← All Teams
CLEM
Clemson
TigersBalancedAtlantic Coast Conference11-3#18 (+6.91)
Grades
Percentile grades against every FBS team this season — 99 is best. Curved so an average team reads C, not F.
87· BOverall
Offense
73· BRating
57· CPer play
62· CConsistency
62· CBig plays
Defense
93· ARating
86· BPer play
76· BConsistency
Situational
69· CRed-zone O
85· BRed-zone D
62· C3rd down O
71· B3rd down D
Analytical Fingerprint
SS-native team profile — opponent-adjusted and garbage-filtered EPA, success, and explosiveness.
Opp-Adj Offense
+0.026
Opp-Adj Defense
+0.116
higher = better
Offensive EPA/play
+0.013
Defensive EPA/play
-0.121
lower = better
Off Success Rate
47.5%
Def Success Rate
43.1%
allowed · lower = better
Explosive Rate
24.6%
pass EPA > 1.0 · rush > 0.8
Explosive Allowed
22.7%
lower = better
Net EPA/play
+0.135
net · higher = better
Recent EPA Trend
-0.014
last 3 weeks
Points / Drive
2.53
Special Teams
Opponent-adjusted special-teams component of the Final Rating, in expected points per game — positive = better. The four units sum to the net.
Net ST Rating
-0.67
expected pts/game
Kicking
+0.46
own kicking game
Kick Defense
+0.17
vs opponent kicks
Returns
-0.61
own return game
Return Defense
-0.69
vs opponent returns
Performance vs Perception
Our opponent-adjusted model rank vs. how others rate this team. Descriptive — where the model and the consensus disagree.
Model Rank
#18
opponent-adjusted strength
AP Poll
#13
AP 5 spots higher
Market (Vegas)
#5
market 13 higher
Recruiting Rank
#6
recruiting 12 spots higher
58 blue-chip recruits
Peer Context
Where Clemson ranks among all FBS teams in 2022 (percentile).
Opp-adjusted offense59th
Opp-adjusted defense88th
Offensive EPA/play58th
Defensive EPA/play87th
Offensive success rate64th
Explosiveness62th
Defensive havoc98th
Points per drive68th
Historical Fingerprint
Most statistically similar team-seasons, 2017–2025, by the same 44-feature profile The Archive uses. Descriptive context, not a forecast.
1Baylor2019OA +0.062 / +0.147similar: TD drive rate, offensive EPA, defensive EPA4602Penn State2018OA +0.000 / +0.080similar: defensive success rate, havoc rate, defensive EPA4363Auburn2019OA -0.022 / +0.217similar: passing offense, run defense, defensive EPA4254TCU2017OA -0.025 / +0.166similar: run defense, havoc rate, offensive success rate4225Toledo2023OA +0.030 / +0.045similar: defensive success rate, defensive EPA, takeaway rate414
2022 Schedule & Results
14 games
| Wk | Opponent | Score | W/L | Spread | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | @ Georgia Tech | 41-10 | W | -24.5 | W | 51 | P |
| 2 | vs Furman | 35-12 | W | -44.3 | L | 51.5 | U |
| 3 | vs Louisiana Tech | 48-20 | W | -33.5 | L | 54 | O |
| 4 | @ Wake Forest | 51-45 | W | -7.0 | L | 55.5 | O |
| 5 | vs NC State | 30-20 | W | -6.5 | W | 42.75 | O |
| 6 | @ Boston College | 31-3 | W | -20.5 | W | 48.5 | U |
| 7 | @ Florida State | 34-28 | W | -3.5 | W | 51 | O |
| 8 | vs Syracuse | 27-21 | W | -13.5 | L | 49.5 | U |
| 10 | @ Notre Dame | 14-35 | L | -4.0 | L | 44.5 | O |
| 11 | vs Louisville | 31-16 | W | -7.0 | W | 51.5 | U |
| 12 | vs Miami | 40-10 | W | -19.0 | W | 48 | O |
| 13 | vs South Carolina | 30-31 | L | -14.5 | L | 52 | O |
| 14 | @ North Carolina | 39-10 | W | -7.5 | W | 63.5 | U |
| 18 | vs Tennessee | 14-31 | L | - | - | - | - |
Betting Profile
ATS Record
7-7
50.0%
O/U Record
7-6-1
53.8%
Straight Up
11-3
78.6%
Home ATS3-5
Away ATS4-2
Favorite ATS7-7
Underdog ATS0-0
Last 5 ATS
WWLWL
Graded against consensus market lines (median across multiple sportsbooks). Games the market never lined — mostly early-season non-FBS matchups — are excluded from ATS and O/U records; individual games may grade differently than closing-line sources.
Situational Profile
Situational EPA percentile across 8 phases (the larger the shape, the more dominant). Within-FBS ranks.
| Situation | OFF EPA | OFF Rank | DEF EPA | DEF Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | +0.018 | 58th | -0.123 | 87th |
| Red Zone | +0.088 | 70th | -0.241 | 86th |
| Third Down | +0.135 | 63th | -0.064 | 72th |
| No Garbage Time | +0.018 | 59th | -0.117 | 84th |
| First Half | +0.048 | 64th | -0.067 | 67th |
| Second Half | -0.016 | 49th | -0.175 | 95th |
| Early Downs | +0.011 | 61th | -0.106 | 83th |
| Passing Downs | -0.006 | 50th | -0.092 | 76th |
| Standard Downs | +0.029 | 65th | -0.142 | 90th |
| Goal to Go | +0.167 | 77th | -0.488 | 96th |
Style & Tendencies
Pass 46.8%Rush 53.2%
Havoc/Game
17.4
Havoc Rate
25.4%
TO Margin
-0.1
Explosive/G
16.6
Yards/Game
410.3
Pts/Drive
2.53
3rd Down%
47.6%
3&Out%
20.0%
Team Statistics
2022 season totals across 14 games — Clemson vs. the combined line of every opponent in those games.
| Stat | Clemson | Opponents |
|---|---|---|
| Scoring | ||
| Points | 465 | 292 |
| Points / Game | 33.2 | 20.9 |
| First Downs | ||
| Total | 320 | 257 |
| Rushing | 143 | 89 |
| Passing | 144 | 143 |
| Penalty | 33 | 25 |
| Rushing | ||
| Attempts | 546 | 442 |
| Yards | 2,491 | 1,438 |
| Yards / Carry | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| Yards / Game | 177.9 | 102.7 |
| Touchdowns | 31 | 12 |
| Passing | ||
| Attempts | 480 | 488 |
| Completions | 298 | 299 |
| Completion % | 62.1% | 61.3% |
| Yards | 3,253 | 3,244 |
| Yards / Attempt | 6.8 | 6.6 |
| Touchdowns | 24 | 21 |
| Interceptions | 10 | 13 |
| Passer Rating | 131.34 | 125.98 |
| Total Offense | ||
| Plays | 1,026 | 930 |
| Yards | 5,744 | 4,682 |
| Yards / Play | 5.6 | 5.0 |
| Yards / Game | 410.3 | 334.4 |
| Punt Returns | ||
| Returns | 27 | 24 |
| Yards | 191 | 246 |
| Average | 7.1 | 10.3 |
| Touchdowns | 0 | 1 |
| Kickoff Returns | ||
| Returns | 19 | 15 |
| Yards | 411 | 296 |
| Average | 21.6 | 19.7 |
| Touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Punting | ||
| Punts | 65 | 76 |
| Yards | 2,715 | 3,258 |
| Average | 41.8 | 42.9 |
| Interception Returns | ||
| Returns | 13 | 10 |
| Yards | 153 | 97 |
| Touchdowns | 2 | 1 |
| Fumbles | ||
| Fumbles | 23 | 15 |
| Lost | 12 | 8 |
| Penalties | ||
| Penalties | 76 | 85 |
| Yards | 685 | 824 |
| Yards / Game | 48.9 | 58.9 |
| Time of Possession | ||
| Per Game | 31:13 | 28:47 |
| Third Downs | ||
| Attempts | 212 | 196 |
| Conversions | 101 | 69 |
| Conversion % | 47.6% | 35.2% |
| Fourth Downs | ||
| Attempts | 12 | 24 |
| Conversions | 6 | 9 |
| Conversion % | 50.0% | 37.5% |
| Red Zone | ||
| Trips | 62 | 46 |
| Scores (TD + FG) | 58 | 38 |
| Score % | 93.5% | 82.6% |
| Touchdowns | 45 | 26 |
| TD % | 72.6% | 56.5% |
| Field Goals | ||
| Attempts | 26 | 20 |
| Made | 20 | 14 |
| Pct | 76.9% | 70.0% |
| PAT Kicking | ||
| Attempts | 51 | 35 |
| Made | 51 | 34 |
| Pct | 100.0% | 97.1% |
| Two-Point Conversions | ||
| Attempts | 6 | 0 |
| Made | 4 | 0 |
Official-stats conventions: rushing includes sacks as negative attempts (NCAA), so Total Offense = rush + pass. Red-zone Score % counts touchdowns and field goals per trip.