Record
4-5 wins–losses
No rank assigned
Results earned. Wins and losses do not account for opponent strength or victory margin.
2026, provider Week 9; captured 2026-10-25T21:28:39.844929+00:00
SP+ workbook recordEastern Michigan
2026 season
Mid-American
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
Eastern Michigan's rank in each system (1 = best). Middle rank 125.5 across 8 systems; best 121, worst 128, so they disagree by 7 places.
- Lab EPA
- #128
- Through week 82026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 8. 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
- #123
- down 12026 · 138 FBS roster teams, including prior-only teams · Through week 8 · built 2026-10-30T11:17:06.745613+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+
- #123
- no change2026 · 138 published SP+ teams · Provider week 9 · captured 2026-10-25T21:28:39.844929+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
- #121
- up 12026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 8 · captured 2026-10-30T11:02:01.130624+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
- #127
- up 12026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Event cutoff not supplied · captured 2026-10-30T11:02:01.130624+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
- #128
- down 4 · Through week 8 · captured 2026-10-30T11:02:01.130624+00:002026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 8 · captured 2026-10-30T11:02:01.130624+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
- #124
- up 22026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Event cutoff not supplied · captured 2026-10-30T11:02:01.130624+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
- #128
- no change2026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Event cutoff not supplied · captured 2026-10-30T11:02:01.130624+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 context
ESPN FPI via CFBD · 2026
Résumé and schedule
Results earned and schedule difficulty
- Strength of record
- #118 of 138
- Schedule strength
- #118 of 138
- Remaining schedule strength
- #119 of 138
- Game control
- #115 of 138
Unit efficiency
Performance by unit
- Overall
- #126 of 138
- Offense
- #120 of 138
- Defense
- #101 of 138
- Special teams
- #108 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 Oct 30, 2026, 06:02:01 CDT. FPI supplies no results-through week; capture time records when we received it.
Why the ratings disagree
Eastern Michigan · 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.
Descriptive EPA
-0.169 net EPA/play
#128
2026 · 138 rated FBS teams · Through week 8. 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 8; opponent adjusted ridge
Lab EPA from CFBD playsLocal predictive SRS
-9.30 points
#123 · Down 1 place since the previous CFBD cutoff
2026 · 138 FBS roster teams, including prior-only teams · Through week 8 · built 2026-10-30T11:17:06.745613+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 -2.86 (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 -7.54, schedule #121 of 138 (#1 = toughest); 1 FCS opponent counts at −25; FBS opponents alone average -5.38. That is worth -10.40 on its own; the preseason prior of -4.99 still carries 20% of the weight, giving -9.30.
How each game enters this SRS rating
Eastern Michigan · 2026, through CFBD Week 8. 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.
| Game | Raw margin → transformed | Venue adjustment | Recency weight | Fit share | Opponent rating | Margin term | Opponent term | Total term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Week 1 · Sacramento State home · 2026-08-29 · ID 401866408 | +11.00 → +11.00 | -2.50 | 0.7637 | 7.81% | -20.33 | 0.664 | -1.587 | -0.923 |
| Week 1 · San José State home · 2026-09-04 · ID 401864495 | -6.00 → -6.00 | -2.50 | 0.7637 | 7.81% | -8.63 | -0.664 | -0.674 | -1.338 |
| Week 2 · Michigan State away · 2026-09-12 · ID 401858440 | -28.00 → -28.00 | +2.50 | 0.7937 | 8.11% | +0.05 | -2.069 | 0.004 | -2.065 |
| Week 3 · Wisconsin away · 2026-09-19 · ID 401858460 | -44.00 → -35.00 | +2.50 | 0.8249 | 8.43% | +8.97 | -2.740 | 0.756 | -1.984 |
| Week 4 · Lindenwood home · 2026-09-26 · ID 401866427 | +26.00 → +26.00 | -2.50 | 0.8572 | 8.76% | -25.00 (fixed lower division) | 2.059 | -2.191 | -0.131 |
| Week 5 · Massachusetts away · 2026-10-03 · ID 401866433 | +24.00 → +24.00 | +2.50 | 0.8909 | 9.11% | -8.38 | 2.413 | -0.763 | 1.651 |
| Week 6 · Akron away · 2026-10-10 · ID 401866435 | +2.00 → +2.00 | +2.50 | 0.9259 | 9.46% | -16.43 | 0.426 | -1.555 | -1.129 |
| Week 7 · Toledo home · 2026-10-17 · ID 401866444 | -20.00 → -20.00 | -2.50 | 0.9622 | 9.84% | +1.38 | -2.213 | 0.136 | -2.077 |
| Week 8 · Ohio away · 2026-10-24 · ID 401866449 | -4.00 → -4.00 | +2.50 | 1.0000 | 10.22% | -1.24 | -0.153 | -0.127 | -0.280 |
Game terms -8.28 points; prior term -1.02 points. Their unrounded sum is the fitted rating -9.30 points. The preseason prior is -4.99 with 20.45% 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 ±8.4 points; this decomposition does not reduce uncertainty or assign causal effects.
Download fitted terms and source hashesEstimated 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 8; generated 2026-10-30T11:17:06.745613+00:00
Lab SRS from CFBD scoresExternal SP+
-14.6 SP+ points
#123 · Rank unchanged
2026 · 138 published SP+ teams · Provider week 9 · captured 2026-10-25T21:28:39.844929+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 9; captured 2026-10-25T21:28:39.844929+00:00
Bill Connelly SP+ workbookExternal CORE
-16.02 net points per 100 offensive + 100 defensive plays
#128 of 138 by overall (ranked here; CORE publishes no rank)
2026 · 138 rated FBS teams in this CORE board · 2026, through regular Week 8; model core-v1; captured 2026-10-30T11:02:06.855798+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 -9.73 on 493 plays; defense 6.29 on 473 plays.
2026, through regular Week 8; model core-v1; captured 2026-10-30T11:02:06.855798+00:00
CFBD CORE ratingCORE board: offense vs defenseEPA ranks Eastern Michigan 5 places lower than local SRS at the matched cutoff. This identifies a disagreement; it does not isolate its cause. SP+ movement compares provider weeks 8 and 9. 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 evidenceProgram context
2026 · CFBD records, polls, recruiting, coaches- Record
- 4-5 · conf 3-2 · home 2-2 · away 2-3 · expected wins 3.2
- Polls (Week 9)
- unranked
- CFP latest
- not published
- CFP final
- not published
- Against the spread
- 2026: 4-5 ATS (-1.5 avg) · 2025: 7-5 ATS (-0.4 avg)
- Head coach
- Chris Creighton · hired 2013-12-11 · 15-22 over 4 captured seasons
- Recruiting classes
- 2024 #93 (156 pts) · 2025 #97 (152 pts) · 2026 #106 (175 pts)
- Returning
- 72% of production · 59% of usage
Passing, receiving and rushing detail
Category Production Usage Passing 97% 100% Receiving 64% 50% Rushing 49% 22% Shares of prior-season PPA and usage returning in each category. Missing values are unavailable.
Provider values from CFBD captures dated 2026-09-22, 2026-10-30. 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 2026-10-30 UTC
| Position group | Commits | Avg. stars | Avg. rating | Total rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Defensive Back | 20 | 2.90 | 0.8300 | 16.60 |
| Defensive Line | 18 | 2.94 | 0.8291 | 14.92 |
| Linebacker | 2 | 2.50 | 0.8100 | 1.62 |
| Offensive Line | 12 | 3.00 | 0.8338 | 10.01 |
| Quarterback | 3 | 3.00 | 0.8373 | 2.51 |
| Receiver | 19 | 2.95 | 0.8384 | 15.93 |
| Running Back | 5 | 3.00 | 0.8528 | 4.26 |
| Special Teams | 2 | 3.00 | 0.8125 | 1.63 |
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 2026-10-30 UTCPassing 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 / history | Metric | Value | Plays / attempts | Overall usage | Usage detail | Recruiting |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noah Kim · QBCFBD athlete 4690158. Michigan State (2020–2023); Coastal Carolina (2024–2024); Eastern Michigan (2025–2026) | Passing WEPA | 0.234 | 255 | 56.8% | Pass 95.3% · Rush 10.0%1st 53.0% · 2nd 57.5% · 3rd 65.8% Standard downs 50.3% · Passing downs 70.2% | 2020: 3★ · 0.8496 |
Amareon Blue · RBCFBD athlete 5222594. Eastern Michigan (2025–2026) | Rushing WEPA | 0.225 | 66 | 14.4% | Pass 3.2% · Rush 30.5%1st 18.0% · 2nd 14.9% · 3rd 7.6% Standard downs 17.1% · Passing downs 8.9% | 2025: 3★ · 0.8567 |
Braydon Bennett · RBCFBD athlete 4608922. Virginia Tech (2025–2025); Coastal Carolina (2020–2024); Eastern Michigan (2026–2026) | Rushing WEPA | 0.194 | 60 | 11.7% | Pass 2.7% · Rush 24.6%1st 10.5% · 2nd 10.4% · 3rd 15.2% Standard downs 14.2% · Passing downs 6.4% | 2020: 3★ · 0.8206 |
Joey Mattord · RBCFBD athlete 5125733. Eastern Michigan (2023–2026) | Rushing WEPA | 0.100 | 51 | 14.6% | Pass 9.1% · Rush 23.0%1st 15.7% · 2nd 15.4% · 3rd 11.4% Standard downs 15.7% · Passing downs 12.3% | 2023: stars unavailable |
Rudy Kessinger · PKCFBD athlete 5220057. Eastern Michigan (2024–2026) | Kicker PAAR | 3.050 | 12 | — | Pass — · Rush —1st — · 2nd — · 3rd — Standard downs — · Passing downs — | Not linked |
Antonio Floyd · WRCFBD athlete 5148852. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 4.4% | Pass 8.3% · Rush 0.0%1st 5.1% · 2nd 4.4% · 3rd 3.5% Standard downs 4.0% · Passing downs 5.2% | Not linked |
Armaad Sharp · TECFBD athlete 5278411. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 2.2% | Pass 3.0% · Rush 0.0%1st 5.1% · 2nd 0.0% · 3rd 0.0% Standard downs 3.4% · Passing downs 0.0% | Not linked |
Ben Prosper · WRCFBD athlete 5295525. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 9.5% | Pass 16.8% · Rush 0.8%1st 8.6% · 2nd 8.5% · 3rd 12.9% Standard downs 8.4% · Passing downs 11.8% | Not linked |
Brogan McCaughey · QBCFBD athlete 5094040. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 38.0% | Pass 50.6% · Rush 16.7%1st 38.3% · 2nd 36.4% · 3rd 40.0% Standard downs 36.5% · Passing downs 40.4% | Not linked |
Dalin Wilkins · WRCFBD athlete 5193324. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 2.8% | Pass 5.7% · Rush 0.0%1st 2.4% · 2nd 5.4% · 3rd 0.0% Standard downs 2.0% · Passing downs 4.7% | Not linked |
Decorie Johnson · RBCFBD athlete 5271174. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 4.8% | Pass 0.9% · Rush 9.9%1st 4.4% · 2nd 4.4% · 3rd 4.9% Standard downs 5.2% · Passing downs 4.1% | Not linked |
Harold Mack · WRCFBD athlete 5211694. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 11.0% | Pass 18.7% · Rush 1.3%1st 10.0% · 2nd 11.2% · 3rd 14.2% Standard downs 9.9% · Passing downs 13.3% | Not linked |
Jace Stuckey · QBCFBD athlete 5144207. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 9.6% | Pass 11.7% · Rush 7.7%1st 7.1% · 2nd 6.5% · 3rd 14.8% Standard downs 7.3% · Passing downs 13.0% | Not linked |
Joshua Long · TECFBD athlete 5295532. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 8.6% | Pass 15.6% · Rush 0.0%1st 9.7% · 2nd 6.0% · 3rd 10.6% Standard downs 7.5% · Passing downs 10.8% | Not linked |
Nate Lyman · WRCFBD athlete 5215428. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 1.4% | Pass 2.1% · Rush 0.0%1st 0.0% · 2nd 0.0% · 3rd 6.7% Standard downs 0.0% · Passing downs 3.1% | Not linked |
Nick Devereaux · WRCFBD athlete 5083205. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 11.7% | Pass 21.1% · Rush 0.0%1st 10.9% · 2nd 10.4% · 3rd 15.5% Standard downs 9.2% · Passing downs 16.7% | Not linked |
Quinn Fracassi · WRCFBD athlete 4917422. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 2.8% | Pass 6.9% · Rush 0.0%1st 2.9% · 2nd 0.0% · 3rd 7.1% Standard downs 1.9% · Passing downs 5.3% | Not linked |
Santonyo Isaac · WRCFBD athlete 5295531. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 2.8% | Pass 5.1% · Rush 0.0%1st 1.3% · 2nd 6.1% · 3rd 1.3% Standard downs 2.0% · Passing downs 4.6% | Not linked |
Tanner Lemaster · TECFBD athlete 4918453. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 2.1% | Pass 3.9% · Rush 0.0%1st 2.0% · 2nd 3.3% · 3rd 0.0% Standard downs 2.6% · Passing downs 1.1% | Not linked |
XaVior Tyus · RBCFBD athlete 5387658. Team attribution from the captured season usage record. | Not available | — | — | 2.8% | Pass 4.2% · Rush 0.0%1st 3.4% · 2nd 4.2% · 3rd 0.0% Standard downs 2.5% · Passing downs 3.1% | Not linked |
Transfers
Incoming · 12 reported
| Player | From | Date | Stars / rating | Eligibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adam Samaha · K | Akron | 2026-01-21 | 2★ / — | Immediate |
| Braydon Bennett · RB | Virginia Tech | 2026-01-20 | 3★ / 0.8400 | Immediate |
| Brogan McCaughey · QB | Yale | 2026-02-20 | 3★ / 0.8300 | Immediate |
| Cole Dellinger · IOL | Michigan State | 2026-01-11 | 3★ / 0.8400 | Immediate |
| Elijha Payne · OT | Delaware State | 2026-01-14 | 3★ / 0.8400 | Immediate |
| Guzzy Kayed · OT | Not reported | 2026-01-13 | 3★ / 0.8300 | Immediate |
| Joseph Oluwayemi · DL | Harding | 2026-01-08 | — / — | Immediate |
| Malachi James · RB | Syracuse | 2026-01-12 | 3★ / 0.8300 | Immediate |
| Peyton Christian · DL | Lamar | 2026-01-11 | — / — | Immediate |
| Tyler Brumfield · OT | Oklahoma State | 2026-01-14 | 3★ / 0.8600 | Immediate |
| Tyler McMillan · OT | Illinois | 2026-01-13 | 3★ / 0.8400 | Immediate |
| Xavior Tyus · RB | Not reported | 2026-05-12 | 2★ / — | Immediate |
Outgoing · 26 reported
| Player | To | Date | Stars / rating | Eligibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alijah Alexander · DL | Not reported | 2025-12-14 | — / — | Immediate |
| Andrew Marshall · LB | Minnesota | 2026-01-05 | 3★ / 0.8500 | Immediate |
| Andrew Steger · OT | Not reported | 2025-12-09 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Braden Laux · TE | Not reported | 2025-12-08 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Caden Vanderbush · TE | Not reported | 2025-12-10 | 2★ / — | Immediate |
| Carter Herriman · LB | Not reported | 2026-01-07 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Christian Kiptoo · EDGE | Not reported | 2025-12-16 | — / — | Immediate |
| Deterrius Clayton · EDGE | Not reported | 2025-12-10 | 2★ / — | Immediate |
| Everett Small · OT | Rutgers | 2026-01-09 | 3★ / 0.8500 | Immediate |
| James Jointer Jr. · RB | Central Arkansas | 2026-01-09 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| James Monds III · CB | Not reported | 2026-01-17 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Jaylyn Monds · CB | Not reported | 2026-01-14 | 2★ / — | Immediate |
| Jayvin Norman · RB | Not reported | 2025-12-09 | — / — | Immediate |
| Joshua Scott · CB | Nevada | 2026-01-11 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Mack Indestad · OT | UCLA | 2026-01-13 | 3★ / 0.8500 | Immediate |
| Marco Patierno · LB | Not reported | 2025-12-19 | — / — | Immediate |
| Messiah Blair · EDGE | Jackson State | 2026-01-10 | 3★ / 0.8500 | Immediate |
| Owen Snively · IOL | Boston College | 2026-01-22 | 3★ / 0.8500 | Immediate |
| Spencer Webb · IOL | Florida International | 2026-01-11 | — / — | Immediate |
| Sterling Miles · EDGE | UTEP | 2026-01-18 | 3★ / 0.8400 | Immediate |
| Tamarley Smith · IOL | Not reported | 2025-12-29 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Terrance Saunders · IOL | Tarleton State | 2026-02-05 | 3★ / 0.8500 | Immediate |
| Terrelle Elmore · LB | Not reported | 2026-01-02 | 2★ / — | Immediate |
| Terry Lockett · WR | Not reported | 2026-01-08 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Zah'eed Pierre · CB | Not reported | 2026-01-12 | 3★ / — | Immediate |
| Zavian Dilworth · CB | Not reported | 2026-01-02 | 2★ / — | Immediate |
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 Eastern Michigan. Records are CFBD-attributed results; active tenures and the current season may be incomplete.
Chris Creighton · career 61–83 across 13 seasons and 1 schools
Tenure timeline · 13 appointments
2014–present · Chris Creighton · active at capture
61–83 · 144 attributed games · 13 seasons
Hired 2013-12-11. Exact effective dates unavailable.
2013–2013 · Stan Parrish
1–2 · 3 attributed games · 1 seasons · incomplete attribution
Hired 2013-11-08. Exact effective dates unavailable.
2009–2013 · Ron English
11–46 · 57 attributed games · 5 seasons · incomplete attribution
Hired 2008-12-21. Exact effective dates unavailable.
2004–2008 · Jeff Genyk
16–42 · 58 attributed games · 5 seasons
Hired 2003-12-01. Exact effective dates unavailable.
2000–2003 · Jeff Woodruff
11–35 · 46 attributed games · 4 seasons
Hired 1999-10-15. Exact effective dates unavailable.
1995–1999 · Rick Rasnick
20–35 · 55 attributed games · 5 seasons
Exact effective dates unavailable.
1993–1994 · Ron Cooper
9–13 · 22 attributed games · 2 seasons
Exact effective dates unavailable.
1992–1992 · Jan Quarless
1–6 · 7 attributed games · 1 seasons · incomplete attribution
Exact effective dates unavailable.
1983–1992 · Jim Harkema
41–57–5 · 103 attributed games · 10 seasons · incomplete attribution
Exact effective dates unavailable.
1982–1982 · Bob LaPointe
1–6–1 · 8 attributed games · 1 seasons · incomplete attribution
Exact effective dates unavailable.
1978–1982 · Mike Stock
6–38–1 · 45 attributed games · 5 seasons · incomplete attribution
Exact effective dates unavailable.
1976–1977 · Ed Chlebek
10–12 · 22 attributed games · 2 seasons
Exact effective dates unavailable.
1975–1975 · George Mans
4–6 · 10 attributed games · 1 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 / coach | Record | Conference | Postseason | SP+ | SRS | Recruiting rank | Final poll |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 · Chris Creighton · incomplete attribution | 0–0 | — | — | -14.4 | -14.4 | 106 | — |
| 2025 · Chris Creighton | 4–8 | 3–5 | 0–0 | -14.7 | -16.2 | 97 | — |
| 2024 · Chris Creighton | 5–7 | 2–6 | 0–0 | -13.3 | -12.1 | 93 | — |
| 2023 · Chris Creighton | 6–7 | 4–4 | 0–1 | -12.3 | -16.9 | 87 | — |
| 2022 · Chris Creighton | 9–4 | 5–3 | 1–0 | -7.1 | -9.2 | 128 | — |
| 2021 · Chris Creighton | 7–6 | 4–4 | 0–1 | -7.8 | -4.9 | 112 | — |
| 2020 · Chris Creighton | 2–4 | 2–4 | 0–0 | -12.2 | — | 115 | — |
| 2019 · Chris Creighton | 6–7 | 3–5 | 0–1 | -8.6 | -9.3 | 123 | — |
| 2018 · Chris Creighton | 7–6 | 5–3 | 0–1 | -2 | -3.4 | 110 | — |
| 2017 · Chris Creighton | 5–7 | 3–5 | 0–0 | -5.3 | -4.2 | 123 | — |
| 2016 · Chris Creighton | 7–6 | 4–4 | 0–1 | -8.2 | -8.7 | 121 | — |
| 2015 · Chris Creighton | 1–11 | 0–8 | 0–0 | -19.7 | -22.5 | 115 | — |
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 2026-10-26 04:10:14.047809 UTC · Source data
Stat rankings
CFBD FBS ranks · source updated 2026-10-25 13:10:25 UTC · calculated 2026-10-26 04:10:14 UTC · provider cache expiry 2026-10-26 04:20:14 UTC. Rank 1 is best; percentiles use CFBD’s 0–100 scale.
| Statistic | Offense rank / population | Percentile | Defense rank / population | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PPA / play | 121 / 138 | 12.4 | 100 / 138 | 27.7 |
| Success rate | 116 / 138 | 16.1 | 109 / 138 | 21.2 |
| Explosiveness | 109 / 138 | 21.2 | 62 / 138 | 55.5 |
| Standard-down success | 119 / 138 | 13.9 | 116 / 138 | 16.1 |
| Passing-down success | 93 / 138 | 32.8 | 61 / 138 | 56.2 |
| Pass PPA | 105 / 138 | 24.1 | 120 / 138 | 13.1 |
| Rush PPA | 107 / 138 | 22.6 | 37 / 138 | 73.7 |
| Pass explosiveness | 121 / 138 | 12.4 | 36 / 138 | 74.5 |
| Rush explosiveness | 86 / 138 | 38.0 | 59 / 138 | 57.7 |
| Line yards | 72 / 138 | 48.2 | 72 / 138 | 48.2 |
| Second-level yards | 82 / 138 | 40.9 | 101 / 138 | 27.0 |
| Open-field yards | 124 / 138 | 10.2 | 62 / 138 | 55.5 |
| Stuff rate | T67 / 138 | 51.5 | 42 / 138 | 70.1 |
| Power success | 95 / 138 | 31.4 | 32 / 138 | 77.4 |
| Havoc | T103 / 138 | 24.5 | 57 / 138 | 59.1 |
| Front-seven havoc | T93 / 138 | 32.1 | T72 / 138 | 47.4 |
| DB havoc | T108 / 138 | 20.4 | T36 / 138 | 73.4 |
| Points / opportunity | 81 / 138 | 41.6 | 53 / 138 | 62.0 |
| Average field position | 127 / 138 | 8.0 | T101 / 138 | 26.6 |
| Field-position expected points | 127 / 138 | 8.0 | 99 / 138 | 28.5 |
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.
Noah Kim · QBUsage 56.8% · Avg PPA 0.112 · Total 34.702
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.112 | 34.702 | 56.8% |
| Pass | 0.178 | 50.682 | 95.3% |
| Rush | -0.151 | -3.466 | 10.0% |
| 1st down | -0.010 | -1.303 | 53.0% |
| 2nd down | -0.014 | -1.423 | 57.5% |
| 3rd down | 0.656 | 50.494 | 65.8% |
| Standard downs | -0.010 | -1.841 | 50.3% |
| Passing downs | 0.292 | 36.544 | 70.2% |
Brogan McCaughey · QBUsage 38.0% · Avg PPA -0.029 · Total -1.557
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | -0.029 | -1.557 | 38.0% |
| Pass | 0.019 | 0.868 | 50.6% |
| Rush | 0.155 | 1.238 | 16.7% |
| 1st down | -0.166 | -3.817 | 38.3% |
| 2nd down | 0.137 | 2.184 | 36.4% |
| 3rd down | -0.226 | -2.714 | 40.0% |
| Standard downs | -0.039 | -1.213 | 36.5% |
| Passing downs | -0.015 | -0.343 | 40.4% |
Joey Mattord · RBUsage 14.6% · Avg PPA 0.002 · Total 0.203
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.002 | 0.203 | 14.6% |
| Pass | 0.043 | 1.336 | 9.1% |
| Rush | -0.019 | -1.133 | 23.0% |
| 1st down | 0.072 | 3.007 | 15.7% |
| 2nd down | -0.204 | -6.316 | 15.4% |
| 3rd down | -0.045 | -0.670 | 11.4% |
| Standard downs | 0.019 | 1.206 | 15.7% |
| Passing downs | -0.040 | -1.003 | 12.3% |
Amareon Blue · RBUsage 14.4% · Avg PPA 0.142 · Total 12.620
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.142 | 12.620 | 14.4% |
| Pass | -0.108 | -1.183 | 3.2% |
| Rush | 0.177 | 13.803 | 30.5% |
| 1st down | 0.011 | 0.536 | 18.0% |
| 2nd down | 0.023 | 0.698 | 14.9% |
| 3rd down | 0.551 | 5.512 | 7.6% |
| Standard downs | 0.160 | 11.363 | 17.1% |
| Passing downs | 0.070 | 1.257 | 8.9% |
Braydon Bennett · RBUsage 11.7% · Avg PPA 0.252 · Total 18.140
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.252 | 18.140 | 11.7% |
| Pass | 0.606 | 5.455 | 2.7% |
| Rush | 0.201 | 12.685 | 24.6% |
| 1st down | -0.173 | -4.835 | 10.5% |
| 2nd down | 0.202 | 4.239 | 10.4% |
| 3rd down | 0.893 | 17.859 | 15.2% |
| Standard downs | 0.185 | 10.907 | 14.2% |
| Passing downs | 0.556 | 7.233 | 6.4% |
Nick Devereaux · WRUsage 11.7% · Avg PPA 0.089 · Total 3.388
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.089 | 3.388 | 11.7% |
| Pass | 0.089 | 3.388 | 21.1% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | 0.112 | 1.673 | 10.9% |
| 2nd down | 0.006 | 0.064 | 10.4% |
| 3rd down | 0.419 | 4.604 | 15.5% |
| Standard downs | -0.038 | -0.767 | 9.2% |
| Passing downs | 0.231 | 4.155 | 16.7% |
Harold Mack · WRUsage 11.0% · Avg PPA 0.336 · Total 20.497
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.336 | 20.497 | 11.0% |
| Pass | 0.398 | 23.087 | 18.7% |
| Rush | -0.863 | -2.590 | 1.3% |
| 1st down | 0.082 | 1.975 | 10.0% |
| 2nd down | 0.127 | 2.537 | 11.2% |
| 3rd down | 0.940 | 15.985 | 14.2% |
| Standard downs | 0.282 | 10.440 | 9.9% |
| Passing downs | 0.419 | 10.057 | 13.3% |
Jace Stuckey · QBUsage 9.6% · Avg PPA -1.044 · Total -13.568
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | -1.044 | -13.568 | 9.6% |
| Pass | -1.641 | -14.765 | 11.7% |
| Rush | 0.299 | 1.197 | 7.7% |
| 1st down | -0.495 | -1.980 | 7.1% |
| 2nd down | -0.515 | -1.546 | 6.5% |
| 3rd down | -0.373 | -1.493 | 14.8% |
| Standard downs | -1.147 | -6.879 | 7.3% |
| Passing downs | -0.955 | -6.688 | 13.0% |
Ben Prosper · WRUsage 9.5% · Avg PPA 0.121 · Total 7.123
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.121 | 7.123 | 9.5% |
| Pass | 0.162 | 9.222 | 16.8% |
| Rush | -1.050 | -2.100 | 0.8% |
| 1st down | 0.240 | 5.516 | 8.6% |
| 2nd down | 0.171 | 2.906 | 8.5% |
| 3rd down | 0.396 | 6.733 | 12.9% |
| Standard downs | -0.209 | -7.328 | 8.4% |
| Passing downs | 0.602 | 14.451 | 11.8% |
Joshua Long · TEUsage 8.6% · Avg PPA 0.396 · Total 21.002
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.396 | 21.002 | 8.6% |
| Pass | 0.396 | 21.002 | 15.6% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | 0.280 | 7.287 | 9.7% |
| 2nd down | 0.288 | 3.462 | 6.0% |
| 3rd down | 1.006 | 14.081 | 10.6% |
| Standard downs | 0.346 | 10.726 | 7.5% |
| Passing downs | 0.467 | 10.276 | 10.8% |
Decorie Johnson · RBUsage 4.8% · Avg PPA 0.408 · Total 4.078
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.408 | 4.078 | 4.8% |
| Pass | 2.300 | 2.300 | 0.9% |
| Rush | 0.198 | 1.778 | 9.9% |
| 1st down | -0.034 | -0.137 | 4.4% |
| 2nd down | -0.268 | -0.805 | 4.4% |
| 3rd down | 1.047 | 2.094 | 4.9% |
| Standard downs | 0.327 | 2.290 | 5.2% |
| Passing downs | 0.596 | 1.788 | 4.1% |
Antonio Floyd · WRUsage 4.4% · Avg PPA -0.205 · Total -3.688
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | -0.205 | -3.688 | 4.4% |
| Pass | -0.205 | -3.688 | 8.3% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | -0.047 | -0.423 | 5.1% |
| 2nd down | -0.444 | -2.665 | 4.4% |
| 3rd down | -0.200 | -0.601 | 3.5% |
| Standard downs | -0.197 | -2.171 | 4.0% |
| Passing downs | -0.217 | -1.517 | 5.2% |
Dalin Wilkins · WRUsage 2.8% · Avg PPA -0.367 · Total -2.937
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | -0.367 | -2.937 | 2.8% |
| Pass | -0.367 | -2.937 | 5.7% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | 0.207 | 0.620 | 2.4% |
| 2nd down | -0.711 | -3.556 | 5.4% |
| 3rd down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| Standard downs | -0.134 | -0.537 | 2.0% |
| Passing downs | -0.600 | -2.399 | 4.7% |
Quinn Fracassi · WRUsage 2.8% · Avg PPA 0.787 · Total 1.573
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.787 | 1.573 | 2.8% |
| Pass | 0.787 | 1.573 | 6.9% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | -1.051 | -1.051 | 2.9% |
| 2nd down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 3rd down | 2.624 | 2.624 | 7.1% |
| Standard downs | -1.051 | -1.051 | 1.9% |
| Passing downs | 2.624 | 2.624 | 5.3% |
Santonyo Isaac · WRUsage 2.8% · Avg PPA 0.625 · Total 6.245
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.625 | 6.245 | 2.8% |
| Pass | 0.625 | 6.245 | 5.1% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | -0.041 | -0.081 | 1.3% |
| 2nd down | 0.963 | 6.741 | 6.1% |
| 3rd down | -0.415 | -0.415 | 1.3% |
| Standard downs | 0.744 | 3.719 | 2.0% |
| Passing downs | 0.505 | 2.526 | 4.6% |
XaVior Tyus · RBUsage 2.8% · Avg PPA 0.160 · Total 0.320
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.160 | 0.320 | 2.8% |
| Pass | 0.160 | 0.320 | 4.2% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | 0.831 | 0.831 | 3.4% |
| 2nd down | -0.512 | -0.512 | 4.2% |
| 3rd down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| Standard downs | 0.831 | 0.831 | 2.5% |
| Passing downs | -0.512 | -0.512 | 3.1% |
Armaad Sharp · TEUsage 2.2% · Avg PPA -0.192 · Total -0.577
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | -0.192 | -0.577 | 2.2% |
| Pass | -0.141 | -0.281 | 3.0% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | -0.192 | -0.577 | 5.1% |
| 2nd down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 3rd down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| Standard downs | -0.192 | -0.577 | 3.4% |
| Passing downs | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
Tanner Lemaster · TEUsage 2.1% · Avg PPA 0.449 · Total 5.391
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.449 | 5.391 | 2.1% |
| Pass | 0.449 | 5.391 | 3.9% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | -0.136 | -0.680 | 2.0% |
| 2nd down | 0.387 | 2.320 | 3.3% |
| 3rd down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| Standard downs | 0.465 | 4.651 | 2.6% |
| Passing downs | 0.370 | 0.740 | 1.1% |
Nate Lyman · WRUsage 1.4% · Avg PPA 3.322 · Total 3.322
| Split | Average PPA | Total PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3.322 | 3.322 | 1.4% |
| Pass | 3.322 | 3.322 | 2.1% |
| Rush | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 1st down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 2nd down | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| 3rd down | 3.322 | 3.322 | 6.7% |
| Standard downs | — | 0.000 | 0.0% |
| Passing downs | 3.322 | 3.322 | 3.1% |
2026 · Through provider Week 8. 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.
Values and percentiles
| Metric | Value | Percentile | Better |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offense PPA/play | 0.011 | 12th138 teams | higher |
| Offense success rate | 0.387 | 16th138 teams | higher |
| Offense explosiveness | 1.157 | 21st138 teams | higher |
| Offense pass PPA/play | 0.103 | 24th138 teams | higher |
| Offense rush PPA/play | 0.028 | 23rd138 teams | higher |
| Defense PPA/play | 0.144 | 28th138 teams | lower |
| Defense success rate | 0.435 | 21st138 teams | lower |
| Defense explosiveness | 1.206 | 55th138 teams | lower |
| Defense havoc created | 0.165 | 59th138 teams | higher |
Passing profile
2026 · CFBD passing family · raw PPACaptured 2026-10-30. Offense: 100% of 333 attempts charted. Average depth of target 7.4 yards (15th percentile of FBS). Yards after catch 5.4 per completion. Completion 60.7%, 5.8 yards per attempt, pass PPA 0.12.
| Side | Actual | Expected | CPOE (pp) | Qualifying / all attempts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Offense | 60.5% | 63.8% | -3.3 | 294 / 333 |
| Defense allowed | 65.9% | 62.2% | +3.7 | 252 / 275 |
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.
138 teams with at least 40 charted attempts. The highlighted point is Eastern Michigan.
Highlighted bars are deep zones. Shares are of located attempts only.
Defense and rushing detail
| Side | Attempts | Charted | ADOT | YAC | Comp % | PPA | CPOE | CPOE att |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Passing offense | 333 | 100% | 7.4 | 5.4 | 60.7% | 0.12 | -3.3 pp | 294 |
| Passing defense | 275 | 98% | 8.0 | 5.6 | 65.5% | 0.39 | +3.7 pp | 252 |
Rushing production
| Side | Attempts | Yards / carry | Success | PPA | Line yards / rush | Second-level yards / rush | Open-field yards / rush | Stuff rate | Power success |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Offense | 269 | 3.6 | 41.5% | 0.10 | 3.10 | 1.00 | 0.60 | 15.3% | 71.4% |
| Defense allowed | 286 | 4.4 | 41.2% | 0.00 | 3.10 | 1.10 | 1.00 | 19.1% | 64.4% |
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
| Side | Yards recorded | Individual | Unattributed | Sacks | Kneels | Team rushes | Multiple carriers | Direction located / eligible |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Offense | 265 / 269 | 259 | 10 | 16 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 248 / 248 · 100.0% |
| Defense allowed | 283 / 286 | 277 | 9 | 13 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 266 / 267 · 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 -3.3 pp. 8 of 9 captured games have this metric. Missing observations break the line.
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
| Week | Opponent | Pass att | CPOE att | Comp %* | Expected %* | CPOE | ADOT | Pass PPA | Rush att | Rush yds/carry | Rush PPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| W1 | San José State | 43 | 43 | 55.8% | 66.1% | -10.3 pp | 6.0 | -0.20 | 25 | 4.3 | -0.00 |
| W1 | Sacramento State | 38 | 38 | 71.1% | 61.7% | +9.3 pp | 9.8 | 0.34 | 30 | 2.7 | 0.14 |
| W2 | Michigan State | 26 | 26 | 61.5% | 69.1% | -7.6 pp | 4.8 | -0.20 | 26 | 3.9 | 0.38 |
| W3 | Wisconsin | 30 | 30 | 60.0% | 65.6% | -5.6 pp | 5.8 | -0.23 | 30 | 2.1 | -0.07 |
| W4 | Lindenwood | 38 | 0 | — | — | — | 9.8 | 0.36 | 31 | 4.5 | 0.19 |
| W5 | Massachusetts | 30 | 30 | 70.0% | 61.0% | +9.0 pp | 8.3 | 0.57 | 39 | 4.8 | 0.30 |
| W6 | Akron | 46 | 46 | 56.5% | 61.5% | -5.0 pp | 7.5 | 0.23 | 33 | 4.2 | 0.09 |
| W7 | Toledo | 43 | 43 | 46.5% | 62.2% | -15.7 pp | 8.3 | 0.17 | 28 | 1.2 | -0.30 |
| W8 | Ohio | 39 | 38 | 68.4% | 65.3% | +3.1 pp | 5.7 | 0.01 | 27 | 4.5 | 0.08 |
*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 2026-10-30T11:16:37.416814+00:00. Descriptive totals, including postseason when present.
Our punts
41 punts · 43.5 gross yards/punt · 36.2 net yards/punt
7 inside the 20 · 3 touchbacks · 1 blocked
Known gross yards: 41/41 punts. Known net yards: 33/41 punts.
Our punt returns
9 returns · 7.8 yards/return · 0 touchdowns
1 muffs · 1 opponent punts blocked
Known return yards: 9/9 returns. Return totals include team-only and unattributed plays.
Recent games
| Game | Punts | Gross yd/punt | Net yd/punt | Known net yards |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Week 8 · Ohio | 7 | 48.1 | 42.0 | 5/7 |
| Week 7 · Toledo | 4 | 46.8 | 41.0 | 3/4 |
| Week 6 · Akron | 2 | 50.0 | 44.0 | 1/2 |
| Week 5 · Massachusetts | 1 | 53.0 | — | 0/1 |
| Week 4 · Lindenwood | 1 | 45.0 | 45.0 | 1/1 |