East Texas A&M · Next-Season Outcome Band
Fanbase Health Index · East Texas A&M · medium confidence
FCS Program Prestige · East Texas A&M2017 D2 National Championship
East Texas A&M defeats a D2 powerhouse to win the NCAA Division II national title
East Texas A&M3-9Hope-Doping·Offseason
East Texas A&M is the Lions that won a D2 national championship and spent 60 years proving it before jumping to FCS — now climbing out of a reclassification transition.
Title DroughtSince 2025
Fans here believe the chip is identity: a program that won a national championship in D2 and doesn't get credit for it. East Texas A&M is haunted by the assumption that it was always a middling progra…
low signal
Approaching
23 days
until kickoff · at Mercer · Sat Aug 29 · 23:00 UTC
The experience
East Texas A&M is the Lions that won a D2 national championship and spent 60 years proving it before jumping to FCS — now climbing out of a reclassification transition.
The Lions rest in the shade.
East Texas A&M · Next-Season Outcome Band
Floor / Base / Ceiling
Floor 1-11
Base 3-9
Ceiling 6-6
floor1-11Sub-.500 season. Playoff bid out of reach.
base3-9Mid-table finish. Conference title a stretch.
ceiling6-6Conference title race. Playoff bid in play.
Variance assumed at ±2 wins from last-season record. Replace with the season-path projection once preview data is built.
Recent Form · last 10 games
Cold
One of five. The film room is busy this week.
Streak L1Last 5 · 1-4Last 10 · 3-7
The forecast
Opens Aug 29
vs Mercer · away
r/cfb this year
[Postgame Thread] SMU Defeats East Texas A&M 42-13
[Game Thread] East Texas A&M @ SMU (9:00 PM ET)
Top community posts · last 12 months · r/cfb
The Pulse on East Texas A&M
—
The Lions rest in the shade.
What moved it — fall camp · last 14 days
Camp
Fall camp open — install + scrimmage cycle
ongoing
Kickoff
Season opener in 16 days
kickoff
"Go Lions."
— East Texas A&M fanbase · recurring line
5 mentions · awaiting signal
Fanbase Health Index · East Texas A&M · medium confidence
Stable (44)
DecliningStableGrowingSurging
On-Field — 3-9 (25% win rate)44
Volume — 5 effective signal-N44
Key stats — 2025 — FBS rank
Points/game#80 / 138 · 43rd pct25.6
Pts allowed/game39.8
All 16 stats
Other
Red zone pass rate#57 / 154 · 64th pct#27 / 70 · 63rd pct0.40.0/gm
First down pass rate#112 / 215 · 48th pct#40 / 70 · 44th pct#2 / 3 · 67th pct0.40.0/gm
H1 epa per play opponent#157 / 167 · 7th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct0.50.0/gm
Red Zone & Drive Efficiency (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Red zone trips
Team70.6/gm#137 / 167 · 19th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct
Opp70.6/gm#4 / 166 · 98th pct#1 / 70 · 100th pct
Red zone score %
Team57.1%57.1%#152 / 167 · 10th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct
Opp71.4%71.4%#32 / 166 · 81st pct#13 / 70 · 83rd pct
Points / drive
Team0.60.0/gm#153 / 167 · 9th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct
Opp4.60.4/gm#163 / 166 · 2nd pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct
Yards / drive
Team36.13.0/gm#123 / 167 · 27th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct
Opp51.24.3/gm#162 / 166 · 3rd pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct
Plays / drive
Team5.90.5/gm#152 / 167 · 10th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct
Opp6.50.5/gm#69 / 166 · 59th pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct
Three-and-out rate
Team14.8%14.8%#102 / 167 · 40th pct#54 / 70 · 24th pct
Opp0.0%0.0%#163 / 166 · 2nd pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct
Scheme Identity (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Standard-downs success allowed#152 / 172 · 12th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct55.2%55.2%
FBS rankings · 2025 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs
Player stats — 2025 season
No player stats logged for this program yet — stats appear once the season is underway.
East Texas A&M · 2025 schedule & results3-9Hard slateAverage opponent win rate 52% · 2 AP top-25 opponents on the schedule.
| Wk | Date | Us | Opp | Line | Opponent | Result | Record | Conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aug 31 | #223 | #12 | +50.5 | @SMU | L 13–42 141 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2 | Sep 6 | #130 | #68 | +45.5 | @Florida State | L 3–77 120 | 0-2 | 0-0 |
| 4 | Sep 20 | #195 | #177 | -3.5 | @Grambling | L 28–31 | 0-3 | 0-0 |
| 5 | Sep 27 | #205 | #139 | +14.5 | North Carolina Central | L 42–50 | 0-4 | 0-0 |
| 6 | Oct 4 | #216 | #251 | -7 | @Northwestern State | W 40–10 | 1-4 | 1-0 |
| 7 | Oct 11 | #188 | #165 | +7.5 | Lamar | L 23–33 | 1-5 | 1-1 |
| 8 | Oct 18 | #193 | #145 | +18.5 | @Incarnate Word | W 52–45 | 2-5 | 2-1 |
| 9 | Oct 25 | #178 | #98 | +14 | Stephen F. Austin | L 21–31 | 2-6 | 2-2 |
| 10 | Nov 1 | #192 | #106 | +17.5 | @SE Louisiana | L 14–59 | 2-7 | 2-3 |
| 11 | Nov 8 | #204 | #209 | -2.5 | McNeese | L 20–35 | 2-8 | 2-4 |
| 12 | Nov 15 | #212 | #261 | -9.5 | Houston Christian | W 37–32 | 3-8 | 3-4 |
| 13 | Nov 22 | #221 | #119 | — | @UT Rio Grande Valley | L 14–33 | 3-9 | 3-5 |
Advanced box score (EPA, success rate, explosiveness)▼
| Date | Opp | Result | Yds | TO | TOP | EPA/play | Success% | Explosive% | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 22 | @UT Rio Grande Valley | L 14–33 | — | — | — | -0.020 | 42.1% | 105.2% | |
| Nov 15 | Houston Christian | W 37–32 | — | — | — | +0.182 | 46.8% | 116.8% | One-score win |
| Nov 8 | McNeese | L 20–35 | — | — | — | +0.206 | 40.0% | 140.4% | |
| Nov 1 | @SE Louisiana | L 14–59 | — | — | — | -0.042 | 26.9% | 180.2% | Most explosive |
| Oct 25 | Stephen F. Austin | L 21–31 | — | — | — | +0.071 | 32.8% | 134.4% | |
| Oct 18 | @Incarnate Word | W 52–45 | — | — | — | +0.312 | 42.2% | 157.7% | One-score win |
| Oct 11 | Lamar | L 23–33 | — | — | — | -0.091 | 44.6% | 100.7% | |
| Oct 4 | @Northwestern State | W 40–10 | — | — | — | +0.381 | 52.8% | 133.1% | Season-high EPA/play |
| Sep 27 | North Carolina Central | L 42–50 | — | — | — | +0.308 | 39.7% | 170.4% | One-score loss |
| Sep 20 | @Grambling | L 28–31 | — | — | — | +0.171 | 43.2% | 114.8% | One-score loss |
| Sep 6 | @Florida State | L 3–77 | 197 | 2 | 28:01 | -0.108 | 28.6% | 107.6% | Defense's roughest night |
| Aug 31 | @SMU | L 13–42 | 351 | 3 | 38:59 | -0.166 | 34.6% | 108.0% | Season-low EPA/play |
| Season average (12 games) | 274 | 2.5 | +0.100 | 39.5% | 130.8% | ||||
Schedule mirage
How much of East Texas A&M's number is the schedule?
Raw EPA/play through week 21 is 0.10; 50th percentile once opponent strength is stripped out, it's 0.03. The widest gap came in week 1: -0.17 raw vs. -0.01 adjusted.
Home-Field Advantage · East Texas A&M · 2018-present
Strong
39% home win rate vs 31% on the road. margin runs +11.9 better at home. Memorial Stadium (Commerce TX) seats 11,582, averaging 32% full (3,653 attendance, 11 games reported).
Home11-17Away9-20
Venue texture
76°F average kickoff temp; 11% of games had measurable precipitation; 9 mph average wind.
Based on 28 home games with weather data.
FCS Program Prestige · East Texas A&M
Mid-Major Contender
All-Time Record
27-49-1
since 1924 · 23 seasons · .350 win rate
HOME
12-17
AWAY
10-32
NEUTRAL
5-0-1
1920s
1930s
1940s
1950s
1970s
2000s
2010s
2020s
Southland Standing · 2025
7th in the Southland
East Texas A&M is 7th of 10 in the Southland at 3-5. The path to the title is steep — the focus is on playoff positioning and rivalry wins.
| # | Program | Record |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stephen F. Austin | 8-0 |
| 2 | SE Louisiana | 7-1 |
| 3 | Lamar | 5-3 |
| 4 | UT Rio Grande Valley | 5-3 |
| 5 | McNeese | 4-4 |
| 6 | Nicholls | 4-4 |
| 7 | East Texas A&M | 3-5 |
| 8 | Incarnate Word | 3-5 |
| 9 | Houston Christian | 1-7 |
| 10 | Northwestern State | 0-8 |
Program memory
What this program never forgets
Most weeks vanish. These didn’t.
Reclassification to FCS 2024
The Lions jump to FCS after dominating D2, beginning a difficult transition
Wound
Moment of the Year · East Texas A&M · 2025
Moment of the Year · East Texas A&M · 2025Lost 13-42 at SMU
Week 1 of 2025. A reckoning loss — the data point the next season must answer.
Playoff History
Playoff HistoryRecent postseason (2017): 1-0
Most recent: 2017 — win 37-27 (home). Last 5 postseason: 1-0.
2017
FCS → NFL Pipeline
2024–2024
FCS → NFL PipelineDeveloping
1 picks last 5 cycles. The pipeline is real but still building volume.
1
picks · last 5 yrs
#232
Levi Drake Rodriguez
Defensive Tackle · 2024 · Minnesota
#200 all-time in draft picksthe talent factory →
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