483 | 13.0 (100) | 121 (94) | 3 (116) | 54 (123) |
| 112. App State | 482 | 14.0 (96) | 83 (112) | 6 (95) | 76 (102) |
| 113. Temple | 461 | 3.5 (132) | 53 (129) | 5 (102) | 40 (131) |
| 114. Nevada | 459 | 12.0 (105) | 137 (87) | 10 (61) | 73 (107) |
| 115. Louisiana Monroe | 455 | 15.0 (90) | 89 (108) | 2 (126) | 79 (99) |
| 116. Iowa | 440 | 4.0 (131) | 53 (129) | 10 (61) | 63 (114) |
| 117. James Madison | 431 | 13.0 (100) | 89 (108) | 6 (95) | 55 (119) |
| 118. Louisiana Tech | 430 | 13.5 (98) | 114 (97) | 7 (83) | 81 (98) |
| 118. Ball State | 430 | 8.0 (122) | 80 (115) | 6 (95) | 56 (117) |
| 118. Kent State | 430 | 5.5 (128) | 58 (127) | 2 (126) | 49 (126) |
| 121. Western Kentucky | 417 | 3.0 (133) | 73 (118) | 5 (102) | 59 (116) |
| 122. Missouri State | 415 | 12.0 (105) | 93 (103) | 3 (116) | 61 (115) |
| 123. UAB | 408 | 16.5 (87) | 96 (102) | 2 (126) | 55 (119) |
| 124. Wyoming | 396 | 2.0 (135) | 60 (123) | 7 (83) | 50 (125) |
| 125. Bowling Green | 374 | 12.0 (105) | 76 (116) | 5 (102) | 64 (113) |
| 126. Sam Houston | 355 | 12.5 (104) | 86 (111) | 2 (126) | 55 (119) |
| 127. Middle Tennessee | 325 | 10.5 (113) | 67 (122) | 5 (102) | 44 (129) |
| 128. Buffalo | 323 | 8.0 (122) | 48 (132) | 3 (116) | 45 (127) |
| 129. Toledo | 293 | 3.0 (133) | 51 (131) | 3 (116) | 30 (134) |
| 130. San Jose State | 286 | 8.5 (120) | 91 (107) | 2 (126) | 42 (130) |
| 131. Army | 283 | 9.5 (118) | 60 (123) | 8 (74) | 55 (119) |
| 132. South Alabama | 271 | 5.5 (128) | 60 (123) | 1 (134) | 38 (132) |
| 133. Georgia State | 247 | 6.0 (127) | 36 (134) | 0 (135) | 30 (134) |
| 134. Central Michigan | 233 | 9.0 (119) | 59 (126) | 2 (126) | 45 (127) |
| 135. Southern Miss | 220 | 4.5 (130) | 34 (135) | 2 (126) | 38 (132) |
| 136. Northern Illinois | 73 | 2.0 (135) | 29 (136) | 0 (135) | 7 (136) |
| 137. Sacramento State | 46 | 0.0 (137) | 10 (137) | 0 (135) | 1 (137) |
| 138. North Dakota State | 3 | 0.0 (137) | 0 (138) | 0 (135) | 0 (138) |
It's not hard to envision Texas Tech fielding a defense as good as, or better than, the unit that helped win last year's Big 12 Championship. The Red Raiders lost six defenders to the 2026 NFL Draft, but aggressively addressed those departures in the transfer portal by adding players with proven production. As a result, they enter 2026 with the most proven defensive production in the FBS, leading all 138 rosters in career tackles, sacks, pressures and havoc plays.
The portal haul alone is staggering. Texas Tech's 10 incoming defensive transfers have combined for 384 career pressures and 57.5 sacks, production that, by itself, would rank top three nationally in pressures and top six in sacks against entire team rosters. Transfers Adam Trick and Trey White are central to that projection. Both rank among the top 12 active FBS defenders in career sacks and pressures, helping offset the departures of David Bailey and Romello Height.
While few can match Texas Tech's production depth, former conference rival Texas boasts elite individual talent at the top. The Longhorns' returning first-team All-SEC edge rusher Colin Simmons leads the nation in career sacks (21.0) and ranks second in pressures (105), while incoming transfer linebacker Rasheem Biles from Pittsburgh paces the country in havoc plays (53).
Five teams rank among the top 15 in all five defensive production stats: Notre Dame, Ole Miss, Texas, Texas Tech and Virginia. Meanwhile, three others are top 15 in all but one: Indiana, Miami and Vanderbilt. The Hurricanes are actually top 10 in every category except tackles.
Total snaps played on defense certainly help explain raw production totals. It's why the top three teams by tackles mirror the same trio in defensive experience we broke down a few weeks ago.
Several teams stand out for getting much more out of their playing time than their snap counts would suggest. Florida State and Mississippi State are both top 16 nationally in total tackles despite ranking outside the top 35 in defensive snaps. Louisville shows the biggest gap in pressures, checking in 17th in the FBS despite ranking 62nd in total pass rush snaps. Credit Clev Lubin for that -- he owns the second-best pressure rate (22.9%) among the 435 returning defensive players with at least 200 career pass rush snaps in the FBS.
Michigan State is 20th in sacks despite ranking just 73rd in pass rush snaps, and Oklahoma is 32nd in havoc plays despite ranking 67th in defensive snaps.
Then there's Cal. The Golden Bears rank 23rd in total pass rush snaps but just 73rd in sacks and 66th in pressures, with similar drop-offs across the board -- 55th in defensive snaps but 78th in tackles and 84th in havoc plays. It's a tough starting point heading into a new era under coach Tosh Lupoi, who inherits one of the least disruptive defensive units in the country.
Production volume can be misleading, though. A defense playing more snaps naturally creates more opportunities for tackles, sacks and pressures. The better question is how efficiently those players converted their opportunities into impact plays.
Defensive efficiencyMinimum thresholds: Missed Tackle% (teams with ≥100 tackles in FBS); Sack% and Pressure% (teams with ≥250 pass rush snaps in FBS); Havoc% (teams with ≥1,000 defensive snaps in FBS)
| 1. Clemson | 11.0% | 1.8% (20) | 11.2% (30) | 1.9% (2) |
| 2. Kentucky | 11.3% | 1.2% (80) | 9.0% (95) | 1.2% (100) |
| 3. USC | 11.5% | 1.4% (44) | 9.7% (68) | 1.3% (73) |
| 4. Rutgers | 11.5% | 1.2% (87) | 9.6% (76) | 1.3% (80) |
| 5. James Madison | 11.7% | 1.3% (67) | 8.6% (106) | 1.2% (94) |
| 6. Buffalo | 11.7% | 1.5% (43) | 8.8% (101) | 1.1% (118) |
| 7. Marshall | 11.9% | 1.8% (26) | 9.8% (67) | 1.4% (56) |
| 8. Middle Tennessee | 11.9% | 1.4% (52) | 8.9% (96) | 1.0% (128) |
| 9. Jacksonville State | 12.1% | 1.0% (102) | 9.4% (82) | 1.7% (18) |
| 10. Alabama | 12.4% | 1.0% (104) | 9.6% (75) | 1.5% (44) |
| 11. Georgia State | 12.4% | 1.0% (105) | 6.0% (135) | 1.0% (125) |
| 12. Nebraska | 12.4% | 1.2% (82) | 8.5% (108) | 1.3% (74) |
| 13. UMass | 12.5% | 1.8% (16) | 11.4% (25) | 1.0% (124) |
| 14. Louisiana Monroe | 12.5% | 1.8% (21) | 10.6% (44) | 1.6% (29) |
| 15. UTEP | 12.5% | 1.2% (88) | 8.4% (109) | 1.4% (70) |
| 16. Texas | 12.7% | 2.0% (6) | 11.0% (36) | 1.8% (6) |
| 17. Pittsburgh | 12.7% | 1.1% (91) | 9.0% (92) | 1.7% (12) |
| 18. Southern Miss | 12.7% | 1.3% (68) | 9.5% (81) | 1.5% (36) |
| 19. Oregon | 12.9% | 1.5% (39) | 10.3% (55) | 1.7% (17) |
| 20. Miami (Ohio) | 12.9% | 1.3% (64) | 10.3% (54) | 1.4% (66) |
| 21. Delaware | 12.9% | 1.2% (86) | 13.0% (7) | 1.4% (59) |
| 22. North Carolina | 12.9% | 1.4% (56) | 9.4% (84) | 1.2% (99) |
| 23. Florida State | 12.9% | 1.9% (12) | 11.5% (24) | 1.6% (27) |
| 24. Georgia | 13.0% | 0.9% (115) | 8.8% (103) | 1.5% (34) |
| 25. Arizona | 13.0% | 1.6% (31) | 11.0% (37) | 1.6% (28) |
| 26. South Florida | 13.1% | 0.9% (114) | 10.7% (43) | 1.3% (72) |
| 27. Louisiana Tech | 13.1% | 1.2% (74) | 10.3% (52) | 1.7% (9) |
| 28. Indiana | 13.1% | 1.9% (15) | 11.1% (32) | 1.8% (4) |
| 29. Georgia Tech | 13.2% | 1.2% (70) | 10.8% (40) | 1.1% (112) |
| 30. Ole Miss | 13.3% | 1.5% (37) | 11.5% (22) | 1.7% (11) |
| 31. Missouri | 13.3% | 1.1% (97) | 11.0% (35) | 1.5% (40) |
| 32. Duke | 13.3% | 0.8% (122) | 11.1% (33) | 1.4% (62) |
| 33. UConn | 13.4% | 1.2% (83) | 8.9% (100) | 1.2% (91) |
| 34. Oklahoma State | 13.4% | 1.4% (46) | 10.5% (48) | 1.4% (65) |
| 35. Houston | 13.4% | 1.1% (89) | 8.1% (113) | 1.2% (90) |
| 36. Florida | 13.5% | 1.5% (41) | 9.7% (72) | 1.6% (33) |
| 37. Notre Dame | 13.5% | 1.8% (24) | 13.2% (4) | 1.7% (14) |
| 38. Temple | 13.5% | 0.7% (127) | 11.1% (34) | 0.8% (135) |
| 39. LSU | 13.5% | 1.8% (23) | 12.7% (9) | 1.6% (26) |
| 40. Mississippi State | 13.6% | 1.4% (48) | 9.5% (79) | 1.3% (76) |
| 41. Syracuse | 13.7% | 1.4% (54) | 9.6% (77) | 1.4% (57) |
| 42. Memphis | 13.7% | 1.1% (96) | 10.2% (59) | 1.3% (85) |
| 43. Wyoming | 13.7% | 0.2% (136) | 6.9% (132) | 1.0% (123) |
| 44. Georgia Southern | 13.8% | 0.6% (133) | 7.1% (130) | 1.1% (114) |
| 45. Bowling Green | 13.8% | 1.5% (38) | 9.7% (73) | 1.5% (42) |
| 46. Tulsa | 13.9% | 1.1% (90) | 7.9% (117) | 1.2% (103) |
| 47. Nevada | 13.9% | 1.0% (108) | 11.2% (29) | 1.3% (78) |
| 48. Virginia | 14.0% | 2.0% (7) | 12.1% (14) | 1.5% (46) |
| 49. Illinois | 14.0% | 1.3% (60) | 9.3% (86) | 1.3% (75) |
| 50. San Jose State | 14.1% | 0.7% (128) | 7.8% (120) | 1.2% (105) |
| 51. Oklahoma | 14.2% | 1.9% (13) | 11.5% (21) | 2.0% (1) |
| 52. Western Kentucky | 14.2% | 0.3% (135) | 7.2% (129) | 1.1% (115) |
| 53. Minnesota | 14.2% | 1.8% (19) | 10.5% (46) | 1.8% (5) |
| 54. East Carolina | 14.2% | 2.0% (8) | 11.2% (31) | 1.8% (3) |
| 55. Iowa | 14.2% | 0.8% (125) | 10.1% (61) | 1.3% (84) |
| 56. NC State | 14.2% | 1.2% (79) | 7.6% (123) | 1.1% (106) |
| 57. Vanderbilt | 14.3% | 1.0% (101) | 8.8% (104) | 1.4% (54) |
| 58. Wisconsin | 14.3% | 1.5% (36) | 9.9% (66) | 1.2% (97) |
| 59. Colorado State | 14.5% | 0.9% (118) | 7.8% (119) | 1.1% (113) |
| 60. Air Force | 14.5% | 1.4% (50) | 10.5% (47) | 1.0% (131) |
| 61. Kansas | 14.5% | 1.3% (62) | 10.6% (45) | 1.4% (64) |
| 62. Louisiana | 14.6% | 0.6% (134) | 6.2% (134) | 1.1% (121) |
| 63. West Virginia | 14.6% | 1.3% (61) | 11.9% (19) | 1.3% (82) |
| 64. Arkansas | 14.7% | 2.4% (1) | 14.9% (2) | 1.5% (49) |
| 65. Kansas State | 14.7% | 2.1% (4) | 13.0% (6) | 1.7% (15) |
| 66. Tennessee | 14.7% | 1.9% (11) | 12.3% (12) | 1.6% (24) |
| 67. New Mexico | 14.7% | 1.4% (45) | 10.4% (50) | 1.2% (93) |
| 68. Colorado | 14.7% | 1.7% (28) | 12.1% (15) | 1.7% (8) |
| 69. Virginia Tech | 14.7% | 1.8% (27) | 10.1% (63) | 1.4% (61) |
| 70. Utah State | 14.7% | 1.4% (53) | 8.8% (102) | 1.2% (95) |
| 71. Boston College | 14.7% | 0.9% (112) | 8.1% (114) | 1.0% (133) |
| 72. Michigan | 14.7% | 1.2% (71) | 11.3% (26) | 1.6% (22) |
| 73. FIU | 14.8% | 1.5% (40) | 9.5% (78) | 1.3% (83) |
| 74. Western Michigan | 14.8% | 1.2% (75) | 9.3% (87) | 1.4% (63) |
| 75. North Texas | 14.9% | 0.9% (113) | 8.1% (112) | 1.5% (43) |
| 76. Central Michigan | 15.0% | 1.1% (92) | 7.4% (126) | 1.4% (68) |
| 77. Texas Tech | 15.0% | 1.6% (34) | 12.2% (13) | 1.6% (25) |
| 78. Old Dominion | 15.1% | 1.8% (18) | 12.0% (16) | 1.5% (41) |
| 79. Cincinnati | 15.1% | 1.4% (51) | 9.7% (69) | 1.3% (71) |
| 80. Baylor | 15.1% | 1.2% (76) | 8.9% (98) | 1.4% (53) |
| 81. Washington | 15.3% | 1.4% (49) | 13.4% (3) | 1.5% (39) |
| 82. Ohio State | 15.3% | 1.8% (17) | 10.3% (53) | 1.5% (37) |
| 83. San Diego State | 15.3% | 0.6% (131) | 7.6% (122) | 1.1% (116) |
| 84. UCLA | 15.4% | 1.3% (63) | 10.7% (42) | 1.6% (30) |
| 85. Texas State | 15.4% | 1.2% (78) | 12.0% (17) | 1.6% (23) |
| 86. SMU | 15.4% | 1.6% (33) | 12.3% (11) | 1.5% (50) |
| 87. Louisville | 15.4% | 2.3% (3) | 15.2% (1) | 1.7% (10) |
| 88. Liberty | 15.5% | 0.9% (116) | 9.6% (74) | 1.1% (110) |
| 89. UCF | 15.5% | 1.3% (59) | 11.0% (38) | 1.5% (51) |
| 90. Ball State | 15.5% | 0.9% (117) | 9.0% (94) | 1.1% (119) |
| 91. Army | 15.5% | 0.9% (111) | 5.9% (136) | 1.4% (69) |
| 92. App State | 15.6% | 1.9% (14) | 11.3% (27) | 1.5% (35) |
| 93. Wake Forest | 15.6% | 1.3% (66) | 10.8% (41) | 1.3% (77) |
| 94. UTSA | 15.6% | 1.3% (65) | 8.9% (99) | 1.8% (7) |
| 95. Arizona State | 15.6% | 1.0% (109) | 7.8% (118) | 1.4% (58) |
| 96. Maryland | 15.7% | 1.4% (47) | 10.2% (60) | 1.4% (55) |
| 97. Florida Atlantic | 15.7% | 1.5% (42) | 10.0% (65) | 1.3% (86) |
| 98. Rice | 15.7% | 0.8% (121) | 7.7% (121) | 1.0% (122) |
| 99. Coastal Carolina | 15.7% | 1.7% (29) | 12.0% (18) | 1.6% (20) |
| 100. Arkansas State | 15.8% | 1.0% (107) | 8.3% (110) | 1.0% (127) |
| 101. TCU | 15.8% | 1.1% (95) | 8.0% (116) | 1.3% (79) |
| 102. South Carolina | 15.8% | 1.6% (32) | 11.5% (23) | 1.6% (31) |
| 103. Northwestern | 15.8% | 1.1% (98) | 8.5% (107) | 1.2% (98) |
| 104. Kent State | 15.9% | 0.7% (129) | 7.5% (124) | 1.0% (129) |
| 105. New Mexico State | 15.9% | 0.9% (119) | 9.7% (70) | 1.2% (101) |
| 106. Auburn | 15.9% | 2.1% (5) | 13.2% (5) | 1.5% (48) |
| 107. Troy | 16.0% | 1.9% (10) | 11.2% (28) | 1.2% (89) |
| 108. Navy | 16.0% | 1.3% (58) | 8.1% (115) | 1.0% (126) |
| 109. UNLV | 16.1% | 1.2% (77) | 10.1% (62) | 1.3% (87) |
| 110. California | 16.1% | 0.8% (124) | 6.8% (133) | 1.0% (132) |
| 111. Charlotte | 16.1% | 0.8% (123) | 7.3% (128) | 1.0% (130) |
| 112. Tulane | 16.3% | 1.1% (99) | 9.3% (88) | 1.1% (109) |
| 113. Texas A&M | 16.3% | 2.0% (9) | 10.8% (39) | 1.7% (13) |
| 114. Akron | 16.5% | 1.6% (30) | 9.0% (93) | 1.2% (92) |
| 115. Penn State | 16.6% | 1.2% (85) | 9.5% (80) | 1.5% (38) |
| 116. Missouri State | 16.8% | 1.2% (69) | 9.7% (71) | 1.2% (96) |
| 117. Stanford | 16.9% | 1.1% (93) | 9.4% (85) | 1.1% (107) |
| 118. Kennesaw State | 16.9% | 1.0% (106) | 9.4% (83) | 1.1% (111) |
| 119. UAB | 16.9% | 1.5% (35) | 8.9% (97) | 1.1% (120) |
| 120. Michigan State | 17.1% | 2.3% (2) | 12.4% (10) | 1.5% (52) |
| 121. Miami | 17.1% | 1.8% (25) | 12.7% (8) | 1.7% (16) |
| 122. Purdue | 17.2% | 1.1% (100) | 9.2% (90) | 1.3% (81) |
| 123. Iowa State | 17.2% | 1.2% (84) | 10.2% (58) | 1.5% (47) |
| 124. BYU | 17.2% | 1.2% (73) | 10.5% (49) | 1.6% (21) |
| 125. Utah | 17.2% | 1.8% (22) | 11.5% (20) | 1.5% (45) |
| 126. Hawaii | 17.2% | 1.4% (55) | 10.3% (57) | 1.6% (32) |
| 127. Boise State | 17.3% | 1.3% (57) | 10.3% (56) | 1.7% (19) |
| 128. Ohio | 17.4% | 1.0% (103) | 9.1% (91) | 1.4% (60) |
| 129. Fresno State | 17.4% | 0.9% (110) | 7.4% (127) | 1.4% (67) |
| 130. Eastern Michigan | 17.8% | 1.2% (72) | 7.5% (125) | 1.2% (102) |
| 131. Oregon State | 18.1% | 0.7% (126) | 7.1% (131) | 1.2% (88) |
| 131. Washington State | 18.1% | 1.1% (94) | 8.6% (105) | 1.1% (108) |
| 133. South Alabama | 18.6% | 0.8% (120) | 9.3% (89) | 1.1% (117) |
| 134. Sam Houston | 19.5% | 1.2% (81) | 8.2% (111) | 1.2% (104) |
| 135. Toledo | 19.5% | 0.6% (132) | 10.4% (51) | 0.9% (134) |
| Northern Illinois | n/a | 0.7% (130) | 10.1% (64) | n/a |
| North Dakota State | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Sacramento State | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Few teams might be as sure tackling as Clemson this upcoming season. The Tigers have the lowest aggregated player missed tackle rate in the country, and the reason is simple: 12 of their 13 players with at least 20 career FBS tackles are at or below the 14.7% national average, the best mark among the 101 teams with at least 10 qualifying players.
Returning leading tackler Sammy Brown, the former ACC Defensive Rookie of the Year and first-team All-ACC linebacker, has missed tackles just 7.7% of the time in his two-year career -- 14th-best among the 255 returning FBS defensive players with at least 100 career tackles.
Alabama isn't far behind. The Crimson Tide had 12 of their 15 qualifying players at or below the national average, nearly matching Clemson's depth across a bigger group. USC gets there a different way. Only eight of its 14 qualifying players are below the national average, but six of those eight have a single-digit missed-tackle rate, giving the Trojans some of the surest individual tacklers in the country.
BYU and Miami have two of the worst aggregated player missed-tackle rates among Power Four teams, which isn't all that shocking considering they were also among the five worst in actual team missed-tackle rate last season. Roughly a third of the qualifying players on both rosters have a career missed-tackle rate worse than the national average.
BYU's biggest swing-and-miss problem sits right in the middle of its defense. Cade Uluave, the No. 1-ranked transfer portal linebacker in the most recent cycle, was brought in this offseason to anchor that spot. He's one of the most experienced players in college football and ranks fifth nationally in career tackles, but his 19.3% missed-tackle rate ranks 1,312th out of 1,667 qualifying players with at least 20 career FBS tackles. Fellow starting linebacker Isaiah Glasker isn't much better at 18.8%.
For sack rate and havoc rate, there's little separation across the board because the denominator -- pass rush snaps for sack rate, defensive snaps for havoc rate -- is so high compared to the number of actual events. That makes these numbers fundamentally different from a true team rate, because they're not measuring how disruptive the defense is as a unit, but how often individual players, on their own snaps, turned an opportunity into a sack, pressure or havoc play.
Now that we've made that clear, let's look at some notable rates for each category.
Aggregated sack rate leaders (Power Four only)- Arkansas — 2.4%
- Michigan State — 2.3%
- Louisville — 2.3%
- Kansas State — 2.1%
- Auburn — 2.1%
For reference, the average individual sack rate over the past five FBS seasons is 1.6%.
Louisville's pass rush, which we touched on earlier through Clev Lubin's pressure rate, looks just as strong by this measure. A broader look at the Cardinals' pass rushers shows three players carrying that production: Lubin (3.7%; 24th), Tyler Thompson (3.2%; 42nd) and Antonio Watts (3.0%; 54th) all sit in the top 55 in sack rate among the 780 returning players with at least 100 career FBS pass-rush snaps.
Aggregated pressure rate leaders (Power Four only)- Louisville — 15.2%
- Arkansas — 14.9%
- Washington — 13.4%
- Notre Dame — 13.2%
- Auburn — 13.2%
The average individual pressure rate over the past five FBS seasons is 10.5%.
Washington and Notre Dame stand out for getting to the quarterback often, but haven't finished the job at the same rate as the others. The Huskies rank third in pressure rate but fall to 49th in sack rate, while the Fighting Irish are fourth in pressure rate but slide to 24th in sack rate. Pressure without a finish still bothers an offense, but it's a different kind of disruption than what players on Arkansas and Louisville are doing.
Aggregated havoc play rate leaders (Power Four only)- Oklahoma — 2.0%
- Clemson — 1.9%
- Indiana — 1.8%
- Minnesota — 1.8%
- Texas — 1.8%
The average individual havoc play rate over the past five FBS seasons is 1.6%.
Oklahoma ranked second nationally last season in team havoc rate, and with six starters returning on that unit, there's no reason to expect much of a drop-off. Taylor Wein (3.7%; 4th), David Stone (2.5%; 59th) and Kip Lewis (2.34%; 77th) are the trio driving the Sooners' aggregated individual rate. Of the 992 returning players with at least 500 defensive snaps in the FBS, all three sit in the top 80 in havoc play rate.
Tackling and pass rush only tell part of the story. Elite defenses eventually need players who can hold up in coverage.
The next four metrics help measure exactly that: completion rate allowed, yards allowed per attempt, touchdown rate allowed and target rate when a defender is the primary coverage assignment.
Coverage EfficiencyMinimum thresholds: Defensive Completion% and Defensive Touchdown Allowed% (Teams with ≥50 targets in primary coverage in FBS); Defensive Pass Yards/Attempt (Teams with ≥50 pass attempts against as primary defender); Target% (Teams with ≥300 coverage snaps)
| 1. Nevada | 49.7% | 6.5 (17) | 4.4% (48) | 11.3% (12) |
| 2. Buffalo | 50.5% | 6.2 (6) | 3.8% (23) | 13.4% (98) |
| 3. Notre Dame | 52.9% | 6.4 (11) | 3.8% (22) | 13.0% (78) |
| 4. Central Michigan | 53.2% | 6.2 (7) | 4.3% (39) | 14.0% (116) |
| 5. Marshall | 53.6% | 7.3 (57) | 5.6% (91) | 12.9% (70) |
| 6. Boise State | 53.9% | 6.6 (27) | 4.4% (51) | 13.7% (110) |
| 7. Missouri | 54.1% | 6.9 (39) | 2.7% (5) | 13.1% (83) |
| 8. California | 55.1% | 7.8 (92) | 4.1% (33) | 13.7% (111) |
| 9. Michigan | 55.5% | 6.5 (18) | 5.5% (88) | 13.9% (112) |
| 10. UNLV | 55.9% | 6.6 (22) | 4.3% (44) | 14.0% (114) |
| 11. Western Michigan | 56.0% | 6.6 (24) | 3.2% (9) | 13.4% (99) |
| 12. Miami | 56.2% | 6.4 (13) | 4.8% (69) | 12.8% (65) |
| 13. Iowa | 56.7% | 6.6 (23) | 2.7% (6) | 15.1% (128) |
| 14. Utah | 56.8% | 6.7 (32) | 5.1% (79) | 14.2% (119) |
| 15. UCLA | 57.0% | 6.1 (3) | 4.5% (59) | 12.9% (74) |
| 16. Western Kentucky | 57.1% | 6.9 (42) | 4.2% (34) | 10.6% (5) |
| 17. South Carolina | 57.2% | 6.3 (8) | 3.6% (14) | 13.5% (104) |
| 18. TCU | 57.4% | 7.8 (90) | 5.9% (100) | 13.4% (100) |
| 19. Coastal Carolina | 57.6% | 6.7 (34) | 7.6% (129) | 12.5% (49) |
| 20. Auburn | 57.7% | 6.8 (36) | 2.5% (4) | 12.5% (48) |
| 21. Georgia Southern | 58.4% | 7.5 (74) | 3.3% (11) | 15.6% (133) |
| 22. Alabama | 58.4% | 6.5 (19) | 4.5% (58) | 11.0% (8) |
| 23. Virginia | 58.5% | 7.4 (65) | 7.5% (128) | 12.4% (41) |
| 24. Kansas State | 58.6% | 7.7 (84) | 4.6% (63) | 13.2% (86) |
| 25. South Alabama | 58.6% | 7.7 (83) | 6.3% (109) | 12.2% (37) |
| 26. North Texas | 58.6% | 8.1 (103) | 5.7% (95) | 13.1% (82) |
| 27. Illinois | 58.7% | 6.5 (15) | 4.2% (38) | 14.5% (122) |
| 28. Louisiana Monroe | 59.0% | 7.5 (72) | 6.7% (117) | 12.3% (38) |
| 29. Hawaii | 59.1% | 5.9 (2) | 4.2% (37) | 15.5% (132) |
| 30. Texas AM | 59.3% | 6.8 (35) | 4.3% (43) | 10.9% (7) |
| 31. Wyoming | 59.3% | 7.9 (94) | 9.1% (135) | 13.3% (92) |
| 32. Georgia | 59.3% | 6.6 (25) | 4.4% (46) | 12.9% (71) |
| 33. Colorado | 59.3% | 7.4 (70) | 3.8% (21) | 13.0% (79) |
| 34. Texas Tech | 59.4% | 6.7 (31) | 4.0% (27) | 12.9% (69) |
| 35. Louisiana Tech | 59.4% | 6.2 (4) | 2.4% (2) | 13.2% (88) |
| 36. Florida | 59.4% | 7.2 (53) | 4.0% (29) | 11.9% (23) |
| 37. Ohio State | 59.5% | 6.2 (5) | 4.3% (40) | 11.1% (10) |
| 38. NC State | 59.8% | 7.0 (45) | 4.0% (30) | 13.1% (84) |
| 39. Louisiana | 59.9% | 5.8 (1) | 5.6% (94) | 12.1% (35) |
| 40. Temple | 59.9% | 8.3 (118) | 4.5% (53) | 12.4% (43) |
| 41. SMU | 60.2% | 7.6 (78) | 5.0% (76) | 13.5% (103) |
| 42. Washington State | 60.2% | 7.3 (60) | 6.3% (112) | 15.4% (130) |
| 43. Liberty | 60.3% | 7.4 (69) | 3.7% (19) | 12.0% (27) |
| 44. Oregon State | 60.3% | 7.6 (81) | 5.3% (83) | 15.4% (131) |
| 45. Georgia Tech | 60.5% | 7.7 (88) | 5.0% (75) | 13.1% (85) |
| 46. Virginia Tech | 60.5% | 7.6 (79) | 5.9% (102) | 12.9% (68) |
| 47. Navy | 60.5% | 8.1 (108) | 4.0% (28) | 11.8% (21) |
| 48. Clemson | 60.6% | 7.0 (46) | 3.1% (8) | 12.4% (44) |
| 49. Miami (Ohio) | 60.6% | 7.2 (51) | 4.5% (55) | 15.0% (127) |
| 50. Ball State | 60.7% | 7.8 (93) | 6.0% (103) | 10.2% (3) |
| 51. Jacksonville State | 60.8% | 7.9 (95) | 4.5% (55) | 12.4% (46) |
| 52. Washington | 60.9% | 6.5 (14) | 3.6% (13) | 12.1% (30) |
| 53. Louisville | 60.9% | 6.7 (29) | 2.2% (1) | 13.1% (80) |
| 54. Oklahoma | 60.9% | 6.7 (33) | 3.8% (20) | 12.7% (57) |
| 55. USC | 61.0% | 6.5 (20) | 3.6% (17) | 13.0% (76) |
| 56. Syracuse | 61.1% | 7.3 (59) | 6.0% (105) | 14.1% (118) |
| 57. Iowa State | 61.1% | 7.7 (87) | 5.4% (87) | 13.3% (90) |
| 58. Kentucky | 61.1% | 7.8 (91) | 4.8% (68) | 12.0% (28) |
| 59. UTEP | 61.2% | 7.6 (80) | 7.8% (130) | 12.7% (55) |
| 60. Nebraska | 61.2% | 6.9 (40) | 3.3% (12) | 12.3% (39) |
| 61. Oklahoma State | 61.3% | 7.1 (47) | 4.7% (64) | 12.4% (42) |
| 62. Pittsburgh | 61.4% | 7.0 (43) | 4.5% (57) | 15.7% (134) |
| 63. Cincinnati | 61.4% | 6.5 (16) | 4.2% (34) | 12.7% (56) |
| 64. Oregon | 61.4% | 6.8 (37) | 4.2% (36) | 12.8% (64) |
| 65. South Florida | 61.5% | 8.2 (112) | 5.0% (74) | 12.8% (63) |
| 66. Ole Miss | 61.6% | 6.3 (9) | 4.0% (26) | 13.4% (97) |
| 67. Bowling Green | 61.7% | 8.8 (132) | 5.4% (85) | 11.6% (19) |
| 68. Indiana | 61.8% | 7.4 (66) | 4.3% (42) | 11.8% (20) |
| 69. Georgia State | 61.8% | 8.6 (130) | 8.2% (131) | 14.8% (125) |
| 70. Florida State | 62.0% | 7.7 (89) | 4.9% (71) | 13.3% (94) |
| 71. UConn | 62.0% | 8.4 (121) | 6.1% (106) | 10.0% (2) |
| 72. Old Dominion | 62.0% | 6.6 (28) | 5.3% (84) | 12.1% (33) |
| 73. Fresno State | 62.1% | 6.4 (12) | 2.9% (7) | 12.9% (72) |
| 74. Houston | 62.3% | 6.9 (41) | 3.6% (16) | 12.1% (34) |
| 75. Boston College | 62.3% | 8.1 (101) | 5.3% (82) | 13.2% (87) |
| 76. Mississippi State | 62.4% | 7.1 (49) | 4.1% (32) | 12.1% (29) |
| 77. Penn State | 62.5% | 7.0 (44) | 4.4% (47) | 13.3% (95) |
| 78. BYU | 62.6% | 7.3 (58) | 4.5% (60) | 12.6% (52) |
| 79. Arkansas State | 62.8% | 8.1 (104) | 5.6% (92) | 11.3% (11) |
| 80. FIU | 62.8% | 8.3 (120) | 6.2% (107) | 10.7% (6) |
| 81. Southern Miss | 62.8% | 8.0 (99) | 6.6% (114) | 13.5% (107) |
| 82. Wake Forest | 62.8% | 7.1 (48) | 3.6% (15) | 13.1% (81) |
| 83. Army | 62.8% | 7.2 (50) | 7.4% (126) | 13.5% (102) |
| 84. Arizona | 62.8% | 7.4 (63) | 4.5% (54) | 13.3% (91) |
| 85. UAB | 62.9% | 8.6 (128) | 9.0% (134) | 14.2% (120) |
| 86. Arizona State | 63.0% | 7.3 (56) | 5.1% (77) | 11.5% (14) |
| 87. Tulsa | 63.1% | 8.3 (116) | 6.8% (118) | 13.5% (106) |
| 88. Middle Tennessee | 63.3% | 8.5 (126) | 9.0% (133) | 12.0% (26) |
| 89. Maryland | 63.3% | 7.7 (85) | 6.7% (115) | 14.0% (113) |
| 90. UCF | 63.3% | 7.5 (73) | 4.4% (49) | 14.1% (117) |
| 91. Delaware | 63.7% | 7.4 (68) | 5.6% (93) | 11.6% (17) |
| 92. Memphis | 63.8% | 8.0 (100) | 5.8% (97) | 12.6% (50) |
| 93. Duke | 63.8% | 8.2 (114) | 5.2% (80) | 13.0% (77) |
| 94. Utah State | 63.9% | 8.1 (106) | 6.0% (104) | 12.5% (47) |
| 95. Baylor | 64.0% | 7.6 (82) | 7.1% (123) | 11.5% (15) |
| 96. Colorado State | 64.0% | 7.9 (98) | 6.2% (108) | 15.2% (129) |
| 97. Texas | 64.2% | 6.4 (10) | 4.1% (31) | 12.6% (51) |
| 98. Northwestern | 64.3% | 7.2 (55) | 3.2% (10) | 12.7% (60) |
| 99. UMass | 64.4% | 8.3 (118) | 7.4% (125) | 11.4% (13) |
| 100. East Carolina | 64.4% | 6.7 (30) | 3.9% (24) | 12.7% (62) |
| 101. Michigan State | 64.4% | 7.2 (52) | 5.0% (73) | 13.3% (96) |
| 102. Rice | 64.7% | 8.1 (105) | 6.3% (111) | 11.8% (22) |
| 103. Tulane | 64.7% | 8.1 (109) | 4.7% (65) | 13.4% (101) |
| 104. Florida Atlantic | 64.7% | 8.4 (123) | 5.8% (98) | 12.9% (66) |
| 105. Troy | 64.8% | 8.5 (127) | 2.4% (3) | 12.3% (40) |
| 106. Ohio | 64.8% | 7.5 (76) | 5.5% (89) | 9.9% (1) |
| 107. Wisconsin | 64.9% | 7.9 (97) | 6.3% (110) | 13.0% (75) |
| 108. Kennesaw State | 64.9% | 8.3 (117) | 5.8% (99) | 14.9% (126) |
| 109. New Mexico | 64.9% | 8.2 (110) | 7.5% (127) | 11.6% (16) |
| 110. App State | 65.0% | 7.3 (62) | 4.7% (66) | 13.6% (108) |
| 111. West Virginia | 65.0% | 7.3 (61) | 4.9% (70) | 14.6% (124) |
| 112. Tennessee | 65.1% | 7.4 (67) | 4.4% (51) | 12.9% (67) |
| 113. Stanford | 65.3% | 8.4 (125) | 6.7% (116) | 12.9% (73) |
| 114. Arkansas | 65.3% | 7.5 (75) | 5.2% (81) | 12.1% (32) |
| 115. San Diego State | 65.6% | 6.6 (26) | 5.6% (90) | 12.1% (31) |
| 116. Rutgers | 65.6% | 8.4 (124) | 6.9% (122) | 11.0% (9) |
| 117. LSU | 65.6% | 7.7 (86) | 4.6% (61) | 12.6% (53) |
| 118. Minnesota | 65.6% | 7.4 (64) | 6.9% (121) | 12.2% (36) |
| 119. Sam Houston | 65.7% | 9.3 (134) | 5.9% (101) | 13.2% (89) |
| 120. New Mexico State | 65.7% | 7.6 (77) | 6.5% (113) | 13.3% (93) |
| 121. Eastern Michigan | 65.7% | 7.9 (96) | 4.4% (50) | 12.4% (45) |
| 122. North Carolina | 65.9% | 7.5 (71) | 4.4% (45) | 14.2% (121) |
| 123. UTSA | 66.1% | 8.6 (129) | 7.2% (124) | 15.8% (135) |
| 124. Kent State | 66.1% | 8.1 (107) | 4.0% (25) | 11.6% (18) |
| 125. Vanderbilt | 66.3% | 8.2 (113) | 5.8% (96) | 13.5% (105) |
| 126. Texas State | 66.4% | 7.2 (54) | 3.6% (18) | 14.0% (115) |
| 127. Purdue | 66.6% | 8.4 (122) | 4.6% (62) | 12.7% (58) |
| 128. Akron | 67.1% | 9.1 (133) | 6.8% (120) | 12.7% (59) |
| 129. Kansas | 67.9% | 8.1 (102) | 5.1% (78) | 11.9% (25) |
| 130. James Madison | 68.0% | 6.9 (38) | 4.7% (67) | 12.6% (54) |
| 131. Air Force | 69.3% | 9.4 (135) | 4.9% (72) | 12.7% (61) |
| 132. San Jose State | 69.3% | 6.6 (21) | 6.8% (119) | 13.6% (109) |
| 133. Toledo | 69.6% | 8.2 (111) | 8.9% (132) | 10.5% (4) |
| 134. Charlotte | 69.9% | 8.7 (131) | 4.3% (41) | 14.6% (123) |
| 135. Missouri State | 70.1% | 8.2 (115) | 5.4% (86) | 11.9% (24) |
| North Dakota State | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Northern Illinois | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Sacramento State | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Notre Dame might have the best secondary in the country heading into 2026. The Fighting Irish return four starters in coverage and added Colorado transfer DJ McKinney, one of the most experienced defensive backs in the FBS, to lock down the back end even further.
Of the 808 returning players with at least 25 targets as the primary defender in coverage in the FBS, Notre Dame has all three of its starting cornerbacks in the top 80 in completion percentage allowed: Christian Gray (46.3%; 57th), McKinney (47.0%; 76th) and Leonard Moore (47.3%; 80th).
Smith Snowden, a Michigan transfer by way of Utah, is another newcomer who should make an immediate impact. His 40.7% completion rate allowed is the best of the 73 returning FBS players with at least 100 targets as the primary defender in coverage.
Aggregated defensive pass yards allowed/attempt leaders (Power Four only)- UCLA — 6.1
- Ohio State — 6.2
- South Carolina — 6.3
- Ole Miss — 6.3
- Texas — 6.4
The average individual defensive pass yards allowed per attempt as the primary coverage defender over the past five FBS seasons is 7.3.
UCLA was relatively average compared to the rest of the FBS in yards allowed per pass attempt last season, but could see real improvement in 2026. Of the 804 returning players with at least 25 pass attempts against as the primary defender in coverage in the FBS, the Bruins have three players in the top 45 for best pass yards allowed per attempt: Scooter Jackson (3.7; 11th), Rodrick Pleasant (3.9; 14th) and Ta'Shawn James (4.8; 43rd).
Aggregated defensive passing touchdowns allowed % leaders (Power Four only)- Louisville — 2.2%
- Auburn — 2.5%
- Missouri — 2.7%
- Iowa — 2.7%
- Clemson — 3.1%
The average individual defensive passing touchdowns allowed per target as the primary defender over the past five FBS seasons is 4.9%.
Clemson's depth stands out here, too. Of the 808 returning players with at least 25 targets as the primary defender in coverage, nine Tigers are at or better than the 4.9% national average. Starting cornerback Ashton Hampton has the second-best mark (0.93%) of the 73 players with at least 100 targets, allowing just one touchdown on 108 primary coverage snaps.
Aggregated target rate leaders (Power Four only)- Texas A&M — 10.9%
- Alabama — 11.0%
- Rutgers — 11.0%
- Ohio State — 11.1%
- Arizona State — 11.5%
The average individual target rate -- how often a player is thrown at relative to their total coverage snaps -- over the past five FBS seasons is 12.5%.
A low target rate usually means opposing quarterbacks are steering clear of a defense's best coverage players, and Ohio State's depth shows why it will likely do so in 2026. Of the 964 returning FBS players with at least 150 career pass-coverage snaps, three projected starters for the Buckeyes are in the top 120 in target rate: Jaylen McClain (6.8%; 46th), Terry Moore (7.3%; 69th) and Earl Little Jr. (8.2%; 116th).
Add it all up, and Ohio State has the best average FBS ranking across all four individual pass-coverage stats of any power conference team, with Alabama not far behind. The Crimson Tide rank inside the top 25 nationally in individual completion rate allowed (58.4%; 22nd), defensive pass yards allowed per attempt (6.5; 19th) and individual target rate (11.0%; eighth).
Putting it all togetherPerhaps the most interesting takeaway from this study is that elite production, elite efficiency and elite coverage rarely overlap. Some defenses thrive through disruption. Others win with tackling discipline or sticky coverage. Very few can credibly claim all three.
Texas Tech's pass rush doesn't really show up in the coverage numbers. Clemson's sure tackling won't make it highly disruptive.
But no defense checks every box quite like Notre Dame. The Fighting Irish are top 15 in all five production stats listed in the first table, and that same roster ranks top 25 nationally in six of the eight efficiency and coverage stats -- which is why, heading into 2026, Notre Dame's defense is arguably one of the most complete units in the country.
Miami deserves a mention, too. As previously noted. The Hurricanes are top 10 in every production category except tackles, and they are top 25 nationally in five of the same eight efficiency and coverage stats (pressure rate, havoc rate, sack rate, completion percentage allowed and yards allowed per attempt).
If either defense plays anywhere close to what these numbers might suggest once the season starts, it's going to be a long year for opposing offenses.
cbssports
