2identity shift
CMich's fanbase shift signals Mid-Major identity evolution.
Matt Drinkall's 7-6 debut season marks the start of a new era for Central Michigan, a program historically defined by MAC titles in the early 2000s.
Central Michigan7-6Latest
Cautious optimism is building around Central Michigan.
belief warmed ↑ 2.4vs prior week
Fanbase belief
Leaning up
55/100 · 35 mentions · top 24% of FBS
~ our readGrounding
running on emotion
6% cite a stat · 8% typical ✓ counted
~ our readVolatility
Chaotic
σ 38 pts
~ our readThe model
#95
CFB Zeitgeist · -2.3
✓ measured2Hope-Doping·Offseason
Central Michigan won three MAC titles in four years under two coaches who both left for major-conference jobs, and produced an NFL star in Antonio Brown along the way -- a program that keeps building things other people get to keep.
Title DroughtSince 2009 · 16 yrs
Central Michigan fans watched Brian Kelly and Butch Jones build their national coaching reputations here before cashing out at bigger programs -- and watched Antonio Brown become an NFL star after lea…
offseason · quiet
Roster Reload - Central Michigan
2026 snapshot - 2026-08-06Returning Production10%Low continuity / heavy reload
Talent Composite#121 nationally247 composite 481.2
Portal Additions12Primary repair: S
Portal Losses17Primary pressure: CB
Draft Loss0No NFL Draft departures recorded
Recruiting Reload#95Depth class
TEin 3 - Dontae Robinsonout 2 - Travis AmbroseEven
current room: 234 lbs avg (2025 roster)
WRin 1 - Shawn Fosterout 3 - Langston LewisStarter Risk
current room: 192 lbs avg (2025 roster)
CBin 1 - Donavan Philordout 3 - Brenden DeasfernandesStarter Risk
current room: 186 lbs avg (2025 roster)
OTin 2 - Nic DiSantoout 2 - Jacob BoothEven
IOLin 1 - Losini Makaout 2 - Apisa PoumeleDowngrade
current room: 296 lbs avg (2025 roster)
RBin 2 - Jayden Clerveauxout 1 - Trey CornistEven
current room: 209 lbs avg (2025 roster)
Belief EKG
WinLoss · hover for scorePrior seasons
Approaching
31 days
until kickoff · at New Mexico · Sun Sep 6 · 02:00 UTC
The experience
Central Michigan won MAC titles in 2006, 2007, and 2009 under coaches Brian Kelly and Butch Jones -- both of whom left for bigger jobs -- fielding a 2009 title team led by Dan LeFevour and Antonio Brown, and just opened a new era with Army import Matt Drinkall, who went 7-6 in his 2025 debut season.
Offense: SoftRun/Pass: Run-heavy, ground-controlDefense: Strong
Central Michigan faces a challenging 2026 season with high volatility and limited returning core
The team's roster features only 10% returning players, and it has lost more transfers (17) than it has gained (12), creating uncertainty in key positions like CB and S. With a recruiting rank of #95 and a low continuity score, the team is heavily reliant on new talent to avoid a winless postseason.
- Roster reloadCentral Michigan has only 10% returning players, as indicated by the roster_reload.returning_total_pct value of 10.
Data as of 2026-08-03
·
Validated against program evidence
Chip waits quietly on the sideline.
Central Michigan · the story right now
7 storylines developing
What Central Michigan's coaching hire is really about
the open questioncan a new staff change the trajectory?
coachingthis cycle~readnew
Drinkall, who went 7-6 in his debut, inherits a 10% production return and a program that hasn't won a MAC title since 2009 — the identity anchor is the challenge.
what happenedMatt Drinkall took over as Central Michigan's head coach, replacing Jim McElwain. ✓ fact
the contextreplaces 5-year head coach Jim McElwain (24-30)
narrative tension · our read
program_outlookthis cycle~readnew
Central Michigan jumped 20 spots in SP+ — the 7-6 record and bottom-quintile returning production create a tension between optimism and the challenge of maintaining momentum under first-year coach Matt Drinkall.
what happenedCentral Michigan enters 2026 rated No. 100 in 2025 SP+ (-8.8), up 20 spots from 2024. ✓ fact
the contextbottom-quintile returning production — heavy turnover entering the season
narrative tension · our read
coordinatorsthis cycle✓ factnew
Central Michigan: coordinator change reshaping a unit.
narrative tension · our read
closerthis cycle~attributednew
Trey Cornist gets LESS work in the fourth quarter with a lead than his overall workload would predict -- not the trusted closer raw carries might suggest.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
Trey Cornist: a garbage time merchant signal screened this season.
narrative tension · our read
program_outlookthis cycle✓ factnew
Central Michigan enters 2025 rated No. 100 in SP+ (-8.8), up 20 spots from 2024.
the contextbottom-quintile returning production — heavy turnover entering the season
narrative tension · our read
identitythis cycle~readnew
Matt Drinkall's 7-6 debut season marks the start of a new era for Central Michigan, a program historically defined by MAC titles in the early 2000s.
what happenedCentral Michigan: the fanbase's identity shifting. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
How past storylines here turned out
AnsweredCentral Michigan's head-coaching hire held for another season.
ReplacedCentral Michigan's offensive coordinator spot turned over again the following season. See who's next →
The story
The Offseason Ledger · Central Michigan
1 verified update · portal · recruiting · staff · news- Recruiting
Markese Peoples commits to Central Michigan
CB depth was flagged as a pressure point for Drinkall's rebuild — Peoples fills that board with the class sitting at #94 nationally and still looking for separation in a reshaped MAC identity.
Transfer portal snapshot
-20.7 net portal points
(raw ledger: -32.7 — unweighted, no position adjustment)WR-8.5
starter risk
CB-7.2
starter risk
S+6.6
need not filled
IOL-6.0
EDGE-5.5
starter risk
DL-3.5
low confidence
LB-3.5
low confidence
OT-2.7
RB-1.5
TE-1.0
Top 3 commits
2026 class
★★★☆☆
Wyatt Graffin
#1474 national
★★★☆☆
Traverse Moore
#1474 national
Projects: Hybrid Nickel — 12 of his 25 closest recruiting profiles since 2018 shared the Hybrid Nickel archetype.~our read · projection from recruiting profile — no college snaps yet
★★★☆☆
Colton Benaitis
#1474 national
↑
Among the stronger offseasons on record for this program
82nd percentile among FBS programs
Fan vs. market↑
82nd
Fan percentile
(FBS mood rank)
(FBS mood rank)
6.5
Vegas O/U wins
(41st among FBS)
(41st among FBS)
Fans 41pp more bullish than market implies
Win total consensus · 3 books
Market outlook
Season expectations
Win total3 booksO/U 6.5
CFP championship#125 in field+100000
MAC title#5 in market+700
Sportsbook consensus · best odds across multiple books · 2026-08-06
Central Michigan · Next-Season Outcome Band
Central Michigan · Next-Season Outcome BandFloor / Base / Ceiling
Floor 3-9
Base 5-7
Ceiling 8-5
floor3-9No postseason.
base5-7No postseason.
ceiling8-5Bowl game.
Final-season-aware projection: floor / base / ceiling include conference title and CFP games where the model supports them, so a ceiling can exceed a 12-game regular season.
How the room reacted
Developing · Central Michigan · Coaching Confidence
The Matt Drinkall era at Central Michigan: where it actually stands.
Matt Drinkall took over as Central Michigan's head coach, replacing Jim McElwain. It is replaces 5-year head coach Jim McElwain (24-30). The hire has receded from the front page. The roster and recruiting pipeline are the real measure now. The discourse has moved on; what's left is the quiet work of building something.
The saga so far~18 months old
2 weeks agoChippewas eye next step in Year 2 under Drinkall — The Morning Sun
Jul 9Central Michigan Football, Drinkall Announces Six More Coaching Staff Members — Central Michigan University Athletics
Feb 5Central Michigan, Drinkall Announces Five Coaching Staff Members — Central Michigan University Athletics
The cast who's driving the story · latest headline on each, attributed
Matt Drinkall Head coach
“Matt Drinkall Named Central Michigan Head Football Coach” — Central Michigan University Athletics · 2024-12-09
Jim McElwain Out
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Drinkall, who went 7-6 in his debut, inherits a 10% production return and a program that hasn't won a MAC title since 2009 — the identity anchor is the challenge.
Next · what to watch
The obvious story is the marquee name; the non-obvious one is roster churn — a coaching change keeps a portal and decommit window open long after the introductory presser. Watch decommitments and portal moves in the next window — that's where this is actually won or lost, not at the podium.
Source of record: Matt Drinkall took over as Central Michigan's head coach, replacing Jim McElwain — replaces 5-year head coach Jim McElwain (24-30).
How each room reacted — tap to expand
📣Believers0 bullish/hire items -- the case it's working.›
The 'this hire changes everything' takes -- new-era believers making the case early.
“Chippewas eye next step in Year 2 under Drinkall”
The Morning Sun · 2026-07-22 · read ↗
“Central Michigan Football, Drinkall Announces Six More Coaching Staff Members”
Central Michigan University Athletics · 2025-07-09 · read ↗
“Central Michigan, Drinkall Announces Five Coaching Staff Members”
Central Michigan University Athletics · 2025-02-05 · read ↗
🧐SkepticsNo prominent dissent — the coverage runs one way.›
The 'show me the body of work' counter -- resume gaps, scheme fits, and 'not that guy' reads.
Nothing in our corpus yet — this door stays open for when there is.
💬The boards1 board mentions — too thin to call a stance.›
Only 1 of 21 board posts mention it — below our floor to call a community stance. Shown as texture, not a verdict.
"Still proud of our guys. Drinkall is our coach for the long run, can’t wait to see what he does after he’s had this great first year. Fire Up Chips!"
r/CFB ~ fan take
"FIRE UP! Drinkall’s first season has been an absolute success, already at 7 wins and a bowl game. It’s a long shot for the MAC Championship but I still believe!"
r/CFB ~ fan take
The boards ≠ the fanbase: a vocal, self-selected slice.
🔗The dominoes17 downstream moves — the hire's knock-on effects.›
The second-order trail: commits, decommits, portal and staff knock-on from the hire.
“Joseph Manna - Head Coach - Staff Directory”
Central Michigan University Athletics · 2026-07-31 · read ↗
“St. Laurence senior Markese Peoples, one of the summer's breakout stars, commits to Central Michigan - Chicago Sun-Times”
news · 2026-07-22 · read ↗
Following now · Central Michigan · Season outlook Confidence
Central Michigan enters the season in the middle of the pack. That's the whole tension.
Central Michigan enters 2026 rated No. 100 in 2025 SP+ (-8.8), up 20 spots from 2024. It is bottom-quintile returning production — heavy turnover entering the season. One of the bigger model jumps in the country — the tape moved faster than the consensus noticed. The preview consensus leans in — but preseason ratings reward the recent past, not the season ahead.
near-unanimous belief
where the takes land · dot = how loud
DOUBTBELIEF
Believers4 bull takes
💬 fans: 33% volume
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Central Michigan jumped 20 spots in SP+ — the 7-6 record and bottom-quintile returning production create a tension between optimism and the challenge of maintaining momentum under first-year coach Matt Drinkall.
Next · what to watch
The non-obvious consequence of a major jump in the model is the expectations tax: a season that would have read as a breakthrough last year now reads as meeting the floor. Watch whether the model holds through the first month of the schedule.
Source of record: Central Michigan enters 2026 rated No. 100 in 2025 SP+ (-8.8), up 20 spots from 2024 — bottom-quintile returning production — heavy turnover entering the season.
How each room is reacting — tap to expand
📣Believers4 bullish items -- the case it's working.›
The 'the projection is underselling us' read -- fans betting the season beats the preview number.
“125 Years of CMU Football: Remembering Central Michigan's Wins Over Michigan State”
Central Michigan University Athletics · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“Central Michigan University announces Athletics Hall of Fame Class of 2026”
abc12.com · 2026-08-01 · read ↗
“Central Michigan Announces 2026 Athletics Hall of Fame Class”
Central Michigan University Athletics · 2026-07-30 · read ↗
🧐SkepticsNo prominent dissent — the coverage runs one way.›
The 'the model has seen the tape' counter -- efficiency ratings reward what a program has actually done, not hope.
Nothing in our corpus yet — this door stays open for when there is.
💬The boards7 board mentions — too thin to call a stance.›
Only 7 of 21 board posts mention it — below our floor to call a community stance. Shown as texture, not a verdict.
"The ESPN announcer for the CMU game literally said word for word "Those fans are really supportive, you have to pay me to be here" and "Get this game over with as soon as possible""
r/CFB ~ fan take
"As this game goes on and the field conditions get worse, its going to favor the ground game for Central."
r/CFB ~ fan take
The boards ≠ the fanbase: a vocal, self-selected slice.
Recent Form · last 10 games
Cooling
Two of five. Schedule has caught up.
Streak L2Last 5 · 2-3Last 10 · 6-4
The forecast
Opens Sep 6
vs New Mexico · away
Season line6.5 winsover +110
SoftRun-heavy, ground-controlStrong
✓ fact on line · ~ our read on style
Rival pulse
Eastern Michigan
Uneasy-9
Michigan MAC Trophy (EMU-CMU)
Western Michigan
Hopeful+16
Victory Cannon
Fan mood index · most recent r/cfb data
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
38
MI · 14CA · 4FL · 4IL · 4IN · 3WI · 2IA · 1MO · 1+5 more
MI leads the 2026 class with 14 commits. National footprint reaching 13 states.
Where they recruit · 2023-2026
93 signees across 18 states, 2023-2026. MI leads the pull.
r/cfb this year
[Postgame Thread] Central Michigan Defeats Buffalo 38-19
[Postgame Thread] Central Michigan Defeats UMass 38-13
[Postgame Thread] Central Michigan Defeats Wagner 49-10
Top community posts · last 12 months · r/cfb
National spotlight
8 games with TV coverage: 1 ESPN, 3 cable, 1 conference network, 3 streaming
Kickoff windows: 4 noon, 1 afternoon, 3 primetime
Fumble luck
The bounces haven't gone their way on their own fumbles: 33% recovered, vs. ~51% expected.
3 of 9 own fumbles recovered themselves; 8 of 12 forced fumbles recovered, 2025 only.
Takeaway conversion
Cashing in at a normal clip: 22% of disrupted passes intercepted, close to ~19% league-wide.
12 interceptions of 54 disrupted passes (42 deflected, 12 intercepted), 2025 only.
Penalty battle
The flags have favored them: 79 penalties drawn on opponents vs. 78 committed, 69 yards to the good.
633 penalty yards committed vs. 702 drawn on opponents, 2025 season total.
The Pulse on Central Michigan
55
Δ +2.4 vs last wk
35
mentions this week · conversation velocity
What moved it — fall camp · last 14 days
Camp
Fall camp open — install + scrimmage cycle
ongoing
Kickoff
Season opener in 16 days
kickoff
"Go Chips"
— Central Michigan fanbase · recurring line
39 mentions · sample growing
The Fever Year
Position = mood · width = volume · color = the kind of feeling
Belief checklight on evidence
~ our readCentral Michigan fans are down on the program, with a bit less hard evidence than most fanbases.
backed by facts
the mood
✓ counted We read 70 posts from Central Michigan fans this week.
Season storylines
Week 1
“THEN WE'RE GONNA BEAT THE CHIEFS IN THE SUPERBOWL AND TAYLOR SWIFT WILL BREAK UP WITH TRAVIS AND START DATING JORDAN KWIATKOWSKI”— r/CFB
Week 18
“Good news sunbelt, youll get a bowl win here no matter what. Bad news, youll also lose.”— r/CFB
Week 2
“This might be a watch something else at halftime kinda game. I was at least hoping we could get on the board”— r/CFB
Week 12
“FIRE UP! Drinkall’s first season has been an absolute success, already at 7 wins and a bowl game. It’s a long shot for the MAC Championship but I still believe!”— r/CFB
Week 3
“I think you'd be more than happy sacrificing this one for the way your primary game is going”— r/CFB
Fanbase Health Index · Central Michigan · medium confidence
Fanbase Health Index · Central Michigan · medium confidenceGrowing (63)
DecliningStableGrowingSurging
On-Field — 7-6 (54% win rate)64
Volume — 38 effective signal-N62
Fanbase Voice
350 fan mentions
Believers
vs the 81 highest-volume fanbases - 2025 season
Key stats — 2025 — FBS rank
Points/game#101 / 138 · 28th pct22.5
Pts allowed/game#51 / 138 · 64th pct23.5
Total yards/gm#101 / 136 · 26th pct332.2
Rush yards/gm#57 / 136 · 59th pct165.1
Pass yards/gm#117 / 136 · 15th pct167.1
Yards allowed/gm#60 / 136 · 57th pct356.5
Rush yds allowed/gm#73 / 136 · 47th pct147.1
Sacks#50 / 136 · 64th pct29
Interceptions#34 / 136 · 76th pct13
3rd-down conv#115 / 136 · 16th pct34.1%
All 98 stats
Offense / Defense
Total yards
Team4318332.2/gm5.46/play#101 / 136 · 26th pct#54 / 70 · 24th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp4634356.5/gm5.47/play#60 / 136 · 57th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Rush yards
Team2146165.1/gm2.71/play#57 / 136 · 59th pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp1912147.1/gm2.26/play#73 / 136 · 47th pct#48 / 70 · 33rd pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Rush carries
Team53841.4/gm#26 / 136 · 82nd pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp43933.8/gm#52 / 136 · 62nd pct#37 / 70 · 49th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Rush TDs
Team171.3/gm#85 / 136 · 38th pct#49 / 70 · 31st pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp181.4/gm#60 / 136 · 57th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Net pass yards
Team2172167.1/gm2.75/play#117 / 136 · 15th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp2722209.4/gm3.21/play#61 / 136 · 56th pct#35 / 70 · 51st pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Pass attempts
Team25319.5/gm#131 / 136 · 4th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Opp40831.4/gm#87 / 136 · 37th pct#43 / 70 · 40th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Completions
Team17613.5/gm#124 / 136 · 10th pct#69 / 70 · 3rd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp23818.3/gm#65 / 136 · 53rd pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Pass TDs
Team161.2/gm#92 / 136 · 33rd pct#52 / 70 · 27th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Opp181.4/gm#63 / 136 · 54th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Passer rating
Team152.3152.3#20 / 136 · 86th pct#15 / 70 · 80th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp125.5125.5#44 / 136 · 68th pct#27 / 70 · 63rd pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Interceptions thrown
Team70.5/gm#97 / 136 · 29th pct#47 / 70 · 34th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Opp131.0/gm#96 / 136 · 30th pct#49 / 70 · 31st pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Sacks (def)
Team292.2/gm#50 / 136 · 64th pct#32 / 70 · 56th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#6 / 10 · 50th pct
Opp241.8/gm#72 / 136 · 48th pct#38 / 70 · 47th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#4 / 10 · 70th pct
Tackles for loss
Team695.3/gm#64 / 136 · 54th pct#34 / 70 · 53rd pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#8 / 10 · 30th pct
Opp755.8/gm#105 / 136 · 24th pct#58 / 70 · 19th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#6 / 10 · 50th pct
First downs
Team22016.9/gm#113 / 136 · 18th pct#60 / 70 · 16th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp25319.5/gm#77 / 136 · 44th pct#44 / 70 · 39th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
3rd-down conv
Team564.3/gm#119 / 136 · 13th pct#64 / 70 · 10th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp735.6/gm#94 / 136 · 32nd pct#55 / 70 · 23rd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
3rd-down att
Team16412.6/gm#100 / 136 · 27th pct#43 / 70 · 40th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp18013.8/gm#75 / 136 · 46th pct#40 / 70 · 44th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
4th-down conv
Team151.2/gm#47 / 136 · 66th pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Opp100.8/gm#22 / 136 · 85th pct#9 / 70 · 89th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
4th-down att
Team262.0/gm#55 / 136 · 60th pct#30 / 70 · 59th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Opp282.2/gm#77 / 136 · 44th pct#37 / 70 · 49th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Time of possession
Team417:1832:06/gm#27 / 136 · 81st pct#14 / 70 · 81st pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Opp362:0427:51/gm#31 / 136 · 78th pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Kicking & Punting
Field goals#40 / 135 · 71st pct14/17 (82.4%)
Extra points35/35
Punting#111 / 136 · 19th pct41.1 avg · 57 punts
Turnovers & special teams
Turnovers
Team161.2/gm#65 / 136 · 53rd pct#26 / 70 · 64th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp211.6/gm#103 / 136 · 25th pct#54 / 70 · 24th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Fumbles lost
Team90.7/gm#14 / 136 · 90th pct#5 / 70 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp80.6/gm#90 / 136 · 35th pct#52 / 70 · 27th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
INT return TDs
Team20.2/gm#18 / 135 · 87th pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#2 / 10 · 90th pct
Opp00.0/gm#1 / 136 · 100th pct#1 / 70 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
INT return yards
Team15011.5/gm#47 / 136 · 66th pct#25 / 70 · 66th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp453.5/gm#22 / 136 · 85th pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Punt ret yds
Team695.3/gm#112 / 136 · 18th pct#62 / 70 · 13th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp1239.5/gm#78 / 136 · 43rd pct#44 / 70 · 39th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Punt ret TDs
Team00.0/gm#43 / 135 · 69th pct#23 / 70 · 69th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#3 / 10 · 80th pct
Opp10.1/gm#97 / 135 · 29th pct#52 / 70 · 27th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#6 / 9 · 44th pct
Kick ret yds
Team33625.8/gm#90 / 136 · 35th pct#41 / 70 · 43rd pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Opp67351.8/gm#117 / 136 · 15th pct#64 / 70 · 10th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Kick ret TDs
Team00.0/gm#40 / 136 · 71st pct#17 / 70 · 77th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#5 / 11 · 64th pct
Opp00.0/gm#1 / 135 · 100th pct#1 / 70 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#1 / 9 · 100th pct
Penalty yards
Team63348.7/gm#86 / 136 · 38th pct#40 / 70 · 44th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp70254.0/gm#86 / 136 · 38th pct#51 / 70 · 29th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Other
Passes intercepted opponent#23 / 136 · 84th pct#11 / 70 · 86th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct70.5/gm
H1 epa per play opponent#30 / 167 · 83rd pct#20 / 70 · 73rd pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct0.10.0/gm
Fumbles recovered#33 / 136 · 76th pct#17 / 70 · 77th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct80.6/gm
Interceptions (def)#34 / 136 · 76th pct#19 / 70 · 74th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct131.0/gm
Punt ret (opp)#39 / 136 · 72nd pct#25 / 70 · 66th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct110.8/gm
H1 epa per play#58 / 162 · 65th pct#41 / 70 · 43rd pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct0.20.0/gm
Penalties#61 / 136 · 56th pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct786.0/gm
Fourth down go rate#66 / 138 · 53rd pct#35 / 70 · 51st pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct0.40.0/gm
H2 epa per play opponent#77 / 143 · 47th pct#40 / 70 · 44th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct0.20.0/gm
Penalties (opp)#79 / 136 · 43rd pct#47 / 70 · 34th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct796.1/gm
H2 epa per play#82 / 142 · 43rd pct#44 / 70 · 39th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct0.20.0/gm
Kick returns#84 / 136 · 39th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct181.4/gm
Recruiting rating#113 / 138 · 19th pct#69 / 70 · 3rd pct#8 / 13 · 46th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct128.49.9/gm
Fumbles rec (def)#114 / 136 · 17th pct#62 / 70 · 13th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct90.7/gm
Punt returns#121 / 136 · 12th pct#64 / 70 · 10th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct90.7/gm
Kick ret (opp)#123 / 136 · 10th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct342.6/gm
Red zone pass rate#142 / 154 · 8th pct#69 / 70 · 3rd pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct0.20.0/gm
First down pass rate#185 / 215 · 14th pct#68 / 70 · 4th pct#12 / 13 · 15th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct0.30.0/gm
Situational
3rd-down conversion
Off34.1%#115 / 136 · 16th pct#64 / 70 · 10th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Def40.6%#87 / 136 · 37th pct#47 / 70 · 34th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
4th-down conversion
Off57.7%#51 / 136 · 63rd pct#32 / 70 · 56th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Def35.7%#7 / 136 · 96th pct#3 / 70 · 97th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Turnover margin#35 / 136 · 75th pct#20 / 70 · 73rd pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct+0.38/gm
Sack rate (def)#48 / 136 · 65th pct#31 / 70 · 57th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#8 / 10 · 30th pct7.1%
Red Zone & Drive Efficiency (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Red zone trips
Team413.2/gm#80 / 167 · 53rd pct#46 / 70 · 36th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp413.2/gm#91 / 166 · 46th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Red zone score %
Team68.3%68.3%#135 / 167 · 20th pct#66 / 70 · 7th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Opp73.2%73.2%#42 / 166 · 75th pct#18 / 70 · 76th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Points / drive
Team1.70.1/gm#106 / 167 · 37th pct#59 / 70 · 17th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Opp1.80.1/gm#60 / 166 · 64th pct#35 / 70 · 51st pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Yards / drive
Team36.12.8/gm#121 / 167 · 28th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp40.43.1/gm#74 / 166 · 56th pct#38 / 70 · 47th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Plays / drive
Team6.40.5/gm#98 / 167 · 42nd pct#50 / 70 · 30th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Opp6.70.5/gm#106 / 166 · 37th pct#47 / 70 · 34th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Three-and-out rate
Team18.7%18.7%#132 / 167 · 22nd pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Opp14.7%14.7%#66 / 166 · 61st pct#34 / 70 · 53rd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Scheme Identity (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Rush rate over expected#8 / 145 · 95th pct#1 / 70 · 100th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct+12.8%+12.8%
Havoc rate
Team16.6%16.6%#55 / 140 · 61st pct#34 / 70 · 53rd pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp14.7%14.7%#63 / 140 · 56th pct#31 / 70 · 57th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Standard-downs success
Team48.7%48.7%#65 / 154 · 58th pct#38 / 70 · 47th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Opp45.8%45.8%#54 / 172 · 69th pct#29 / 70 · 60th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Passing-downs success
Team25.1%25.1%#133 / 153 · 14th pct#67 / 70 · 6th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp26.9%26.9%#25 / 149 · 84th pct#16 / 70 · 79th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Line yards / carry
Team2.82.8#89 / 143 · 38th pct#46 / 70 · 36th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Opp2.82.8#57 / 155 · 64th pct#35 / 70 · 51st pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Stuff rate
Team17.7%17.7%#56 / 143 · 62nd pct#31 / 70 · 57th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Opp21.5%21.5%#34 / 155 · 79th pct#19 / 70 · 74th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Power success rate
Team72.7%72.7%#53 / 137 · 62nd pct#30 / 70 · 59th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Opp56.4%56.4%#14 / 141 · 91st pct#8 / 70 · 90th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Efficiency
Completion %
Off69.6%#8 / 136 · 95th pct#7 / 70 · 91st pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Def58.3%#27 / 136 · 81st pct#13 / 70 · 83rd pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Yards / attempt
Off8.6#17 / 136 · 88th pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Def6.7#48 / 136 · 65th pct#31 / 70 · 57th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Yards / completion
Off12.3#42 / 136 · 70th pct#20 / 70 · 73rd pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Def11.4#65 / 136 · 53rd pct#45 / 70 · 37th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Yards / carry#95 / 136 · 31st pct#48 / 70 · 33rd pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct4.0
Yards / play#87 / 136 · 37th pct#50 / 70 · 30th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct5.46
Scoring margin#85 / 136 · 38th pct#52 / 70 · 27th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct#6 / 11 · 55th pct-1.0/gm
FBS rankings · 2025 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs
Player stats — 2025 season
Quarterbacks
| Player | # | G | Cmp/Att | Pct | Yds | Y/A | TD | INT | Rate | QBR | Adj ANY/A | Sack% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pocket Passer · +0.28 EPA/play | 2 | 13 | 147 / 208 | 70.7 | 1854 | 8.9 | 13 | 6 | 160.4 | 48.0 | 7.8 | 6.7 | |
Yards by week → Pocket PasserBalanced passer who operates within the system, without one standout number carrying the profile. Impact starter — above-average production for the conference. The rare part: he can push it deep — and he puts it wherever he wants, too 97 of 183 QBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / attempt9.3 92th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Completion %73.0% 95th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts — the part the label misses Trait fingerprint Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score moved from the 6th to 52nd percentile among FBS QBs | |||||||||||||
| +0.20 EPA/play | 7 | 9 | 19 / 28 | 67.9 | 195 | 7.0 | 2 | 1 | 142.8 | 50.1 | — | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||||
Running Backs
| Player | # | G | Car | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Stuff% | 10+% | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Back · +0.07 EPA/play | 5 | 12 | 105 | 540 | 5.1 | 2 | 58 | 9.8 | 10.7 | 19.4 | 13.6 | 8.0% (18/226) | |
Yards by week → Balanced BackPlays within the scheme — consistent production without a dominant dimension. Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. 186 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry5.3 51th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Rush TD rate1.9% bottom 19th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Nahree Biggins's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Balanced Back · -0.11 EPA/play | 6 | 13 | 104 | 469 | 4.5 | 1 | 29 | 3.9 | 8.7 | 20.8 | 13.9 | — | |
Yards by week → Balanced BackPlays within the scheme — consistent production without a dominant dimension. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 186 of 349 classified this way. Played in 13 of 21 games this season · sophomore View Trey Cornist's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Workhorse · +0.16 EPA/play | 22 | 12 | 82 | 418 | 5.1 | 4 | 46 | 9.9 | 8.7 | 6.3 | 12.7 | — | |
Yards by week → WorkhorseBuilt to take 20+ carries per game. Volume is the value. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 52 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Weight220 lb 82th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Yards / reception11.2 86th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Brock Townsend's full player page | |||||||||||||
Receivers
| Player | # | G | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possession Receiver · +0.29 EPA/play | 20 | 13 | 43 | 596 | 13.9 | 3 | 77 | 9.7 | 9.5 | 24.8% (56/226) | |
Yards by week → Possession Receiver· Boom-or-bustReliable target who converts on critical downs. Not flashy; consistently productive. his yards come in chunks — feast or famine All-Conference honorable mention / 2nd team — the recognition has started. 332 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception13.9 56th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions EPA / play (adj)0.3 bottom 25th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Langston Lewis's full player page | |||||||||||
| Possession Receiver · +0.41 EPA/play | 82 | 13 | 31 | 422 | 13.6 | 3 | 47 | 5.2 | 5.8 | 19.0% (43/226) | |
Yards by week → Possession ReceiverReliable target who converts on critical downs. Not flashy; consistently productive. 332 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception13.9 55th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions EPA / play (adj)0.4 bottom 41th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Tommy McIntosh's full player page | |||||||||||
| Possession Receiver · +0.69 EPA/play | 3 | 12 | 25 | 323 | 12.9 | 2 | 36 | 7.8 | 7.9 | 14.2% (32/226) | |
Yards by week → Possession Receiver· Money-downReliable target who converts on critical downs. Not flashy; consistently productive. lives on the sticks and moves the chains 332 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception10.7 bottom 26th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions EPA / play (adj)0.7 80th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Tyson Davis's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.35 EPA/play | 8 | 8 | 17 | 143 | 8.4 | 2 | 19 | 5.4 | 6.4 | 10.2% (23/226) | |
Yards by week → Complete TENo single go-to route — the receiving numbers show up inline and split out alike. The most common profile in its group this season — 177 of 223 classified this way. Played in 8 of 21 games this season · junior · 3-star, 2022 class View D.C. Temple's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.39 EPA/play | 88 | 7 | 8 | 70 | 8.8 | 0 | 23 | 1.6 | 2.1 | — | |
Yards by week → Complete TENo single go-to route — the receiving numbers show up inline and split out alike. 177 of 223 TEs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception8.8 bottom 28th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions TD rate0.0% bottom 10th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Henry Dryden's full player page | |||||||||||
| +0.29 EPA/play | 80 | 6 | 7 | 63 | 9 | 0 | 21 | 7.0 | 6.3 | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
Defensive Line
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | TFL | Sack | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 97 | 13 | 48 | 24 | 16.5 #11 FBS | 11.5 #7 FBS | 8 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. All-Conference honorable mention / 2nd team — the recognition has started. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate34.4% 98th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 37th to 84th to 99th percentile among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 56 | 12 | 28 | 15 | 9 | 4 | 5 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate32.1% 97th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readUnranked recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 98 | 10 | 25 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Two-Gap BaseStout at the point of attack — steady tackle-for-loss production without a standout pass-rush number. 388 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate8.0% bottom 24th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Jonathan Decker's full player page | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 49 | 11 | 15 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate13.3% bottom 45th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score moved from the 5th to 50th percentile among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| Nose Anchor | 96 | 6 | 14 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Nose AnchorThe heaviest frame on the interior. Sack production is intentionally not the point of this profile. 152 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Weight310 lb 83th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Quavion Bird's full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 93 | 7 | 10 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Two-Gap BaseStout at the point of attack — steady tackle-for-loss production without a standout pass-rush number. 388 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate0.0% bottom 6th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Daniel Bennett's full player page | |||||||
| 95 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 94 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | |
| 81 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 | |
Linebackers
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | Ast | TFL | Sack | PD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Linebacker | 12 | 13 | 112 | 51 | 61 | 13.5 #36 FBS | 2.5 | 4 | 3 #56 FBS |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. All-Conference honorable mention / 2nd team — the recognition has started. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume112 99th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles TFL rate12.1% 65th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 18th to 78th to 98th percentile among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 1 | 13 | 81 | 42 | 39 | 6 | 0.5 | 3 | 1 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. All-Conference honorable mention / 2nd team — the recognition has started. The most common profile in its group this season — 362 of 660 classified this way. Played in 13 of 21 games this season · senior · 3-star, 2021 class View Dakota Cochran's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 40 | 13 | 43 | 17 | 26 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. The most common profile in its group this season — 362 of 660 classified this way. Played in 13 of 21 games this season · senior View Lawai'a Brown's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 45 | 11 | 26 | 14 | 12 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. The most common profile in its group this season — 362 of 660 classified this way. Played in 11 of 21 games this season · sophomore · 3-star, 2024 class View Xavier White's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 14 | 6 | 19 | 5 | 14 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume19 bottom 13th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles PD rate0.0% bottom 18th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Fernando Sanchez III's full player page | |||||||||
| Coverage 'Backer | 33 | 8 | 15 | 5 | 10 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 |
Coverage 'BackerCarries tight ends and patrols the middle of the field in coverage. 99 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate6.7% 93th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Tackle volume15 bottom 10th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Victor Earl's full player page | |||||||||
| 42 | 5 | 10 | 3 | 7 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | |
| 51 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Defensive Backs
| Player | # | G | Tot | PD | INT | TFL | Sack |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid Nickel | 15 | 13 | 54 | 4 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 419 of 801 classified this way. Played in 13 of 21 games this season · senior · 3-star, 2021 class View Caleb Spann's full player page | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 6 | 13 | 49 | 4 | 2 | 1.5 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 419 of 801 classified this way. Played in 13 of 21 games this season · junior our readBreakout: his CFB Index score now sits at the 63rd percentile among FBS Ss, up from the 8th | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 29 | 12 | 48 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 419 of 801 classified this way. Played in 12 of 21 games this season · senior View Elijah Gordon's full player page | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 2 | 13 | 46 | 0 | 1 | 1.5 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 419 of 801 classified this way. Played in 13 of 21 games this season · senior · 3-star, 2021 class View Elijah Rikard's full player page | |||||||
| Rover | 4 | 13 | 45 | 7 | 1 | 4 | 2 |
RoverHits like a linebacker and still takes the ball away. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 83 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate15.6% 85th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score climbed from the 33rd percentile to the 89th among FBS Ss | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 17 | 12 | 42 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 419 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate0.0% bottom 14th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like View Maddix Blackwell's full player page | |||||||
| Centerfielder | 3 | 13 | 25 | 8 #45 FBS | 2 | 0 | 0 |
CenterfielderSingle-high range who erases the deep middle of the field. 133 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate32.0% 100th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score went from the 2nd percentile among FBS Ss to the 83rd | |||||||
| 24 | 4 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | |
| 7 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 8 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| 9 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | |
Kicking
| Player | # | G | FG M/A | FG% | XP M/A | Pts | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steady | 47 | 13 | 14/17 | 82.4 | 35/35 | 77 | 47 |
Punting
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | Long | In20 | TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steady | 18 | 13 | 54 | 2221 | 41.1 | 71 | 18 | 3 |
Net average is unavailable — CFBD's punting feed carries gross yards only, with no return-yardage or touchback deduction.
Kick Returns
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Back · +0.07 EPA/play | 5 | 12 | 12 | 250 | 20.8 | 0 | 32 |
Punt Returns
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid Nickel | 15 | 13 | 9 | 69 | 7.7 | 0 | 46 |
2025 stat leaders
final
2025 stat leaders
1.
Jordan Kwiatkowski
LB
112 tot (def)
2.
Dakota Cochran
LB
81.0 tot (def)
3.
Caleb Spann
DB
54.0 tot (def)
4.
Langston Lewis
WR
596 yds (rec)
5.
Kalen Carroll
DB
49.0 tot (def)
Roster
2025
24
players carry a qualified CFB Index Score this season.
Michael Heldman
EDGE
#6 of 420
Jordan Kwiatkowski
LB
#16 of 583
Jaion Jackson
CB
#53 of 364
Brenden Deasfernandes
CB
#76 of 364
Korver Demma
EDGE
#109 of 420
Dakota Cochran
LB
#164 of 583
+18 more
Central Michigan · 2025 schedule & results7-6Hard slateAverage opponent win rate 44% · 2 AP top-25 opponents on the schedule.
| Wk | Date | Us | Opp | Line | Opponent | Result | Record | Conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aug 30 | #114 | #94 | +14.5 | @San José State | W 16–14 130 | 1-0 | 0-0 |
| 2 | Sep 6 | #112 | #47 | +21.5 | @Pittsburgh | L 17–45 126 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| 3 | Sep 13 | #103 | #11 | +27.5 | @Michigan | L 3–63 128 | 1-2 | 0-0 |
| 4 | Sep 20 | #107 | #239 | -30.5 | Wagner | W 49–10 119 | 2-2 | 0-0 |
| 5 | Sep 27 | #111 | #171 | -3.5 | Eastern Michigan | W 24–13 123 | 3-2 | 1-0 |
| 6 | Oct 4 | #114 | #177 | -6.5 | @Akron | L 22–28 130 | 3-3 | 1-1 |
| 8 | Oct 18 | #129 | #110 | +3.5 | @Bowling Green | W 27–6 112 | 4-3 | 2-1 |
| 9 | Oct 25 | #112 | #228 | -17.5 | Massachusetts | W 38–13 143 | 5-3 | 3-1 |
| 10 | Nov 1 | #98 | #71 | +5.5 | @Western Michigan | L 21–24 115 | 5-4 | 3-2 |
| 12 | Nov 13 | #96 | #109 | -2 | Buffalo | W 38–19 135 | 6-4 | 4-2 |
| 13 | Nov 20 | #81 | #213 | -7.5 | @Kent State | W 28–16 129 | 7-4 | 5-2 |
| 14 | Nov 29 | #84 | #27 | +11.5 | Toledo | L 3–21 127 | 7-5 | 5-3 |
| Bowl Season | ||||||||
| 17 | Dec 26 | #86 | #59 | +12 | Northwestern (N) | L 7–34 | 7-6 | 5-3 |
Advanced box score (EPA, success rate, explosiveness)▼
| Date | Opp | Result | Yds | TO | TOP | EPA/play | Success% | Explosive% | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 26 | Northwestern | L 7–34 | — | — | — | +0.017 | 47.5% | 64.9% | |
| Nov 29 | Toledo | L 3–21 | 323 | 1 | 31:26 | -0.041 | 29.9% | 113.1% | |
| Nov 20 | @Kent State | W 28–16 | 297 | 1 | 33:21 | +0.101 | 38.8% | 130.0% | |
| Nov 13 | Buffalo | W 38–19 | 358 | 2 | 31:06 | +0.184 | 50.0% | 95.8% | |
| Nov 1 | @Western Michigan | L 21–24 | 240 | 2 | 26:18 | +0.172 | 36.0% | 165.9% | Most explosive |
| Oct 25 | Massachusetts | W 38–13 | 502 | 1 | 37:53 | +0.304 | 51.5% | 122.4% | |
| Oct 18 | @Bowling Green | W 27–6 | 276 | 0 | 31:20 | +0.165 | 36.0% | 137.4% | |
| Oct 4 | @Akron | L 22–28 | 374 | 0 | 27:42 | +0.261 | 37.9% | 146.4% | One-score loss |
| Sep 27 | Eastern Michigan | W 24–13 | 451 | 0 | 35:46 | +0.334 | 51.4% | 103.5% | Season-high EPA/play |
| Sep 20 | Wagner | W 49–10 | 507 | 2 | 32:23 | +0.228 | 53.7% | 116.6% | Best success rate |
| Sep 13 | @Michigan | L 3–63 | 142 | 2 | 26:53 | -0.170 | 20.8% | 106.6% | Season-low EPA/play |
| Sep 6 | @Pittsburgh | L 17–45 | 217 | 1 | 36:43 | +0.037 | 26.5% | 159.1% | Blowout loss |
| Aug 30 | @San José State | W 16–14 | 362 | 0 | 33:45 | +0.125 | 43.8% | 89.5% | One-score win |
| Season average (13 games) | 337 | 1.0 | +0.132 | 40.3% | 119.3% | ||||
How They Play · 2025
How They Play · 2025Central Michigan fields a limited run-heavy offense behind a strong, bend-don't-break defense.
Opponent-adjusted percentiles vs all FBS. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.
Team identity · competitive snaps only
How Central Michigan actually scores
52nd percentile quality, 64th percentile boom-dependency. Garbage time excluded from both axes — the same correction that changes the Q4 story below.
View all FBS teams as a table
| Team | Quality percentile | Boom-share percentile |
|---|---|---|
| Air Force | 86th | 11th |
| Akron | 12th | 89th |
| Alabama | 58th | 17th |
| App State | 35th | 47th |
| Arizona | 64th | 37th |
| Arizona State | 41st | 62nd |
| Arkansas | 90th | 12th |
| Arkansas State | 17th | 66th |
| Army | 57th | 43rd |
| Auburn | 47th | 53rd |
| BYU | 78th | 19th |
| Baylor | 69th | 25th |
| Boise State | 66th | 20th |
| Boston College | 37th | 54th |
| Bowling Green | 2nd | 98th |
| Buffalo | 11th | 88th |
| California | 28th | 48th |
| Central Michigan | 52nd | 64th |
| Cincinnati | 89th | 16th |
| Clemson | 51st | 48th |
| Coastal Carolina | 17th | 83rd |
| Colorado | 18th | 84th |
| Colorado State | 16th | 83rd |
| Delaware | 38th | 58th |
| Duke | 80th | 14th |
| East Carolina | 63rd | 36th |
| Eastern Michigan | 49th | 42nd |
| Florida | 30th | 67th |
| Florida Atlantic | 62nd | 59th |
| Florida International | 42nd | 50th |
| Florida State | 83rd | 32nd |
| Fresno State | 26th | 73rd |
| Georgia | 81st | 3rd |
| Georgia Southern | 73rd | 21st |
| Georgia State | 36th | 70th |
| Georgia Tech | 84th | 5th |
| Hawai'i | 64th | 41st |
| Houston | 27th | 65th |
| Illinois | 75th | 26th |
| Indiana | 95th | 1st |
| Iowa | 44th | 40th |
| Iowa State | 68th | 22nd |
| Jacksonville State | 54th | 38th |
| James Madison | 65th | 44th |
| Kansas | 85th | 28th |
| Kansas State | 71st | 49th |
| Kennesaw State | 56th | 30th |
| Kent State | 21st | 86th |
| Kentucky | 15th | 85th |
| LSU | 14th | 81st |
| Liberty | 43rd | 56th |
| Louisiana | 19th | 73rd |
| Louisiana Tech | 39th | 61st |
| Louisville | 48th | 64th |
| Marshall | 55th | 39th |
| Maryland | 30th | 74th |
| Memphis | 80th | 24th |
| Miami | 76th | 5th |
| Miami (OH) | 34th | 67th |
| Michigan | 67th | 33rd |
| Michigan State | 27th | 75th |
| Middle Tennessee | 39th | 52nd |
| Minnesota | 29th | 77th |
| Mississippi State | 22nd | 77th |
| Missouri | 61st | 30th |
| Missouri State | 55th | 46th |
| NC State | 86th | 23rd |
| Navy | 94th | 17th |
| Nebraska | 48th | 57th |
| Nevada | 3rd | 97th |
| New Mexico | 58th | 60th |
| New Mexico State | 9th | 87th |
| North Carolina | 13th | 89th |
| North Texas | 98th | 7th |
| Northern Illinois | 8th | 92nd |
| Northwestern | 52nd | 36th |
| Notre Dame | 99th | 20th |
| Ohio | 67th | 18th |
| Ohio State | 93rd | 4th |
| Oklahoma | 20th | 80th |
| Oklahoma State | 5th | 95th |
| Old Dominion | 83rd | 45th |
| Ole Miss | 89th | 2nd |
| Oregon | 91st | 10th |
| Oregon State | 2nd | 98th |
| Penn State | 73rd | 33rd |
| Pittsburgh | 60th | 39th |
| Purdue | 25th | 78th |
| Rice | 6th | 94th |
| Rutgers | 70th | 27th |
| SMU | 74th | 42nd |
| Sam Houston | 4th | 96th |
| San Diego State | 24th | 76th |
| San José State | 45th | 69th |
| South Alabama | 36th | 58th |
| South Carolina | 23rd | 86th |
| South Florida | 87th | 23rd |
| Southern Miss | 40th | 55th |
| Stanford | 10th | 90th |
| Syracuse | 5th | 95th |
| TCU | 72nd | 35th |
| Temple | 70th | 34th |
| Tennessee | 96th | 11th |
| Texas | 45th | 55th |
| Texas A&M | 82nd | 14th |
| Texas State | 92nd | 8th |
| Texas Tech | 77th | 31st |
| Toledo | 50th | 61st |
| Troy | 14th | 80th |
| Tulane | 79th | 15th |
| Tulsa | 20th | 70th |
| UAB | 61st | 45th |
| UCF | 33rd | 82nd |
| UCLA | 23rd | 79th |
| UConn | 95th | 13th |
| UL Monroe | 11th | 92nd |
| UNLV | 88th | 9th |
| USC | 98th | 2nd |
| UTEP | 1st | 99th |
| UTSA | 77th | 51st |
| Utah | 97th | 6th |
| Utah State | 46th | 63rd |
| Vanderbilt | 100th | 0th |
| Virginia | 59th | 27th |
| Virginia Tech | 32nd | 71st |
| Wake Forest | 42nd | 72nd |
| Washington | 92nd | 8th |
| Washington State | 33rd | 52nd |
| West Virginia | 7th | 93rd |
| Western Kentucky | 53rd | 29th |
| Western Michigan | 31st | 68th |
| Wisconsin | 0th | 100th |
| Wyoming | 8th | 91st |
Fourth-quarter reliability, corrected
Central Michigan's 4th-quarter offense, before and after garbage time
Raw Q4 EPA/play ranks 7th percentile in FBS. Strip out snaps taken with a blowout margin and it climbs to the 28th — the correction is the finding, not a footnote.
Standard downs vs. passing downs
Does Central Michigan hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?
57th percentile success on standard downs, 11th on passing downs — a 46-point gap between the two.
View all FBS teams as a table
| Team | Standard-downs percentile | Passing-downs percentile |
|---|---|---|
| Air Force | 82nd | 69th |
| Akron | 20th | 36th |
| Alabama | 47th | 76th |
| App State | 41st | 80th |
| Arizona | 54th | 54th |
| Arizona State | 40th | 37th |
| Arkansas | 90th | 97th |
| Arkansas State | 51st | 40th |
| Army | 37th | 44th |
| Auburn | 73rd | 24th |
| Austin Peay | 56th | 13th |
| BYU | 91st | 46th |
| Ball State | 5th | 3rd |
| Baylor | 70th | 77th |
| Boise State | 42nd | 63rd |
| Boston College | 56th | 54th |
| Bowling Green | 10th | 17th |
| Bryant | 7th | 2nd |
| Buffalo | 29th | 20th |
| California | 25th | 66th |
| Central Michigan | 57th | 11th |
| Charlotte | 7th | 7th |
| Cincinnati | 89th | 65th |
| Clemson | 49th | 34th |
| Coastal Carolina | 16th | 22nd |
| Colorado | 8th | 48th |
| Colorado State | 29th | 35th |
| Delaware | 66th | 31st |
| Duke | 82nd | 63rd |
| East Carolina | 63rd | 91st |
| Eastern Michigan | 46th | 67th |
| Florida | 52nd | 45th |
| Florida Atlantic | 44th | 61st |
| Florida International | 50th | 26th |
| Florida State | 65th | 90th |
| Fresno State | 22nd | 71st |
| Georgia | 95th | 69th |
| Georgia Southern | 64th | 84th |
| Georgia State | 22nd | 75th |
| Georgia Tech | 92nd | 89th |
| Hawai'i | 33rd | 87th |
| Houston | 61st | 29th |
| Idaho | 30th | 78th |
| Idaho State | 93rd | 14th |
| Illinois | 79th | 95th |
| Indiana | 97th | 98th |
| Iowa | 74th | 19th |
| Iowa State | 80th | 58th |
| Jacksonville State | 59th | 56th |
| James Madison | 77th | 52nd |
| Kansas | 99th | 82nd |
| Kansas State | 37th | 59th |
| Kennesaw State | 44th | 67th |
| Kent State | 15th | 5th |
| Kentucky | 62nd | 29th |
| LSU | 18th | 52nd |
| Lafayette | 0th | 12th |
| Liberty | 65th | 53rd |
| Lindenwood | 4th | 1st |
| Long Island University | 24th | 78th |
| Louisiana | 24th | 23rd |
| Louisiana Tech | 41st | 24th |
| Louisville | 84th | 32nd |
| Maine | 3rd | 18th |
| Marshall | 71st | 62nd |
| Maryland | 11th | 86th |
| Massachusetts | 5th | 9th |
| Memphis | 75th | 68th |
| Merrimack | 1st | 83rd |
| Miami | 80th | 64th |
| Miami (OH) | 33rd | 39th |
| Michigan | 73rd | 74th |
| Michigan State | 48th | 39th |
| Middle Tennessee | 69th | 47th |
| Minnesota | 35th | 33rd |
| Mississippi State | 52nd | 35th |
| Missouri | 76th | 50th |
| Missouri State | 32nd | 50th |
| Murray State | 1st | 6th |
| NC State | 58th | 71st |
| Navy | 95th | 72nd |
| Nebraska | 78th | 51st |
| Nevada | 17th | 16th |
| New Mexico | 38th | 60th |
| New Mexico State | 16th | 33rd |
| North Carolina | 14th | 30th |
| North Texas | 100th | 97th |
| Northern Illinois | 9th | 5th |
| Northwestern | 48th | 88th |
| Notre Dame | 88th | 99th |
| Ohio | 69th | 76th |
| Ohio State | 99th | 99th |
| Oklahoma | 39th | 41st |
| Oklahoma State | 14th | 7th |
| Old Dominion | 72nd | 79th |
| Ole Miss | 83rd | 95th |
| Oregon | 93rd | 55th |
| Oregon State | 54th | 25th |
| Penn State | 76th | 73rd |
| Pittsburgh | 35th | 56th |
| Purdue | 46th | 88th |
| Rice | 20th | 0th |
| Rutgers | 71st | 84th |
| SMU | 50th | 57th |
| Sam Houston | 26th | 4th |
| San Diego State | 84th | 1st |
| San José State | 68th | 70th |
| South Alabama | 53rd | 28th |
| South Carolina | 31st | 8th |
| South Carolina State | 10th | 3rd |
| South Florida | 86th | 46th |
| Southern Miss | 27th | 38th |
| Stanford | 12th | 12th |
| Syracuse | 19th | 10th |
| TCU | 63rd | 82nd |
| Temple | 85th | 22nd |
| Tennessee | 97th | 81st |
| Texas | 27th | 61st |
| Texas A&M | 88th | 59th |
| Texas State | 60th | 93rd |
| Texas Tech | 45th | 65th |
| Toledo | 67th | 42nd |
| Troy | 18th | 27th |
| Tulane | 81st | 86th |
| Tulsa | 43rd | 43rd |
| UAB | 34th | 94th |
| UCF | 39th | 20th |
| UCLA | 28th | 48th |
| UConn | 96th | 37th |
| UL Monroe | 13th | 14th |
| UNLV | 78th | 85th |
| USC | 94th | 90th |
| UT Martin | 2nd | 41st |
| UTEP | 3rd | 10th |
| UTSA | 67th | 92nd |
| Utah | 87th | 96th |
| Utah State | 31st | 49th |
| Vanderbilt | 90th | 100th |
| Virginia | 36th | 73rd |
| Virginia Tech | 59th | 21st |
| Wake Forest | 21st | 31st |
| Washington | 98th | 93rd |
| Washington State | 61st | 44th |
| West Virginia | 12th | 18th |
| Western Kentucky | 55th | 80th |
| Western Michigan | 86th | 16th |
| Wisconsin | 6th | 27th |
| Wyoming | 23rd | 15th |
Halftime identity
Central Michigan by half
1st-half offense ranks 65th percentile in FBS; 2nd-half, 43rd — competitive snaps only, garbage time excluded from both halves.
Schedule mirage
How much of Central Michigan's number is the schedule?
Raw EPA/play through week 21 is 0.13; 52nd percentile once opponent strength is stripped out, it's 0.03. The widest gap came in week 9: 0.16 raw vs. 0.06 adjusted.
Central Michigan reads strongest in passing epa (top 4%) and explosive plays allowed (top 9%); the crux lives in rushing epa, where Central Michigan sits at the 15th percentile.
offense · strengths lead
defense · higher bar = harder to play against
hidden math · special situations
ELITE · 90+STRONG · 70+AVERAGE · 40-70CONCERN · 10-40BOTTOM · <10
Most Similar Programs · Central Michigan
Most Similar Programs · Central MichiganReads Like
AkronTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontApp StateTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontArmyTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up front
Static-attribute similarity across tier, archetype, conference, and voice. Not a prediction — a calibration.
Home-Field Advantage · Central Michigan · 2018-present
Elite
62% home win rate vs 28% on the road. margin runs +17.2 better at home. Kelly/Shorts Stadium seats 30,255, averaging 55% full (16,572 attendance, 22 games reported).
Home27-16Away13-33
Positional competition · RB room
The carries are split. The job isn’t.
Nahree Biggins and Trey Cornist split the carries (103/204 vs 101/204) -- but Nahree Biggins leads on every measured axis. This isn't a split role, it's a hierarchy with a change-of-pace back behind it.
Nahree BigginsTrey Cornist
Carries
the baseline -- every row below is tested against this split, not a flat 50/50
Q4, leading (competitive)
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Targets
p = 0.000 -- real, not noise
Top-5-carry share
concentration and EPA/carry agree -- a real boom/bust split
Screened 3 claims, 2 survived, 1 falsified
Positional competition · WR/TE room
The targets are split. The job isn’t.
Langston Lewis (WR) and D.C. Temple (TE) split the targets (55/77 vs 22/77) -- but the job isn't split the same way.
Langston LewisD.C. Temple
Targets
the baseline -- every row below is tested against this split, not a flat 50/50
3rd-down targets
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Garbage-time share
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Top-5-catch share
concentration alone -- EPA/target doesn't corroborate, read with caution
Screened 3 claims, 0 survived, 3 falsified
What changed
Central Michigan’s play-calling, before and after the change
Offense: Jim Chapin (2024) → Jim Chapin / co-Derek Fulton (2025)
The biggest shift: red-zone pass rate moved down 10 points. The rest held closer to steady.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Defense: Robb Akey (2019–2024) → Sean Cronin (2025)
The biggest shift: red-zone pass rate moved down 13 points. The rest held closer to steady.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Defensive identity · pass zones
What this defense gives up, by zone.
On short passes, Central Michigan’s defense allows a completion rate below the FBS mean (61.2% vs 65.9% league-wide, shrunk toward the mean for its 167-play sample) — mid-pack, 8 of 133 qualifying defenses.
We won’t show a deep-ball leaderboard here: at the defense level, most teams face well under 30 rich-feed deep targets all season — too thin to tell a real tendency from noise, so we won’t guess.
Screened 133 claims, 133 survived · 2025 only, in the 399 games with the detailed play-text feed; n=167 short-zone plays faced, raw rate 57.5%
Venue texture
56°F average kickoff temp; 17% of games had measurable precipitation; 9 mph average wind.
Based on 66 home games with weather data.
The CFP Era
12 seasons inside the CFP era, no bids yet — the era the program is still trying to break into.
TRAJECTORY · quality-score line · AP rank dotted · CFP bids marked · coach regimes ribboned
Program Quality
AP Rank (inverted)
CFP Appearance
Central Michigan's 2014–2025 record is 68-77. The era is still being written; the CFP line is the one the program is arguing for.
All-Time Record
319-285-11
since 1931 · 67 seasons · .518 win rate
HOME
184-91-7
AWAY
130-182-4
NEUTRAL
5-12
1930s
1940s
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
2010s
2020s
The program, in full — read the essay
Central Michigan won three MAC titles in four years under two coaches who both left for bigger jobs — and produced an NFL star receiver along the way. The program built it. Other places got to keep it.
Brian Kelly won a MAC title at Central Michigan. Then he left for Cincinnati, and eventually Notre Dame, and eventually LSU. Butch Jones took over, won two more MAC titles (2007 and 2009), and then he left too — for Cincinnati, and eventually Tennessee. Three championships in four years, and both architects moved on to Power-conference careers almost as soon as the ink dried.
The best of those teams was 2009: a 20-10 win over Ohio for the title, quarterback Dan LeFevour running the show (3,438 passing yards, 24 touchdowns, plus 713 rushing yards and 15 more scores on the ground that season alone), and receiver Antonio Brown extending a 40-game catch streak and crossing 1,000 receiving yards for the third season running — in the championship game itself. Brown went on to become one of the most productive wide receivers in the NFL for a stretch of years, which means the Chippewas can point to a real, honest-to-god NFL star who wore maroon and gold before anyone outside Mount Pleasant knew the name.
Matt Drinkall took over in December 2024 after six seasons at Army, where he'd helped build an 81-56 record and three bowl appearances, and his first Central Michigan team went 7-6 (5-3 MAC) in 2025 — a solid debut in a program that knows exactly what a real coaching era looks like, and knows exactly how fast a good one can leave.
How they play
The Kelly/Jones era set the template — up-tempo, quarterback-driven football built around a dual-threat centerpiece like LeFevour — and every era since has been measured against whether it can find that same identity again.
Steady
Central Michigan 2016–2025. Holding the line. The 10-year slope (-0.12 rungs / yr) doesn't tilt either way — the program lives at roughly Tier 2.
CFP Era · Central Michigan
12 seasons on file
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
down middle peak CFP year
Season Standing · 2025 · 7-6
Season Standing · 2025 · 7-6Bowl eligible
Central Michigan: 6+ wins, bowl access secured. The baseline of a successful FBS year.
R0R1R2R3R4R5R6R7R8R9
Sub-FBSBuildingBowlRankedContenderPlayoff
Mid-American Standing · 2025
4th in the Mid-American
Central Michigan sits 4th of 13 in the Mid-American at 5-3. Mid-conference — moves up or down depend on rivalry results and the late-season closing run.
| # | Program | Record |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Western Michigan | 7-1 |
| 2 | Ohio | 5-2 |
| 3 | Toledo | 5-2 |
| 4 | Central Michigan | 5-3 |
| 5 | Miami (OH) | 5-3 |
| 6 | Akron | 4-4 |
| 7 | Buffalo | 4-4 |
| 8 | Ball State | 3-4 |
| 9 | Kent State | 3-4 |
| 10 | Eastern Michigan | 2-5 |
| 11 | Bowling Green | 2-6 |
| 12 | Sacramento State | 0-0 |
| 13 | Massachusetts | 0-7 |
Coaching Era · Central Michigan
Coaching Era · Central MichiganMatt Drinkall
Matt Drinkall in year 2 of the rebuild. The methodology is taking shape.
Era Matt Drinkall · 2025–presentPrev: Jim McElwain (2020–2024)OC: co-Jim Chapin / co-Derek FultonPrev OC: Jim Chapin (2024)DC: Sean CroninPrev DC: Robb Akey (2019–2024)
2
years · era
Rituals
Three gameday rituals — the ones outsiders never quite catch.
The Brian Kelly / Butch Jones MAC Titles (2006-2009)
since 2006
Brian Kelly and Butch Jones combined for three MAC Championships in four years (2006, 2007, 2009) before both left for bigger jobs -- Kelly eventually to Notre Dame and LSU, Jones to Cincinnati and Tennessee. Central Michigan's modern coaching-pipeline reputation traces directly to this stretch.
The 2009 MAC Championship: LeFevour and Brown
since 2009
The 2009 team beat Ohio 20-10 for the MAC title behind quarterback Dan LeFevour (3,438 passing yards, 24 TD, plus 713 rushing yards and 15 rushing TD) and All-American receiver Antonio Brown, who extended a 40-game catch streak and posted his third straight 1,000-yard receiving season in the title game itself. Brown went on to become one of the most productive wide receivers of his NFL generation.
Kelly/Shorts Stadium in Maroon and Gold
since 1972
The Chippewas play in maroon and gold at Kelly/Shorts Stadium in Mount Pleasant, Michigan -- the program's identity colors since the school's founding-era athletics branding.
Program memory
What this program never forgets
Most weeks vanish. These didn’t.
2009 MAC Championship
Central Michigan beats Ohio 20-10 for the MAC title behind Dan LeFevour and Antonio Brown, capping a three-titles-in-four-years run
Moment of the Year · Central Michigan · 2025
Moment of the Year · Central Michigan · 2025Postseason · Lost 7-34 at Northwestern
Week 17 of 2025. The single game that defined the season's arc.
Bowl / Postseason Ledger
Bowl / Postseason LedgerRecent postseason (2014-2025): 1-6
Most recent: 2025 — loss 34-7 (away). Last 5 postseason: 1-4.
20252021201920172016
NFL Draft Pipeline
2022–2025
NFL Draft PipelineDeveloping
4 picks last 5 cycles. Pipeline emerging.
4
picks · 0 R1
#57
Luke Goedeke
Offensive Tackle · 2022 · Tampa Bay
#77
Bernhard Raimann
Offensive Tackle · 2022 · Indianapolis
#229
Donte Kent
Cornerback · 2025 · Pittsburgh · #238/327 final season
#108 all-time · 2 first-round picksthe talent factory →
Unit lineage
Central Michigan’s offense and defense, by coordinator
FBS-relative efficiency percentile per season (2014–2025), same population as the Coordinator Mirror board. Dashed vertical lines mark a coordinator change.
Offense2014–2025
2014–2016 · Morris Watts2017–2018 · Chris Ostrowsky2019–2020 · Charlie Frye2021 · Kevin Barbay2022–2023 · Paul Petrino2024 · Jim Chapin2025 (ongoing) · Jim Chapin / co-Derek Fulton
Defense2014–2025
2014 · Joe Tumpkin2015–2018 · Greg Colby2019–2024 · Robb Akey2025 (ongoing) · Sean Cronin
Elite (≥70th pct)AveragePoor (≤30th pct)
Chronicle Visuals
A heavy-turnover 2025: 10% returning (below average), with the offense the biggest question.
The portal upgraded the S room but opened a hole at EDGE.
1 player drafted in 2025; the reload runs through the portal and recruiting.
Central Michigan converts recruit talent into draft picks better than its class rank suggests.
r/cfb moments
149
[Postgame Thread] Central Michigan Defeats Buffalo 31-27
121
[Postgame Thread] LSU Defeats Central Michigan 49-21
All-time top community posts · ranked by upvotes
This page may include content derived from public news sources, social media, and fan communities. We relay these sources as-is — we are not reporting them. Sources may be summarized or quoted imperfectly; for anything that matters, go look at the original source directly. The original source may also be wrong. AI-generated content is labeled and may contain factual errors. All analysis is editorial opinion, not professional reporting. Data sources · About this site