3coordinators
Old Dominion10-3No consensus around Old Dominion right now — the fanbase is genuinely divided.
belief cooled ↓ 16.1vs prior week
Fanbase belief
Mixed
49/100 · 2,064 mentions
~ our readGrounding
running on emotion
5% cite a stat · 8% typical ✓ counted
~ our readVolatility
Chaotic
σ 36 pts
~ our readThe model
#31
CFB Zeitgeist · +7.0
✓ measured3Hope-Doping·Offseason
Old Dominion brought football back from the dead in 2009 — and in 2025 walked into Blacksburg and hung 45 on Virginia Tech, won ten games, and authored the best season in the program's short, improbable life.
Title DroughtSince 2009 · 16 yrs
Old Dominion has beaten Virginia Tech three times now, and the 2025 rout in Blacksburg was the first on the Hokies' own field — a program that didn't exist a generation ago putting a Power Four neighb…
offseason · quiet
Roster Reload - Old Dominion
2026 snapshot - 2026-08-06Returning Production74%High continuity
Talent Composite#122 nationally247 composite 477.4
Portal Additions15Primary repair: IOL
Portal Losses22Primary pressure: WR
Draft Loss0No NFL Draft departures recorded
Recruiting Reload#96Depth class
IOLin 4 - Bubba Craigout 2 - Skyler GrantNeed Filled
current room: 308 lbs avg (2025 roster)
WRin 1 - Zion Agnewout 4 - Tre' Brown IIIStarter Risk
current room: 191 lbs avg (2025 roster)
LBin 1 - Montrell Chapmanout 3 - Jackson ForrestStarter Risk
current room: 216 lbs avg (2025 roster)
CBin 1 - Jivan Balyout 3 - Zion FrinkStarter Risk
current room: 180 lbs avg (2025 roster)
OTin 2 - Raykwon Goldthwaiteout 2 - Joshua SchuetzmannEven
Sin 0out 3 - Jerome Carter IIIStarter Risk
current room: 189 lbs avg (2025 roster)
Belief EKG
WinLoss · hover for score
Approaching
30 days
until kickoff · vs Norfolk State · Sat Sep 5 · 22:00 UTC
The experience
Old Dominion is the Sun Belt program whose 2009 football resurrection + 2014 FBS reclassification + S.B. Ballard Stadium 2019 reset define what historic-Tidewater-football-rebuilds look like.
Offense: EliteRun/Pass: Run-heavy, ground-controlDefense: Elite
Old Dominion's 2026 Season Projected to Reach 10-3 with Bowl Game Appearance
With a high continuity roster and strategic transfer additions, Old Dominion is poised for a strong 2026 season. The team's depth class recruitment and net portal exporter status suggest improved performance over prior years.
- Roster reloadOld Dominion has a returning_total_pct of 74% and a high continuity profile, indicating strong retention of key players.
Data as of 2026-08-03
·
Validated against program evidence
Big Blue the Monarch is patient.
Old Dominion · the story right now
10 storylines developing
What Old Dominion's coordinator hires is really about
the open questiondo the new coordinators fit the roster?
coordinatorsthis cycle✓ factnew
Old Dominion: coordinator change reshaping a unit.
narrative tension · our read
identitythis cycle~readnew
Ricky Rahne enters his fifth season with a 10-3 record, anchoring Old Dominion's identity as a historic Tidewater rebuild in a middle-tier program navigating a conference shift.
what happenedOld Dominion: the fanbase's identity shifting. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
underdogthis cycle✓ factnew
Tre' Brown III produces at a notably LOWER rate when his team is an underdog than when favored -- he fades when the pressure is on, and his per-target value drops too.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
Devin Roche does NOT see a usage spike in garbage time -- his workload holds steady regardless of score.
narrative tension · our read
closerthis cycle~attributednew
Ke'Travion Hargrove: a closer signal screened this season.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
Ke'Travion Hargrove sees a real spike in usage once the game is out of reach.
narrative tension · our read
closerthis cycle~attributednew
Trequan Jones 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
Trequan Jones: a garbage time merchant signal screened this season.
narrative tension · our read
program_outlookthis cycle~readnew
Old Dominion leaped 46 spots in SP+ — Ricky Rahne's fifth season opens with a 10-3 record and a historic rebuild identity on the line.
what happenedOld Dominion enters 2025 rated No. 49 in SP+ (+5.9), up 46 spots from 2024. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
program_outlookthis cycle~readnew
Old Dominion leaped 46 spots in SP+ — the 10-3 record and 2019 stadium reset suggest a return to the 2009-14 rebuild era, but Ricky Rahne’s fifth season must prove.
what happenedOld Dominion enters 2026 rated No. 49 in 2025 SP+ (+5.9), up 46 spots from 2024. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
The story
The Offseason Ledger · Old Dominion
1 verified update · portal · recruiting · staff · news- News
Cal adds ODU to 2027 schedule
Cross-country payday for a #102 class that needs every resource it can find — Rahne's WR room is thin, and this check helps fund the fixes.
Transfer portal snapshot
-8.2 net portal points
(raw ledger: -20.5 — unweighted, no position adjustment)WR-11.6
starter risk
S-9.0
starter risk
LB-7.2
starter risk
IOL+6.3
need not filled
CB-4.3
starter risk
RB+3.4
OT+2.3
TE-1.4
K+1.0
low confidence
DL+0.2
QB-0.2
Top 3 commits
2026 class
★★★☆☆
Zialis Blackmon
#884 national
★★★☆☆
BJ Bedgood
#1438 national
Profiles like a typical incoming wide receiver — 16 of his 25 closest recruiting profiles since 2018 shared the Possession Receiver archetype.~our read · projection from recruiting profile — no college snaps yet
★★★☆☆
Brayden Myovela
#1566 national
Profiles like a typical incoming wide receiver — 15 of his 25 closest recruiting profiles since 2018 shared the Possession Receiver archetype.~our read · projection from recruiting profile — no college snaps yet
Fan vs. market≈
54th
Fan percentile
(FBS mood rank)
(FBS mood rank)
7.5
Vegas O/U wins
(60th among FBS)
(60th among FBS)
Fan mood aligned with market consensus
Win total consensus · 3 books
Market outlook
Season expectations
Win total3 booksO/U 7.5
CFP championship#83 in field+100000
Sun Belt title#2 in market+425
Sportsbook consensus · best odds across multiple books · 2026-08-06
Old Dominion · Next-Season Outcome Band
Old Dominion · Next-Season Outcome BandFloor / Base / Ceiling
Floor 5-7
Base 8-5
Ceiling 10-3
floor5-7No postseason.
base8-5Bowl game.
ceiling10-3Bowl 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
Following now · Old Dominion · Developing Confidence
Old Dominion: the fanbase's identity shifting.
Old Dominion: the fanbase's identity shifting.
near-unanimous belief
where the takes land · dot = how loud
DOUBTBELIEF
Believers8 bull takes
💬 fans: 6% volume
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Ricky Rahne enters his fifth season with a 10-3 record, anchoring Old Dominion's identity as a historic Tidewater rebuild in a middle-tier program navigating a conference shift.
Source of record: Old Dominion: the fanbase's identity shifting.
How each room is reacting — tap to expand
📣Believers8 bullish items -- the case it's working.›
The optimistic read: momentum, and the 'this is real' takes.
“Chris Forbes Named to Outland Trophy Watch List”
Old Dominion Athletics · 2026-08-04 · read ↗
“2026 Sun Belt Picks, Preview, Odds: Our Futures, Win Totals for JMU, Old Dominion, More”
Action Network · 2026-08-04 · read ↗
“Old Dominion 2027 Football Commits in Louisiana”
247Sports · 2026-08-01 · read ↗
🧐SkepticsNo prominent dissent — the coverage runs one way.›
The analytical counter: rankings, results, and 'the hype is ahead of the tape' takes.
Nothing in our corpus yet — this door stays open for when there is.
💬The boards12 board mentions — too thin to call a stance.›
Only 12 of 206 board posts mention it — below our floor to call a community stance. Shown as texture, not a verdict.
"You'd think for the cost of tuition and what some of the people at ODU are making there would be higher student outcomes. ["
r/ODU ~ fan take
"If you go to this website, you can see what individual administrators made in 2025. When you click on one, you can see what they made each year. Some of them have seen raises of ov"
r/ODU ~ fan take
The boards ≠ the fanbase: a vocal, self-selected slice.
Following now · Old Dominion · Season outlook Confidence
One of the biggest jumps in the country. Old Dominion has to prove the model right.
Old Dominion enters 2025 rated No. 49 in SP+ (+5.9), up 46 spots from 2024. 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
Believers7 bull takes
💬 fans: 37% volume
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Old Dominion leaped 46 spots in SP+ — Ricky Rahne's fifth season opens with a 10-3 record and a historic rebuild identity on the line.
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: Old Dominion enters 2025 rated No. 49 in SP+ (+5.9), up 46 spots from 2024.
How each room is reacting — tap to expand
📣Believers7 bullish items -- the case it's working.›
The 'the projection is underselling us' read -- fans betting the season beats the preview number.
“Chris Forbes Named to Outland Trophy Watch List”
Old Dominion Athletics · 2026-08-04 · read ↗
“2026 Sun Belt Picks, Preview, Odds: Our Futures, Win Totals for JMU, Old Dominion, More”
Action Network · 2026-08-04 · read ↗
“Old Dominion 2027 Football Commits in Louisiana”
247Sports · 2026-08-01 · 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 boards37% of recent board volume — the fanbase is locked in.›
This event was in 77 of 206 board posts (37%) over the last 60 days — a fanbase consumed by it. Fan text shown verbatim, attributed to the community not the individual poster.
"hi! i am transferring to oduglobal this fall. i just completed my associates degree about two weeks ago. i need to send odu my official transcript with the last two classes i took"
r/ODU ~ fan take
"I’m a 30yo navy vet that works full time (overnight) and currently holds a bachelors in Healthcare administration Im looking for anyone in the MBA program at odu (Strome college of"
r/ODU ~ fan take
The boards ≠ the fanbase: a vocal, self-selected slice.
Recent Form · last 10 games
Hot
Five straight. The momentum tier on every blog right now.
Streak W6Last 5 · 5-0Last 10 · 8-2
The forecast
Opens Sep 5
vs Norfolk State · at home
Season line7.5 winsover -120
EliteRun-heavy, ground-controlElite
✓ fact on line · ~ our read on style
Rival pulse
Liberty
Mixed+0
Commonwealth Clash
James Madison
Uneasy-7
Royal Rivalry
Fan mood index · most recent r/cfb data
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
30
MS · 6VA · 5NC · 3TX · 3AL · 2FL · 2KS · 2PA · 2+5 more
MS leads the 2026 class with 6 commits. National footprint reaching 13 states.
Where they recruit · 2023-2026
108 signees across 26 states, 2023-2026. NC leads the pull.
r/cfb this year
[Postgame Thread] Old Dominion Defeats USF 24-10
[Postgame Thread] Old Dominion Defeats Appalachian State 24-21
[Game Thread] USF vs. Old Dominion (5:00 PM ET)
Top community posts · last 12 months · r/cfb
Voter spread
3 of 66 AP voters have them ranked, final AP ballot (2025) — from #25, Dylan Sinn (The Journal Gazette), to #25, Randy Johnson (Minneapolis Star Tribune). 63 voters left them off the ballot entirely.
Individual AP Top 25 ballots, final AP ballot, 2025 — 66 voters tracked.
National spotlight
6 games with TV coverage: 2 ESPN, 1 cable, 1 conference network, 2 streaming
Kickoff windows: 1 noon, 3 afternoon, 2 primetime
Fumble luck
The bounces have gone their way on the fumbles they've forced: 59% recovered, vs. ~49% expected.
10 of 17 forced fumbles recovered; 11 of 24 own fumbles recovered themselves, 2025 only.
Takeaway conversion
Cashing in at a normal clip: 20% of disrupted passes intercepted, close to ~19% league-wide.
11 interceptions of 55 disrupted passes (44 deflected, 11 intercepted), 2025 only.
Penalty battle
The flags have favored them: 96 penalties drawn on opponents vs. 78 committed, 159 yards to the good.
700 penalty yards committed vs. 859 drawn on opponents, 2025 season total.
The Pulse on Old Dominion
49
Δ -16.1 vs last wk
2,064
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 Monarchs"
— Old Dominion fanbase · recurring line
Fanbase Signals
Cohort Divergence1 pctSpread between sub-fanbase cohorts in the Pulse window.
The Fever Year
Position = mood · width = volume · color = the kind of feeling
Inside the fanbase — all 5 corners
Cr/CFB
GGoogle News
UUnderdog Dynasty
CCampus paper
AA Sea of Red (ODU)
BBluesky
YYouTube
One voice
+0.00whole-room sentiment · cool our read
Every cohort from the die-hards to the analytics crowd lands within 0.01 of each other — a rare consensus. The loudest voice in the room:
UUnderdog DynastyBeat · article
Ryder Burton looks to build on iconic upset as Uab’s QB1
underdogdynasty.com →How Old Dominion fans actually talk real · top-upvoted
Rr/CFBthe room
Old Dominion (Norfolk, VA) is still closer to Berkeley than some of Cal's conference opponents
▲ 79 ▼open ↗
The crowd’s loudest take by upvotes — read for mood, not as a side. The cohort read is the measured part.
The room, end to end
skeptical
buying in
Die-hards−0.02
National take−0.03
Cohort sentiment is a source-weighted model read — never a quote pinned to a person.
What this fanbase keeps coming back to our read · topic model
Topics are model-labeled from Reddit — a rough signal of what this fanbase is circling right now.
172 mentions · 7 sources · week 2026-01. Counts, sources and the divergence rank are measured (fact). Cohort labels and sentiment are a source-weighted model read (our read) — never a quote attributed to a person.
Belief checklight on evidence
~ our readOld Dominion fans are cautiously optimistic, but it's more feel than fact right now.
backed by facts
the mood
✓ counted We read 110 posts from Old Dominion fans this week.
Season storylines
Week 6
“What a rough day. Our OC is getting outcoached. Like they’re crashing to stop the run.”— r/CFB
Week 5
“this is by far and away the best ODU team in my lifetime. Im glad others are starting to see how solid this team is. I think a couple more wins and we nab some votes. Indy was asleep on a couple plays but otherwise they had us stomped by their defense”— r/CFB
Week 3
Week 1
“He really has an old school mentality. In my opinion that could be good for recruiting”— r/CFB
Week 8
“We need to execute our special teams coach. Three muffed punts, a missed FG, a missed extra point, and a fake punt allowed in three games.”— r/CFB
Five Lenses
What people are saying right now
Radio, beat writers & editorial14 posts
News & campus coverage8 posts
Rent free · r/cfb fan posts, last season
Old Dominion lives rent-free in
share of each rival fanbase’s football posts that bring up Old Dominion
Fanbase Health Index · Old Dominion · high confidence
Fanbase Health Index · Old Dominion · high confidenceGrowing (66)
DecliningStableGrowingSurging
On-Field — 10-3 (77% win rate)79
Volume — 442 effective signal-N83
Cohort Engagement — Divergence 0.01 — quiet35
Key stats — 2025 — FBS rank
Points/game#25 / 138 · 83rd pct32.0
Pts allowed/game#13 / 138 · 91st pct18.5
Total yards/gm#19 / 136 · 87th pct454.9
Rush yards/gm#8 / 136 · 95th pct238.9
Pass yards/gm#74 / 136 · 46th pct216.0
Yards allowed/gm#38 / 136 · 73rd pct331.7
Rush yds allowed/gm#58 / 136 · 58th pct140.2
Sacks#8 / 136 · 95th pct39
Interceptions#14 / 136 · 90th pct15
3rd-down conv#50 / 136 · 64th pct41.4%
All 98 stats
Offense / Defense
Total yards
Team5914454.9/gm6.71/play#19 / 136 · 87th pct#13 / 70 · 83rd pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp4312331.7/gm4.80/play#38 / 136 · 73rd pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Rush yards
Team3106238.9/gm3.52/play#8 / 136 · 95th pct#3 / 70 · 97th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp1822140.2/gm2.03/play#58 / 136 · 58th pct#42 / 70 · 41st pct#4 / 14 · 79th pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Rush carries
Team55242.5/gm#16 / 136 · 89th pct#7 / 70 · 91st pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp49037.7/gm#108 / 136 · 21st pct#63 / 70 · 11th pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Rush TDs
Team312.4/gm#19 / 136 · 87th pct#10 / 70 · 87th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp131.0/gm#24 / 136 · 83rd pct#18 / 70 · 76th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct
Net pass yards
Team2808216.0/gm3.18/play#74 / 136 · 46th pct#45 / 70 · 37th pct#8 / 14 · 50th pct#5 / 11 · 64th pct
Opp2490191.5/gm2.77/play#31 / 136 · 78th pct#16 / 70 · 79th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Pass attempts
Team33025.4/gm#113 / 136 · 18th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp40931.5/gm#89 / 136 · 35th pct#43 / 70 · 40th pct#8 / 14 · 50th pct#8 / 11 · 36th pct
Completions
Team19114.7/gm#117 / 136 · 15th pct#67 / 70 · 6th pct#12 / 14 · 21st pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp24719.0/gm#82 / 136 · 40th pct#40 / 70 · 44th pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct#7 / 11 · 45th pct
Pass TDs
Team211.6/gm#53 / 136 · 62nd pct#33 / 70 · 54th pct#6 / 14 · 64th pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Opp161.2/gm#40 / 136 · 71st pct#27 / 70 · 63rd pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Passer rating
Team141.3141.3#45 / 136 · 68th pct#30 / 70 · 59th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Opp119.6119.6#27 / 136 · 81st pct#16 / 70 · 79th pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Interceptions thrown
Team100.8/gm#56 / 136 · 60th pct#23 / 70 · 69th pct#9 / 14 · 43rd pct#7 / 11 · 45th pct
Opp151.2/gm#116 / 136 · 15th pct#57 / 70 · 20th pct#12 / 14 · 21st pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Sacks (def)
Team393.0/gm#8 / 136 · 95th pct#6 / 70 · 93rd pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 9 · 100th pct
Opp201.5/gm#41 / 136 · 71st pct#23 / 70 · 69th pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#3 / 9 · 78th pct
Tackles for loss
Team906.9/gm#13 / 136 · 91st pct#10 / 70 · 87th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#2 / 9 · 89th pct
Opp584.5/gm#27 / 136 · 81st pct#16 / 70 · 79th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 9 · 100th pct
First downs
Team29222.5/gm#33 / 136 · 76th pct#20 / 70 · 73rd pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp23017.7/gm#29 / 136 · 79th pct#20 / 70 · 73rd pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
3rd-down conv
Team725.5/gm#50 / 136 · 64th pct#24 / 70 · 67th pct#9 / 14 · 43rd pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Opp665.1/gm#53 / 136 · 62nd pct#32 / 70 · 56th pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct
3rd-down att
Team17413.4/gm#61 / 136 · 56th pct#27 / 70 · 63rd pct#12 / 14 · 21st pct#6 / 11 · 55th pct
Opp19314.8/gm#116 / 136 · 15th pct#60 / 70 · 16th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#9 / 11 · 27th pct
4th-down conv
Team50.4/gm#134 / 136 · 2nd pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#14 / 14 · 7th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp80.6/gm#6 / 136 · 96th pct#4 / 70 · 96th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct
4th-down att
Team161.2/gm#123 / 136 · 10th pct#63 / 70 · 11th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#10 / 11 · 18th pct
Opp282.2/gm#77 / 136 · 44th pct#37 / 70 · 49th pct#12 / 14 · 21st pct#8 / 11 · 36th pct
Time of possession
Team370:2828:30/gm#80 / 136 · 42nd pct#43 / 70 · 40th pct#8 / 14 · 50th pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Opp409:3231:30/gm#113 / 136 · 18th pct#60 / 70 · 16th pct#10 / 14 · 36th pct#9 / 11 · 27th pct
Kicking & Punting
Field goals#126 / 135 · 7th pct15/25 (60.0%)
Extra points51/52
Punting#113 / 136 · 18th pct41.0 avg · 47 punts
Turnovers & special teams
Turnovers
Team241.8/gm#4 / 136 · 98th pct#1 / 70 · 100th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp262.0/gm#129 / 136 · 6th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#13 / 14 · 14th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Fumbles lost
Team141.1/gm#1 / 136 · 100th pct#1 / 70 · 100th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp110.8/gm#126 / 136 · 8th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#13 / 14 · 14th pct#9 / 11 · 27th pct
INT return TDs
Team00.0/gm#76 / 135 · 44th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#8 / 14 · 50th pct#6 / 10 · 50th pct
Opp10.1/gm#61 / 136 · 56th pct#30 / 70 · 59th pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct#3 / 10 · 80th pct
INT return yards
Team1108.5/gm#70 / 136 · 49th pct#36 / 70 · 50th pct#6 / 14 · 64th pct#7 / 11 · 45th pct
Opp1128.6/gm#71 / 136 · 49th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct#6 / 11 · 55th pct
Punt ret yds
Team30523.5/gm#13 / 136 · 91st pct#10 / 70 · 87th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp13010.0/gm#82 / 136 · 40th pct#46 / 70 · 36th pct#8 / 14 · 50th pct#7 / 11 · 45th pct
Punt ret TDs
Team00.0/gm#43 / 135 · 69th pct#23 / 70 · 69th pct#4 / 14 · 79th pct#4 / 8 · 62nd pct
Opp10.1/gm#97 / 135 · 29th pct#52 / 70 · 27th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#5 / 9 · 56th pct
Kick ret yds
Team17113.2/gm#130 / 136 · 5th pct#68 / 70 · 4th pct#12 / 14 · 21st pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp94772.8/gm#134 / 136 · 2nd pct#68 / 70 · 4th pct#14 / 14 · 7th pct#7 / 11 · 45th pct
Kick ret TDs
Team00.0/gm#40 / 136 · 71st pct#17 / 70 · 77th pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct#3 / 8 · 75th pct
Opp00.0/gm#1 / 135 · 100th pct#1 / 70 · 100th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 8 · 100th pct
Penalty yards
Team70053.8/gm#61 / 136 · 56th pct#29 / 70 · 60th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#5 / 11 · 64th pct
Opp85966.1/gm#123 / 136 · 10th pct#67 / 70 · 6th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#10 / 11 · 18th pct
Other
H1 epa per play opponent#6 / 167 · 97th pct#4 / 70 · 96th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct0.00.0
Fumbles recovered#6 / 136 · 96th pct#3 / 70 · 97th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#4 / 11 · 73rd pct110.8/gm
Punt returns#11 / 136 · 93rd pct#8 / 70 · 90th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct251.9/gm
H2 epa per play opponent#12 / 143 · 92nd pct#8 / 70 · 90th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct0.10.0/gm
Interceptions (def)#14 / 136 · 90th pct#11 / 70 · 86th pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct151.2/gm
H1 epa per play#17 / 162 · 90th pct#15 / 70 · 80th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct0.30.0/gm
H2 epa per play#49 / 142 · 66th pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#4 / 14 · 79th pct0.20.0/gm
Punt ret (opp)#59 / 136 · 57th pct#34 / 70 · 53rd pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#4 / 11 · 73rd pct131.0/gm
Penalties#61 / 136 · 56th pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#10 / 14 · 36th pct#4 / 11 · 73rd pct786.0/gm
Passes intercepted opponent#64 / 136 · 54th pct#38 / 70 · 47th pct#4 / 14 · 79th pct#4 / 11 · 73rd pct100.8/gm
Red zone pass rate#82 / 154 · 47th pct#39 / 70 · 46th pct#6 / 14 · 64th pct#8 / 11 · 36th pct0.40.0/gm
Recruiting rating#102 / 138 · 27th pct#69 / 70 · 3rd pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct144.311.1/gm
Fourth down go rate#115 / 138 · 17th pct#59 / 70 · 17th pct#10 / 14 · 36th pct#10 / 11 · 18th pct0.30.0/gm
Penalties (opp)#121 / 136 · 12th pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#10 / 11 · 18th pct967.4/gm
Kick returns#125 / 136 · 9th pct#63 / 70 · 11th pct#13 / 14 · 14th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct100.8/gm
Fumbles rec (def)#136 / 136 · 1st pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#14 / 14 · 7th pct#10 / 11 · 18th pct141.1/gm
Kick ret (opp)#136 / 136 · 1st pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#14 / 14 · 7th pct#8 / 11 · 36th pct493.8/gm
First down pass rate#144 / 215 · 33rd pct#55 / 70 · 23rd pct#8 / 14 · 50th pct#9 / 11 · 27th pct0.40.0/gm
Situational
3rd-down conversion
Off41.4%#50 / 136 · 64th pct#30 / 70 · 59th pct#4 / 14 · 79th pct#4 / 11 · 73rd pct
Def34.2%#26 / 136 · 82nd pct#15 / 70 · 80th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
4th-down conversion
Off31.2%#131 / 136 · 4th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#14 / 14 · 7th pct#10 / 11 · 18th pct
Def28.6%#2 / 136 · 99th pct#2 / 70 · 99th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Turnover margin#54 / 136 · 61st pct#31 / 70 · 57th pct#6 / 14 · 64th pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct+0.15/gm
Sack rate (def)#11 / 136 · 93rd pct#7 / 70 · 91st pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 9 · 100th pct9.5%
Red Zone & Drive Efficiency (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Red zone trips
Team564.3/gm#16 / 167 · 91st pct#11 / 70 · 86th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct
Opp372.8/gm#68 / 166 · 60th pct#25 / 70 · 66th pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Red zone score %
Team73.2%73.2%#115 / 167 · 32nd pct#59 / 70 · 17th pct#10 / 14 · 36th pct#8 / 11 · 36th pct
Opp70.3%70.3%#23 / 166 · 87th pct#9 / 70 · 89th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Points / drive
Team2.20.2/gm#52 / 167 · 69th pct#37 / 70 · 49th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Opp1.30.1/gm#11 / 166 · 94th pct#7 / 70 · 91st pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Yards / drive
Team44.13.4/gm#45 / 167 · 74th pct#27 / 70 · 63rd pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Opp32.12.5/gm#7 / 166 · 96th pct#4 / 70 · 96th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Plays / drive
Team6.00.5/gm#150 / 167 · 11th pct#70 / 70 · 1st pct#14 / 14 · 7th pct#8 / 11 · 36th pct
Opp6.30.5/gm#36 / 166 · 79th pct#13 / 70 · 83rd pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct#3 / 11 · 82nd pct
Three-and-out rate
Team7.1%7.1%#17 / 167 · 90th pct#11 / 70 · 86th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp9.6%9.6%#132 / 166 · 21st pct#65 / 70 · 9th pct#10 / 14 · 36th pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct
Scheme Identity (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Rush rate over expected#29 / 145 · 81st pct#6 / 70 · 93rd pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct+6.0%+6.0%
Havoc rate
Team19.1%19.1%#14 / 140 · 91st pct#10 / 70 · 87th pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct
Opp14.2%14.2%#56 / 140 · 61st pct#28 / 70 · 61st pct#5 / 14 · 71st pct
Standard-downs success
Team51.0%51.0%#42 / 154 · 73rd pct#30 / 70 · 59th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct
Opp45.6%45.6%#48 / 172 · 73rd pct#27 / 70 · 63rd pct#5 / 14 · 71st pct
Passing-downs success
Team35.0%35.0%#32 / 153 · 80th pct#20 / 70 · 73rd pct#3 / 14 · 86th pct
Opp26.3%26.3%#19 / 149 · 88th pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct
Line yards / carry
Team3.23.2#23 / 143 · 85th pct#15 / 70 · 80th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct
Opp2.92.9#74 / 155 · 53rd pct#45 / 70 · 37th pct#7 / 14 · 57th pct
Stuff rate
Team15.1%15.1%#20 / 143 · 87th pct#11 / 70 · 86th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct
Opp21.1%21.1%#39 / 155 · 75th pct#21 / 70 · 71st pct#4 / 14 · 79th pct
Power success rate
Team63.9%63.9%#105 / 137 · 24th pct#57 / 70 · 20th pct#10 / 14 · 36th pct
Opp54.3%54.3%#8 / 141 · 95th pct#5 / 70 · 94th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct
Efficiency
Completion %
Off57.9%#112 / 136 · 18th pct#63 / 70 · 11th pct#11 / 14 · 29th pct#6 / 11 · 55th pct
Def60.4%#50 / 136 · 64th pct#25 / 70 · 66th pct#5 / 14 · 71st pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct
Yards / attempt
Off8.5#18 / 136 · 88th pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Def6.1#16 / 136 · 89th pct#11 / 70 · 86th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Yards / completion
Off14.7#5 / 136 · 97th pct#2 / 70 · 99th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Def10.1#6 / 136 · 96th pct#5 / 70 · 94th pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Yards / carry#8 / 136 · 95th pct#6 / 70 · 93rd pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct5.6
Yards / play#16 / 136 · 89th pct#13 / 70 · 83rd pct#1 / 14 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct6.71
Scoring margin#16 / 136 · 89th pct#12 / 70 · 84th pct#2 / 14 · 93rd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct+13.5/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% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dual Threat · +0.37 EPA/play | 1 | 12 | 173 / 288 | 60.1 | 2619 #56 FBS | 9.1 | 21 #39 FBS | 10 | 153.6 | 72.4 | 8.3 | 4.6 | |
Yards by week → Dual Threat· Money-downDangerous with both arm and legs — defenses can't just pin the ears back. saves his best for the money downs All-Conference honorable mention / 2nd team — the recognition has started. 10 of 183 QBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Rush yards / carry6.4 97th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Yards / attempt9.0 89th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Trait fingerprint Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score climbed from the 60th percentile to the 94th among FBS QBs | |||||||||||||
| +0.21 EPA/play | 10 | 7 | 17 / 40 | 42.5 | 184 | 4.6 | 0 | 0 | 81.1 | 26.7 | — | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||||
Running Backs
| Player | # | G | Car | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Stuff% | 10+% | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Speed Merchant · +0.13 EPA/play | 20 | 13 | 105 | 792 | 7.5 | 6 | 93 | 10.8 | 8.1 | 13.3 | 20 | — | |
Yards by week → Speed MerchantCuts upfield fast. Designed to find the crease, not run through the line. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 48 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry7.9 98th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Yards / reception3.3 bottom 10th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Trequan Jones's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Balanced Back · +0.02 EPA/play | 3 | 11 | 111 | 634 | 5.7 | 4 | 67 | 12.4 | 10.1 | 10.2 | 14.8 | — | |
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. 186 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry5.8 68th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Receiving share4.3% bottom 13th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Devin Roche's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Balanced Back · +0.14 EPA/play | 18 | 11 | 64 | 268 | 4.2 | 4 | 29 | 6.3 | 6.9 | 11.7 | 11.7 | — | |
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. 186 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry4.1 bottom 14th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Yards / reception32.0 100th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Ke'Travion Hargrove's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Balanced Back · +0.11 EPA/play | 5 | 10 | 56 | 224 | 4 | 2 | 30 | 6.4 | 11.7 | 19.6 | 10.7 | — | |
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. 186 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry4.3 bottom 21th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Yards / reception6.5 bottom 36th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint View Maurki James's full player page | |||||||||||||
Receivers
| Player | # | G | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deep Threat · +1.19 EPA/play | 2 | 13 | 38 | 762 | 20.1 | 4 | 98 | 9.9 | 11.9 | 12.4% (33/267) | |
Yards by week → Deep Threat· Boom-or-bustStretches the field vertically. Every snap is a potential big play. his yards come in chunks — feast or famine 100 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception20.7 98th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions EPA / play (adj)1.2 100th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Tre' Brown III's full player page | |||||||||||
| Deep Threat · +0.39 EPA/play | 6 | 12 | 41 | 714 | 17.4 | 5 | 55 | 4.1 | 8.4 | 26.2% (70/267) | |
Yards by week → Deep ThreatStretches the field vertically. Every snap is a potential big play. 100 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception16.5 80th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Plays like our readTwo-star recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile | |||||||||||
| Slot Technician · +0.63 EPA/play | 7 | 13 | 51 | 667 | 13.1 | 6 #62 FBS | 46 | 12.7 | 10.8 | 30.7% (82/267) | |
Yards by week → Slot TechnicianRuns precise routes in tight quarters. Volume player who keeps chains moving. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 97 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Reception volume51 81th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Plays like View Na'eem Abdul-Rahim Gladding's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.66 EPA/play | 19 | 7 | 10 | 99 | 9.9 | 1 | 17 | 4.8 | 3.6 | — | |
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 / reception9.9 bottom 39th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Reception volume10 bottom 16th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Dawson Johnson's full player page | |||||||||||
| -0.20 EPA/play | — | 2 | 8 | 84 | 10.5 | 1 | 34 | 0 | 10 | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
| +0.48 EPA/play | 13 | 4 | 6 | 68 | 11.3 | 0 | 18 | 4.3 | 6.4 | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · -0.28 EPA/play | 9 | 6 | 9 | 59 | 6.6 | 1 | 18 | 3.6 | 2.4 | — | |
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 / reception6.6 bottom 11th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions EPA / play (adj)-0.3 bottom 1th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Jailen Butler's full player page | |||||||||||
Defensive Line
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | TFL | Sack | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Versatile End | 43 | 12 | 33 | 11 | 7 | 4 | 4 |
Versatile EndNo single standout number, but nothing missing either — competent across the board. All-Conference honorable mention / 2nd team — the recognition has started. The most common profile in its group this season — 139 of 200 classified this way. Played in 12 of 21 games this season · senior our readUnranked recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 90 | 12 | 31 | 11 | 9 | 1 | 1 |
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 rate29.0% 94th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Chris Forbes's full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 9 | 11 | 30 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Two-Gap BaseStout at the point of attack — steady tackle-for-loss production without a standout pass-rush number. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 388 of 809 classified this way. Played in 11 of 21 games this season · sophomore our readBreakout: his CFB Index score climbed from the 14th percentile to the 76th among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 36 | 10 | 24 | 8 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 1 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate18.8% 67th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Javen Gibson's full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 30 | 11 | 22 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
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 rate13.6% bottom 46th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Fred Giles's full player page | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 94 | 12 | 18 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate16.7% 58th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Ricardo Williams Jr.'s full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 95 | 7 | 16 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 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 rate18.8% 67th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Ahmaad Foster's full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 99 | 7 | 13 | 4 | 2.5 | 1 | 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 rate19.2% 68th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Cole Daniels's full player page | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 40 | 5 | 10 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate25.0% 86th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Hunter Malecki's full player page | |||||||
| 98 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 75 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | |
Linebackers
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | Ast | TFL | Sack | PD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Linebacker | 4 | 13 | 75 | 36 | 39 | 10 | 5.5 | 3 | 1 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume75 81th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Sack rate7.3% 80th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score now sits at the 96th percentile among FBS LBs, up from the 47th | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 34 | 13 | 71 | 27 | 44 | 9.5 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume71 76th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles PD rate0.0% bottom 18th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 1st to 43rd to 75th percentile among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 38 | 12 | 64 | 17 | 47 | 5.5 | 2.5 | 1 | 1 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume64 68th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles PD rate1.6% bottom 36th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readUnranked recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile our readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 0th to 13th to 78th percentile among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 18 | 12 | 52 | 19 | 33 | 7 | 4.5 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume52 52th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Sack rate8.7% 87th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Jackson Forrest's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 1 | 13 | 37 | 14 | 23 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 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 · junior · 3-star, 2025 class View Keshawn Thomas's full player page | |||||||||
| 13 | 10 | 14 | 6 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| 24 | 6 | 11 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| 22 | 6 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| — | 5 | 9 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| 42 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 41 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Defensive Backs
| Player | # | G | Tot | PD | INT | TFL | Sack |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Box Safety | 3 | 13 | 80 | 4 | 1 | 1.5 | 0 |
Box SafetyLives near the line of scrimmage as a de facto extra linebacker. Impact starter — above-average production for the conference. 166 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume80 97th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 0th to 27th to 76th percentile among FBS Ss | |||||||
| Rover | 12 | 13 | 76 | 2 | 6 #2 FBS | 2.5 | 0 |
Rover· Takeaway threatHits like a linebacker and still takes the ball away. the kind of DB who takes it back the other way Impact starter — above-average production for the conference. 83 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate2.6% bottom 24th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score now sits at the 98th percentile among FBS Ss, up from the 5th | |||||||
| Perimeter Tackler | 6 | 13 | 60 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Perimeter TacklerTargeted often and asked to tackle in space on the perimeter. Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. 42 of 270 CBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume60 99th percentile · FBS corners, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Zion Frink's full player page | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 2 | 13 | 46 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 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 our readBreakout: his CFB Index score went from the 0th percentile among FBS Ss to the 53rd | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 19 | 12 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 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 12 of 21 games this season · sophomore · 2-star, 2025 class View Lucas Struck's full player page | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 33 | 12 | 37 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. The most common profile in its group this season — 419 of 801 classified this way. Played in 12 of 21 games this season · sophomore · 3-star, 2024 class our readAscending: his CFB Index score now sits at the 37th percentile among FBS Ss, up from the 1st | |||||||
| Cover Corner | 8 | 8 | 35 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Cover CornerSteady in coverage; doesn't get beat deep and rarely gives up the big play. The most common profile in its group this season — 141 of 270 classified this way. Played in 8 of 21 games this season · senior View Botros Alisandro's full player page | |||||||
| Cover Corner | 5 | 11 | 35 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Cover Corner· Takeaway threatSteady in coverage; doesn't get beat deep and rarely gives up the big play. the kind of DB who takes it back the other way The most common profile in its group this season — 141 of 270 classified this way. Played in 11 of 21 games this season · sophomore · 3-star, 2024 class View Brandon Crutchfield's full player page | |||||||
| 27 | 5 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Cover Corner | 23 | 6 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Cover CornerSteady in coverage; doesn't get beat deep and rarely gives up the big play. 141 of 270 CBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate0.0% bottom 8th percentile · FBS corners, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Jorian Haynes's full player page | |||||||
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 26 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 16 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Kicking
| Player | # | G | FG M/A | FG% | XP M/A | Pts | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steady | 94 | 9 | 8/15 | 53.3 | 32/33 | 56 | 50 |
| Steady | 93 | 5 | 7/10 | 70 | 19/19 | 40 | 32 |
Punting
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | Long | In20 | TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steady | 96 | 13 | 47 | 1926 | 41 | 59 | 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 · +0.11 EPA/play | 5 | 10 | 8 | 149 | 18.6 | 0 | 28 |
Punt Returns
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Back · +0.02 EPA/play | 3 | 11 | 19 | 265 | 13.9 | 0 | 49 |
| Slot Technician · +0.63 EPA/play | 7 | 13 | 4 | 33 | 8.3 | 0 | 22 |
2025 stat leaders
final
2025 stat leaders
1.
Mario Easterly
S
80.0 tot (def)
2.
Jeremy Mack Jr.
LB
75.0 tot (def)
3.
Jahleel Culbreath
LB
71.0 tot (def)
4.
Colton Joseph
QB
2,619 yds (pass)
5.
Seth Naotala
LB
64.0 tot (def)
Roster
2025
27
players carry a qualified CFB Index Score this season.
Jerome Carter
S
#10 of 544
Jeremy Mack Jr.
LB
#29 of 583
Colton Joseph
QB
#12 of 146
Trequan Jones
RB
#60 of 326
Tre' Brown III
WR
#94 of 485
Na'eem Abdul-Rahim Gladding
WR
#102 of 485
+21 more
Old Dominion · 2025 schedule & results10-3Hard slateAverage opponent win rate 50% · 3 AP top-25 opponents on the schedule.
| Wk | Date | Us | Opp | Line | Opponent | Result | Record | Conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aug 30 | #72 | #32 | +23 | @Indiana | L 14–27 134 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2 | Sep 6 | #51 | #171 | -21.5 | North Carolina Central | W 54–6 128 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| 3 | Sep 13 | #56 | #47 | +5.5 | @Virginia Tech | W 45–26 134 | 2-1 | 0-0 |
| 5 | Sep 27 | #46 | #58 | -14.5 | Liberty | W 21–7 122 | 3-1 | 0-0 |
| 6 | Oct 4 | #44 | #121 | -18.5 | Coastal Carolina | W 47–7 144 | 4-1 | 1-0 |
| 7 | Oct 11 | #32 | #84 | -14.5 | @Marshall | L 24–48 140 | 4-2 | 1-1 |
| 8 | Oct 18 | #40 | #51 | +3.5 | @James Madison | L 27–63 129 | 4-3 | 1-2 |
| 9 | Oct 25 | #53 | #141 | -13.5 | App State | W 24–21 150 | 5-3 | 2-2 |
| 10 | Nov 1 | #61 | #171 | -17 | @UL Monroe | W 31–6 135 | 6-3 | 3-2 |
| 12 | Nov 14 | #54 | #95 | -9.5 | Troy | W 33–0 125 | 7-3 | 4-2 |
| 13 | Nov 22 | #34 | #114 | -10.5 | @Georgia Southern | W 45–10 141 | 8-3 | 5-2 |
| 14 | Nov 29 | #31 | #203 | -28.5 | Georgia State | W 27–10 143 | 9-3 | 6-2 |
| Bowl Season | ||||||||
| 16 | Dec 17 | #32 | #11 | +4 | South Florida (N) | W 24–10 | 10-3 | 6-2 |
Advanced box score (EPA, success rate, explosiveness)▼
| Date | Opp | Result | Yds | TO | TOP | EPA/play | Success% | Explosive% | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 17 | South Florida | W 24–10 | — | — | — | +0.132 | 35.8% | 130.7% | |
| Nov 29 | Georgia State | W 27–10 | 409 | 2 | 32:28 | +0.098 | 41.6% | 111.9% | |
| Nov 22 | @Georgia Southern | W 45–10 | 551 | 1 | 34:35 | +0.352 | 54.2% | 114.4% | Blowout win |
| Nov 14 | Troy | W 33–0 | 503 | 0 | 30:15 | +0.256 | 43.5% | 143.2% | Best defensive stand |
| Nov 1 | @UL Monroe | W 31–6 | 391 | 1 | 26:17 | +0.086 | 44.8% | 101.2% | |
| Oct 25 | App State | W 24–21 | 459 | 1 | 35:19 | +0.043 | 41.2% | 120.7% | One-score win |
| Oct 18 | @James Madison | L 27–63 | 285 | 3 | 18:34 | +0.218 | 32.7% | 172.7% | Most explosive |
| Oct 11 | @Marshall | L 24–48 | 439 | 5 | 23:25 | +0.039 | 41.2% | 125.2% | Season-low EPA/play |
| Oct 4 | Coastal Carolina | W 47–7 | 619 | 1 | 29:34 | +0.425 | 53.9% | 128.2% | Blowout win |
| Sep 27 | Liberty | W 21–7 | 490 | 4 | 32:02 | +0.206 | 55.9% | 93.2% | Best success rate |
| Sep 13 | @Virginia Tech | W 45–26 | 527 | 1 | 29:57 | +0.500 | 55.6% | 133.3% | Season-high EPA/play |
| Sep 6 | North Carolina Central | W 54–6 | 545 | 1 | 28:23 | +0.496 | 47.8% | 170.1% | Blowout win |
| Aug 30 | @Indiana | L 14–27 | 314 | 3 | 18:32 | +0.303 | 37.2% | 165.3% | |
| Season average (13 games) | 461 | 1.9 | +0.243 | 45.0% | 131.6% | ||||
How They Play · 2025
How They Play · 2025Old Dominion fields an elite run-heavy offense behind an elite, 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 Old Dominion actually scores
83rd percentile quality, 45th 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
Old Dominion's 4th-quarter offense, before and after garbage time
Raw Q4 EPA/play ranks 55th percentile in FBS. Strip out snaps taken with a blowout margin and it climbs to the 72nd — the correction is the finding, not a footnote.
Standard downs vs. passing downs
Does Old Dominion hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?
72nd percentile success on standard downs, 79th on passing downs — little dropoff between the two — a schedule-independent identity.
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
Old Dominion by half
1st-half offense ranks 90th percentile in FBS; 2nd-half, 66th — competitive snaps only, garbage time excluded from both halves.
Schedule mirage
How much of Old Dominion's number is the schedule?
Raw EPA/play through week 21 is 0.24; 82nd percentile once opponent strength is stripped out, it's 0.06. The widest gap came in week 2: 0.40 raw vs. 0.07 adjusted.
Old Dominion reads strongest in explosive plays allowed (top 2%) and epa allowed (top 5%); the crux lives in explosive plays, where Old Dominion sits at the 72nd 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 · Old Dominion
Most Similar Programs · Old DominionReads Like
CharlotteTier 3 · Prestige T2 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontColorado StateTier 3 · Prestige T2 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontEast CarolinaTier 3 · Prestige T2 · Similarly-sized rosters up front
Static-attribute similarity across tier, archetype, conference, and voice. Not a prediction — a calibration.
Home-Field Advantage · Old Dominion · 2018-present
Strong
52% home win rate vs 28% on the road. margin runs +9.3 better at home. S.B. Ballard Stadium seats 20,118, averaging 95% full (19,171 attendance, 23 games reported).
Home22-20Away12-30
Positional competition · RB room
The carries are split. The job isn’t.
Devin Roche and Trequan Jones split the carries (110/214 vs 104/214) -- but the job isn't split the same way. Trequan Jones produces in bigger chunks.
Devin RocheTrequan Jones
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
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Top-5-carry share
concentration and EPA/carry agree -- a real boom/bust split
Screened 3 claims, 1 survived, 2 falsified
Positional competition · WR/TE room
The targets are split. The job isn’t.
Na'eem Abdul-Rahim Gladding (WR) and Jailen Butler (TE) split the targets (76/88 vs 12/88) -- but the job isn't split the same way.
Na'eem Abdul-Rahim GladdingJailen Butler
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
Old Dominion’s play-calling, before and after the change
Offense: Kevin Reihner (2022) → Kevin Decker (2023–2025)
The biggest shift: red-zone pass rate moved down 21 points. The rest held closer to steady.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Defense: co-David Blackwell / co-Grady Brown (2019) → Blake Seiler (2020–2025)
The biggest shift: red-zone pass rate moved up 9 points. The rest held closer to steady.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Season by season
How Old Dominion’s current staff calls plays, year over year
Offense: Kevin Decker (2023–2025)
1st-down pass rate
2023: 40% → 2025: 39% · 5-pt range · #145 of 171 · less than most
Red-zone pass rate
2023: 41% → 2025: 37% · 6-pt range · #145 of 171 · less than most
4th-down go rate
2023: 38% → 2025: 29% · 13-pt range · #113 of 171 · a typical amount
Defense: Blake Seiler (2020–2025)
1st-down pass rate
2021: 42% → 2025: 39% · 18-pt range · #24 of 189 · more than most
Red-zone pass rate
2021: 41% → 2025: 37% · 24-pt range · #17 of 189 · more than most
4th-down go rate
2021: 34% → 2025: 29% · 13-pt range · #117 of 188 · a typical amount
Defensive identity · pass zones
What this defense gives up, by zone.
On short passes, Old Dominion’s defense allows a completion rate above the FBS mean (66.0% vs 65.9% league-wide, shrunk toward the mean for its 174-play sample) — mid-pack, 69 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=174 short-zone plays faced, raw rate 66.1%
Venue texture
67°F average kickoff temp; 9% of games had measurable precipitation; 9 mph average wind.
Based on 67 home games with weather data.
The CFP Era
11 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
Old Dominion's 2014–2025 record is 61-74. The era is still being written; the CFP line is the one the program is arguing for.
All-Time Record
106-88
since 2009 · 16 seasons · .546 win rate
HOME
58-35
AWAY
35-49
NEUTRAL
13-4
2000s
2010s
2020s
The program, in full — read the essay
Old Dominion didn't play football for 68 years. In 2025 the Monarchs went to Blacksburg, hung 45 on Virginia Tech, won ten games, and authored the best season in a program that has existed for 17 years. The resurrection is real.
The program didn't exist until 2009. Bobby Wilder built it from the first practice — a commuter university in Norfolk's Tidewater with no football culture, no recruiting base, and no reason to think it would become anything. By 2014 the Monarchs were FBS. In 2016 they won the Bahamas Bowl. In 2018 they went to Blacksburg and beat the No. 13 Virginia Tech program 49-35 — a Power Four giant-kill that announced the program had a chip and wasn't afraid to use it. The identity was set: a young program with nothing to protect, built to ambush bigger names with players nobody else trusted.
The 2025 season was the clearest proof yet. Ricky Rahne's sixth-year program went 10-3 — the first ten-win FBS season in program history — with a Sun Belt record good enough to force respect. The Blacksburg trip in September was the program's signature moment: ODU 45, Virginia Tech 26, on the Hokies' own field, the first road win over a Power Four program since the program started playing people. Colton Joseph accounted for three touchdowns. A win that helped cost the Hokies their coach. The Monarchs closed the year with a 24-10 Cure Bowl win over South Florida, a program with resources and history that still lost to the 17-year-old upstart from Norfolk.
Entering 2026, the question is whether ten wins becomes a floor or a peak. The Sun Belt is a real conference now, not a soft landing for mid-majors — winning it outright requires depth, portal acumen, and the ability to beat Sun Belt programs that can also recruit. The fanbase fracture is clean and generous: the dream-bigger room wants ODU treated as a genuine Sun Belt contender with upward trajectory; the grateful-for-everything room is still quietly amazed the program exists at all. Both are right, and 2026 is where the distinction matters.
How they play
Tidewater-tough and opportunistic: a young program built on the chip of being underestimated, with a scheme designed to create explosive plays out of scheme rather than physical mismatches. Rahne's offense uses spread concepts with a mobile quarterback at the center, manufactured yards-after-contact and manufactured big plays out of designed rollouts and receiver motion. The defense punches above its recruiting level through preparation. The program's best games have come as decided underdogs — the nothing-to-lose brand is not an accident, it is a cultivated identity.
Steady
Old Dominion 2015–2025. Holding the line. The 10-year slope (+0.10 rungs / yr) doesn't tilt either way — the program lives at roughly Tier 2.
CFP Era · Old Dominion
11 seasons on file
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
down middle peak CFP year
Season Standing · 2025 · 10-3
Season Standing · 2025 · 10-3Bowl eligible
Old Dominion: 6+ wins, bowl access secured. The baseline of a successful FBS year.
R0R1R2R3R4R5R6R7R8R9
Sub-FBSBuildingBowlRankedContenderPlayoff
Sun Belt Standing · 2025
2nd in the Sun Belt
Old Dominion is 2nd in the Sun Belt at 6-2. 1 team above — that's the direct path to the title game.
| # | Program | Record |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | James Madison | 8-0 |
| 2 | Old Dominion | 6-2 |
| 3 | Southern Miss | 5-3 |
| 4 | Troy | 5-3 |
| 5 | Coastal Carolina | 5-4 |
| 6 | Georgia Southern | 5-4 |
| 7 | Arkansas State | 4-3 |
| 8 | Louisiana | 4-3 |
| 9 | South Alabama | 3-4 |
| 10 | Louisiana Tech | 2-0 |
| 11 | Marshall | 2-5 |
| 12 | App State | 2-7 |
| 13 | UL Monroe | 1-6 |
| 14 | Georgia State | 0-8 |
Coaching Era · Old Dominion
Coaching Era · Old DominionRicky Rahne
Ricky Rahne has held the program for 6 seasons — the era is established.
Era Ricky Rahne · 2021–presentPrev: Bobby Wilder (2014–2017)OC: Kody CookPrev OC: Kevin Decker (2023–2025)DC: Blake SeilerPrev DC: co-David Blackwell / co-Grady Brown (2019)
6
years · era
Rituals
Three gameday rituals — the ones outsiders never quite catch.
2009 Football Resurrection
since 2009
Old Dominion football was dropped after the 1941 season + remained dormant for 68 years. The 2009 program resurrection — under Bobby Wilder — produced rapid ascent: FCS in 2009, FBS reclassification in 2014, multiple bowl appearances. The 68-year gap + revival is unique in CFB. The 2009 ODU 'Football Returns' moment is permanent institutional canon.
Bobby Wilder 2009-2018 Era
since 2009
Bobby Wilder — the football resurrection-era head coach — built ODU from scratch through FCS to FBS to Conference USA membership. The 2016 10-3 + Bahamas Bowl championship was the era's peak. Wilder's 2018 retirement opened Bobby Rahne's tenure; Ricky Rahne's 2020-present tenure continues the rebuild.
S.B. Ballard Stadium 2019
since 2019
S.B. Ballard Stadium (built 2019, replacing old Foreman Field on the same site) — Old Dominion's dedicated football venue with 22,000 capacity — anchors the post-2009 era. The Norfolk Tidewater geographic setting + modern facilities + 2019 ribbon-cutting + the brick-and-concrete construction create a venue distinct from the historic legacy programs.
Program memory
What this program never forgets
Most weeks vanish. These didn’t.
2009
Football resurrected
The Monarchs play their first game in 68 years — the founding moment of the modern program
2018
Upset of No. 13 Virginia Tech
ODU 49, Virginia Tech 35 — the program's first win over a ranked Power team and the biggest win in school history
2025
Rout of Virginia Tech in Blacksburg
ODU 45, Virginia Tech 26 — the program's first road win over a Power Four team
Moment of the Year · Old Dominion · 2025
Moment of the Year · Old Dominion · 2025Postseason · Won 24-10 at South Florida
Week 16 of 2025. Postseason win — the season-defining moment.
Bowl / Postseason Ledger
Bowl / Postseason LedgerRecent postseason (2016-2025): 2-2
Most recent: 2025 — win 10-24 (away). Last 5 postseason: 2-2.
2025202320212016
NFL Draft Pipeline
2023–2023
NFL Draft PipelineDeveloping
3 picks last 5 cycles. Pipeline emerging.
3
picks · 0 R1
#103
Nick Saldiveri
Offensive Tackle · 2023 · New Orleans
#209
Tre Hawkins III
Cornerback · 2023 · New York
#220
Zack Kuntz
Tight End · 2023 · New York · #6/119 final season
Unit lineage
Old Dominion’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
2014–2019 · Brian Scott2020–2021 · Kirk Campbell2022 · Kevin Reihner2023–2025 · Kevin Decker
Hired for 2026: Kody Cook — not yet reflected in on-field data.
Defense2014–2025
2014–2018 · Rich Nagy2019 · co-David Blackwell / co-Grady Brown2020–2025 (ongoing) · Blake Seiler
Elite (≥70th pct)AveragePoor (≤30th pct)
Chronicle Visuals
Among the most continuous rosters into 2025 — 74% back, anchored by the qb room, only offense to settle.
The portal upgraded the IOL room but opened a hole at S.
Old Dominion converts recruit talent into draft picks better than its class rank suggests.
r/cfb moments
886
[Postgame Thread] Old Dominion Defeats USF 24-10
560
[Postgame Thread] WKU Defeats Old Dominion 38-35 (OT)
107
[Game Thread] Famous Toastery Bowl: Old Dominion vs. WKU (2:30 PM ET)
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