Bowling Green Falcons Football · 2026 Season Preview

Bowling Green Falcons

A data-backed preview built from the committed 2026 preseason SP+ snapshot, the CFBD schedule, and Bill Connelly's extracted conference preview tables. Every projection traces to a stored payload.

2026 SP+
#115
-13.3 overall · 6th of 13 in the MAC
Projection
5.8
Expected wins across 12 games
Most Likely
6-6
29.4% of outcomes
Off / Def
128/88
National ranks · Connelly model: 5.3 avg wins

Executive read

Bowling Green Falcons enters 2026 rated 6th in the MAC (#115 nationally). The profile is a below average defense (#88) paired with a poor offense (#128). Schedule math puts the season at 5.8 expected wins, against Connelly's independent 5.3. 5 games project as clear underdog spots (Nebraska, Iowa State, South Florida, Miami (OH), Western Michigan). The season turns on 2 close games: Buffalo, Toledo.

Page 2 · Team Quality

What the Ratings Say

Overall SP+
#115
-13.3 rating
Offense
#128
14.8 pts/gm · poor
Defense
#88
28.3 allowed · below average
Special teams
#43
+0.3 value

Unit ranks, 1–138 national

Offense#128
Defense#88
Special teams#43

Bars run left (worst) to right (best): a longer bar is a better national rank. Special-teams ratings are volatile year to year.

2025 resultRecordConfSP+ rank OffDefST
Where they finished4-8 2-6 #113 #128 #83 #43

Sideline

Eddie George — year 2, 4-8 career.

OC: Greg Nosal (NEW)
DC: returning

Heisman winner; took time at Tennessee State; exciting transfer/freshman class; aimed for unproven upside; 11 total offensive starts return

Returning production

35% overall, ranked #124 nationally.

Offense 32% · Defense 38%

47 returning starts, 15 redshirt freshmen.

Two models, one slate. This report's schedule math projects 5.81 wins; Connelly's published model projects 5.3 (4.5 in conference) with a strength-of-schedule rank of #110. His model gives 45.3% odds of six-plus wins and 0.0% of eleven-plus. Two independent methods landing close together is corroboration, not confirmation — they share SP+ as an input.
Page 3 · Schedule Math

Game-by-Game Projection

WeekDateOpponentOpp SP+ Proj marginWin %Tier
Wk 12026-09-05vs Tarleton StateFCS+14.286%Should win
Wk 22026-09-12@ Nebraska#37 / +7.7-23.55%Upset needed
Wk 32026-09-19@ Iowa State#64 / +1.0-16.811%Upset needed
Wk 42026-09-26vs South Florida#80 / -2.8-8.027%Upset needed
Wk 52026-10-03@ Miami (OH)#81 / -2.9-12.917%Upset needed
Wk 62026-10-10vs Sacramento State#130 / -22.7+11.982%Should win
Wk 72026-10-17vs Ball State#134 / -25.2+14.486%Should win
Wk 82026-10-24@ Buffalo#110 / -11.9-3.938%Lean loss
Wk 92026-10-31@ Western Michigan#95 / -7.2-8.625%Upset needed
Wk 112026-11-10vs Kent State#128 / -20.1+9.376%Lean win
Wk 122026-11-21@ Toledo#108 / -11.5-4.337%Lean loss
Wk 132026-11-28vs Massachusetts#137 / -30.9+20.192%Should win

Opening third

1.28

expected wins across 4 games
Tarleton State, Nebraska, Iowa State, South Florida

Middle third

2.22

expected wins across 4 games
Miami (OH), Sacramento State, Ball State, Buffalo

Closing third

2.31

expected wins across 4 games
Western Michigan, Kent State, Toledo, Massachusetts

How to read the margin column. It is the SP+ rating gap plus home field, in points — a positive number means the model favors Bowling Green. Win percentage is that margin mapped through a logistic calibrated so a seven-point favorite wins about 70% of the time.
Page 4 · Outlook

Season Distribution

Expected wins
5.81
across 12 games
Bowl odds
59%
six or more wins
Total mass
100%
distribution sums to 100%
Conference
MAC
13 teams rated

Win-total probability

2 wins0.5%
3 wins3.2%
4 wins12.0%
5 wins25.2%
6 wins29.4%
7 wins19.8%
8 wins7.9%
9 wins1.8%

Exact Poisson-binomial over the projected game probabilities. Bars are scaled to the most likely outcome, and the percentages are absolute.

Quarterback

Hunter Najm vs Austin Novosad vs Jay Kastantin

battle (sophomore vs Oregon transfer vs Assumption D2 transfer) limited sample

Najm 2 good starts to 1 terrible; Novosad from Oregon; Kastantin from Assumption; receiving corps has zero players over 5 FBS catches

Program context

Upset Wins
Beat Toledo and Liberty; treated UMass with disdain in 31-point win; 3 one-score losses suggest marginal not fundamental problems

Page 5 · Conference & Method

Where They Sit in the MAC

#TeamSP+ rankRatingOff DefRet prodRet rank
1Miami (OH)#81-2.9#111#4849%#84
2Western Michigan#95-7.2#112#6851%#72
3Toledo#108-11.5#121#8433%#130
4Buffalo#110-11.9#126#8530%#135
5Central Michigan#113-12.4#116#9246%#100
6Bowling Green#115-13.3#128#8835%#124
7Ohio#117-13.6#134#7233%#129
8Eastern Michigan#121-15.0#115#11262%#24
9Akron#127-19.5#135#10640%#115
10Kent State#128-20.1#125#12748%#87
11Sacramento State#130-22.7#127#13132%#131
12Ball State#134-25.2#136#12836%#123
13Massachusetts#137-30.9#138#13646%#96

Method & Provenance

Sp 2026. Committed preseason SP+ snapshot data/external/cfbd_2026/sp_plus_2026.csv via cfb_model_lab.preseason.load_sp_plus; CFBD /ratings/sp returns zero rows for 2026.

Schedule. data/external/cfbd_2026/schedule_2026.csv (CFBD /games snapshot, regular season only).

Connelly. Bill Connelly ESPN+ 2026 conference previews extracted to data/external/connelly_*_2026/.

Projection Method. SP+ differential plus 2.5-point home field, mapped to win probability by a logistic with scale 8.0 (illustrative scale; not validated for this SP+ snapshot). Win distribution is an exact Poisson-binomial assuming independent games. Not a betting model and not the repo's StackedEnsemble forecast.

Lower Division. FCS/lower-division opponents absent from the FBS SP+ table are assigned a -25.0 rating placeholder.

Not betting advice. No market lines were pulled for this report and no edge is claimed. These are schedule-strength projections from public preseason ratings. If a real market exists, price it independently.