Central Michigan

1-1
Latest
Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan to play at Ford Field in 2026our readThe Eastern Michigan rivalry

Mid-American · Matt Drinkall, year 2 (8-7) · Kelly/Shorts Stadium · 30,255 · 19,005 avg in 2026

The nationunrankedAP / Coaches
The model#116 CFB ZeitgeistSP+ #126 (-20.0) · FPI #134
The marketCentral Michigan by 1.5vs Wyoming · our model 57% Central Michigan · a number, not a pick

LastW 13–10 vs Colgate · Sat Sep 12 · Mayson Hitchens 1 INT, 10 tackles

Nextvs Wyoming · Sat Sep 19 · 1 pm ET · Kelly/Shorts Stadium · Central Michigan by 1.5 · series 1-2, last win 2002 · Game preview

Updated Tue Sep 15 · through week 2

Key stats — 2026 — FBS rank
Points/game
10.0
Pts allowed/game
24.0
Total yards/gm#137 / 138 · 1st pct
212.5
Rush yards/gm#80 / 138 · 42nd pct
159.5
Pass yards/gm#137 / 138 · 1st pct
53.0
Yards allowed/gmT-#48 / 138 · 65th pct
291.5
Rush yds allowed/gm#96 / 138 · 31st pct
150.0
SacksT-#80 / 138 · 33rd pct
3
InterceptionsT-#29 / 115 · 61st pct
2
3rd-down conv#126 / 138 · 9th pct
29.6%
All 85 stats
Offense / Defense
Total yards
Team
425212.5/gm3.83/play#137 / 138 · 1st pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#13 / 13 · 4th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
583291.5/gm4.45/playT-#48 / 138 · 65th pct#40 / 70 · 44th pct#2 / 13 · 88th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush yards
Team
319159.5/gm2.87/play#80 / 138 · 42nd pct#43 / 70 · 39th pct#5 / 13 · 65th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
300150.0/gm2.29/play#96 / 138 · 31st pct#60 / 70 · 15th pct#7 / 13 · 50th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush carries
Team
7437.0/gmT-#73 / 138 · 47th pctT-#39 / 70 · 44th pct#6 / 13 · 58th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
7537.5/gmT-#99 / 138 · 28th pctT-#58 / 70 · 17th pct#10 / 13 · 27th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush TDs
Team
31.5/gmT-#77 / 138 · 34th pctT-#45 / 70 · 29th pctT-#4 / 13 · 58th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
42.0/gmT-#107 / 138 · 18th pctT-#62 / 70 · 8th pctT-#8 / 13 · 38th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Net pass yards
Team
10653.0/gm0.95/play#137 / 138 · 1st pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#13 / 13 · 4th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
283141.5/gm2.16/playT-#24 / 138 · 83rd pctT-#20 / 70 · 71st pct#1 / 13 · 96th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Pass attempts
Team
3718.5/gm#127 / 138 · 8th pct#65 / 70 · 8th pct#12 / 13 · 12th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
5628.0/gmT-#51 / 138 · 62nd pct#34 / 70 · 52nd pctT-#1 / 13 · 92nd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Completions
Team
178.5/gmT-#133 / 138 · 4th pct#69 / 70 · 2nd pct#13 / 13 · 4th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
3316.5/gmT-#50 / 138 · 60th pctT-#31 / 70 · 51st pct#1 / 13 · 96th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Pass TDs
Team
00.0/gmT-#135 / 138 · 1st pctT-#69 / 70 · 1st pct#13 / 13 · 4th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
10.5/gmT-#13 / 138 · 80th pctT-#11 / 70 · 72nd pctT-#1 / 13 · 92nd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Passer rating
Team
59.259.2#115 / 115 · 1st pct#60 / 60 · 1st pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
96.696.6#11 / 91 · 88th pct#8 / 42 · 82nd pct#2 / 10 · 85th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Interceptions thrown
Team
31.5/gmT-#8 / 138 · 89th pctT-#5 / 70 · 91st pctT-#1 / 13 · 88th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
21.0/gmT-#77 / 138 · 33rd pctT-#40 / 70 · 29th pctT-#9 / 13 · 27th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Sacks (def)
Team
31.5/gmT-#80 / 138 · 33rd pctT-#49 / 70 · 22nd pctT-#7 / 13 · 46th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp
63.0/gmT-#121 / 138 · 11th pctT-#65 / 70 · 6th pctT-#12 / 13 · 8th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Tackles for loss
Team
52.5/gmT-#130 / 138 · 5th pct#68 / 70 · 4th pctT-#11 / 13 · 15th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp
84.0/gmT-#39 / 138 · 67th pctT-#26 / 70 · 56th pctT-#4 / 13 · 65th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
First downs
Team
2512.5/gm#135 / 138 · 3rd pct#68 / 70 · 4th pct#13 / 13 · 4th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
4321.5/gmT-#101 / 138 · 26th pctT-#61 / 70 · 12th pctT-#6 / 13 · 54th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
3rd-down conv
Team
84.0/gmT-#104 / 138 · 21st pctT-#57 / 70 · 15th pctT-#9 / 13 · 27th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
126.0/gmT-#91 / 138 · 30th pctT-#52 / 70 · 24th pct#9 / 13 · 35th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
3rd-down att
Team
2713.5/gmT-#57 / 138 · 57th pctT-#24 / 70 · 64th pctT-#6 / 13 · 54th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
2713.5/gmT-#54 / 138 · 59th pctT-#28 / 70 · 58th pctT-#6 / 13 · 54th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
4th-down conv
Team
52.5/gmT-#4 / 138 · 95th pctT-#3 / 70 · 94th pct#1 / 13 · 96th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
21.0/gmT-#71 / 138 · 37th pctT-#40 / 70 · 32nd pctT-#4 / 13 · 54th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
4th-down att
Team
63.0/gmT-#16 / 138 · 85th pctT-#8 / 70 · 86th pct#2 / 13 · 88th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
21.0/gmT-#20 / 138 · 74th pctT-#10 / 70 · 72nd pctT-#2 / 13 · 77th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Time of possession
Team
55:1227:36/gm#112 / 138 · 19th pct#59 / 70 · 16th pct#12 / 13 · 12th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
64:4832:24/gm#102 / 138 · 26th pct#59 / 70 · 16th pct#9 / 13 · 35th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct

FBS rankings · 2026 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs

Player stats — 2026 season
Quarterbacks
Player#GCmp/AttPctYdsY/ATDINTRateZPRQBRAdj ANY/ASack%
+0.07 EPA/play7210 / 1952.6713.70263.0—24.9——
-0.40 EPA/play525 / 1435.7241.70135.8—8.4——

2026 stat leaders · Central Michigan

through 2 games

Xavier White leads Central Michigan with 17 tackles through 2 games.

1. Xavier White LB 17 tackles
2. Mayson Hitchens LB 15 tackles
3. Darrell Bryant Jr. DB 13 tackles
4. Brett McCalla LB 12 tackles
5. Angel H Flores QB 149 rushing yards
How They Play · 2025

Central Michigan fields a limited run-heavy offense behind a strong, bend-don't-break defense.

Offense
33rd pct EPA/play
Run/Pass
68% run plays
Defense
75th pct EPA allowed
Defensive shape
92nd pct at limiting explosive plays

Percentile vs all FBS, based on this season's per-game production. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.

The Savant Card · Central Michigan · 2025

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

EPA / play +0.13
33rd
Success Rate +0.40
31st
Explosive Plays +1.19
21st
Rushing EPA +0.00
16th

defense · higher bar = harder to play against

EPA Allowed +0.08
75th
Success Rate Allowed +0.40
62nd
Explosive Plays Allowed +1.15
92nd
Passing EPA Allowed +0.15
80th

hidden math · special situations

Passing EPA +0.54
97th
Rushing EPA Allowed +0.06
60th
Elite · 90+Strong · 70+Average · 40-70Concern · 10-40Bottom · <10
Sources · CFBD tier-2 advanced stats · per-game production · 13 games this season · percentiles vs. up to 136 FBS peers

Home-field advantage · Central Michigan · 2018–present · FBS opponents

Central Michigan is worth +6.6 points more at home than on the road.

Top third of FBS, 89th percentile of 133 programs

56% at home, 28% away against FBS opponents since 2018 (20–16 home, 13–34 away). Interval ±3.8.

95% intervalmodel 2.3 · books ~3Weakest home edge in FBSStrongest

Our model gives every stadium the same flat 2.3-point home edge — per-team modelling was tested and did not survive scrutiny (why) — and the books use about 3. Against the closing line, Central Michigan has beaten the number by +3.3 more at home than away over 72 games — inside the ±6.9 that many games can resolve. Results here cannot tell the flat number apart from the building, and that is the honest reading of nearly every FBS stadium.

Kelly/Shorts Stadium seats 30,255 and has averaged 55% full (16,677, 23 games reported). Visitors get here easily: a median 240 miles trip since 2018, the 15th-shortest of 135 FBS venues. Whatever the band above is picking up, it isn't the flight. 19% of the 2026 roster (20 of 103 located players) grew up inside 100 miles of the stadium.

Edge = half the gap between average home margin and average road margin, FBS opponents only, non-neutral games since 2018; the interval is 95%. Market line: closing spread, seasons with lines on file. Trip length is straight-line miles from the visiting team's campus to the venue, measured across all 44 home games since 2018.

Home20–16Away13–34Edge+6.6 ±3.8Visitor trip240 mi

More in this tab

Scheme claimsFive specific, testable claims about how this team plays.

Standard downs vs. passing downs

Does Central Michigan hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?

16th percentile success on standard downs, 6th on passing downs — little dropoff between the two — a schedule-independent identity.

Fragile off scheduleBalanced, both workStruggles even on scheduleStandard-downs reliantCentral MichiganWeak on standard downsElite on standard downsFalls apart off scheduleHolds up off scheduleHawai'i18th standard · 41st passingUNLV51st standard · 7th passingStanford76th standard · 15th passingEastern Michigan52nd standard · 10th passingSan José State54th standard · 22nd passingNew Mexico State45th standard · 75th passingSacramento State23rd standard · 14th passingOklahoma State41st standard · 49th passingDuke20th standard · 29th passingFlorida State28th standard · 65th passingRutgers30th standard · 71st passingKansas70th standard · 35th passingBoston College27th standard · 56th passingNorfolk State16th standard · 9th passingLouisville96th standard · 70th passingMissouri36th standard · 85th passingMemphis69th standard · 65th passingGeorgia Southern24th standard · 45th passingOle Miss94th standard · 50th passingJacksonville State65th standard · 82nd passingNorth Dakota State86th standard · 27th passingArizona92nd standard · 86th passingUSC97th standard · 99th passingWake Forest56th standard · 97th passingTCU93rd standard · 8th passingDelaware70th standard · 31st passingUAB65th standard · 81st passingMichigan State62nd standard · 29th passingSouth Florida91st standard · 52nd passingFlorida International46th standard · 43rd passingNavy98th standard · 59th passingWisconsin13th standard · 18th passingOregon State10th standard · 38th passingSyracuse48th standard · 64th passingOhio State90th standard · 40th passingBall State12th standard · 24th passingPittsburgh30th standard · 76th passingColorado35th standard · 77th passingGeorgia Tech58th standard · 44th passingAuburn75th standard · 55th passingBaylor40th standard · 96th passingNorth Texas49th standard · 68th passingApp State44th standard · 90th passingIowa State4th standard · 23rd passingUTSA99th standard · 29th passingArkansas60th standard · 80th passingBoise State58th standard · 46th passingOregon35th standard · 33rd passingTulsa56th standard · 1st passingTulane31st standard · 2nd passingPurdue83rd standard · 88th passingMiddle Tennessee87th standard · 68th passingVanderbilt80th standard · 12th passingSan Diego State4th standard · 40th passingLSU33rd standard · 98th passingClemson1st standard · 19th passingCentral Michigan16th standard · 6th passingTexas Tech88th standard · 48th passingMichigan2nd standard · 62nd passingWestern Michigan39th standard · 20th passingOhio38th standard · 17th passingBuffalo7th standard · 14th passingTexas72nd standard · 94th passingCoastal Carolina61st standard · 52nd passingColorado State82nd standard · 91st passingWyoming65th standard · 36th passingTexas A&M85th standard · 72nd passingLiberty14th standard · 59th passingFlorida Atlantic43rd standard · 87th passingLouisiana19th standard · 92nd passingSouth Alabama50th standard · 73rd passingTroy22nd standard · 59th passingSam Houston78th standard · 61st passingNevada77th standard · 52nd passingWestern Kentucky25th standard · 34th passingWashington State8th standard · 3rd passingWashington81st standard · 4th passingCalifornia9th standard · 25th passingCharlotte73rd standard · 83rd passingTennessee65th standard · 78th passingUtah State4th standard · 93rd passing
Source CFB Zeitgeist · advanced team stats, Connelly success-rate definition
View all FBS teams as a table
TeamStandard-downs percentilePassing-downs percentile
App State44th90th
Arizona92nd86th
Arkansas60th80th
Auburn75th55th
Ball State12th24th
Baylor40th96th
Boise State58th46th
Boston College27th56th
Buffalo7th14th
California9th25th
Central Michigan16th6th
Charlotte73rd83rd
Clemson1st19th
Coastal Carolina61st52nd
Colorado35th77th
Colorado State82nd91st
Delaware70th31st
Duke20th29th
Eastern Michigan52nd10th
Florida Atlantic43rd87th
Florida International46th43rd
Florida State28th65th
Georgia Southern24th45th
Georgia Tech58th44th
Hawai'i18th41st
Iowa State4th23rd
Jacksonville State65th82nd
Kansas70th35th
LSU33rd98th
Liberty14th59th
Louisiana19th92nd
Louisville96th70th
Memphis69th65th
Michigan2nd62nd
Michigan State62nd29th
Middle Tennessee87th68th
Missouri36th85th
Navy98th59th
Nevada77th52nd
New Mexico State45th75th
Norfolk State16th9th
North Dakota State86th27th
North Texas49th68th
Ohio38th17th
Ohio State90th40th
Oklahoma State41st49th
Ole Miss94th50th
Oregon35th33rd
Oregon State10th38th
Pittsburgh30th76th
Purdue83rd88th
Rutgers30th71st
Sacramento State23rd14th
Sam Houston78th61st
San Diego State4th40th
San José State54th22nd
South Alabama50th73rd
South Florida91st52nd
Stanford76th15th
Syracuse48th64th
TCU93rd8th
Tennessee65th78th
Texas72nd94th
Texas A&M85th72nd
Texas Tech88th48th
Troy22nd59th
Tulane31st2nd
Tulsa56th1st
UAB65th81st
UNLV51st7th
USC97th99th
UTSA99th29th
Utah State4th93rd
Vanderbilt80th12th
Wake Forest56th97th
Washington81st4th
Washington State8th3rd
Western Kentucky25th34th
Western Michigan39th20th
Wisconsin13th18th
Wyoming65th36th
Tendency driftHow this coordinator's calls have drifted since arriving.

Season by season

How Central Michigan’s current staff calls plays, year over year

Offense: Jim Chapin / co-Derek Fulton (2025–2026)
1st-down pass rate
2025: 32% → 2026: 41% · 9-pt range · #104 of 184 · a typical amount
Defense: Sean Cronin (2025–2026)
1st-down pass rate
2025: 32% → 2026: 41% · 9-pt range · #115 of 203 · a typical amount
RatingsWhere the public rating systems put this team.

Model Consensus

Where the Models Rank Central Michigan

CFB Zeitgeist

#116

-4.6

SP+

#126

-20.0

FPI

#134

-18.6

Elo

#124

1253

The national models put Central Michigan between 124th and 134th nationally — CFB Zeitgeist is higher on them than any of these models, at 116th.

National rank of 138 FBS teams · 2026 season. SP+/FPI/SRS published; Elo & CFB Zeitgeist ranked by rating.

Comparable teamsPrograms built like this one — tier, prestige band, kind of fanbase, roster size. Not a stat match.

Most similar programs · Central Michigan

Reads like

AkronMid-AmericanSame tier of program · Same prestige band · Similarly-sized rosters up frontApp StateSun BeltSame tier of program · Same prestige band · Similarly-sized rosters up frontArmyAmerican AthleticSame tier of program · Same prestige band · Similarly-sized rosters up front

Matched on how the programs are built — tier, prestige band, kind of fanbase, conference, voice and roster size — not on this season's stats. A calibration, not a prediction.

ConditionsThe weather and altitude visitors have to deal with.
Venue texture

57°F average kickoff temp; 16% of games had measurable precipitation; 9 mph average wind.

Based on 68 home games with weather data.

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