Skip to content
CFB/LAB
Menu

USC

2026 season

Big Ten
2026 preseason report

Historical preseason snapshot from 2026-07-29, including roster context and illustrative season projections. This is not a live injury feed.

What every system says

USC's rank in each system (1 = best). Middle rank 24 across 8 systems; best 15, worst 31, so they disagree by 16 places.

Lab EPA
#27
Through week 92026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 9. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings take separate places, ordered by team name.
Lab SRS
#21
up 102026 · 138 FBS roster teams, including prior-only teams · Through week 9 · built 2026-11-06T12:26:24.430328+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings take separate places, ordered by team name.
SP+
#20
down 12026 · 138 published SP+ teams · Provider week 10 · captured 2026-11-02T14:10:13.208713+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Published provider ranks; tie handling is not documented in this snapshot.
Elo
#16
up 72026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 9 · captured 2026-11-06T12:01:15.459089+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings share the best tied rank; the next rank skips places.
FPI
#15
up 102026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Event cutoff not supplied · captured 2026-11-06T12:01:15.459089+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings share the best tied rank; the next rank skips places.
CORE
#31
no change · Through week 9 · captured 2026-11-06T12:01:15.459089+00:002026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 9 · captured 2026-11-06T12:01:15.459089+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings share the best tied rank; the next rank skips places.
CFBD SRS
#30
up 92026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Event cutoff not supplied · captured 2026-11-06T12:01:15.459089+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings share the best tied rank; the next rank skips places.
WEPA
#27
up 52026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Event cutoff not supplied · captured 2026-11-06T12:01:15.459089+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings share the best tied rank; the next rank skips places.
Compare every team

FPI context

ESPN FPI via CFBD · 2026

Résumé and schedule

Results earned and schedule difficulty

Strength of record
#14 of 138
Schedule strength
#27 of 138
Remaining schedule strength
#14 of 138
Game control
#17 of 138

Unit efficiency

Performance by unit

Overall
#25 of 138
Offense
#6 of 138
Defense
#72 of 138
Special teams
#31 of 138

Ranks calculated among rated FBS teams; ties share rank. #1 means strongest résumé, hardest schedule, best game control or highest efficiency. These are separate measures, not a combined forecast. Captured Nov 6, 2026, 06:01:15 CST. FPI supplies no results-through week; capture time records when we received it.

Why the ratings disagree

USC · 2026. Each system answers a different question. The cards show each source's rank (published or computed here) and coverage, so a rank gap can also reflect which teams have data.

Record

7-2 wins–losses

No rank assigned

Results earned. Wins and losses do not account for opponent strength or victory margin.

2026, provider Week 10; captured 2026-11-02T14:10:13.208713+00:00

SP+ workbook record

Descriptive EPA

0.106 net EPA/play

#27

2026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 9. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings take separate places, ordered by team name.

Observed per-play efficiency after opponent adjustment. FBS-vs-FBS plays; no preseason strength prior. Sparse schedules can produce sharp early movement.

2026, through CFBD Week 9; opponent adjusted ridge

Lab EPA from CFBD plays

Local predictive SRS

9.64 points

#21 · Up 10 places since the previous CFBD cutoff

2026 · 138 FBS roster teams, including prior-only teams · Through week 9 · built 2026-11-06T12:26:24.430328+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings take separate places, ordered by team name.

This season's 9 games, with recent games counting a bit more: average margin +6.15 (with blowouts capped at 35 points and overtime games counted as a 1-point result, then 2.5 points of home field removed) against opponents averaging +4.51, schedule #11 of 138 (#1 = toughest). That is worth +10.66 on its own; the preseason prior of +5.76 still carries 21% of the weight, giving +9.64.

How each game enters this SRS rating

USC · 2026, through CFBD Week 9. Margins are team minus opponent. The fit caps margins and treats overtime as a one-point result before adjusting for venue. Recent games carry more weight; the fit share includes the preseason prior in its denominator.

GameRaw margin → transformedVenue adjustmentRecency weightFit shareOpponent ratingMargin termOpponent termTotal term
Week 1 · San José State
home · 2026-08-29 · ID 401864494
+16.00 → +16.00-2.500.73497.68%-7.541.037-0.5790.458
Week 1 · Fresno State
home · 2026-09-05 · ID 401858436
+39.00 → +35.00-2.500.73497.68%+3.432.4980.2632.761
Week 2 · Louisiana
home · 2026-09-13 · ID 401858445
+19.00 → +19.00-2.500.76377.99%+0.301.3180.0241.342
Week 3 · Rutgers
away · 2026-09-19 · ID 401858457
+7.00 → +7.00+2.500.79378.30%-5.850.789-0.4850.303
Week 4 · Oregon
home · 2026-09-26 · ID 401858469
-14.00 → -14.00-2.500.82498.63%+9.21-1.4230.794-0.629
Week 5 · Washington
home · 2026-10-03 · ID 401858478
+4.00 → +4.00-2.500.85728.96%+4.990.1340.4470.582
Week 6 · Penn State
away · 2026-10-10 · ID 401858485
+8.00 → +8.00+2.500.89099.32%+7.690.9780.7171.695
Week 8 · Wisconsin
away · 2026-10-24 · ID 401858500
-17.00 → -17.00+2.500.962210.06%+6.21-1.4590.625-0.834
Week 9 · Ohio State
home · 2026-10-31 · ID 401858509
+12.00 → +12.00-2.501.000010.46%+16.870.9931.7642.758

Game terms +8.43 points; prior term +1.20 points. Their unrounded sum is the fitted rating +9.64 points. The preseason prior is +5.76 with 20.92% of the fit weight. Displayed values are rounded; the producer checks the unrounded identity within 0.00000001 points.

These are additive terms of the current fit, not the effect of removing a game. Opponent ratings already reflect the connected schedule. Lower-division opponents use the fixed anchor, not an individually fitted rating. The rating's model-based 95% band is ±8.5 points; this decomposition does not reduce uncertainty or assign causal effects.

Download fitted terms and source hashes

Estimated strength from schedule-adjusted scoring margins, margin caps, home-field adjustment and recency weighting. Half of prior-season strength, including postseason, carries forward with two games of weight. SRS includes FCS opponents under a fixed strength assumption. 9 current games; prior available.

2026, through CFBD Week 9; generated 2026-11-06T12:26:24.430328+00:00

Lab SRS from CFBD scores

External SP+

14.6 SP+ points

#20 · Down 1 place

2026 · 138 published SP+ teams · Provider week 10 · captured 2026-11-02T14:10:13.208713+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Published provider ranks; tie handling is not documented in this snapshot.

Bill Connelly's published predictive strength estimate. Its method and scale differ from local SRS.

2026, provider Week 10; captured 2026-11-02T14:10:13.208713+00:00

Bill Connelly SP+ workbook

External CORE

9.92 net points per 100 offensive + 100 defensive plays

#31 of 138 by overall (ranked here; CORE publishes no rank)

2026 · 138 rated FBS teams in this CORE board · 2026, through regular Week 9; model core-v1; captured 2026-11-06T12:03:20.826325+00:00. Rank 1 is best; lower rank numbers are better. Higher rating values are better. Equal ratings share the best tied rank; the next rank skips places.

CFBD's context- and opponent-relative efficiency. Offense is higher-better; defense is points allowed above average, so lower is better; overall is offense minus defense. It counts only pass and rush plays from FBS-vs-FBS games, with no special teams, overtime or garbage time; early-week values are pulled toward average but are still uncertain, and it is not a résumé ranking. Its scale is not comparable to EPA, SRS or SP+. Offense 15.16 on 561 plays; defense 5.24 on 496 plays.

2026, through regular Week 9; model core-v1; captured 2026-11-06T12:03:20.826325+00:00

CFBD CORE ratingCORE board: offense vs defense

EPA ranks USC 6 places lower than local SRS at the matched cutoff. This identifies a disagreement; it does not isolate its cause. SP+ movement compares provider weeks 9 and 10. Provider weeks may differ from CFBD weeks, so no cross-provider rank gap is calculated. CORE reports its own inclusive cutoff and is shown beside these systems for comparison only; it is an external research rating and is never blended into the lab's opponent-adjusted EPA, local SRS or any pick.

Team ratings and rank gaps are not matchup spreads or win probabilities. Matchup context and a calibrated forecast mapping are required. Do not average EPA, SRS, SP+ and CORE values across their different scales.

Read local SRS assumptions and forecast evidence

Program context

2026 · CFBD records, polls, recruiting, coaches
Record
7-2 · conf 4-2 · home 5-1 · away 2-1 · expected wins 6.6
Polls (Week 10)
Coaches Poll #17 · AP Top 25 #18
CFP latest
#20 · 2026 regular Week 10 · captured 2026-11-06
CFP final
not published
Against the spread
2026: 3-6 ATS (-4.3 avg) · 2025: 5-8 ATS (+1.9 avg)
Head coach
Lincoln Riley · hired 2021-11-28 · 24-15 over 4 captured seasons
Recruiting classes
2024 #17 (254 pts) · 2025 #14 (257 pts) · 2026 #1 (311 pts)
Returning
59% of production · 66% of usage
Passing, receiving and rushing detail
CategoryProductionUsage
Passing91%96%
Receiving27%25%
Rushing78%73%

Shares of prior-season PPA and usage returning in each category. Missing values are unavailable.

Provider values from CFBD captures dated 2026-09-22, 2026-11-06. head coach for the season; tenure counts cover only the captured seasons, hire date is the provider's. Returning usage carries no signal beyond returning production in this repo's research; neither is a model input.

Recruiting by position group

2023–2026 classes · High school · CFBD · captured 2026-11-06 UTC

Position groupCommitsAvg. starsAvg. ratingTotal rating
Defensive Back183.670.903716.27
Defensive Line253.520.901522.54
Linebacker83.630.91207.30
Offensive Line213.430.899218.88
Quarterback34.670.97812.93
Receiver184.060.934916.83
Running Back73.710.90506.33
Special Teams62.830.85245.11

Recruiting class aggregates, not current roster strength. Commits count recruits across the window; total rating also reflects class size. JUCO, prep-school and transfer ratings are excluded. These values do not enter the prediction model.

Player efficiency and usage

2026 · observed 2026-11-06 UTC

Passing and rushing WEPA adjust efficiency for opponents. Kicker PAAR measures points added above replacement. Higher is better within each metric. Metric rows are ordered by sample size, followed by usage-only players. Usage is the share of team plays involving the player within each category; categories overlap and should not be added. CFBD definitions

Player / historyMetricValuePlays / attemptsOverall usageUsage detailRecruiting
Jayden Maiava · QB

CFBD athlete 4685454. USC (2024–2026); UNLV (2022–2023)

Passing WEPA0.65632551.5%
Pass 95.0% · Rush 5.2%

1st 43.6% · 2nd 55.1% · 3rd 63.3%

Standard downs 44.0% · Passing downs 71.3%

2022: 3★ · 0.8663
King Miller · RB

CFBD athlete 5233016. USC (2025–2026)

Rushing WEPA0.18814123.8%
Pass 3.4% · Rush 47.4%

1st 28.4% · 2nd 23.9% · 3rd 12.8%

Standard downs 27.4% · Passing downs 14.0%

Not linked
Waymond Jordan · RB

CFBD athlete 5295318. USC (2025–2026)

Rushing WEPA0.1637915.6%
Pass 3.4% · Rush 28.5%

1st 18.7% · 2nd 11.2% · 3rd 15.1%

Standard downs 18.4% · Passing downs 7.7%

2025: 3★ · 0.8683
Caden Chittenden · PK

CFBD athlete 5192405. USC (2025–2026); UNLV (2024–2024)

Kicker PAAR0.38012—
Pass — · Rush —

1st — · 2nd — · 3rd —

Standard downs — · Passing downs —

2024: 3★ · 0.8044
Ryon Sayeri · P

CFBD athlete 5221037. USC (2024–2026)

Kicker PAAR1.0002—
Pass — · Rush —

1st — · 2nd — · 3rd —

Standard downs — · Passing downs —

Not linked
Carson Tabaracci · TE

CFBD athlete 4905248. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——2.6%
Pass 5.1% · Rush 0.0%

1st 1.3% · 2nd 4.3% · 3rd 3.4%

Standard downs 1.7% · Passing downs 5.1%

Not linked
Corey Simms · WR

CFBD athlete 5148664. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——5.6%
Pass 12.2% · Rush 0.0%

1st 4.4% · 2nd 5.3% · 3rd 8.7%

Standard downs 5.1% · Passing downs 7.4%

Not linked
Deshonne Redeaux · RB

CFBD athlete 5159076. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——2.7%
Pass 0.0% · Rush 6.2%

1st 1.9% · 2nd 2.7% · 3rd 5.4%

Standard downs 3.0% · Passing downs 1.8%

Not linked
Ethan Feaster · WR

CFBD athlete 5268018. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——2.2%
Pass 4.1% · Rush 0.0%

1st 2.6% · 2nd 1.9% · 3rd 2.4%

Standard downs 2.5% · Passing downs 1.5%

Not linked
Jonas Williams · QB

CFBD athlete 5161854. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——7.7%
Pass 15.3% · Rush 1.7%

1st 6.6% · 2nd 8.2% · 3rd 11.1%

Standard downs 6.5% · Passing downs 11.5%

Not linked
Kayden Dixon-Wyatt · WR

CFBD athlete 5161013. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——8.5%
Pass 15.9% · Rush 0.7%

1st 5.9% · 2nd 10.7% · 3rd 9.2%

Standard downs 6.0% · Passing downs 15.2%

Not linked
Mark Bowman · TE

CFBD athlete 5264686. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——7.5%
Pass 15.7% · Rush 0.0%

1st 5.2% · 2nd 11.7% · 3rd 7.5%

Standard downs 6.2% · Passing downs 11.3%

Not linked
Riley Wormley · RB

CFBD athlete 5144164. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——5.0%
Pass 5.0% · Rush 5.4%

1st 7.3% · 2nd 1.9% · 3rd 6.0%

Standard downs 6.0% · Passing downs 2.3%

Not linked
Shahn Alston · RB

CFBD athlete 5158934. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——7.3%
Pass 1.6% · Rush 14.0%

1st 8.8% · 2nd 7.5% · 3rd 4.5%

Standard downs 9.2% · Passing downs 2.0%

Not linked
Taniela Tupou · TE

CFBD athlete 5209130. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——4.1%
Pass 7.7% · Rush 0.0%

1st 3.6% · 2nd 3.2% · 3rd 5.8%

Standard downs 4.6% · Passing downs 2.7%

Not linked
Tanook Hines · WR

CFBD athlete 5141975. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——6.7%
Pass 12.7% · Rush 0.0%

1st 4.8% · 2nd 7.4% · 3rd 11.6%

Standard downs 4.3% · Passing downs 12.5%

Not linked
Terrell Anderson · WR

CFBD athlete 5084658. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——5.3%
Pass 9.3% · Rush 0.0%

1st 2.9% · 2nd 7.7% · 3rd 9.1%

Standard downs 3.8% · Passing downs 8.3%

Not linked
Trent Mosley · WR

CFBD athlete 5160469. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——12.4%
Pass 23.7% · Rush 0.5%

1st 11.0% · 2nd 11.7% · 3rd 17.8%

Standard downs 11.4% · Passing downs 15.0%

Not linked
Tron Baker · WR

CFBD athlete 5158959. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——2.2%
Pass 4.2% · Rush 0.0%

1st 2.1% · 2nd 3.0% · 3rd 1.1%

Standard downs 1.9% · Passing downs 2.9%

Not linked
Tucker Ashcraft · TE

CFBD athlete 5032961. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——1.9%
Pass 4.1% · Rush 0.0%

1st 0.8% · 2nd 2.4% · 3rd 2.0%

Standard downs 2.2% · Passing downs 1.4%

Not linked
Walter Matthews · TE

CFBD athlete 5079510. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——1.4%
Pass 3.4% · Rush 0.0%

1st 2.8% · 2nd 0.0% · 3rd 0.0%

Standard downs 1.9% · Passing downs 0.0%

Not linked
Zach Williams · WR

CFBD athlete 5146757. Team attribution from the captured season usage record.

Not available——4.3%
Pass 8.1% · Rush 0.3%

1st 3.8% · 2nd 4.9% · 3rd 3.7%

Standard downs 3.5% · Passing downs 6.4%

Not linked

Transfers

Incoming · 10 reported
PlayerFromDateStars / ratingEligibility
Alex VanSumeren · DLMichigan State2026-01-063★ / 0.8900Immediate
Caleb Moser · LSUAB2026-09-09— / —Immediate
Carrington Pierce · CBOklahoma State2025-12-143★ / 0.8000Immediate
Deven Bryant · LBWashington2026-01-043★ / 0.8700Immediate
GianCarlo Rufo · LBGeorgetown2026-02-063★ / 0.8000Immediate
Jontez Williams · CBIowa State2026-01-044★ / 0.9300Immediate
Lachlan Carrigan · PMemphis2026-01-09— / —Immediate
Terrell Anderson · WRNC State2026-01-054★ / 0.9400Immediate
Tucker Ashcraft · TEWisconsin2026-01-153★ / 0.8800Immediate
Zuriah Fisher · EDGEPenn State2026-01-124★ / 0.9200Immediate
Outgoing · 22 reported
PlayerToDateStars / ratingEligibility
AJ Tuitele · LBCalifornia2026-01-173★ / 0.8600Immediate
Alex Payne · OTVirginia2026-01-133★ / 0.8700Immediate
Anthony Beavers Jr. · SWyoming2026-01-104★ / —Immediate
Braylon Conley · CBGeorgia2026-01-083★ / 0.8600Immediate
Bryan Jackson · RBWisconsin2026-01-073★ / 0.8600Immediate
Carlon Jones · DLArkansas2026-01-063★ / 0.8600Immediate
DJ Jordan · WRArizona2026-01-083★ / 0.8600Immediate
Devan Thompkins · DLAlabama2026-01-074★ / 0.9400Immediate
Gage Roy · QBIllinois State2026-01-21— / —Immediate
Garrison Madden · LBWestern Kentucky2026-01-113★ / 0.8400Immediate
Gus Cordova · EDGEMississippi State2026-01-103★ / 0.8500Immediate
Harry Dalton III · RBMaryland2026-01-063★ / 0.8600Immediate
Husan Longstreet · QBLSU2026-01-144★ / 0.9200Immediate
James Johnson · CBMiddle Tennessee2026-01-153★ / 0.8500Immediate
Joey Olsen · TENew Mexico2026-01-133★ / 0.8500Immediate
Kevin Longstreet · CBNot reported2026-01-05— / —Immediate
Makai Saina · IOLPurdue2026-01-053★ / 0.8500Immediate
Matai Tagoa'i · LBArizona2026-01-123★ / 0.8600Immediate
Micah Banuelos · IOLPurdue2026-01-043★ / 0.8500Immediate
Prince Strachan · WRWest Virginia2026-01-053★ / 0.8600Immediate
Steve Miller · SUConn2026-01-133★ / 0.8500Immediate
Walker Lyons · TEBYU2026-01-094★ / 0.9000Immediate

Transfer observations can include unresolved destinations. CFBD supplies no timezone for transfer dates and no athlete ID linking these records to the efficiency table. These observations do not establish current roster membership or game availability.

Descriptive context only; no player or transfer value enters the prediction model. Adjusted metrics require unambiguous season/team history. Usage-only rows use the captured athlete ID and team; conflicting usage identities are omitted. Missing values are unavailable, not zero. Provider coverage is incomplete.

Coaching eras

Continuous appointments at USC. Records are CFBD-attributed results; active tenures and the current season may be incomplete.

Lincoln Riley · career 90–28 across 10 seasons and 2 schools

Tenure timeline · 20 appointments
  1. 2022–present · Lincoln Riley · active at capture

    35–18 · 53 attributed games · 5 seasons

    Hired 2021-11-28. Exact effective dates unavailable.

  2. 2021–2021 · Donte Williams

    3–7 · 10 attributed games · 1 seasons · incomplete attribution

    Hired 2021-09-13. Exact effective dates unavailable.

  3. 2015–2021 · Clay Helton

    45–24 · 69 attributed games · 7 seasons · incomplete attribution

    Hired 2015-12-30. Exact effective dates unavailable.

  4. 2014–2014 · Steve Sarkisian

    9–4 · 13 attributed games · 1 seasons

    Hired 2013-12-02. Exact effective dates unavailable.

  5. 2013–2013 · Clay Helton

    1–0 · 1 attributed games · 1 seasons · incomplete attribution

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  6. 2013–2013 · Ed Orgeron

    6–2 · 8 attributed games · 1 seasons · incomplete attribution

    Hired 2013-09-29. Exact effective dates unavailable.

  7. 2010–2013 · Lane Kiffin

    28–15 · 43 attributed games · 4 seasons · incomplete attribution

    Hired 2010-01-12. Exact effective dates unavailable.

  8. 2001–2009 · Pete Carroll

    97–19 · 116 attributed games · 9 seasons

    Hired 2000-12-15. Exact effective dates unavailable.

  9. 1998–2000 · Paul Hackett

    19–18 · 37 attributed games · 3 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  10. 1993–1997 · John Robinson

    37–21–2 · 60 attributed games · 5 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  11. 1987–1992 · Larry Smith

    44–25–3 · 72 attributed games · 6 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  12. 1983–1986 · Ted Tollner

    26–20–1 · 47 attributed games · 4 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  13. 1976–1982 · John Robinson

    67–14–2 · 83 attributed games · 7 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  14. 1960–1975 · John McKay

    127–40–8 · 175 attributed games · 16 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  15. 1957–1959 · Don Clark

    13–16–1 · 30 attributed games · 3 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  16. 1951–1956 · Jess Hill

    45–17–1 · 63 attributed games · 6 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  17. 1942–1950 · Jeff Cravath

    54–28–8 · 90 attributed games · 9 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  18. 1941–1941 · Sam Barry

    2–6–1 · 9 attributed games · 1 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  19. 1925–1940 · Howard Jones

    121–36–13 · 170 attributed games · 16 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

  20. 1922–1924 · Gus Henderson

    25–5 · 30 attributed games · 3 seasons

    Exact effective dates unavailable.

Season résumé · 2015–2026

Coach-attributed records appear beside team-season ratings, recruiting and poll context. Shared seasons appear once per coach; rows are not assigned to individual stints. Ratings describe team performance, not a causal coaching effect.

Season / coachRecordConferencePostseasonSP+SRSRecruiting rankFinal poll
2026 · Lincoln Riley · incomplete attribution0–0——15.37.11—
2025 · Lincoln Riley9–47–20–116.915.51420
2024 · Lincoln Riley7–64–51–011.912.117—
2023 · Lincoln Riley8–55–41–09.498—
2022 · Lincoln Riley11–38–20–118.911.47012
2021 · Clay Helton · incomplete attribution1–1——-0.60.48—
2021 · Donte Williams · incomplete attribution3–7——-0.60.48—
2020 · Clay Helton5–15–10–012.4—5521
2019 · Clay Helton8–57–20–113.19.520—
2018 · Clay Helton5–74–50–09.71.34—
2017 · Clay Helton11–39–10–117.911.9412
2016 · Clay Helton10–37–21–023.619.4103
2015 · Clay Helton · incomplete attribution5–4——16.813.62—
Download coaching history JSON

Source: CFBD · captured 2026-10-26T02:02:59.394463+00:00 UTC. Season résumé covers 2015–2026; timeline spans all returned tenures. — means unavailable. Career summaries cover active coaches at capture. This snapshot is descriptive and is not a pregame cutoff.

CFBD season overview

2026 stored season snapshot, including postseason and garbage time. Raw CFBD PPA is not opponent-adjusted EPA or player WEPA. No week cutoff; these values do not enter our forecasts.

Captured 2026-11-02 13:51:41.272114 UTC · Source data

Stat rankings

CFBD FBS ranks · source updated 2026-11-01 14:09:44 UTC · calculated 2026-11-02 13:47:25 UTC · provider cache expiry 2026-11-02 13:57:25 UTC. Rank 1 is best; percentiles use CFBD’s 0–100 scale.

StatisticOffense rank / populationPercentileDefense rank / populationPercentile
PPA / play22 / 13884.798 / 13829.2
Success rate9 / 13894.280 / 13842.3
Explosiveness90 / 13835.085 / 13838.7
Standard-down success19 / 13886.963 / 13854.7
Passing-down success5 / 13897.1116 / 13816.1
Pass PPA18 / 13887.6118 / 13814.6
Rush PPA89 / 13835.869 / 13850.4
Pass explosiveness94 / 13832.1107 / 13822.6
Rush explosiveness117 / 13815.354 / 13861.3
Line yards80 / 13842.368 / 13851.1
Second-level yards70 / 13849.642 / 13870.1
Open-field yards127 / 1388.060 / 13856.9
Stuff rate112 / 13819.087 / 13837.2
Power successT97 / 13829.2111 / 13819.7
HavocT19 / 13886.1121 / 13812.4
Front-seven havocT20 / 13885.8T87 / 13836.9
DB havocT52 / 13861.7135 / 1382.2
Points / opportunity51 / 13863.599 / 13828.5
Average field positionT66 / 13851.1T38 / 13872.3
Field-position expected pointsT73 / 13847.135 / 13875.2

Player PPA and usage

Ordered by overall usage. Open a player for pass, rush, down and situation splits. Usage is the provider’s share of team plays in each situation; PPA is the provider’s average or total for that player. Missing values stay blank (—); play counts are not supplied here. Standard downs are 1st down, 2nd-and-7 or shorter, and 3rd/4th-and-4 or shorter; other situations are passing downs.

Jayden Maiava · QBUsage 51.5% · Avg PPA 0.349 · Total 112.099
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.349112.09951.5%
Pass0.437133.23795.0%
Rush-1.145-17.1705.2%
1st down0.14718.57643.6%
2nd down0.56463.68255.1%
3rd down0.54337.47363.3%
Standard downs0.24248.06544.0%
Passing downs0.52564.03471.3%
King Miller · RBUsage 23.8% · Avg PPA 0.124 · Total 18.306
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.12418.30623.8%
Pass0.0770.8483.4%
Rush0.11816.11347.4%
1st down0.0080.69528.4%
2nd down-0.029-1.41023.9%
3rd down1.09315.30312.8%
Standard downs0.08610.67427.4%
Passing downs0.3187.63214.0%
Waymond Jordan · RBUsage 15.6% · Avg PPA 0.029 · Total 2.483
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.0292.48315.6%
Pass-0.315-2.8373.4%
Rush0.0705.32028.5%
1st down-0.025-1.22018.7%
2nd down-0.026-0.51511.2%
3rd down0.0280.39415.1%
Standard downs0.0332.47518.4%
Passing downs0.0010.0077.7%
Trent Mosley · WRUsage 12.4% · Avg PPA 0.668 · Total 34.088
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.66834.08812.4%
Pass0.65532.73923.7%
Rush1.3481.3480.5%
1st down0.4339.10311.0%
2nd down0.97415.59111.7%
3rd down1.02613.33617.8%
Standard downs0.71524.31011.4%
Passing downs0.5759.77815.0%
Kayden Dixon-Wyatt · WRUsage 8.5% · Avg PPA 0.455 · Total 24.137
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.45524.1378.5%
Pass0.57729.44515.9%
Rush-2.654-5.3090.7%
1st down-0.208-3.5375.9%
2nd down0.50911.20810.7%
3rd down1.08410.8449.2%
Standard downs0.2526.8066.0%
Passing downs0.66717.33115.2%
Jonas Williams · QBUsage 7.7% · Avg PPA 0.041 · Total 0.699
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.0410.6997.7%
Pass0.0470.71215.3%
Rush-0.007-0.0131.7%
1st down0.3462.4216.6%
2nd down0.1851.1078.2%
3rd down-0.707-2.82911.1%
Standard downs0.2953.2486.5%
Passing downs-0.425-2.54911.5%
Mark Bowman · TEUsage 7.5% · Avg PPA 0.605 · Total 18.743
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.60518.7437.5%
Pass0.60518.74315.7%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.5765.7585.2%
2nd down0.65510.48311.7%
3rd down0.5002.5027.5%
Standard downs0.3186.0336.2%
Passing downs1.05912.70911.3%
Shahn Alston · RBUsage 7.3% · Avg PPA 0.226 · Total 6.094
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.2266.0947.3%
Pass-0.505-1.5161.6%
Rush0.3177.60914.0%
1st down-0.074-1.1058.8%
2nd down0.4043.6377.5%
3rd down1.1873.5614.5%
Standard downs0.1934.8189.2%
Passing downs0.6381.2762.0%
Tanook Hines · WRUsage 6.7% · Avg PPA 0.722 · Total 23.826
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.72223.8266.7%
Pass0.72223.82612.7%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.3233.5574.8%
2nd down0.8169.7957.4%
3rd down1.04710.47311.6%
Standard downs0.2964.4474.3%
Passing downs1.07719.37912.5%
Corey Simms · WRUsage 5.6% · Avg PPA 0.669 · Total 10.701
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.66910.7015.6%
Pass0.66910.70112.2%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.6053.6324.4%
2nd down0.4592.2955.3%
3rd down2.1758.6998.7%
Standard downs0.1651.8195.1%
Passing downs1.7768.8827.4%
Terrell Anderson · WRUsage 5.3% · Avg PPA 0.940 · Total 3.761
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.9403.7615.3%
Pass0.9403.7619.3%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down-0.703-0.7032.9%
2nd down2.6385.2767.7%
3rd down-0.811-0.8119.1%
Standard downs0.7031.4053.8%
Passing downs1.1782.3568.3%
Riley Wormley · RBUsage 5.0% · Avg PPA 0.349 · Total 8.722
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.3498.7225.0%
Pass0.5536.6385.0%
Rush0.1602.0845.4%
1st down0.3736.3407.3%
2nd down0.0480.1451.9%
3rd down0.4472.2376.0%
Standard downs0.4449.7716.0%
Passing downs-0.350-1.0492.3%
Zach Williams · WRUsage 4.3% · Avg PPA 0.993 · Total 26.806
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.99326.8064.3%
Pass1.12229.1638.1%
Rush-2.357-2.3570.3%
1st down0.3864.2443.8%
2nd down1.36013.6024.9%
3rd down2.2579.0273.7%
Standard downs0.5588.9243.5%
Passing downs1.62617.8826.4%
Taniela Tupou · TEUsage 4.1% · Avg PPA 0.552 · Total 6.620
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.5526.6204.1%
Pass0.5526.6207.7%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down-0.167-0.8373.6%
2nd down-0.100-0.2993.2%
3rd down1.6394.9175.8%
Standard downs0.4864.8654.6%
Passing downs0.8781.7552.7%
Deshonne Redeaux · RBUsage 2.7% · Avg PPA 0.934 · Total 5.605
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.9345.6052.7%
Pass—0.0000.0%
Rush0.9345.6056.2%
1st down-0.438-0.8761.9%
2nd down1.0532.1062.7%
3rd down2.1884.3765.4%
Standard downs0.6483.2413.0%
Passing downs2.3632.3631.8%
Carson Tabaracci · TEUsage 2.6% · Avg PPA 0.010 · Total 0.125
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.0100.1252.6%
Pass0.0100.1255.1%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.5651.6941.3%
2nd down-0.001-0.0064.3%
3rd down-0.521-1.5633.4%
Standard downs0.2201.3181.7%
Passing downs-0.170-1.1935.1%
Ethan Feaster · WRUsage 2.2% · Avg PPA 0.379 · Total 4.165
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.3794.1652.2%
Pass0.3794.1654.1%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.4312.5892.6%
2nd down0.3220.9671.9%
3rd down0.3050.6092.4%
Standard downs0.4173.7562.5%
Passing downs0.2040.4091.5%
Tron Baker · WRUsage 2.2% · Avg PPA 0.853 · Total 9.380
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.8539.3802.2%
Pass0.8539.3804.2%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.6013.0032.1%
2nd down1.4777.3853.0%
3rd down-1.009-1.0091.1%
Standard downs0.3072.1481.9%
Passing downs1.8087.2322.9%
Tucker Ashcraft · TEUsage 1.9% · Avg PPA 0.767 · Total 3.833
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.7673.8331.9%
Pass0.7673.8334.1%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.6880.6880.8%
2nd down0.5831.1652.4%
3rd down-0.019-0.0192.0%
Standard downs0.9633.8522.2%
Passing downs-0.019-0.0191.4%
Walter Matthews · TEUsage 1.4% · Avg PPA 0.452 · Total 0.452
SplitAverage PPATotal PPAUsage
Overall0.4520.4521.4%
Pass0.4520.4523.4%
Rush—0.0000.0%
1st down0.4520.4522.8%
2nd down—0.0000.0%
3rd down—0.0000.0%
Standard downs0.4520.4521.9%
Passing downs—0.0000.0%
Where USC sits · 2026 FBS distributions138 teams · raw PPA

2026 · Through provider Week 9. Each metric uses only published FBS teams with a numeric value. Higher percentile is better; tied values receive the midpoint of their positions, rounded to a whole percentile. Missing values are unranked.

Offense PPA/playOffense PPA/play: 0.237 (85th percentile; 138 teams)85thOffense success rateOffense success rate: 0.501 (94th percentile; 138 teams)94thOffense explosivenessOffense explosiveness: 1.203 (35th percentile; 138 teams)35thOffense pass PPA/playOffense pass PPA/play: 0.411 (88th percentile; 138 teams)88thOffense rush PPA/playOffense rush PPA/play: 0.054 (35th percentile; 138 teams)35thDefense PPA/playDefense PPA/play: 0.131 (29th percentile; 138 teams)29thDefense success rateDefense success rate: 0.415 (42nd percentile; 138 teams)42ndDefense explosivenessDefense explosiveness: 1.251 (39th percentile; 138 teams)39thDefense havoc createdDefense havoc created: 0.125 (12th percentile; 138 teams)12th
Values and percentiles
USC metric values with FBS percentiles, 2026
MetricValuePercentileBetter
Offense PPA/play0.23785th138 teamshigher
Offense success rate0.50194th138 teamshigher
Offense explosiveness1.20335th138 teamshigher
Offense pass PPA/play0.41188th138 teamshigher
Offense rush PPA/play0.05435th138 teamshigher
Defense PPA/play0.13129th138 teamslower
Defense success rate0.41542nd138 teamslower
Defense explosiveness1.25139th138 teamslower
Defense havoc created0.12512th138 teamshigher

Passing profile

2026 · CFBD passing family · raw PPA

Captured 2026-11-06. Offense: 98% of 313 attempts charted. Average depth of target 8.0 yards (27th percentile of FBS). Yards after catch 6.4 per completion. Completion 67.4%, 8.5 yards per attempt, pass PPA 0.46.

Completion percentage over expected (CPOE)
SideActualExpectedCPOE (pp)Qualifying / all attempts
Offense67.4%61.4%+6.1307 / 313
Defense allowed63.6%60.3%+3.3250 / 252

Actual and expected use the same qualifying attempts, which can be fewer than all passes. CPOE is their difference in percentage points (pp); higher is better on offense, lower allowed is better on defense. CFBD models FBS-vs-FBS passes, excluding spikes, throwaways, intentional grounding and attempts without air yards. — means unavailable; small samples have fewer than 40 qualifying attempts.

Depth of target vs yards after catch, FBS offenses
Air Force: ADOT 13.0, YAC 3.9Akron: ADOT 7.7, YAC 4.9Alabama: ADOT 9.9, YAC 5.3App State: ADOT 8.5, YAC 5.3Arizona: ADOT 8.1, YAC 5.8Arizona State: ADOT 7.9, YAC 6.1Arkansas: ADOT 7.6, YAC 5.4Arkansas State: ADOT 9.0, YAC 5.3Army: ADOT 12.5, YAC 3.7Auburn: ADOT 7.9, YAC 5.1BYU: ADOT 8.8, YAC 5.9Ball State: ADOT 7.6, YAC 5.4Baylor: ADOT 10.2, YAC 5.1Boise State: ADOT 7.6, YAC 5.0Boston College: ADOT 8.0, YAC 6.6Bowling Green: ADOT 6.4, YAC 5.6Buffalo: ADOT 10.1, YAC 2.2California: ADOT 6.2, YAC 5.6Central Michigan: ADOT 9.0, YAC 5.5Charlotte: ADOT 7.1, YAC 5.5Cincinnati: ADOT 7.2, YAC 6.7Clemson: ADOT 6.9, YAC 5.8Coastal Carolina: ADOT 10.6, YAC 5.8Colorado: ADOT 8.6, YAC 7.1Colorado State: ADOT 5.6, YAC 8.3Delaware: ADOT 9.4, YAC 6.4Duke: ADOT 8.6, YAC 6.6East Carolina: ADOT 8.9, YAC 6.2Eastern Michigan: ADOT 7.2, YAC 5.3Florida: ADOT 7.1, YAC 6.7Florida Atlantic: ADOT 8.4, YAC 4.5Florida International: ADOT 8.0, YAC 5.3Florida State: ADOT 10.4, YAC 8.1Fresno State: ADOT 8.0, YAC 6.0Georgia: ADOT 8.2, YAC 7.7Georgia Southern: ADOT 6.9, YAC 5.1Georgia State: ADOT 8.3, YAC 6.3Georgia Tech: ADOT 7.3, YAC 4.7Hawai'i: ADOT 8.4, YAC 4.2Houston: ADOT 8.3, YAC 6.7Illinois: ADOT 9.9, YAC 4.0Indiana: ADOT 11.3, YAC 4.9Iowa: ADOT 7.5, YAC 6.2Iowa State: ADOT 9.2, YAC 5.3Jacksonville State: ADOT 8.3, YAC 5.8James Madison: ADOT 8.5, YAC 5.1Kansas: ADOT 12.5, YAC 5.2Kansas State: ADOT 7.8, YAC 5.3Kennesaw State: ADOT 6.7, YAC 4.9Kent State: ADOT 9.4, YAC 5.2Kentucky: ADOT 6.7, YAC 7.0LSU: ADOT 8.0, YAC 6.9Liberty: ADOT 11.3, YAC 6.0Louisiana: ADOT 8.5, YAC 5.1Louisiana Tech: ADOT 6.5, YAC 6.2Louisville: ADOT 9.1, YAC 7.1Marshall: ADOT 8.9, YAC 5.3Maryland: ADOT 6.9, YAC 6.0Massachusetts: ADOT 10.4, YAC 4.6Memphis: ADOT 10.3, YAC 5.6Miami: ADOT 7.3, YAC 7.2Miami (OH): ADOT 10.7, YAC 6.2Michigan: ADOT 9.9, YAC 4.8Michigan State: ADOT 7.6, YAC 4.1Middle Tennessee: ADOT 8.0, YAC 5.5Minnesota: ADOT 6.1, YAC 6.1Mississippi State: ADOT 8.8, YAC 5.6Missouri: ADOT 10.1, YAC 5.1Missouri State: ADOT 8.6, YAC 5.7NC State: ADOT 8.9, YAC 5.4Navy: ADOT 13.8, YAC 8.0Nebraska: ADOT 8.6, YAC 5.9Nevada: ADOT 8.4, YAC 6.1New Mexico: ADOT 9.9, YAC 6.1New Mexico State: ADOT 9.6, YAC 4.4North Carolina: ADOT 7.4, YAC 6.4North Dakota State: ADOT 10.0, YAC 4.6North Texas: ADOT 9.2, YAC 6.0Northern Illinois: ADOT 8.4, YAC 5.5Northwestern: ADOT 8.8, YAC 5.5Notre Dame: ADOT 9.6, YAC 4.9Ohio: ADOT 9.6, YAC 6.1Ohio State: ADOT 11.0, YAC 5.1Oklahoma: ADOT 8.3, YAC 5.3Oklahoma State: ADOT 8.5, YAC 6.2Old Dominion: ADOT 10.9, YAC 4.3Ole Miss: ADOT 8.7, YAC 4.1Oregon: ADOT 7.6, YAC 6.5Oregon State: ADOT 8.8, YAC 7.7Penn State: ADOT 9.8, YAC 5.1Pittsburgh: ADOT 9.2, YAC 5.6Purdue: ADOT 8.5, YAC 6.9Rice: ADOT 10.8, YAC 4.9Rutgers: ADOT 11.3, YAC 5.5SMU: ADOT 8.4, YAC 6.3Sacramento State: ADOT 8.2, YAC 4.3Sam Houston: ADOT 7.8, YAC 5.5San Diego State: ADOT 9.7, YAC 5.2San José State: ADOT 10.0, YAC 3.7South Alabama: ADOT 10.7, YAC 5.2South Carolina: ADOT 8.8, YAC 5.9South Florida: ADOT 7.7, YAC 6.3Southern Miss: ADOT 8.2, YAC 5.1Stanford: ADOT 8.9, YAC 4.9Syracuse: ADOT 8.9, YAC 5.5TCU: ADOT 9.5, YAC 4.6Temple: ADOT 9.0, YAC 6.9Tennessee: ADOT 6.9, YAC 6.8Texas: ADOT 8.3, YAC 6.3Texas A&M: ADOT 8.8, YAC 5.3Texas State: ADOT 8.6, YAC 6.8Texas Tech: ADOT 9.6, YAC 4.7Toledo: ADOT 9.1, YAC 6.1Troy: ADOT 8.9, YAC 6.5Tulane: ADOT 9.2, YAC 4.9Tulsa: ADOT 8.7, YAC 4.7UAB: ADOT 9.8, YAC 4.4UCF: ADOT 7.0, YAC 5.4UCLA: ADOT 9.1, YAC 5.8UConn: ADOT 11.2, YAC 6.3UL Monroe: ADOT 8.1, YAC 5.8UNLV: ADOT 10.5, YAC 4.3UTEP: ADOT 8.7, YAC 4.9UTSA: ADOT 7.1, YAC 6.0Utah: ADOT 9.5, YAC 5.8Utah State: ADOT 9.9, YAC 4.5Vanderbilt: ADOT 9.2, YAC 5.1Virginia: ADOT 8.3, YAC 5.3Virginia Tech: ADOT 6.5, YAC 7.0Wake Forest: ADOT 8.7, YAC 6.0Washington: ADOT 7.9, YAC 6.5Washington State: ADOT 7.1, YAC 4.0West Virginia: ADOT 13.8, YAC 8.5Western Kentucky: ADOT 6.9, YAC 5.4Western Michigan: ADOT 8.5, YAC 5.1Wisconsin: ADOT 7.5, YAC 6.9Wyoming: ADOT 8.4, YAC 5.6USC: ADOT 8.0, YAC 6.4Average depth of target (yards) →Yards after catch per completion →

138 teams with at least 40 charted attempts. The highlighted point is USC.

Target mix by zone, USC offense
Short left29% · 87Short middle20% · 60Short right40% · 121Deep left3% · 9Deep middle3% · 8Deep right5% · 16

Highlighted bars are deep zones. Shares are of located attempts only.

Defense and rushing detail
USC passing defense and rushing profile, 2026
SideAttemptsChartedADOTYACComp %PPACPOECPOE att
Passing offense31398%8.06.467.4%0.46+6.1 pp307
Passing defense25299%8.86.063.5%0.37+3.3 pp250

Rushing production

SideAttemptsYards / carrySuccessPPALine yards / rushSecond-level yards / rushOpen-field yards / rushStuff ratePower success
Offense3004.046.2%0.123.101.100.7017.6%68.8%
Defense allowed2943.842.5%0.122.900.900.8016.0%78.9%

Second-level yards are gained 5–10 yards past the line; open-field yards are beyond 10. These are provider per-rush averages, not totals. Power success measures success with two or fewer yards needed. Exact line-metric and power-success denominators are not supplied in this feed.

Rushing sample and attribution

SideYards recordedIndividualUnattributedSacksKneelsTeam rushesMultiple carriersDirection located / eligible
Offense293 / 3002841612990276 / 279 · 98.9%
Defense allowed290 / 294286815340274 / 275 · 99.6%

Counts are attempts. Team totals include sacks, kneels, team-only rushes and unresolved attribution; these categories can overlap and must not be summed. Direction coverage uses ordinary direction-eligible rushes, not all attempts. Missing fields in older captures remain unavailable.

Raw provider values, no opponent adjustment; not model inputs. CFBD metric definitions.

Game-by-game passing and rushing

2026 · Passing CPOE · percentage points. Dashed line: season +6.1 pp. 9 of 9 captured games have this metric. Missing observations break the line.

-5.411.628.6W1W1 vs Fresno State: +28.6 ppW1W1 vs San José State: +21.4 ppW2W2 vs Louisiana: +7.1 ppW3W3 vs Rutgers: +5.9 ppW4W4 vs Oregon: -3.9 ppW5W5 vs Washington: -5.4 ppW6W6 vs Penn State: +6.7 ppW8W8 vs Wisconsin: -0.1 ppW9W9 vs Ohio State: -1.0 pp

CPOE is completion percentage over expected on qualifying FBS-vs-FBS attempts; positive means more completions than expected. PPA is raw provider PPA. These are game observations, not opponent-adjusted forecasts. P labels postseason weeks.

Game log and attempt coverage
WeekOpponentPass attCPOE attComp %*Expected %*CPOEADOTPass PPARush attRush yds/carryRush PPA
W1Fresno State313093.3%64.8%+28.6 pp6.00.89373.8-0.28
W1San José State363683.3%61.9%+21.4 pp7.40.41404.10.43
W2Louisiana313066.7%59.5%+7.1 pp7.50.74415.20.20
W3Rutgers323262.5%56.6%+5.9 pp10.70.48326.00.33
W4Oregon424254.8%58.7%-3.9 pp10.00.43333.60.20
W5Washington343360.6%66.0%-5.4 pp6.20.30353.30.09
W6Penn State333161.3%54.6%+6.7 pp12.50.77304.60.18
W8Wisconsin515162.7%62.9%-0.1 pp6.6-0.0226-0.4-0.28
W9Ohio State232268.2%69.2%-1.0 pp4.40.42264.80.11

*Completion and expected rates use the same CPOE-eligible attempts. ADOT uses available air-yard attempts; a game needs at least one. No missing family is filled with the other family’s data.

Punting and returns

2026 season to date · CFBD · captured 2026-11-06T12:25:52.746993+00:00. Descriptive totals, including postseason when present.

Our punts

17 punts · 48.6 gross yards/punt · 39.8 net yards/punt

4 inside the 20 · 3 touchbacks · 0 blocked

Known gross yards: 17/17 punts. Known net yards: 13/17 punts.

Our punt returns

16 returns · 17.5 yards/return · 1 touchdowns

1 muffs · 0 opponent punts blocked

Known return yards: 15/16 returns. Return totals include team-only and unattributed plays.

Recent games
GamePuntsGross yd/puntNet yd/puntKnown net yards
Week 9 · Ohio State446.035.03/4
Week 8 · Wisconsin145.045.01/1
Week 6 · Penn State252.547.52/2
Week 5 · Washington549.838.84/5
Week 4 · Oregon148.0—0/1
Team style
Rating history