- Messages
- 355
- Likes
- 1,223
The DC thread in the bunker inspired this post. I wanted a data-led analysis of Vince Kehres that clearly displays what his defenses at Toledo and in the MAC have done. Important statistics such as yards/play, points/play, takeaways, and opponent offense ranking by season (I excluded FCS opponents for this category) among others were assembled. Here is the data for you to make up your mind if you like this dude or not. Me telling you my take on hiring him relative to other options isnt the point of this post.
Full disclosure: I used ChatGPT to assemble alot of this data + I gathered some categories my own when it ran into issues with data scraping. I had it create a draft of the brief below of which I have edited. I prodded this thing with inputs over the course of an hour and a half. I used ChatGPT Thinking 5.1. Was very mindful to make this data focused, with minor analysis by the LLM and some editorialization by me vs typical slop that is commonly posted here by those we wont name as we've cooked them hard enough.
Read:
Story here:
Using opponent 3rd-down conversion % and FBS rank:
Interpretation:
Tied roughly to the seasons those guys played on Kehres’ defenses:
Net: 5 defensive draftees in 4 drafts, including a 1st-round corner and a day-2 interior DL. Also displays some ability to develop.
Looking just at 2021–2025, where we have both sides of the equation:
Compressed verdict:
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Full disclosure: I used ChatGPT to assemble alot of this data + I gathered some categories my own when it ran into issues with data scraping. I had it create a draft of the brief below of which I have edited. I prodded this thing with inputs over the course of an hour and a half. I used ChatGPT Thinking 5.1. Was very mindful to make this data focused, with minor analysis by the LLM and some editorialization by me vs typical slop that is commonly posted here by those we wont name as we've cooked them hard enough.
1. Season-level efficiency snapshot (Toledo defense, Vince Kehres DC 2020–2025)
Key:- Def PPP = Toledo defensive points/play allowed (TeamRankings)
- Opp PPP avg = Average offensive points/play of Toledo’s FBS opponents that season (you calculated)
- PPP ratio = Def PPP ÷ Opp PPP avg ( <1 = suppressing scoring efficiency)
- Ranks are FBS national ranks for that stat.
A. Efficiency & schedule context
| Year | Def PPP (rank) | Opp PPP avg (rank) | PPP ratio | Est. effect vs baseline |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 0.197 (3rd) | 0.319 (97th) | 0.62 | ~38% lower PPP than opp baseline |
| 2024 | 0.317 (24th) | 0.355 (84th) | 0.89 | ~11% lower than baseline |
| 2023 | 0.310 (22nd) | 0.353 (79th) | 0.88 | ~12% lower than baseline |
| 2022 | 0.380 (61st) | 0.354 (80th) | 1.07 | ~7% higher than baseline |
| 2021 | 0.301 (17th) | 0.364 (74th) | 0.83 | ~17% lower than baseline |
| 2020 | 0.349 (36th) | — | — | schedule PPP not calculated |
- 2021, 2023, 2024, 2025 → defenses consistently held teams below their normal scoring efficiency.
- 2025 is absurd: chopping opponent PPP by roughly 38%.
- 2022 is the oddball: good yardage metrics, but worse PPP than opponent baseline, i.e. leaking points relative to the quality of offenses faced.
- Toledo's opponent average rank is typically poor. A post on twitter highlighted they havent played anybody this year, from the data it appears they have poor opponent rankings every year. I think this is an artifact of playing in the MAC.
B. Classic yardage & scoring profile
| Year | Yards/play allowed (rank) | Yards/game allowed (rank) | Points/game allowed (rank) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 3.91 (2nd) | ~248 (2nd) | 12.2 (4th) |
| 2024 | 4.90 (t-19th) | 358.6 (54th) | 23.2 (48th) |
| 2023 | 4.96 (t-16th) | 331.8 (27th) | 20.3 (23rd) |
| 2022 | 4.80 (12th) | 326.2 (18th) | 25.1 (56th) |
| 2021 | 4.88 (13th) | 350.2 (36th) | 21.8 (29th) |
| 2020 | 5.35 (t-34th) | 362.2 (56th) | 24.3 (37th) |
- 2021–2023: stable top-20-ish in yards/play, top-30-ish in scoring.
- 2024: yards/play still good, but more yardage/points per game (some combination of pace, field position, etc.).
- 2025: near-elite across all basic metrics.
2. Run defense & takeaways
Have to be able to stop the run in the Big Ten, here are the stats:
| Year | Rush YPC allowed (rank) | Rush YPG allowed (rank) | Takeaways (rank) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 2.53 (3rd) | 88.8 (6th) | 20 (22nd) |
| 2024 | 3.73 (34th) | 150.7 (62nd) | 20 (43rd) |
| 2023 | 3.96 (50th) | 148.8 (63rd) | 18 (59th) |
| 2022 | 3.83 (42nd) | 143.2 (54th) | 18 (66th) |
| 2021 | 3.75 (38th) | 151.5 (62nd) | 18 (52nd) |
| 2020 | 3.69 (31st) | 129.2 (36th) | 9 (90th) |
- Run defense is solidly above average every year, then truly elite in 2025.
- Takeaways are generally middle-of-the-pack nationally (not a pure havoc/turnover machine).
3. Third-down defense (its own category)
Have to get off the field on third down. Tony White had issues here and it almost gave me aneurysms.Using opponent 3rd-down conversion % and FBS rank:
| Year | Opp 3rd-down conv% | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 32.1% | 16th |
| 2024 | 39.06% | 62nd |
| 2023 | 36.9% | 42nd |
| 2022 | 34.8% | 26th |
| 2021 | 38.14% | 58th |
| 2020 | 27.38% | 3rd |
- 2020 & 2025: truly high-leverage monsters on money downs (top-20; 2020 basically elite at 3rd nationally).
- In the in-between years, third-down defense is fine to good, not dominant—which matches the “good but not suffocating” PPP picture for 2021, 2023, 2024.
- The 2022 weirdness shows up: 3rd-down rank is solid (26th) but PPP is mediocre → suggests issues elsewhere (explosives, red-zone, turnovers/field position).
- Third-down defense: huge spike years 2020 (3rd) and 2025 (16th), otherwise middling.
4. Defensive draft picks (since 2020)
Tied roughly to the seasons those guys played on Kehres’ defenses:
- 2022 Draft (from 2021 team):
- Tycen Anderson – S, Round 5 (CIN)
- Samuel Womack – CB, Round 5 (SF)
- 2023 Draft (from 2022 team):
- Desjuan Johnson – DL, Round 7 (LAR)
- 2024 Draft (from 2023 team):
- Quinyon Mitchell – CB, Round 1 (PHI)
- 2025 Draft (from 2024 team):
- Darius Alexander – DT, Round 3 (NYG)
Net: 5 defensive draftees in 4 drafts, including a 1st-round corner and a day-2 interior DL. Also displays some ability to develop.
5. Differences in PPP and WHY this matters/I choose to focus on this
Looking just at 2021–2025, where we have both sides of the equation:
- 2025:
- Opp offenses: 0.319 PPP (avg rank ~97th)
- Toledo D: 0.197 PPP (3rd) → ~38% reduction in points per play.
- Combined with 3rd in PPP allowed, top-5 yards/play and rush numbers → that’s a legitimate top-5 FBS defense, even after discounting for a weakish offensive slate.
- 2024:
- Opp: 0.355 PPP (~84th)
- UT D: 0.317 PPP (24th) → ~11% reduction.
- Facing below-average offenses and holding them somewhat further down: good, not transcendent.
- 2023:
- Opp: 0.353 PPP (~79th)
- UT D: 0.310 PPP (22nd) → ~12% reduction.
- Again: solidly better than schedule, aligns with top-25-ish scoring and yardage ranks.
- 2022:
- Opp: 0.354 PPP (~80th)
- UT D: 0.380 PPP (61st) → ~7% worse than what those offenses normally did.
- That matches the “good yardage, meh points allowed” disconnect: they limited yards but bled points (field position, red zone, explosives, or ST/TO issues likely at play).
- 2021:
- Opp: 0.364 PPP (~74th)
- UT D: 0.301 PPP (17th) → ~17% reduction.
- Very strong performance vs a slightly sub-average slate.
Compressed verdict:
- There’s a consistent pattern (except 2022) where Kehres’ defenses drive opponents below their season-long scoring efficiency, not just feasting on bad MAC offenses without real drag.
- 2025 isn’t just “good numbers in a weak league” — it’s top-3 PPP allowed while dramatically altering how efficient those offenses are on a snap-by-snap basis.
6. Why I care about per-play / per-carry metrics
- Totals (points/game, yards/game)are contaminated by:
- Tempo (fast vs slow offenses/defenses)
- Game script (garbage-time drives, teams going ultra-run-heavy with a lead)
- Play-count variance (one game with 95 snaps, another with 55)
- Per-play stats(points/play, yards/play, rush yards/carry):
- Normalize for volume, telling you how much damage you take per snap faced rather than “how many total yards happened in this 80-play track meet.”
- Are more portable across contexts — a 0.30 PPP defense is typically good whether it’s facing 60 or 80 plays per game.
- Correlate better with underlying quality and are less noisy week to week.
- Separate “this defense gave up 24 points because they played 95 snaps and their offense went 3-and-out all night”
from - “this defense gives up 0.40 points every snap and is structurally bad.”
- 2022: yards/play looks good, PPP vs opponent baselines says ‘not actually that good.’
- 2025: PPP and YPP and YPC all agree this unit is legitimately elite, not just protected by context.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Last edited:
