UAB Blazers Football · 2026 Season Preview

UAB Blazers

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+
#124
-18.1 overall · 14th of 15 in the American
Projection
3.6
Expected wins across 12 games
Most Likely
3-9
30.5% of outcomes
Off / Def
108/132
National ranks · Connelly model: 4.1 avg wins

Executive read

UAB Blazers enters 2026 rated 14th in the American (#124 nationally). The profile is a poor defense (#132) paired with a poor offense (#108). Schedule math puts the season at 3.6 expected wins, against Connelly's independent 4.1. 9 games project as clear underdog spots (Illinois, Louisiana, Navy, Memphis, East Carolina, South Florida, Temple, UTSA, North Texas).

Page 2 · Team Quality

What the Ratings Say

Overall SP+
#124
-18.1 rating
Offense
#108
20.3 pts/gm · poor
Defense
#132
37.9 allowed · poor
Special teams
#123
-0.5 value

Unit ranks, 1–138 national

Offense#108
Defense#132
Special teams#123

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 #125 #80 #132 #121

Sideline

Alex Mortensen — year 1 (first full), 2-4 career.

OC: NEW
DC: Todd Grantham (NEW)

Mortensen was Dilfer's OC promoted; Grantham veteran DC; 3 years 11 wins under Dilfer; program directionless; 39-man transfer class

Returning production

35% overall, ranked #125 nationally.

Offense 32% · Defense 38%

41 returning starts, 7 redshirt freshmen.

Two models, one slate. This report's schedule math projects 3.64 wins; Connelly's published model projects 4.1 (2.1 in conference) with a strength-of-schedule rank of #101. His model gives 13.0% 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 12026-09-04@ Illinois#33 / +9.3-29.92%Upset needed
Wk 22026-09-12vs UL Monroe#132 / -24.3+8.775%Lean win
Wk 32026-09-20@ Louisiana#104 / -9.1-11.519%Upset needed
Wk 42026-09-25vs Navy#63 / +1.1-16.711%Upset needed
Wk 52026-10-03vs SamfordFCS+9.476%Lean win
Wk 62026-10-10@ Memphis#70 / -1.1-19.58%Upset needed
Wk 72026-10-15vs East Carolina#76 / -2.0-13.615%Upset needed
Wk 92026-10-31@ South Florida#80 / -2.8-17.810%Upset needed
Wk 102026-11-07vs Charlotte#138 / -32.4+16.889%Should win
Wk 112026-11-14@ Temple#102 / -8.7-11.918%Upset needed
Wk 122026-11-21vs UTSA#73 / -1.5-14.115%Upset needed
Wk 132026-11-28@ North Texas#109 / -11.8-8.825%Upset needed

Opening third

1.07

expected wins across 4 games
Illinois, UL Monroe, Louisiana, Navy

Middle third

1.10

expected wins across 4 games
Samford, Memphis, East Carolina, South Florida

Closing third

1.47

expected wins across 4 games
Charlotte, Temple, UTSA, North Texas

How to read the margin column. It is the SP+ rating gap plus home field, in points — a positive number means the model favors UAB. 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
3.64
across 12 games
Bowl odds
7%
six or more wins
Total mass
100%
distribution sums to 100%
Conference
American
15 teams rated

Win-total probability

1 wins2.6%
2 wins13.8%
3 wins30.5%
4 wins30.1%
5 wins16.2%
6 wins5.3%
7 wins1.1%

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

Quarterback

Ryder Burton

returning (was backup) limited sample

Promising moments as backup; Mortensen's system; skill corps awfully new

Program context

Dilfer Record · 11
11 wins in 3 years under Dilfer; program directionless; bottom 10 in defensive SP+

Page 5 · Conference & Method

Where They Sit in the American

#TeamSP+ rankRatingOff DefRet prodRet rank
1Navy#63+1.1#58#7747%#93
2Memphis#70-1.1#56#9542%#111
3UTSA#73-1.5#47#10254%#57
4East Carolina#76-2.0#84#7142%#110
5South Florida#80-2.8#59#9841%#113
6Army#83-3.0#81#8250%#75
7Tulane#87-5.5#99#8640%#117
8Florida Atlantic#94-7.1#60#12064%#19
9Tulsa#96-7.6#91#10362%#23
10Temple#102-8.7#74#11753%#64
11UConn#107-11.2#107#10831%#134
12North Texas#109-11.8#89#12332%#132
13Rice#120-14.7#119#11039%#120
14UAB#124-18.1#108#13235%#125
15Charlotte#138-32.4#137#13843%#107

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.