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

TeamTklSacksPressuresINTHavoc Plays1. Texas Tech1,62173.5 (1)564 (1)24 (7)305 (1)2. Virginia1,61359.0 (5)364 (8)27 (2)271 (4)3. Oklahoma State1,55651.5 (10)378 (4)19 (20)242 (10)4. Tennessee1,51342.5 (18)270 (25)22 (11)252 (7)5. Texas A&M1,43161.5 (2)338 (12)13 (39)282 (3)5. Vanderbilt1,43144.0 (17)368 (6)25 (4)240 (11)7. Ole Miss1,41956.0 (7)421 (2)23 (8)289 (2)8. Kansas1,36533.5 (38)275 (24)10 (61)205 (22)9. Texas1,33059.0 (5)318 (14)23 (8)248 (9)10. UCF1,32334.0 (36)283 (22)21 (15)227 (12)11. Notre Dame1,32249.0 (12)364 (8)35 (1)268 (6)12. LSU1,29046.0 (14)326 (13)20 (17)214 (18)13. Arizona State1,23735.5 (31)285 (21)12 (44)204 (24)14. Mississippi State1,23532.0 (40)216 (54)11 (50)156 (46)15. Penn State1,23431.5 (42)256 (33)22 (11)217 (16)16. Florida State1,23144.5 (16)266 (29)8 (74)190 (32)17. Miami1,22753.5 (8)386 (3)25 (4)251 (8)18. Houston1,21928.5 (52)202 (55)12 (44)172 (39)19. Colorado1,20142.5 (18)296 (20)19 (20)225 (13)20. BYU1,19135.5 (31)303 (19)25 (4)221 (15)21. Indiana1,19059.5 (4)349 (11)22 (11)270 (5)22. Baylor1,18634.5 (35)253 (34)20 (17)190 (32)23. Arizona1,17640.5 (21)276 (23)22 (11)217 (16)24. Cincinnati1,17519.5 (78)135 (90)10 (61)163 (44)25. Washington1,16939.0 (24)372 (5)17 (28)198 (27)26. UCLA1,14532.0 (40)267 (28)13 (39)223 (14)27. Wake Forest1,13730.5 (47)260 (32)11 (50)177 (37)28. SMU1,13540.0 (23)306 (17)18 (23)208 (21)29. Georgia1,13423.5 (63)223 (48)27 (2)196 (28)30. Tulsa1,12921.0 (69)145 (81)11 (50)148 (52)31. Virginia Tech1,12538.0 (25)219 (52)16 (29)195 (29)32. Florida1,11736.5 (29)237 (44)14 (35)204 (24)33. Georgia Tech1,10831.0 (45)268 (27)4 (113)141 (56)34. Miami (Ohio)1,08938.0 (25)307 (16)8 (74)169 (42)35. Oregon1,06353.5 (8)368 (6)16 (29)211 (20)36. Michigan State1,05041.0 (20)221 (51)15 (33)167 (43)37. Tulane1,04821.0 (69)181 (69)12 (44)133 (62)38. Maryland1,04331.0 (45)223 (48)18 (23)174 (38)39. Minnesota1,03861.0 (3)358 (10)11 (50)214 (18)40. Auburn1,03449.5 (11)313 (15)14 (35)188 (35)41. Clemson1,02937.0 (28)231 (45)18 (23)205 (22)42. Stanford1,02127.0 (54)228 (46)9 (68)136 (60)43. Louisville1,01945.5 (15)306 (17)10 (61)203 (26)44. South Florida1,01821.0 (69)241 (41)13 (39)151 (50)45. Nebraska1,00930.5 (47)218 (53)8 (74)153 (48)46. Arkansas1,00230.0 (51)182 (67)23 (8)170 (40)47. Northwestern98923.5 (63)185 (64)8 (74)139 (57)48. TCU97630.5 (47)222 (50)18 (23)161 (45)49. West Virginia94821.0 (69)193 (60)11 (50)127 (66)50. Alabama94126.0 (56)246 (37)20 (17)178 (36)51. Ohio State93347.0 (13)263 (30)15 (33)170 (40)52. Michigan93225.0 (59)227 (47)21 (15)194 (30)53. Memphis93119.5 (78)182 (67)18 (23)139 (57)54. Utah State92225.5 (57)161 (75)11 (50)120 (71)55. Pittsburgh91634.0 (36)270 (25)14 (35)193 (31)56. New Mexico90616.5 (87)120 (95)13 (39)117 (75)57. Oklahoma89640.5 (21)245 (38)14 (35)190 (32)58. Purdue89328.0 (53)244 (39)13 (39)145 (54)59. Florida Atlantic89136.5 (29)248 (36)2 (126)136 (60)60. Kennesaw State88219.5 (78)184 (65)7 (83)113 (79)61. Utah88137.5 (27)242 (40)19 (20)150 (51)62. Illinois85720.0 (75)142 (84)16 (29)133 (62)62. Boston College85711.5 (109)100 (99)16 (29)94 (92)64. USC85435.0 (34)239 (43)11 (50)138 (59)65. Arkansas State84411.0 (111)93 (103)7 (83)92 (94)66. San Diego State83314.5 (93)175 (71)9 (68)105 (84)67. Kentucky82924.0 (62)181 (69)10 (61)118 (73)68. Iowa State82022.5 (66)195 (59)12 (44)145 (54)69. FIU81125.0 (59)160 (77)11 (50)119 (72)70. Old Dominion81023.5 (63)156 (78)6 (95)122 (69)71. New Mexico State80417.0 (85)192 (61)11 (50)113 (79)72. Georgia Southern79317.0 (85)200 (57)11 (50)116 (77)73. Liberty77514.5 (93)151 (79)3 (116)96 (90)74. Rutgers76631.5 (42)261 (31)3 (116)118 (73)75. Texas State76315.0 (90)150 (80)8 (74)133 (62)76. Syracuse76227.0 (54)188 (62)7 (83)131 (65)77. Wisconsin76130.5 (47)197 (58)5 (102)111 (81)78. California76020.5 (73)183 (66)3 (116)105 (84)79. North Texas73616.5 (87)144 (83)5 (102)122 (69)80. Duke72910.0 (116)137 (87)8 (74)105 (84)81. Kansas State72232.5 (39)202 (55)9 (68)154 (47)82. South Carolina71835.5 (31)253 (34)9 (68)148 (52)83. Eastern Michigan71414.5 (93)88 (110)5 (102)84 (97)84. Colorado State70418.0 (83)162 (73)9 (68)89 (95)85. UConn68725.0 (59)188 (62)4 (113)98 (89)86. Boise State66931.5 (42)240 (42)6 (95)153 (48)86. NC State66918.5 (82)118 (96)9 (68)96 (90)88. North Carolina66820.0 (75)139 (85)7 (83)88 (96)89. Air Force66613.0 (100)97 (100)7 (83)68 (111)90. Rice66010.5 (113)97 (100)3 (116)76 (102)91. Jacksonville State65419.0 (81)175 (71)12 (44)123 (68)92. Missouri64013.0 (100)132 (92)8 (74)109 (83)93. Fresno State63720.5 (73)161 (75)12 (44)110 (82)94. Coastal Carolina61622.5 (66)162 (73)8 (74)117 (75)95. Navy61511.5 (109)70 (120)7 (83)67 (112)96. East Carolina60325.5 (57)145 (81)5 (102)114 (78)97. UNLV60111.0 (111)92 (106)5 (102)100 (88)98. UTSA57920.0 (75)139 (85)7 (83)124 (67)99. UMass5616.5 (125)40 (133)5 (102)51 (124)100. Troy54721.5 (68)124 (93)10 (61)76 (102)101. Hawaii53914.0 (96)105 (98)7 (83)103 (87)102. UTEP52410.0 (116)73 (118)3 (116)74 (106)103. Marshall51113.5 (98)75 (117)11 (50)93 (93)104. Delaware50712.0 (105)134 (91)7 (83)78 (100)105. Louisiana5056.5 (125)68 (121)6 (95)56 (117)106. Ohio50010.5 (113)93 (103)6 (95)76 (102)107. Washington State48917.5 (84)137 (87)4 (113)72 (108)107. Oregon State4898.5 (120)82 (114)5 (102)77 (101)109. Akron48515.0 (90)83 (112)3 (116)69 (109)110. Western Michigan4837.5 (124)57 (128)7 (83)69 (109)110. Charlotte48313.0 (100)121 (94)3 (116)54 (123)112. App State48214.0 (96)83 (112)6 (95)76 (102)113. Temple4613.5 (132)53 (129)5 (102)40 (131)114. Nevada45912.0 (105)137 (87)10 (61)73 (107)115. Louisiana Monroe45515.0 (90)89 (108)2 (126)79 (99)116. Iowa4404.0 (131)53 (129)10 (61)63 (114)117. James Madison43113.0 (100)89 (108)6 (95)55 (119)118. Louisiana Tech43013.5 (98)114 (97)7 (83)81 (98)118. Ball State4308.0 (122)80 (115)6 (95)56 (117)118. Kent State4305.5 (128)58 (127)2 (126)49 (126)121. Western Kentucky4173.0 (133)73 (118)5 (102)59 (116)122. Missouri State41512.0 (105)93 (103)3 (116)61 (115)123. UAB40816.5 (87)96 (102)2 (126)55 (119)124. Wyoming3962.0 (135)60 (123)7 (83)50 (125)125. Bowling Green37412.0 (105)76 (116)5 (102)64 (113)126. Sam Houston35512.5 (104)86 (111)2 (126)55 (119)127. Middle Tennessee32510.5 (113)67 (122)5 (102)44 (129)128. Buffalo3238.0 (122)48 (132)3 (116)45 (127)129. Toledo2933.0 (133)51 (131)3 (116)30 (134)130. San Jose State2868.5 (120)91 (107)2 (126)42 (130)131. Army2839.5 (118)60 (123)8 (74)55 (119)132. South Alabama2715.5 (128)60 (123)1 (134)38 (132)133. Georgia State2476.0 (127)36 (134)0 (135)30 (134)134. Central Michigan2339.0 (119)59 (126)2 (126)45 (127)135. Southern Miss2204.5 (130)34 (135)2 (126)38 (132)136. Northern Illinois732.0 (135)29 (136)0 (135)7 (136)137. Sacramento State460.0 (137)10 (137)0 (135)1 (137)138. North Dakota State30.0 (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 efficiency

Minimum 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)

TeamMissTkl%Sack%Prsr%Havoc%1. Clemson11.0%1.8% (20)11.2% (30)1.9% (2)2. Kentucky11.3%1.2% (80)9.0% (95)1.2% (100)3. USC11.5%1.4% (44)9.7% (68)1.3% (73)4. Rutgers11.5%1.2% (87)9.6% (76)1.3% (80)5. James Madison11.7%1.3% (67)8.6% (106)1.2% (94)6. Buffalo11.7%1.5% (43)8.8% (101)1.1% (118)7. Marshall11.9%1.8% (26)9.8% (67)1.4% (56)8. Middle Tennessee11.9%1.4% (52)8.9% (96)1.0% (128)9. Jacksonville State12.1%1.0% (102)9.4% (82)1.7% (18)10. Alabama12.4%1.0% (104)9.6% (75)1.5% (44)11. Georgia State12.4%1.0% (105)6.0% (135)1.0% (125)12. Nebraska12.4%1.2% (82)8.5% (108)1.3% (74)13. UMass12.5%1.8% (16)11.4% (25)1.0% (124)14. Louisiana Monroe12.5%1.8% (21)10.6% (44)1.6% (29)15. UTEP12.5%1.2% (88)8.4% (109)1.4% (70)16. Texas12.7%2.0% (6)11.0% (36)1.8% (6)17. Pittsburgh12.7%1.1% (91)9.0% (92)1.7% (12)18. Southern Miss12.7%1.3% (68)9.5% (81)1.5% (36)19. Oregon12.9%1.5% (39)10.3% (55)1.7% (17)20. Miami (Ohio)12.9%1.3% (64)10.3% (54)1.4% (66)21. Delaware12.9%1.2% (86)13.0% (7)1.4% (59)22. North Carolina12.9%1.4% (56)9.4% (84)1.2% (99)23. Florida State12.9%1.9% (12)11.5% (24)1.6% (27)24. Georgia13.0%0.9% (115)8.8% (103)1.5% (34)25. Arizona13.0%1.6% (31)11.0% (37)1.6% (28)26. South Florida13.1%0.9% (114)10.7% (43)1.3% (72)27. Louisiana Tech13.1%1.2% (74)10.3% (52)1.7% (9)28. Indiana13.1%1.9% (15)11.1% (32)1.8% (4)29. Georgia Tech13.2%1.2% (70)10.8% (40)1.1% (112)30. Ole Miss13.3%1.5% (37)11.5% (22)1.7% (11)31. Missouri13.3%1.1% (97)11.0% (35)1.5% (40)32. Duke13.3%0.8% (122)11.1% (33)1.4% (62)33. UConn13.4%1.2% (83)8.9% (100)1.2% (91)34. Oklahoma State13.4%1.4% (46)10.5% (48)1.4% (65)35. Houston13.4%1.1% (89)8.1% (113)1.2% (90)36. Florida13.5%1.5% (41)9.7% (72)1.6% (33)37. Notre Dame13.5%1.8% (24)13.2% (4)1.7% (14)38. Temple13.5%0.7% (127)11.1% (34)0.8% (135)39. LSU13.5%1.8% (23)12.7% (9)1.6% (26)40. Mississippi State13.6%1.4% (48)9.5% (79)1.3% (76)41. Syracuse13.7%1.4% (54)9.6% (77)1.4% (57)42. Memphis13.7%1.1% (96)10.2% (59)1.3% (85)43. Wyoming13.7%0.2% (136)6.9% (132)1.0% (123)44. Georgia Southern13.8%0.6% (133)7.1% (130)1.1% (114)45. Bowling Green13.8%1.5% (38)9.7% (73)1.5% (42)46. Tulsa13.9%1.1% (90)7.9% (117)1.2% (103)47. Nevada13.9%1.0% (108)11.2% (29)1.3% (78)48. Virginia14.0%2.0% (7)12.1% (14)1.5% (46)49. Illinois14.0%1.3% (60)9.3% (86)1.3% (75)50. San Jose State14.1%0.7% (128)7.8% (120)1.2% (105)51. Oklahoma14.2%1.9% (13)11.5% (21)2.0% (1)52. Western Kentucky14.2%0.3% (135)7.2% (129)1.1% (115)53. Minnesota14.2%1.8% (19)10.5% (46)1.8% (5)54. East Carolina14.2%2.0% (8)11.2% (31)1.8% (3)55. Iowa14.2%0.8% (125)10.1% (61)1.3% (84)56. NC State14.2%1.2% (79)7.6% (123)1.1% (106)57. Vanderbilt14.3%1.0% (101)8.8% (104)1.4% (54)58. Wisconsin14.3%1.5% (36)9.9% (66)1.2% (97)59. Colorado State14.5%0.9% (118)7.8% (119)1.1% (113)60. Air Force14.5%1.4% (50)10.5% (47)1.0% (131)61. Kansas14.5%1.3% (62)10.6% (45)1.4% (64)62. Louisiana14.6%0.6% (134)6.2% (134)1.1% (121)63. West Virginia14.6%1.3% (61)11.9% (19)1.3% (82)64. Arkansas14.7%2.4% (1)14.9% (2)1.5% (49)65. Kansas State14.7%2.1% (4)13.0% (6)1.7% (15)66. Tennessee14.7%1.9% (11)12.3% (12)1.6% (24)67. New Mexico14.7%1.4% (45)10.4% (50)1.2% (93)68. Colorado14.7%1.7% (28)12.1% (15)1.7% (8)69. Virginia Tech14.7%1.8% (27)10.1% (63)1.4% (61)70. Utah State14.7%1.4% (53)8.8% (102)1.2% (95)71. Boston College14.7%0.9% (112)8.1% (114)1.0% (133)72. Michigan14.7%1.2% (71)11.3% (26)1.6% (22)73. FIU14.8%1.5% (40)9.5% (78)1.3% (83)74. Western Michigan14.8%1.2% (75)9.3% (87)1.4% (63)75. North Texas14.9%0.9% (113)8.1% (112)1.5% (43)76. Central Michigan15.0%1.1% (92)7.4% (126)1.4% (68)77. Texas Tech15.0%1.6% (34)12.2% (13)1.6% (25)78. Old Dominion15.1%1.8% (18)12.0% (16)1.5% (41)79. Cincinnati15.1%1.4% (51)9.7% (69)1.3% (71)80. Baylor15.1%1.2% (76)8.9% (98)1.4% (53)81. Washington15.3%1.4% (49)13.4% (3)1.5% (39)82. Ohio State15.3%1.8% (17)10.3% (53)1.5% (37)83. San Diego State15.3%0.6% (131)7.6% (122)1.1% (116)84. UCLA15.4%1.3% (63)10.7% (42)1.6% (30)85. Texas State15.4%1.2% (78)12.0% (17)1.6% (23)86. SMU15.4%1.6% (33)12.3% (11)1.5% (50)87. Louisville15.4%2.3% (3)15.2% (1)1.7% (10)88. Liberty15.5%0.9% (116)9.6% (74)1.1% (110)89. UCF15.5%1.3% (59)11.0% (38)1.5% (51)90. Ball State15.5%0.9% (117)9.0% (94)1.1% (119)91. Army15.5%0.9% (111)5.9% (136)1.4% (69)92. App State15.6%1.9% (14)11.3% (27)1.5% (35)93. Wake Forest15.6%1.3% (66)10.8% (41)1.3% (77)94. UTSA15.6%1.3% (65)8.9% (99)1.8% (7)95. Arizona State15.6%1.0% (109)7.8% (118)1.4% (58)96. Maryland15.7%1.4% (47)10.2% (60)1.4% (55)97. Florida Atlantic15.7%1.5% (42)10.0% (65)1.3% (86)98. Rice15.7%0.8% (121)7.7% (121)1.0% (122)99. Coastal Carolina15.7%1.7% (29)12.0% (18)1.6% (20)100. Arkansas State15.8%1.0% (107)8.3% (110)1.0% (127)101. TCU15.8%1.1% (95)8.0% (116)1.3% (79)102. South Carolina15.8%1.6% (32)11.5% (23)1.6% (31)103. Northwestern15.8%1.1% (98)8.5% (107)1.2% (98)104. Kent State15.9%0.7% (129)7.5% (124)1.0% (129)105. New Mexico State15.9%0.9% (119)9.7% (70)1.2% (101)106. Auburn15.9%2.1% (5)13.2% (5)1.5% (48)107. Troy16.0%1.9% (10)11.2% (28)1.2% (89)108. Navy16.0%1.3% (58)8.1% (115)1.0% (126)109. UNLV16.1%1.2% (77)10.1% (62)1.3% (87)110. California16.1%0.8% (124)6.8% (133)1.0% (132)111. Charlotte16.1%0.8% (123)7.3% (128)1.0% (130)112. Tulane16.3%1.1% (99)9.3% (88)1.1% (109)113. Texas A&M16.3%2.0% (9)10.8% (39)1.7% (13)114. Akron16.5%1.6% (30)9.0% (93)1.2% (92)115. Penn State16.6%1.2% (85)9.5% (80)1.5% (38)116. Missouri State16.8%1.2% (69)9.7% (71)1.2% (96)117. Stanford16.9%1.1% (93)9.4% (85)1.1% (107)118. Kennesaw State16.9%1.0% (106)9.4% (83)1.1% (111)119. UAB16.9%1.5% (35)8.9% (97)1.1% (120)120. Michigan State17.1%2.3% (2)12.4% (10)1.5% (52)121. Miami17.1%1.8% (25)12.7% (8)1.7% (16)122. Purdue17.2%1.1% (100)9.2% (90)1.3% (81)123. Iowa State17.2%1.2% (84)10.2% (58)1.5% (47)124. BYU17.2%1.2% (73)10.5% (49)1.6% (21)125. Utah17.2%1.8% (22)11.5% (20)1.5% (45)126. Hawaii17.2%1.4% (55)10.3% (57)1.6% (32)127. Boise State17.3%1.3% (57)10.3% (56)1.7% (19)128. Ohio17.4%1.0% (103)9.1% (91)1.4% (60)129. Fresno State17.4%0.9% (110)7.4% (127)1.4% (67)130. Eastern Michigan17.8%1.2% (72)7.5% (125)1.2% (102)131. Oregon State18.1%0.7% (126)7.1% (131)1.2% (88)131. Washington State18.1%1.1% (94)8.6% (105)1.1% (108)133. South Alabama18.6%0.8% (120)9.3% (89)1.1% (117)134. Sam Houston19.5%1.2% (81)8.2% (111)1.2% (104)135. Toledo19.5%0.6% (132)10.4% (51)0.9% (134)Northern Illinoisn/a0.7% (130)10.1% (64)n/aNorth Dakota Staten/an/an/an/aSacramento Staten/an/an/an/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)

1. Arkansas — 2.4%
2. Michigan State — 2.3%
3. Louisville — 2.3%
4. Kansas State — 2.1%
5. 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)

1. Louisville — 15.2%
2. Arkansas — 14.9%
3. Washington — 13.4%
4. Notre Dame — 13.2%
5. 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)

1. Oklahoma — 2.0%
2. Clemson — 1.9%
3. Indiana — 1.8%
4. Minnesota — 1.8%
5. 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 Efficiency

Minimum 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)

TeamDefComp%DefYds/AttDefPsTD%Target%1. Nevada49.7%6.5 (17)4.4% (48)11.3% (12)2. Buffalo50.5%6.2 (6)3.8% (23)13.4% (98)3. Notre Dame52.9%6.4 (11)3.8% (22)13.0% (78)4. Central Michigan53.2%6.2 (7)4.3% (39)14.0% (116)5. Marshall53.6%7.3 (57)5.6% (91)12.9% (70)6. Boise State53.9%6.6 (27)4.4% (51)13.7% (110)7. Missouri54.1%6.9 (39)2.7% (5)13.1% (83)8. California55.1%7.8 (92)4.1% (33)13.7% (111)9. Michigan55.5%6.5 (18)5.5% (88)13.9% (112)10. UNLV55.9%6.6 (22)4.3% (44)14.0% (114)11. Western Michigan56.0%6.6 (24)3.2% (9)13.4% (99)12. Miami56.2%6.4 (13)4.8% (69)12.8% (65)13. Iowa56.7%6.6 (23)2.7% (6)15.1% (128)14. Utah56.8%6.7 (32)5.1% (79)14.2% (119)15. UCLA57.0%6.1 (3)4.5% (59)12.9% (74)16. Western Kentucky57.1%6.9 (42)4.2% (34)10.6% (5)17. South Carolina57.2%6.3 (8)3.6% (14)13.5% (104)18. TCU57.4%7.8 (90)5.9% (100)13.4% (100)19. Coastal Carolina57.6%6.7 (34)7.6% (129)12.5% (49)20. Auburn57.7%6.8 (36)2.5% (4)12.5% (48)21. Georgia Southern58.4%7.5 (74)3.3% (11)15.6% (133)22. Alabama58.4%6.5 (19)4.5% (58)11.0% (8)23. Virginia58.5%7.4 (65)7.5% (128)12.4% (41)24. Kansas State58.6%7.7 (84)4.6% (63)13.2% (86)25. South Alabama58.6%7.7 (83)6.3% (109)12.2% (37)26. North Texas58.6%8.1 (103)5.7% (95)13.1% (82)27. Illinois58.7%6.5 (15)4.2% (38)14.5% (122)28. Louisiana Monroe59.0%7.5 (72)6.7% (117)12.3% (38)29. Hawaii59.1%5.9 (2)4.2% (37)15.5% (132)30. Texas AM59.3%6.8 (35)4.3% (43)10.9% (7)31. Wyoming59.3%7.9 (94)9.1% (135)13.3% (92)32. Georgia59.3%6.6 (25)4.4% (46)12.9% (71)33. Colorado59.3%7.4 (70)3.8% (21)13.0% (79)34. Texas Tech59.4%6.7 (31)4.0% (27)12.9% (69)35. Louisiana Tech59.4%6.2 (4)2.4% (2)13.2% (88)36. Florida59.4%7.2 (53)4.0% (29)11.9% (23)37. Ohio State59.5%6.2 (5)4.3% (40)11.1% (10)38. NC State59.8%7.0 (45)4.0% (30)13.1% (84)39. Louisiana59.9%5.8 (1)5.6% (94)12.1% (35)40. Temple59.9%8.3 (118)4.5% (53)12.4% (43)41. SMU60.2%7.6 (78)5.0% (76)13.5% (103)42. Washington State60.2%7.3 (60)6.3% (112)15.4% (130)43. Liberty60.3%7.4 (69)3.7% (19)12.0% (27)44. Oregon State60.3%7.6 (81)5.3% (83)15.4% (131)45. Georgia Tech60.5%7.7 (88)5.0% (75)13.1% (85)46. Virginia Tech60.5%7.6 (79)5.9% (102)12.9% (68)47. Navy60.5%8.1 (108)4.0% (28)11.8% (21)48. Clemson60.6%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 State60.7%7.8 (93)6.0% (103)10.2% (3)51. Jacksonville State60.8%7.9 (95)4.5% (55)12.4% (46)52. Washington60.9%6.5 (14)3.6% (13)12.1% (30)53. Louisville60.9%6.7 (29)2.2% (1)13.1% (80)54. Oklahoma60.9%6.7 (33)3.8% (20)12.7% (57)55. USC61.0%6.5 (20)3.6% (17)13.0% (76)56. Syracuse61.1%7.3 (59)6.0% (105)14.1% (118)57. Iowa State61.1%7.7 (87)5.4% (87)13.3% (90)58. Kentucky61.1%7.8 (91)4.8% (68)12.0% (28)59. UTEP61.2%7.6 (80)7.8% (130)12.7% (55)60. Nebraska61.2%6.9 (40)3.3% (12)12.3% (39)61. Oklahoma State61.3%7.1 (47)4.7% (64)12.4% (42)62. Pittsburgh61.4%7.0 (43)4.5% (57)15.7% (134)63. Cincinnati61.4%6.5 (16)4.2% (34)12.7% (56)64. Oregon61.4%6.8 (37)4.2% (36)12.8% (64)65. South Florida61.5%8.2 (112)5.0% (74)12.8% (63)66. Ole Miss61.6%6.3 (9)4.0% (26)13.4% (97)67. Bowling Green61.7%8.8 (132)5.4% (85)11.6% (19)68. Indiana61.8%7.4 (66)4.3% (42)11.8% (20)69. Georgia State61.8%8.6 (130)8.2% (131)14.8% (125)70. Florida State62.0%7.7 (89)4.9% (71)13.3% (94)71. UConn62.0%8.4 (121)6.1% (106)10.0% (2)72. Old Dominion62.0%6.6 (28)5.3% (84)12.1% (33)73. Fresno State62.1%6.4 (12)2.9% (7)12.9% (72)74. Houston62.3%6.9 (41)3.6% (16)12.1% (34)75. Boston College62.3%8.1 (101)5.3% (82)13.2% (87)76. Mississippi State62.4%7.1 (49)4.1% (32)12.1% (29)77. Penn State62.5%7.0 (44)4.4% (47)13.3% (95)78. BYU62.6%7.3 (58)4.5% (60)12.6% (52)79. Arkansas State62.8%8.1 (104)5.6% (92)11.3% (11)80. FIU62.8%8.3 (120)6.2% (107)10.7% (6)81. Southern Miss62.8%8.0 (99)6.6% (114)13.5% (107)82. Wake Forest62.8%7.1 (48)3.6% (15)13.1% (81)83. Army62.8%7.2 (50)7.4% (126)13.5% (102)84. Arizona62.8%7.4 (63)4.5% (54)13.3% (91)85. UAB62.9%8.6 (128)9.0% (134)14.2% (120)86. Arizona State63.0%7.3 (56)5.1% (77)11.5% (14)87. Tulsa63.1%8.3 (116)6.8% (118)13.5% (106)88. Middle Tennessee63.3%8.5 (126)9.0% (133)12.0% (26)89. Maryland63.3%7.7 (85)6.7% (115)14.0% (113)90. UCF63.3%7.5 (73)4.4% (49)14.1% (117)91. Delaware63.7%7.4 (68)5.6% (93)11.6% (17)92. Memphis63.8%8.0 (100)5.8% (97)12.6% (50)93. Duke63.8%8.2 (114)5.2% (80)13.0% (77)94. Utah State63.9%8.1 (106)6.0% (104)12.5% (47)95. Baylor64.0%7.6 (82)7.1% (123)11.5% (15)96. Colorado State64.0%7.9 (98)6.2% (108)15.2% (129)97. Texas64.2%6.4 (10)4.1% (31)12.6% (51)98. Northwestern64.3%7.2 (55)3.2% (10)12.7% (60)99. UMass64.4%8.3 (118)7.4% (125)11.4% (13)100. East Carolina64.4%6.7 (30)3.9% (24)12.7% (62)101. Michigan State64.4%7.2 (52)5.0% (73)13.3% (96)102. Rice64.7%8.1 (105)6.3% (111)11.8% (22)103. Tulane64.7%8.1 (109)4.7% (65)13.4% (101)104. Florida Atlantic64.7%8.4 (123)5.8% (98)12.9% (66)105. Troy64.8%8.5 (127)2.4% (3)12.3% (40)106. Ohio64.8%7.5 (76)5.5% (89)9.9% (1)107. Wisconsin64.9%7.9 (97)6.3% (110)13.0% (75)108. Kennesaw State64.9%8.3 (117)5.8% (99)14.9% (126)109. New Mexico64.9%8.2 (110)7.5% (127)11.6% (16)110. App State65.0%7.3 (62)4.7% (66)13.6% (108)111. West Virginia65.0%7.3 (61)4.9% (70)14.6% (124)112. Tennessee65.1%7.4 (67)4.4% (51)12.9% (67)113. Stanford65.3%8.4 (125)6.7% (116)12.9% (73)114. Arkansas65.3%7.5 (75)5.2% (81)12.1% (32)115. San Diego State65.6%6.6 (26)5.6% (90)12.1% (31)116. Rutgers65.6%8.4 (124)6.9% (122)11.0% (9)117. LSU65.6%7.7 (86)4.6% (61)12.6% (53)118. Minnesota65.6%7.4 (64)6.9% (121)12.2% (36)119. Sam Houston65.7%9.3 (134)5.9% (101)13.2% (89)120. New Mexico State65.7%7.6 (77)6.5% (113)13.3% (93)121. Eastern Michigan65.7%7.9 (96)4.4% (50)12.4% (45)122. North Carolina65.9%7.5 (71)4.4% (45)14.2% (121)123. UTSA66.1%8.6 (129)7.2% (124)15.8% (135)124. Kent State66.1%8.1 (107)4.0% (25)11.6% (18)125. Vanderbilt66.3%8.2 (113)5.8% (96)13.5% (105)126. Texas State66.4%7.2 (54)3.6% (18)14.0% (115)127. Purdue66.6%8.4 (122)4.6% (62)12.7% (58)128. Akron67.1%9.1 (133)6.8% (120)12.7% (59)129. Kansas67.9%8.1 (102)5.1% (78)11.9% (25)130. James Madison68.0%6.9 (38)4.7% (67)12.6% (54)131. Air Force69.3%9.4 (135)4.9% (72)12.7% (61)132. San Jose State69.3%6.6 (21)6.8% (119)13.6% (109)133. Toledo69.6%8.2 (111)8.9% (132)10.5% (4)134. Charlotte69.9%8.7 (131)4.3% (41)14.6% (123)135. Missouri State70.1%8.2 (115)5.4% (86)11.9% (24)North Dakota Staten/an/an/an/aNorthern Illinoisn/an/an/an/aSacramento Staten/an/an/an/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)

1. UCLA — 6.1
2. Ohio State — 6.2
3. South Carolina — 6.3
4. Ole Miss — 6.3
5. 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)

1. Louisville — 2.2%
2. Auburn — 2.5%
3. Missouri — 2.7%
4. Iowa — 2.7%
5. 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)

1. Texas A&M — 10.9%
2. Alabama — 11.0%
3. Rutgers — 11.0%
4. Ohio State — 11.1%
5. 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 together

Perhaps 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.

Add CBS Sports on Google Join the Conversation comments