3identity shift
Purdue's fanbase shift signals Big Ten identity evolution.
Barry Odom inherits a 2-10 losing record at Purdue, a program historically known for developing NFL quarterbacks but now ranked in the bottom 25% of FBS by power rating.
Purdue2-10Latest
Cautious optimism is building around Purdue.
belief cooled ↓ 5.2vs prior week
Fanbase belief
Leaning up
57/100 · 185 mentions · top 31% of FBS
~ our readGrounding
backed by facts
9% cite a stat · 7% typical ✓ counted
~ our readVolatility
Reactive
σ 16 pts
~ our readThe model
#123
CFB Zeitgeist · -6.3
✓ measured3Hope-Doping·Offseason
Purdue is the Cradle of Quarterbacks — the West Lafayette program that put Brees, Griese, and Dawson in the NFL — now digging out of back-to-back two-win seasons with Barry Odom hired to rebuild it from the studs.
Title DroughtSince 2000 · 25 yrs
Indiana spent a century as the easy in-state laughingstock — until the Hoosiers surged and Purdue cratered, and the Old Oaken Bucket started living on the wrong side of West Lafayette. The fanbase wan…
offseason · quiet
Roster Reload - Purdue
2026 snapshot - 2026-08-06Returning Production54%Moderate continuity
Talent Composite#54 nationally247 composite 687.7
Portal Additions29Primary repair: EDGE
Portal Losses24Primary pressure: LB
Draft Loss0No NFL Draft departures recorded
Recruiting Reload#55Development class
LBin 3 - Jojo Haydenout 5 - Alex Sanford Jr.Starter Risk
current room: 229 lbs avg (2025 roster)
Sin 4 - Jaden Manghamout 3 - D'Mon MarableUpgrade
IOLin 3 - Boaz Stanleyout 4 - Tyrell GreenEven
current room: 320 lbs avg (2025 roster)
WRin 4 - Asaad Waseemout 2 - Arhmad BranchNeed Filled
current room: 192 lbs avg (2025 roster)
DLin 3 - Curt Nealout 3 - Jamarrion HarklessEven
current room: 299 lbs avg (2025 roster)
RBin 3 - Jerrick Gibsonout 2 - Jaron ThomasEven
current room: 208 lbs avg (2025 roster)
Belief EKG
WinLoss · hover for scorePrior seasons
Approaching
29 days
until kickoff · vs Indiana State · Fri Sep 4 · 23:00 UTC
The experience
Purdue is the Big Ten 'Cradle of Quarterbacks' — 14 NFL starting QBs developed, Drew Brees' 2000 8-1 + Rose Bowl run, and the 2022 9-4 + Big Ten title game under Jeff Brohm.
Offense: PoorRun/Pass: Pass-first, spreadDefense: Poor
Purdue's 2026 season hinges on transfer integration and moderate continuity
With a moderate continuity score of 54% and a net portal importer status, Purdue's 2026 team will rely heavily on its 29 incoming transfers to offset the loss of 24 outgoing players. The program's development class, ranked #55 in recruiting, must quickly integrate new talent to achieve its projected base scenario of an 8-5 record.
- Roster reloadPurdue has a moderate continuity score of 54% and a returning_total_pct of 54, indicating that the team will rely on new talent to fill gaps left by 24 outgoing transfers.
Data as of 2026-08-04
·
Validated against program evidence
Purdue Pete is at the boiler.
Purdue · the story right now
12 storylines developing
What Purdue's offseason is really about
the open questionwhere does it go from here?
program_outlookthis cycle~readnew
Purdue leaped 31 spots in SP+ — the gap between the ranking and 2-10 record is the story Barry Odom has to answer in Big Ten this year.
what happenedPurdue enters 2026 rated No. 90 in 2025 SP+ (-6.1), up 31 spots from 2024. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
coachingthis cycle~readnew
Barry Odom begins his first season at Purdue with 88% of QB production returning — a rare stability in a program known for developing NFL signal-callers but mired in a 2-10 record.
what happenedBarry Odom took over as Purdue's head coach, replacing Ryan Walters. ✓ fact
the contextthe program's third head coach in five seasons
narrative tension · our read
coordinatorsthis cycle~readnew
Barry Odom inherits a 2-10 losing record at Purdue, a program historically known for developing NFL quarterbacks but now sitting in the bottom 25% of FBS power ratings.
what happenedPurdue: coordinator change reshaping a unit. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
portal2025-05-14~read★new
Tyrell Green and Miles Mitchell headline Barry Odom's 51-player portal class — the second-largest in FBS this cycle — as Purdue attempts to rebuild from a 2-10 season.
what happenedPurdue signed a top-16 transfer-portal class — 51 additions headlined by Malachi Singleton (QB) from Arkansas and Ryan Browne (QB) from North Carolina. ✓ fact
the contextthe second-largest transfer-portal haul in FBS this cycle (51 additions)
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle✓ factnew
Antonio Harris sees a real spike in usage once the game is out of reach, and his efficiency in competitive snaps sits below the position baseline -- the numbers lean on the opponent giving up.
narrative tension · our read
money downthis cycle✓ factnew
Michael Jackson III is a legitimate money-down target -- his 3rd-down conversion rate ranks among the position's best, and his per-target value holds up in that spot too.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle✓ factnew
Nitro Tuggle sees a real spike in usage once the game is out of reach, and his efficiency in competitive snaps sits below the position baseline -- the numbers lean on the opponent giving up.
narrative tension · our read
coordinatorsthis cycle~readnew
Barry Odom's second season at Purdue begins with a 2-10 losing record to overcome, though the program's quarterback legacy and coordinator reshaping offer a foundation to rebuild.
what happenedPurdue: coordinator change reshaping a unit. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
EJ Horton Jr.: a garbage time merchant signal screened this season.
narrative tension · our read
deep threatthis cycle~attributednew
Michael Jackson III is used almost exclusively underneath -- a low share of his targets are downfield shots.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
Michael Jackson III does NOT see a usage spike in garbage time -- his workload holds steady regardless of score.
narrative tension · our read
identitythis cycle~readnew
Barry Odom inherits a 2-10 losing record at Purdue, a program historically known for developing NFL quarterbacks but now ranked in the bottom 25% of FBS by power rating.
what happenedPurdue: the fanbase's identity shifting. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
How past storylines here turned out
AnsweredPurdue's head-coaching hire held for another season.
ReplacedPurdue's defensive coordinator spot turned over again the following season. See who's next →
Transfer portal snapshot
-0.4 net portal points
(raw ledger: +28.2 — unweighted, no position adjustment)EDGE+11.0
need not filled
WR+6.8
need not filled
S+6.6
RB+4.0
OT+3.7
CB+3.6
QB-3.5
low confidence
LS-2.0
low confidence
LB-2.0
starter risk
P+1.0
low confidence
IOL-0.9
DL-0.1
TE+0.0
Top 3 commits
2026 class
★★★☆☆
Josiah Hope
#487 national
Profiles like a typical incoming interior lineman — 13 of his 25 closest recruiting profiles since 2018 shared the Two-Gap Base archetype.~our read · projection from recruiting profile — no college snaps yet
★★★☆☆
Jett Goldsberry
#665 national
★★★☆☆
Izaiah Wright
#731 national
Profiles like a typical incoming running back — 11 of his 25 closest recruiting profiles since 2018 shared the Balanced Back archetype.~our read · projection from recruiting profile — no college snaps yet
↑
Among the stronger offseasons on record for this program
69th percentile among FBS programs
Fan vs. market↑
69th
Fan percentile
(FBS mood rank)
(FBS mood rank)
3.5
Vegas O/U wins
(1st among FBS)
(1st among FBS)
Fans 68pp more bullish than market implies
Win total consensus · 3 books
Market outlook
Season expectations
Win total3 booksO/U 3.5
CFP championship#81 in field+100000
Big Ten title#18 in market+30000
Sportsbook consensus · best odds across multiple books · 2026-08-06
Purdue · Next-Season Outcome Band
Purdue · 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 · Purdue · Season outlook Confidence
One of the biggest jumps in the country. Purdue has to prove the model right.
Purdue enters 2026 rated No. 90 in 2025 SP+ (-6.1), up 31 spots from 2024. One of the bigger model jumps in the country — the tape moved faster than the consensus noticed. Preview coverage is split — believers and skeptics are reading the same data differently.
bullish — but with real dissent
where the takes land · dot = how loud
DOUBTBELIEF
Skeptics3 doubt takes
Believers6 bull takes
💬 fans: 31% volume · mostly neutral
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Purdue leaped 31 spots in SP+ — the gap between the ranking and 2-10 record is the story Barry Odom has to answer in Big Ten this year.
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. The boards are already there — one thread raises exactly this.
Source of record: Purdue enters 2026 rated No. 90 in 2025 SP+ (-6.1), up 31 spots from 2024.
How each room is reacting — tap to expand
📣Believers6 bullish items -- the case it's working.›
The 'the projection is underselling us' read -- fans betting the season beats the preview number.
“Happy Valley Rewind: Penn State-Purdue 1999”
Happy Valley Rewind · Black Shoe Diaries · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“The Best Hall-of-Fame Moments From Drew Brees' Career at Purdue”
Sports Illustrated · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“How to Watch the Introductory Press Conference For New Purdue AD Tommy McClelland”
Sports Illustrated · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
🧐Skeptics“4 Big Questions Facing Purdue Football As Preseason Camp Begins” — the real counter.›
The 'the model has seen the tape' counter -- efficiency ratings reward what a program has actually done, not hope.
“4 Big Questions Facing Purdue Football As Preseason Camp Begins”
InkFreeNews.com · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“10 questions facing Purdue, new athletic director Tommy McClelland”
Greater Lafayette Sports Report · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
💬The boards31% of recent board volume — the fanbase is locked in. Board mood this week: mostly neutral · anger notable (49%).›
This event was in 89 of 291 board posts (31%) over the last 60 days — a fanbase consumed by it. Fan text shown verbatim, attributed to the community not the individual poster.
"I'm so mad I didn't get one when I went up for the Purdue game. When we had to evacuate the stands they stopped selling anything and we ended up going back to my in-laws and watchi"
r/CFB ~ fan take
"For some us us it certainly feels like it. Purdue played in the B1G CCG in 2022."
r/CFB ~ fan take
Board health this week (203 posts): 19% positive · 55% neutral · 26% negative. Team-level weekly mood — not specific to this event. The boards ≠ the fanbase: a self-selected vocal slice.
Following now · Purdue · Coaching Confidence
The Barry Odom story at Purdue won't sit still.
Barry Odom took over as Purdue's head coach, replacing Ryan Walters. It is the program's third head coach in five seasons. It's not the hire that's the story anymore — it's everything it set in motion. The room is genuinely divided — believers and skeptics both have receipts.
bullish — but with real dissent
where the takes land · dot = how loud
DOUBTBELIEF
Skeptics2 doubt takes
Believers4 bull takes
💬 fans: 1% volume · mostly neutral
Developing3 new this week
4 days agoBarry Odom Urging For 'Aggressive' Approach to Get Purdue Football Back on the Map — Sports Illustrated
6 days agoBarry Odom’s ties to Mannings open doors for Purdue QBs to gain elite coaching — nwitimes.com
6 days agoBarry Odom sees different outlook for Purdue with no pressure entering Year 2 — sportingnews.com
The cast who's driving the story · latest headline on each, attributed
Barry Odom Head coach
“Barry Odom Urging For 'Aggressive' Approach to Get Purdue Football Back on the Map” — Sports Illustrated · 2026-08-02
Ryan Walters Out
Curt Cignetti
“Purdue’s Barry Odom praises Indiana’s turnaround under Curt Cignetti” — Yahoo Sports · 2026-07-31
Media Days
“GoldandBlack.com video: Purdue's Barry Odom at the podium at B1G Media Days” — On3 · 2026-07-29
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Barry Odom begins his first season at Purdue with 88% of QB production returning — a rare stability in a program known for developing NFL signal-callers but mired in a 2-10 record.
Next · what to watch
The obvious story is the marquee name; the non-obvious one is roster churn — a coaching change keeps a portal and decommit window open long after the introductory presser. Watch decommitments and portal moves in the next window — that's where this is actually won or lost, not at the podium.
Source of record: Barry Odom took over as Purdue's head coach, replacing Ryan Walters — the program's third head coach in five seasons.
How each room is reacting — tap to expand
📣Believers4 bullish/hire items -- the case it's working.›
The 'this hire changes everything' takes -- new-era believers making the case early.
“Barry Odom’s ties to Mannings open doors for Purdue QBs to gain elite coaching”
nwitimes.com · 2026-07-31 · read ↗
“Purdue’s Barry Odom praises Indiana’s turnaround under Curt Cignetti”
Yahoo Sports · 2026-07-31 · read ↗
“Barry Odom Urging For 'Aggressive' Approach to Get Purdue Football Back on the Map”
Sports Illustrated · 2026-08-02 · read ↗
🧐Skeptics“Barry Odom sees different outlook for Purdue with no pressure en” — the real counter.›
The 'show me the body of work' counter -- resume gaps, scheme fits, and 'not that guy' reads.
“Barry Odom sees different outlook for Purdue with no pressure entering Year 2”
sportingnews.com · 2026-07-31 · read ↗
💬The boards3 board mentions — too thin to call a stance. Board mood this week: mostly neutral · anger notable (49%).›
Only 3 of 291 board posts mention it — below our floor to call a community stance. Shown as texture, not a verdict.
"I spent the offseason building a full 2026 preseason preview for every FBS team, each with its own writeup. Here's the Purdue page: ["
r/Boilermakers ~ fan take
"They do not look decent by any stretch of the definition of that word. Horrific play calling, silly penalties, bad drops, bad decisions, bad everything. Yes, Odom is better than Wa"
r/CFB ~ fan take
Board health this week (203 posts): 19% positive · 55% neutral · 26% negative. Team-level weekly mood — not specific to this event. The boards ≠ the fanbase: a self-selected vocal slice.
Recent Form · last 10 games
Hibernating
Zero of five. Reset territory.
Streak L10Last 5 · 0-5Last 10 · 0-10
The forecast
Opens Sep 4
vs Indiana State · at home
Season line3.5 winsover +115
PoorPass-first, spreadPoor
✓ fact on line · ~ our read on style
Rival pulse
Indiana
Mixed+1
Old Oaken Bucket
Fan mood index · most recent r/cfb data
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
25
IL · 4IN · 4FL · 2GA · 2MI · 2OH · 2AL · 1CA · 1+7 more
IL leads the 2026 class with 4 commits. National footprint reaching 15 states.
Where they recruit · 2023-2026
89 signees across 21 states, 2023-2026. IN leads the pull.
r/cfb this year
[Postgame Thread] USC Defeats Purdue 33-17
[Postgame Thread] Purdue Defeats Southern Illinois 34-17
[Game Thread] USC @ Purdue (3:30 PM ET)
Top community posts · last 12 months · r/cfb
National spotlight
12 games with TV coverage: 3 national broadcast, 1 cable, 8 conference network
Kickoff windows: 4 noon, 3 afternoon, 5 primetime
Fumble luck
11% recovery rate on their own fumbles — below the ~51% league baseline.
1 of 9 own fumbles recovered themselves; 5 of 8 forced fumbles recovered, 2025 only.
Takeaway conversion
9% of tipped/broken-up passes have turned into picks — below the ~19% league average, and due for more.
4 interceptions of 43 disrupted passes (39 deflected, 4 intercepted), 2025 only.
Penalty battle
58 penalties committed, 50 drawn on opponents — ceding 68 yards of field position.
562 penalty yards committed vs. 494 drawn on opponents, 2025 season total.
The Pulse on Purdue
57
Δ -5.2 vs last wk
185
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
"Hammer Down"
— Purdue 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 9 corners
Cr/CFB
GGoogle News
LLocked On
HHammer And Rails
CCampus paper
BBluesky
YYouTube
One voice
+0.00whole-room sentiment · warm our read
Every cohort from the die-hards to the analytics crowd lands within 0.02 of each other — a rare consensus. The loudest voice in the room:
How Purdue fans actually talk real · top-upvoted
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+0.03
Bettors+0.02
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.
312 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 checkevidence-driven
~ our readPurdue fans are leaning negative, and they're pointing to real stats and results to back it up — more than most fanbases right now.
backed by facts
the mood
✓ counted We read 203 posts from Purdue fans this week.
What fans are saying
Fan claims · every quote verified verbatim
schedule expectationEarly signal — few voices
fans question whether the team's progress will translate into wins
Odom's shown he can build (he turned UNLV around fast), but the schedule grades 14th-toughest in the country, so even real progress might not show up in the win column.
Based on 1 comment from 1 poster across 1 thread · Jul 30, 2026 · via Boilermakers
player performanceLimited signal that season
fans believe Purdue's defensive stops have increased
That first defense series was actually nice. An actual tackle by the secondary. That’s 1 more than we had last year.
Based on 1 comment from 1 poster across 1 thread · Aug 30, 2025 · via CFB
Season storylines
Week 3
“Purdue football is infinitely more watchable this year and I'm appreciative of that fact”— r/CFB
Week 4
Week 1
“reject young modern guys, embrace old school coaches built like brick shithouses”— r/CFB
Week 2
“Last year we lost games to the tune of 36-0 49-0 62-10 63-7 66-0 Covering as a 20.5-point dog is something I'll gladly take right now.”— r/CFB
Week 6
“How in the fuck did we put up 460 yards and only score 20? How did we finally not give up a million yards and lose? I hate football”— r/CFB
Five Lenses
What people are saying right now
Radio, beat writers & editorial14 posts
The broader fanbase5 posts
News & campus coverage14 posts
Rent free · r/cfb fan posts, last season
Purdue fans this offseason 26% of posts bring up another team▼2pp quieter#26 of 43 saltiest · mostly about Michigan
Who Purdue fans can’t stop bringing up
- Michigan7%
- Kentucky7%
- Ohio State5%
- Penn State2%
- UNLV2%
share of Purdue’s football posts that mention each team
Fanbase Health Index · Purdue · high confidence
Fanbase Health Index · Purdue · high confidenceGrowing (55)
DecliningStableGrowingSurging
On-Field — 2-10 (17% win rate)41
Volume — 812 effective signal-N88
Cohort Engagement — Divergence 0.01 — quiet35
From the booth
The Lexicon
301 posts and articles vs the field · 2025 season
kickoff
×8.0 the field
Characteristic — 3–10×
kickoff×8.0n=44
Mild — <3×
commitment×2.6n=19
defense×1.7n=50
fumble×3.0n=10
last×1.9n=24
better×2.2n=17
big×1.9n=20
offense×1.6n=35
“Can’t block a kickoff if you have no blockers left - Barry Odom 2025”
reddit/CFB · fan post, verbatim
Fanbase Voice
535 fan mentions
Measured
vs the 81 highest-volume fanbases - 2025 season
Key stats — 2025 — FBS rank
Points/game#121 / 138 · 13th pct18.8
Pts allowed/game#118 / 138 · 15th pct31.8
Total yards/gm#111 / 136 · 19th pct343.6
Rush yards/gm#111 / 136 · 19th pct126.4
Pass yards/gm#90 / 136 · 35th pct217.2
Yards allowed/gm#97 / 136 · 29th pct423.9
Rush yds allowed/gm#101 / 136 · 26th pct182.2
Sacks#76 / 136 · 45th pct24
Interceptions#123 / 136 · 10th pct4
3rd-down conv#86 / 136 · 38th pct38.4%
All 98 stats
Offense / Defense
Total yards
Team4123343.6/gm5.29/play#111 / 136 · 19th pct#58 / 69 · 17th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Opp5087423.9/gm6.63/play#97 / 136 · 29th pct#55 / 69 · 22nd pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Rush yards
Team1517126.4/gm1.94/play#111 / 136 · 19th pct#57 / 69 · 19th pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Opp2187182.2/gm2.85/play#101 / 136 · 26th pct#58 / 69 · 17th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Rush carries
Team37631.3/gm#119 / 136 · 13th pct#63 / 69 · 10th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp45638.0/gm#70 / 136 · 49th pct#42 / 69 · 41st pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Rush TDs
Team110.9/gm#116 / 136 · 15th pct#61 / 69 · 13th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp292.4/gm#123 / 136 · 10th pct#66 / 69 · 6th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Net pass yards
Team2606217.2/gm3.34/play#90 / 136 · 35th pct#52 / 69 · 26th pct#11 / 18 · 44th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp2900241.7/gm3.78/play#86 / 136 · 38th pct#48 / 69 · 32nd pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Pass attempts
Team40433.7/gm#63 / 136 · 54th pct#32 / 69 · 55th pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp31125.9/gm#5 / 136 · 97th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 18 · 100th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Completions
Team23819.8/gm#75 / 136 · 46th pct#41 / 69 · 42nd pct#11 / 18 · 44th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp20216.8/gm#15 / 136 · 90th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#2 / 18 · 94th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Pass TDs
Team151.2/gm#97 / 136 · 29th pct#55 / 69 · 22nd pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp151.2/gm#28 / 136 · 80th pct#21 / 69 · 71st pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Passer rating
Team123.4123.4#104 / 136 · 24th pct#60 / 69 · 14th pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp150.8150.8#126 / 136 · 8th pct#66 / 69 · 6th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Interceptions thrown
Team131.1/gm#18 / 136 · 88th pct#7 / 69 · 91st pct#1 / 18 · 100th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp40.3/gm#7 / 136 · 96th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#1 / 18 · 100th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Sacks (def)
Team242.0/gm#76 / 136 · 45th pct#45 / 69 · 36th pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct#6 / 10 · 50th pct
Opp191.6/gm#27 / 136 · 81st pct#16 / 69 · 78th pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#2 / 10 · 90th pct
Tackles for loss
Team645.3/gm#83 / 136 · 40th pct#45 / 69 · 36th pct#10 / 18 · 50th pct#6 / 10 · 50th pct
Opp665.5/gm#57 / 136 · 59th pct#32 / 69 · 55th pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct#3 / 10 · 80th pct
First downs
Team23119.2/gm#104 / 136 · 24th pct#53 / 69 · 25th pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp26221.8/gm#94 / 136 · 32nd pct#54 / 69 · 23rd pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
3rd-down conv
Team615.1/gm#100 / 136 · 27th pct#53 / 69 · 25th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Opp635.2/gm#36 / 136 · 74th pct#18 / 69 · 75th pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
3rd-down att
Team15913.2/gm#112 / 136 · 18th pct#51 / 69 · 28th pct#11 / 18 · 44th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Opp14512.1/gm#3 / 136 · 99th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#2 / 18 · 94th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
4th-down conv
Team151.2/gm#47 / 136 · 66th pct#28 / 69 · 61st pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp110.9/gm#32 / 136 · 77th pct#14 / 69 · 81st pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
4th-down att
Team252.1/gm#61 / 136 · 56th pct#31 / 69 · 57th pct#8 / 18 · 61st pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp181.5/gm#14 / 136 · 90th pct#9 / 69 · 88th pct#4 / 18 · 83rd pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Time of possession
Team336:2228:02/gm#126 / 136 · 8th pct#65 / 69 · 7th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp383:3831:58/gm#75 / 136 · 46th pct#38 / 69 · 46th pct#10 / 18 · 50th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Kicking & Punting
Field goals#15 / 135 · 90th pct15/17 (88.2%)
Extra points24/24
Punting#71 / 136 · 49th pct43.2 avg · 50 punts
Turnovers & special teams
Turnovers
Team211.8/gm#17 / 136 · 88th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 18 · 100th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp90.8/gm#6 / 136 · 96th pct#3 / 69 · 97th pct#2 / 18 · 94th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Fumbles lost
Team80.7/gm#25 / 136 · 82nd pct#9 / 69 · 88th pct#1 / 18 · 100th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp50.4/gm#33 / 136 · 76th pct#16 / 69 · 78th pct#5 / 18 · 78th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
INT return TDs
Team00.0/gm#76 / 135 · 44th pct#39 / 69 · 45th pct#9 / 18 · 56th pct#8 / 10 · 30th pct
Opp20.2/gm#105 / 136 · 24th pct#57 / 69 · 19th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#6 / 11 · 55th pct
INT return yards
Team181.5/gm#127 / 136 · 7th pct#65 / 69 · 7th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp17314.4/gm#103 / 136 · 25th pct#52 / 69 · 26th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Punt ret yds
Team262.2/gm#132 / 136 · 4th pct#69 / 69 · 1st pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Opp594.9/gm#24 / 136 · 83rd pct#17 / 69 · 77th pct#5 / 18 · 78th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Punt ret TDs
Team00.0/gm#43 / 135 · 69th pct#23 / 69 · 68th pct#9 / 18 · 56th pct#1 / 9 · 100th pct
Opp00.0/gm#1 / 135 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 18 · 100th pct#1 / 9 · 100th pct
Kick ret yds
Team62752.2/gm#20 / 136 · 86th pct#8 / 69 · 90th pct#2 / 18 · 94th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Opp32326.9/gm#43 / 136 · 69th pct#28 / 69 · 61st pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Kick ret TDs
Team00.0/gm#40 / 136 · 71st pct#17 / 69 · 77th pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#2 / 10 · 90th pct
Opp10.1/gm#97 / 135 · 29th pct#53 / 69 · 25th pct#11 / 18 · 44th pct#8 / 10 · 30th pct
Penalty yards
Team56246.8/gm#107 / 136 · 22nd pct#50 / 69 · 29th pct#7 / 18 · 67th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Opp49441.2/gm#11 / 136 · 93rd pct#8 / 69 · 90th pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Other
Penalties (opp)#3 / 136 · 99th pct#3 / 69 · 97th pct#3 / 18 · 89th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct504.2/gm
Kick returns#22 / 136 · 85th pct#6 / 69 · 93rd pct#3 / 18 · 89th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct292.4/gm
Kick ret (opp)#24 / 136 · 83rd pct#16 / 69 · 78th pct#3 / 18 · 89th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct131.1/gm
First down pass rate#49 / 215 · 78th pct#12 / 69 · 84th pct#3 / 18 · 89th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct0.50.0/gm
Red zone pass rate#53 / 154 · 66th pct#24 / 69 · 67th pct#8 / 18 · 61st pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct0.40.0/gm
Punt ret (opp)#78 / 136 · 43rd pct#44 / 69 · 38th pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct161.3/gm
H2 epa per play#80 / 142 · 44th pct#43 / 69 · 39th pct#13 / 18 · 33rd pct0.20.0/gm
Fumbles rec (def)#86 / 136 · 38th pct#50 / 69 · 29th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct80.7/gm
Fumbles recovered#91 / 136 · 34th pct#48 / 69 · 32nd pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct50.4/gm
Recruiting rating#99 / 138 · 29th pct#68 / 69 · 3rd pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct147.112.3/gm
H1 epa per play#100 / 162 · 39th pct#54 / 69 · 23rd pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct0.20.0/gm
Fourth down go rate#102 / 138 · 27th pct#51 / 69 · 28th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct0.30.0/gm
Passes intercepted opponent#109 / 136 · 21st pct#60 / 69 · 14th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct131.1/gm
Penalties#121 / 136 · 12th pct#58 / 69 · 17th pct#10 / 18 · 50th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct584.8/gm
H2 epa per play opponent#122 / 143 · 15th pct#59 / 69 · 16th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct0.30.0/gm
Interceptions (def)#123 / 136 · 10th pct#61 / 69 · 13th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct40.3/gm
Punt returns#124 / 136 · 10th pct#65 / 69 · 7th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct80.7/gm
H1 epa per play opponent#140 / 167 · 17th pct#64 / 69 · 9th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct0.30.0/gm
Situational
3rd-down conversion
Off38.4%#86 / 136 · 38th pct#50 / 69 · 29th pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Def43.4%#114 / 136 · 17th pct#62 / 69 · 12th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
4th-down conversion
Off60.0%#36 / 136 · 74th pct#24 / 69 · 67th pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Def61.1%#106 / 136 · 23rd pct#51 / 69 · 28th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Turnover margin#129 / 136 · 6th pct#67 / 69 · 4th pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct-1.00/gm
Sack rate (def)#31 / 136 · 78th pct#21 / 69 · 71st pct#7 / 18 · 67th pct#3 / 10 · 80th pct7.7%
Red Zone & Drive Efficiency (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Red zone trips
Team373.1/gm#102 / 167 · 40th pct#56 / 69 · 20th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp514.2/gm#146 / 166 · 13th pct#61 / 69 · 13th pct#15 / 18 · 22nd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Red zone score %
Team67.6%67.6%#141 / 167 · 16th pct#68 / 69 · 3rd pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Opp74.5%74.5%#51 / 166 · 70th pct#21 / 69 · 71st pct#6 / 18 · 72nd pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Points / drive
Team1.60.1/gm#113 / 167 · 33rd pct#63 / 69 · 10th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Opp2.40.2/gm#127 / 166 · 24th pct#63 / 69 · 10th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Yards / drive
Team40.23.3/gm#85 / 167 · 50th pct#49 / 69 · 30th pct#13 / 18 · 33rd pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp47.43.9/gm#149 / 166 · 11th pct#65 / 69 · 7th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Plays / drive
Team7.00.6/gm#29 / 167 · 83rd pct#13 / 69 · 83rd pct#4 / 18 · 83rd pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Opp6.50.5/gm#67 / 166 · 60th pct#26 / 69 · 64th pct#7 / 18 · 67th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Three-and-out rate
Team15.6%15.6%#113 / 167 · 33rd pct#56 / 69 · 20th pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp15.2%15.2%#55 / 166 · 67th pct#30 / 69 · 58th pct#8 / 18 · 61st pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Scheme Identity (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Rush rate over expected#102 / 145 · 30th pct#48 / 69 · 32nd pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct-3.4%-3.4%
Havoc rate
Team15.0%15.0%#86 / 140 · 39th pct#49 / 69 · 30th pct#10 / 18 · 50th pct
Opp16.0%16.0%#84 / 140 · 41st pct#42 / 69 · 41st pct#13 / 18 · 33rd pct
Standard-downs success
Team47.5%47.5%#81 / 154 · 48th pct#47 / 69 · 33rd pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct
Opp55.0%55.0%#150 / 172 · 13th pct#69 / 69 · 1st pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct
Passing-downs success
Team36.6%36.6%#19 / 153 · 88th pct#14 / 69 · 81st pct#7 / 18 · 67th pct
Opp33.5%33.5%#115 / 149 · 23rd pct#54 / 69 · 23rd pct#10 / 18 · 50th pct
Line yards / carry
Team3.03.0#60 / 143 · 59th pct#34 / 69 · 52nd pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct
Opp3.33.3#128 / 155 · 18th pct#64 / 69 · 9th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct
Stuff rate
Team18.6%18.6%#75 / 143 · 48th pct#39 / 69 · 45th pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct
Opp17.5%17.5%#91 / 155 · 42nd pct#47 / 69 · 33rd pct#8 / 18 · 61st pct
Power success rate
Team56.8%56.8%#126 / 137 · 9th pct#67 / 69 · 4th pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct
Opp72.2%72.2%#83 / 141 · 42nd pct#42 / 69 · 41st pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct
Efficiency
Completion %
Off58.9%#102 / 136 · 26th pct#60 / 69 · 14th pct#16 / 18 · 17th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Def65.0%#110 / 136 · 20th pct#54 / 69 · 23rd pct#12 / 18 · 39th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Yards / attempt
Off6.5#109 / 136 · 21st pct#60 / 69 · 14th pct#13 / 18 · 33rd pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Def9.3#134 / 136 · 2nd pct#69 / 69 · 1st pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Yards / completion
Off10.9#91 / 136 · 34th pct#51 / 69 · 28th pct#11 / 18 · 44th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Def14.4#134 / 136 · 2nd pct#69 / 69 · 1st pct#18 / 18 · 6th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Yards / carry#94 / 136 · 32nd pct#47 / 69 · 33rd pct#13 / 18 · 33rd pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct4.0
Yards / play#101 / 136 · 26th pct#57 / 69 · 19th pct#14 / 18 · 28th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct5.29
Scoring margin#126 / 136 · 8th pct#66 / 69 · 6th pct#17 / 18 · 11th pct#9 / 11 · 27th pct-13.1/gm
FBS rankings · 2025 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs
Player stats — 2025 season
Quarterbacks
| Player | # | G | Cmp/Att | Pct | Yds | Y/A | TD | INT | Rate | QBR | Adj ANY/A | Sack% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pocket Passer · +0.31 EPA/play | 15 | 12 | 199 / 338 | 58.9 | 2153 | 6.4 | 9 | 10 | 115.3 | 51.5 | 5.2 | 3.4 | |
Yards by week → Pocket Passer· Money-downBalanced passer who operates within the system, without one standout number carrying the profile. saves his best for the money downs Impact starter — above-average production for the conference. 97 of 183 QBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / attempt7.4 bottom 45th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Rush usage16.3% bottom 30th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Trait fingerprint Plays like View Ryan Browne's full player page | |||||||||||||
| +0.12 EPA/play | 3 | 11 | 38 / 64 | 59.4 | 439 | 6.9 | 5 | 2 | 136.5 | 51.2 | 6.4 | 4.5 | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||||
Running Backs
| Player | # | G | Car | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Stuff% | 10+% | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Back · +0.24 EPA/play | 45 | 8 | 125 | 521 | 4.2 | 4 | 32 | 14.9 | 15.8 | 20.2 | 11.3 | 5.7% (20/350) | |
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 / carry4.4 bottom 21th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Yards / reception11.9 90th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Devin Mockobee's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Satellite Back · +0.03 EPA/play | 22 | 12 | 69 | 305 | 4.4 | 2 | 41 | 11.9 | 11.7 | 23.9 | 7.5 | 6.3% (22/350) | |
Yards by week → Satellite BackDeployed as a receiver as much as a runner. Value is in space, not between the tackles. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 50 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Receiving share19.8% 90th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Rush TD rate2.9% bottom 31th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Antonio Harris's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Workhorse · +0.07 EPA/play | 24 | 11 | 53 | 243 | 4.6 | 0 | 57 | 5.9 | 6 | 15.1 | 9.4 | — | |
Yards by week → WorkhorseBuilt to take 20+ carries per game. Volume is the value. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 52 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Weight220 lb 82th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Rush TD rate0.0% bottom 6th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Malachi Thomas's full player page | |||||||||||||
Receivers
| Player | # | G | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possession Receiver · +0.50 EPA/play | 2 | 12 | 63 | 570 | 9.0 | 1 | 31 | 9.4 | 13 | 22.9% (80/350) | |
Yards by week → Possession ReceiverReliable target who converts on critical downs. Not flashy; consistently productive. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 332 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception10.3 bottom 21th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Reception volume63 94th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Michael Jackson III's full player page | |||||||||||
| Deep Threat · +0.39 EPA/play | — | 12 | 34 | 505 | 14.9 | 4 | 36 | 10.1 | 11.7 | 20.0% (70/350) | |
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 / reception16.8 81th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions TD rate11.8% 70th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Nitro Tuggle's full player page | |||||||||||
| Possession Receiver · +0.25 EPA/play | 13 | 10 | 27 | 289 | 10.7 | 1 | 28 | 6.6 | 4.1 | 12.9% (45/350) | |
Yards by week → Possession Receiver· Money-downReliable target who converts on critical downs. Not flashy; consistently productive. lives on the sticks and moves the chains 332 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception12.2 bottom 37th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions EPA / play (adj)0.3 bottom 21th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View EJ Horton Jr.'s full player page | |||||||||||
| Deep Threat · +0.39 EPA/play | 12 | 5 | 14 | 237 | 16.9 | 1 | 60 | 4.5 | 8.3 | 6.0% (21/350) | |
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 84th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Plays like View Corey Smith's full player page | |||||||||||
| Deep Threat · +0.49 EPA/play | 6 | 7 | 14 | 212 | 15.1 | 2 | 49 | 2.1 | 3.3 | 6.0% (21/350) | |
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 / reception33.6 100th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Reception volume14 bottom 13th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Arhmad Branch's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.67 EPA/play | 17 | 5 | 9 | 100 | 11.1 | 0 | 30 | 10.9 | 5.4 | — | |
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 / reception8.1 bottom 18th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions TD rate0.0% bottom 10th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Rico Walker's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.73 EPA/play | 81 | 3 | 9 | 94 | 10.4 | 0 | 21 | 2.4 | 4.5 | — | |
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 / reception10.7 bottom 46th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions TD rate0.0% bottom 10th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View George Burhenn's full player page | |||||||||||
| +0.37 EPA/play | 10 | 6 | 8 | 80 | 10 | 2 | 24 | 9.5 | 7.0 | 4.9% (17/350) | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
Defensive Line
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | TFL | Sack | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 91 | 12 | 42 | 29 | 10.5 | 5 | 8 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. 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 our readTwo-star recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile | |||||||
| Nose Anchor | 18 | 11 | 22 | 9 | 3 | 1.5 | 1 |
Nose AnchorThe heaviest frame on the interior. Sack production is intentionally not the point of this profile. 152 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Weight305 lb 78th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Demeco Kennedy's full player page | |||||||
| Versatile End | 58 | 8 | 20 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
Versatile EndNo single standout number, but nothing missing either — competent across the board. The most common profile in its group this season — 139 of 200 classified this way. Played in 8 of 21 games this season · sophomore View Breeon Ishmail's full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 40 | 9 | 20 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 2 |
Two-Gap BaseStout at the point of attack — steady tackle-for-loss production without a standout pass-rush number. The most common profile in its group this season — 388 of 809 classified this way. Played in 9 of 21 games this season · sophomore our readFading: his CFB Index score went from the 62nd percentile among FBS IDLs to the 21st | |||||||
| Versatile End | 8 | 8 | 14 | 6 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 1 |
Versatile EndNo single standout number, but nothing missing either — competent across the board. The most common profile in its group this season — 139 of 200 classified this way. Played in 8 of 21 games this season · junior View C.J. Madden's full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 97 | 12 | 13 | 4 | 2 | 2.5 | 4 |
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 rate15.4% 53th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score moved from the 14th to 66th percentile among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| Versatile End | 23 | 7 | 12 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Versatile EndNo single standout number, but nothing missing either — competent across the board. The most common profile in its group this season — 139 of 200 classified this way. Played in 7 of 21 games this season · sophomore View Trey Smith's full player page | |||||||
| 95 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | |
| 13 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | |
Linebackers
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | Ast | TFL | Sack | PD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Linebacker | 16 | 12 | 110 | 57 | 53 | 12 #51 FBS | 5 | 2 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. All-Conference honorable mention / 2nd team — the recognition has started. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume110 98th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles PD rate1.8% bottom 40th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score moved from the 76th to 94th percentile among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 5 | 12 | 77 | 38 | 39 | 7.5 | 3 | 2 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 362 of 660 classified this way. Played in 12 of 21 games this season · sophomore our readBreakout: his CFB Index score moved from the 9th to 82nd percentile among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 10 | 12 | 47 | 18 | 29 | 3.5 | 0 | 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 12 of 21 games this season · junior View Alex Sanford Jr.'s full player page | |||||||||
| 6 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | |
| 20 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Defensive Backs
| Player | # | G | Tot | PD | INT | TFL | Sack |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Box Safety | 21 | 12 | 110 | 5 | 0 | 2.5 | 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 volume110 100th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readTwo-star recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile | |||||||
| Box Safety | 9 | 10 | 63 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Box SafetyLives near the line of scrimmage as a de facto extra linebacker. Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. 166 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume63 84th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like View Myles Slusher's full player page | |||||||
| Centerfielder | — | 12 | 34 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
CenterfielderSingle-high range who erases the deep middle of the field. 133 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate14.7% 82th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like View Tony Grimes's full player page | |||||||
| Centerfielder | 4 | 12 | 32 | 8 #45 FBS | 1 | 1.5 | 0 |
CenterfielderSingle-high range who erases the deep middle of the field. 133 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate25.0% 99th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like View Hudauri Hines's full player page | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 1 | 11 | 30 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. 419 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate20.0% 95th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score now sits at the 72nd percentile among FBS Ss, up from the 14th | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 25 | 5 | 25 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. 419 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate4.0% bottom 30th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like View Hershey McLaurin's full player page | |||||||
| 14 | 6 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 12 | 6 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | |
| 7 | 3 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| 15 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 17 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 49 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Kicking
| Player | # | G | FG M/A | FG% | XP M/A | Pts | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Automatic | 35 | 11 | 15/17 | 88.2 | 24/24 | 69 | 53 |
Punting
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | Long | In20 | TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pinner | 38 | 11 | 50 | 2162 | 43.2 | 68 | 23 | 2 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possession Receiver · +0.50 EPA/play | 2 | 12 | 22 | 520 | 23.6 | 0 | 56 |
Punt Returns
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possession Receiver · +0.50 EPA/play | 2 | 12 | 8 | 26 | 3.3 | 0 | 17 |
2025 stat leaders
final
2025 stat leaders
1.
Tahj Ra-El
DB
110 tot (def)
2.
Mani Powell
LB
110 tot (def)
3.
Charles Correa
LB
77.0 tot (def)
4.
Myles Slusher
DB
63.0 tot (def)
5.
Ryan Browne
QB
2,153 yds (pass)
Roster
2025
19
players carry a qualified CFB Index Score this season.
Mani Powell
LB
#37 of 583
Tahj Ra-El
S
#56 of 544
C.J. Nunnally
EDGE
#54 of 420
Myles Slusher
S
#101 of 544
Charles Correa
LB
#120 of 583
Michael Jackson III
WR
#146 of 485
+13 more
Purdue · 2025 schedule & results2-10Brutal slateAverage opponent win rate 66% · 7 AP top-25 opponents on the schedule.
| Wk | Date | Us | Opp | Line | Opponent | Result | Record | Conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aug 30 | #207 | #248 | -16.5 | Ball State | W 31–0 111 | 1-0 | 0-0 |
| 2 | Sep 6 | #220 | #236 | -22.5 | Southern Illinois | W 34–17 135 | 2-0 | 0-0 |
| 3 | Sep 13 | #197 | #32 | +20.5 | USC | L 17–33 134 | 2-1 | 0-1 |
| 4 | Sep 20 | #184 | #2 | +24.5 | @Notre Dame | L 30–56 126 | 2-2 | 0-1 |
| 6 | Oct 4 | #136 | #42 | +7 | Illinois | L 27–43 138 | 2-3 | 0-2 |
| 7 | Oct 11 | #123 | #51 | +7.5 | @Minnesota | L 20–27 145 | 2-4 | 0-3 |
| 8 | Oct 18 | #113 | #53 | +3.5 | @Northwestern | L 0–19 132 | 2-5 | 0-4 |
| 9 | Oct 25 | #109 | #85 | -2.5 | Rutgers | L 24–27 126 | 2-6 | 0-5 |
| 10 | Nov 1 | #123 | #18 | +21 | @Michigan | L 16–21 126 | 2-7 | 0-6 |
| 11 | Nov 8 | #120 | #1 | +29 | Ohio State | L 10–34 120 | 2-8 | 0-7 |
| 12 | Nov 16 | #120 | #29 | +15.5 | @Washington | L 13–49 126 | 2-9 | 0-8 |
| 14 | Nov 29 | #139 | #5 | +28.5 | Indiana | L 3–56 128 | 2-10 | 0-9 |
Advanced box score (EPA, success rate, explosiveness)▼
| Date | Opp | Result | Yds | TO | TOP | EPA/play | Success% | Explosive% | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29 | Indiana | L 3–56 | 282 | 2 | 33:08 | -0.036 | 33.3% | 124.7% | Defense's roughest night |
| Nov 16 | @Washington | L 13–49 | 267 | 1 | 28:52 | -0.085 | 28.4% | 142.0% | Season-low EPA/play |
| Nov 8 | Ohio State | L 10–34 | 186 | 1 | 19:07 | +0.054 | 40.9% | 86.1% | |
| Nov 1 | @Michigan | L 16–21 | 276 | 1 | 32:55 | -0.050 | 44.1% | 86.1% | One-score loss |
| Oct 25 | Rutgers | L 24–27 | 345 | 1 | 23:02 | +0.182 | 38.5% | 156.2% | Most explosive |
| Oct 18 | @Northwestern | L 0–19 | 305 | 3 | 22:21 | -0.056 | 37.5% | 112.8% | |
| Oct 11 | @Minnesota | L 20–27 | 456 | 4 | 34:30 | +0.067 | 42.0% | 118.1% | One-score loss |
| Oct 4 | Illinois | L 27–43 | 453 | 2 | 25:28 | +0.352 | 50.7% | 127.7% | |
| Sep 20 | @Notre Dame | L 30–56 | 379 | 2 | 28:00 | +0.185 | 40.3% | 136.6% | |
| Sep 13 | USC | L 17–33 | 357 | 3 | 25:53 | -0.067 | 40.9% | 150.3% | |
| Sep 6 | Southern Illinois | W 34–17 | 384 | 1 | 36:46 | +0.220 | 53.9% | 106.8% | Best success rate |
| Aug 30 | Ball State | W 31–0 | 433 | 0 | 26:20 | +0.397 | 51.7% | 128.7% | Season-high EPA/play |
| Season average (12 games) | 344 | 1.8 | +0.097 | 41.9% | 123.0% | ||||
How They Play · 2025
How They Play · 2025Purdue fields a struggling pass-first offense behind a porous defense.
Opponent-adjusted percentiles vs all FBS. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.
Team identity · competitive snaps only
How Purdue actually scores
25th percentile quality, 78th 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
Purdue's 4th-quarter offense, before and after garbage time
Raw Q4 EPA/play ranks 23rd percentile in FBS. Strip out snaps taken with a blowout margin and it drops to the 9th — the correction is the finding, not a footnote.
Standard downs vs. passing downs
Does Purdue hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?
46th percentile success on standard downs, 88th on passing downs — a 42-point gap between the two.
View all FBS teams as a table
| Team | Standard-downs percentile | Passing-downs percentile |
|---|---|---|
| Air Force | 82nd | 69th |
| Akron | 20th | 36th |
| Alabama | 47th | 76th |
| App State | 41st | 80th |
| Arizona | 54th | 54th |
| Arizona State | 40th | 37th |
| Arkansas | 90th | 97th |
| Arkansas State | 51st | 40th |
| Army | 37th | 44th |
| Auburn | 73rd | 24th |
| Austin Peay | 56th | 13th |
| BYU | 91st | 46th |
| Ball State | 5th | 3rd |
| Baylor | 70th | 77th |
| Boise State | 42nd | 63rd |
| Boston College | 56th | 54th |
| Bowling Green | 10th | 17th |
| Bryant | 7th | 2nd |
| Buffalo | 29th | 20th |
| California | 25th | 66th |
| Central Michigan | 57th | 11th |
| Charlotte | 7th | 7th |
| Cincinnati | 89th | 65th |
| Clemson | 49th | 34th |
| Coastal Carolina | 16th | 22nd |
| Colorado | 8th | 48th |
| Colorado State | 29th | 35th |
| Delaware | 66th | 31st |
| Duke | 82nd | 63rd |
| East Carolina | 63rd | 91st |
| Eastern Michigan | 46th | 67th |
| Florida | 52nd | 45th |
| Florida Atlantic | 44th | 61st |
| Florida International | 50th | 26th |
| Florida State | 65th | 90th |
| Fresno State | 22nd | 71st |
| Georgia | 95th | 69th |
| Georgia Southern | 64th | 84th |
| Georgia State | 22nd | 75th |
| Georgia Tech | 92nd | 89th |
| Hawai'i | 33rd | 87th |
| Houston | 61st | 29th |
| Idaho | 30th | 78th |
| Idaho State | 93rd | 14th |
| Illinois | 79th | 95th |
| Indiana | 97th | 98th |
| Iowa | 74th | 19th |
| Iowa State | 80th | 58th |
| Jacksonville State | 59th | 56th |
| James Madison | 77th | 52nd |
| Kansas | 99th | 82nd |
| Kansas State | 37th | 59th |
| Kennesaw State | 44th | 67th |
| Kent State | 15th | 5th |
| Kentucky | 62nd | 29th |
| LSU | 18th | 52nd |
| Lafayette | 0th | 12th |
| Liberty | 65th | 53rd |
| Lindenwood | 4th | 1st |
| Long Island University | 24th | 78th |
| Louisiana | 24th | 23rd |
| Louisiana Tech | 41st | 24th |
| Louisville | 84th | 32nd |
| Maine | 3rd | 18th |
| Marshall | 71st | 62nd |
| Maryland | 11th | 86th |
| Massachusetts | 5th | 9th |
| Memphis | 75th | 68th |
| Merrimack | 1st | 83rd |
| Miami | 80th | 64th |
| Miami (OH) | 33rd | 39th |
| Michigan | 73rd | 74th |
| Michigan State | 48th | 39th |
| Middle Tennessee | 69th | 47th |
| Minnesota | 35th | 33rd |
| Mississippi State | 52nd | 35th |
| Missouri | 76th | 50th |
| Missouri State | 32nd | 50th |
| Murray State | 1st | 6th |
| NC State | 58th | 71st |
| Navy | 95th | 72nd |
| Nebraska | 78th | 51st |
| Nevada | 17th | 16th |
| New Mexico | 38th | 60th |
| New Mexico State | 16th | 33rd |
| North Carolina | 14th | 30th |
| North Texas | 100th | 97th |
| Northern Illinois | 9th | 5th |
| Northwestern | 48th | 88th |
| Notre Dame | 88th | 99th |
| Ohio | 69th | 76th |
| Ohio State | 99th | 99th |
| Oklahoma | 39th | 41st |
| Oklahoma State | 14th | 7th |
| Old Dominion | 72nd | 79th |
| Ole Miss | 83rd | 95th |
| Oregon | 93rd | 55th |
| Oregon State | 54th | 25th |
| Penn State | 76th | 73rd |
| Pittsburgh | 35th | 56th |
| Purdue | 46th | 88th |
| Rice | 20th | 0th |
| Rutgers | 71st | 84th |
| SMU | 50th | 57th |
| Sam Houston | 26th | 4th |
| San Diego State | 84th | 1st |
| San José State | 68th | 70th |
| South Alabama | 53rd | 28th |
| South Carolina | 31st | 8th |
| South Carolina State | 10th | 3rd |
| South Florida | 86th | 46th |
| Southern Miss | 27th | 38th |
| Stanford | 12th | 12th |
| Syracuse | 19th | 10th |
| TCU | 63rd | 82nd |
| Temple | 85th | 22nd |
| Tennessee | 97th | 81st |
| Texas | 27th | 61st |
| Texas A&M | 88th | 59th |
| Texas State | 60th | 93rd |
| Texas Tech | 45th | 65th |
| Toledo | 67th | 42nd |
| Troy | 18th | 27th |
| Tulane | 81st | 86th |
| Tulsa | 43rd | 43rd |
| UAB | 34th | 94th |
| UCF | 39th | 20th |
| UCLA | 28th | 48th |
| UConn | 96th | 37th |
| UL Monroe | 13th | 14th |
| UNLV | 78th | 85th |
| USC | 94th | 90th |
| UT Martin | 2nd | 41st |
| UTEP | 3rd | 10th |
| UTSA | 67th | 92nd |
| Utah | 87th | 96th |
| Utah State | 31st | 49th |
| Vanderbilt | 90th | 100th |
| Virginia | 36th | 73rd |
| Virginia Tech | 59th | 21st |
| Wake Forest | 21st | 31st |
| Washington | 98th | 93rd |
| Washington State | 61st | 44th |
| West Virginia | 12th | 18th |
| Western Kentucky | 55th | 80th |
| Western Michigan | 86th | 16th |
| Wisconsin | 6th | 27th |
| Wyoming | 23rd | 15th |
Halftime identity
Purdue by half
1st-half offense ranks 39th percentile in FBS; 2nd-half, 44th — competitive snaps only, garbage time excluded from both halves.
Schedule mirage
How much of Purdue's number is the schedule?
Raw EPA/play through week 21 is 0.10; 32nd percentile once opponent strength is stripped out, it's 0.01. The widest gap came in week 1: 0.40 raw vs. 0.03 adjusted.
Purdue reads strongest in explosive plays allowed (top 49%) and rushing epa (top 50%); the crux lives in passing epa allowed, where Purdue sits at the 2nd 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 · Purdue
Most Similar Programs · PurdueReads Like
ArizonaTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontArizona StateTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontBaylorTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up front
Static-attribute similarity across tier, archetype, conference, and voice. Not a prediction — a calibration.
Home-Field Advantage · Purdue · 2018-present
Above-Average
42% home win rate vs 33% on the road. margin runs +6.0 better at home. Ross-Ade Stadium seats 57,282, averaging 101% full (57,943 attendance, 25 games reported).
Home21-29Away13-26
Positional competition · RB room
The carries are split. The job isn’t.
Devin Mockobee and Antonio Harris split the carries (123/191 vs 68/191) -- but the job isn't split the same way. Antonio Harris owns the receiving work.
Devin MockobeeAntonio Harris
Carries
the baseline -- every row below is tested against this split, not a flat 50/50
Inside the 5
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Targets
p = 0.035 -- real, not noise
Top-5-carry share
concentration alone -- EPA/carry doesn't corroborate, read with caution
Screened 3 claims, 1 survived, 2 falsified
Positional competition · WR/TE room
The targets are split. The job isn’t.
Michael Jackson III (WR) and Rico Walker (TE) split the targets (78/89 vs 11/89) -- but the job isn't split the same way. Michael Jackson III is the one trusted on 3rd down; Rico Walker produces in bigger chunks.
Michael Jackson IIIRico Walker
Targets
the baseline -- every row below is tested against this split, not a flat 50/50
3rd-down targets
p = 0.011 -- real, not noise
Garbage-time share
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Top-5-catch share
concentration and EPA/target agree -- a real boom/bust split
See it develop week by week
3rd-down target share, week by week (weeks both players actually played the role)
Screened 3 claims, 2 survived, 1 falsified
What changed
Purdue’s play-calling, before and after the change
Offense: Graham Harrell (2023–2024) → Josh Henson (2025)
The biggest shift: 1st-down pass rate moved up 7 points. The rest held closer to steady.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Defense: Kevin Kane (2023–2024) → Michael Scherer (2025)
The biggest shift: 1st-down pass rate moved up 7 points. The rest held closer to steady.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Defensive identity · pass zones
What this defense gives up, by zone.
On short passes, Purdue’s defense allows a completion rate above the FBS mean (69.8% vs 65.9% league-wide, shrunk toward the mean for its 87-play sample) — mid-pack, 124 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=87 short-zone plays faced, raw rate 75.9%
Venue texture
60°F average kickoff temp; 10% of games had measurable precipitation; 9 mph average wind.
Based on 77 home games with weather data.
The CFP Era
12 seasons inside the CFP era, no bids yet — the era the program is still trying to break into.
TRAJECTORY · quality-score line · AP rank dotted · CFP bids marked · coach regimes ribboned
Program Quality
AP Rank (inverted)
CFP Appearance
Purdue's 2014–2025 record is 50-92. The era is still being written; the CFP line is the one the program is arguing for.
All-Time Record
633-614-48
since 1892 · 134 seasons · .488 win rate
HOME
395-256-23
AWAY
226-345-25
NEUTRAL
12-13
1890s
1900s
1910s
1920s
1930s
1940s
1950s
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
2010s
2020s
The program, in full — read the essay
Drew Brees. Bob Griese. Len Dawson. Three Pro Football Hall of Famers came out of West Lafayette. The program that produced all of them just went 0-9 in Big Ten play for the second straight year.
The Cradle of Quarterbacks is not a slogan — it is the most specific identity in the sport. No school has sent more distinguished passers to the NFL than Purdue: Griese's two Super Bowls, Dawson's ring in Kansas City, Brees's Super Bowl MVP in New Orleans. The position is the program, and the program built itself around a pipeline the sport doesn't have anywhere else. That identity doesn't evaporate in a bad year, or even two of them.
But two of them is what Purdue has now. Ryan Walters' 1-11 disaster in 2024 cost him his job. Barry Odom arrived from UNLV with a record for rebuilding programs — and his first year produced another 2-10, another winless conference slate. The only wins: Ball State and FCS Southern Illinois. The fanbase split is real: one side argues Odom inherited a gutted roster and needs time; the other has watched enough resets to wonder if this one is different. Quarterback Ryan Browne transferred to North Carolina after the season. The Cradle is empty.
The 2026 question isn't whether Odom can save this program — it's whether the infrastructure beneath the identity is still there. The 2022 Big Ten West title under Jeff Brohm proved the ceiling exists; the question Odom inherits is whether the floor has a bottom. The next quarterback who emerges from West Lafayette will tell the story. There's always been one. Whether one arrives in Year Three is what 2026 will answer.
How they play
Purdue wins, when it wins, by throwing it — that has been the program's operating system since Joe Tiller arrived with his 'basketball on grass' spread in 1997 and Drew Brees ran it. The tradition is pass-first and quarterback-centric, built around developing NFL-caliber passers from the pocket. Odom is rebuilding the scheme identity on top of that tradition, with the Big Ten's trench demands as the baseline requirement the program is still working back toward.
Steady
Purdue 2016–2025. Holding the line. The 10-year slope (-0.09 rungs / yr) doesn't tilt either way — the program lives at roughly Tier 2.
CFP Era · Purdue
12 seasons on file
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
down middle peak CFP year
Season Standing · 2025 · 2-10
Season Standing · 2025 · 2-10FBS sub-.500
Purdue: Below .500 in FBS play. The rebuild bar.
R0R1R2R3R4R5R6R7R8R9
Sub-FBSBuildingBowlRankedContenderPlayoff
Big Ten Standing · 2025
18th in the Big Ten
Purdue is 18th of 18 in the Big Ten at 0-9. The path to the title is steep — the focus is on bowl access and rivalry wins.
| # | Program | Record |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Indiana | 11-0 |
| 2 | Ohio State | 9-1 |
| 3 | Oregon | 8-2 |
| 4 | Michigan | 7-2 |
| 5 | USC | 7-2 |
| 6 | Iowa | 6-3 |
| 7 | Illinois | 5-4 |
| 8 | Minnesota | 5-4 |
| 9 | Washington | 5-4 |
| 10 | Nebraska | 4-5 |
| 11 | Northwestern | 4-5 |
| 12 | Penn State | 3-6 |
| 13 | UCLA | 3-6 |
| 14 | Rutgers | 2-7 |
| 15 | Wisconsin | 2-7 |
| 16 | Maryland | 1-8 |
| 17 | Michigan State | 1-8 |
| 18 | Purdue | 0-9 |
Coaching Era · Purdue
Coaching Era · PurdueBarry Odom
Barry Odom in year 2 of the rebuild. The methodology is taking shape.
Era Barry Odom · 2025–presentPrev: Ryan Walters (2023–2024)OC: Josh HensonPrev OC: Graham Harrell (2023–2024)DC: Kevin KanePrev DC: Michael Scherer (2025)
2
years · era
Rituals
Three gameday rituals — the ones outsiders never quite catch.
Cradle of Quarterbacks
since 1960s
Purdue's 'Cradle of Quarterbacks' identity — 14 NFL starting QBs including Bob Griese, Len Dawson, Drew Brees, Kyle Orton, Curtis Painter — is the program's permanent recruiting + cultural identity. The 2000 season's Drew Brees Heisman-finalist + Rose Bowl run is the modern peak.
Old Oaken Bucket (vs Indiana)
since 1925
Purdue-Indiana plays for the Old Oaken Bucket — one of CFB's oldest trophy games. The in-state Big Ten rivalry has produced 90+ meetings since 1925. The bucket's metal-letter chain (P for Purdue wins, I for Indiana) hangs on the trophy through every annual outcome.
Boilermaker Special
since 1940
The Boilermaker Special — a steam-locomotive replica vehicle that runs across Ross-Ade Stadium pre-game and after touchdowns — is one of CFB's most-unusual mascot vehicles. Powered by an actual gasoline engine; designed to look like a locomotive boiler. Visiting fans cite as one of the more-memorable Big Ten game-day experiences.
Program memory
What this program never forgets
Most weeks vanish. These didn’t.
1967 Rose Bowl win
Bob Griese's Boilermakers won the Rose Bowl to cap the 1966 season — the historic high point
2000 Big Ten title and Rose Bowl
Drew Brees led Purdue to a share of the Big Ten and its first Rose Bowl since 1967 — the modern peak
2022 Big Ten West title
A West Division crown and a Championship Game appearance under Jeff Brohm — the last time Purdue mattered in the league
Moment of the Year · Purdue · 2025
Moment of the Year · Purdue · 2025Lost 10-34 vs Ohio State
Week 11 of 2025. The single game that defined the season's arc.
Bowl / Postseason Ledger
Bowl / Postseason LedgerRecent postseason (2017-2022): 2-2
Most recent: 2022 — loss 7-63 (home). Last 5 postseason: 2-2.
2022202120182017
NFL Draft Pipeline
2022–2025
NFL Draft PipelineSteady
11 picks last 5 cycles. Reliable mid-tier pipeline.
11
picks · 1 R1
#30
George Karlaftis
Defensive End · 2022 · Kansas City · #33/370 final season
#99
David Bell
Wide Receiver · 2022 · Cleveland · #12/468 final season
#131
Charlie Jones
Wide Receiver · 2023 · Cincinnati · #2/488 final season
#33 all-time · 23 first-round picksthe talent factory →
Unit lineage
Purdue’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
2014–2015 · John Shoop2016 · Terry Malone2017 · co-Tony Levine / co-Brian Brohm2018–2021 · co-JaMarcus Shephard / co-Brian Brohm2022 · Brian Brohm2023–2024 · Graham Harrell2025 (ongoing) · Josh Henson
Defense2014–2025
2014–2015 · Greg Hudson2016 · Ross Els / co-Marcus Freeman2017–2019 · co-Nick Holt / co-Anthony Poindexter2020 · co-Bob Diaco / co-Anthony Poindexter2021 · Brad Lambert / co-Ron English / co-Mark Hagen2022 · co-Ron English / co-Mark Hagen2023–2024 · Kevin Kane2025 · Michael Scherer
Hired for 2026: Kevin Kane — not yet reflected in on-field data.
Elite (≥70th pct)AveragePoor (≤30th pct)
Chronicle Visuals
Average 2025 continuity (54% back) — qb room anchors it, offense is the stress point.
The portal upgraded the EDGE room but opened a hole at LB.
1 player drafted in 2025; the reload runs through the portal and recruiting.
Purdue converts recruit talent into draft picks better than its class rank suggests.
Featured in The Canon
r/cfb moments
2.3k
[Postgame Thread] LSU Defeats Purdue 63-7
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