Texas A&M11-2CFP #75With Brandon Arrington (ATH, #34 nationally) joining, Mike Elko's eighth straight top-20 class faces the challenge of matching Texas' top-7 haul while maintaining 75% production returning in a program still.
Texas A&M built the loudest, most ritual-heavy program in the sport and spent decades watching the wins not match the cathedral — until 2025, when an 11-0 start and the program's first-ever Playoff berth finally made the football worthy of the tradition.
Fans heard the program written off as all pageantry and no payoff — the place with the best traditions and the most overrated football in America — for a generation. The 2025 Playoff berth was the ans…
Approaching
30 days
until kickoff · vs Missouri State · Sat Sep 5 · 23:00 UTC
Texas A&M is the program with the country's largest cathedral and the longest wait for what it was built for.
With a #10 recruiting class and high continuity, Texas A&M is positioned for a strong 2026 season. The team's balanced portal churn and heavy freshman injection suggest potential for significant improvement.
The Yell hasn't started yet. Stand by.
the open questionis this a real, durable shift in the program's tier?
Texas A&M has reached elite-tier consistency — a 26-10 record over three seasons raises the question of whether Mike Elko's second year can hold the program's top-12% power rating amid rising expectations.
Jerome Myles (WR, #19 nationally) headlines Elko's eighth straight top-20 class, but with Texas signing No. 1 and 75% production returning, the Aggies' cathedral still waits.
Texas A&M has climbed into dynasty-caliber territory — into the top 15% of FBS by power rating over the last three seasons, up from the top 20% a year ago.
Texas A&M: the betting market's belief swinging.
With Brandon Arrington (ATH, #34 nationally) joining, Mike Elko's eighth straight top-20 class faces the challenge of matching Texas' top-7 haul while maintaining 75% production returning in a program still.
Jamarion Morrow 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.
Mike Elko's second season at Texas A&M arrives with an 11-2 record and a #7 AP finish, but coordinator changes and an uneasy fanbase signal unmet expectations after a historic program peak.
Ashton Bethel-Roman is used almost exclusively underneath -- a low share of his targets are downfield shots.
E.J. Smith: a closer signal screened this season.
E.J. Smith: a garbage time merchant signal screened this season.
Mario Craver is used almost exclusively underneath -- a low share of his targets are downfield shots.
Texas A&M enters 2026 rated No. 9 in SP+ — the gap between the ranking and its 11-2 record is the story Mike Elko has to answer in the SEC this year.
Player plans to use eligibility ruling
Ten drafted out the door and the CB room still has question marks — an eligibility ruling that keeps even one veteran in College Station is the kind of roster math Elko can't afford to ignore right now.
Eligibility ruling could return players
Ten drafted out the door and a CB room already under pressure — if Elko gets even two of these eligibility rulings to break right, that's the difference between patching holes and actually competing in the SEC West this fall.
Bryson Warren eligibility update given
Warren's eligibility getting sorted matters because Elko already burned a roster spot counting on him — with 10 players gone to the draft, every healthy body on the depth chart is load-bearing right now.
RB DD Murray transfer commits from Arkansas State
Ronnie Crosby III's departure left a gap in the RB room that two portal adds hadn't fully addressed — Murray's Sun Belt production jumps a full tier, and Elko needed a back who can carry a load behind a line still absorbing 10 draft exits.
Demond Demas decommits from Texas A&M
Top-10 class and 10 players drafted out — Elko can't afford decommits bleeding into a CB room already under pressure heading into SEC play.
Mikahi Allen commits to Texas A&M
Ten players drafted out of College Station this spring and the CB room still has pressure on it — Allen's arrival from Don Bosco lands in a class already ranked ninth nationally but facing real depth math, not just roster aesthetics.
Top 3 commits
Fan confidence in a typical range for this program right now
32nd percentile among FBS programs
Market outlook
Sportsbook consensus · best odds across multiple books · 2026-08-06
Texas A&M · Next-Season Outcome Band
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.
Texas A&M has climbed into dynasty-caliber territory — into the top 11% of FBS by power rating over the last three seasons, up from the top 15% a year ago. It is a 26-10 record over the last three regular seasons. A real, measurable rise in the model. The room has caught up; now the schedule has to agree.
The 'resurgence is real' read: the numbers are starting to back the hype.
The 'wait and see' counter -- power shifts often get overread before the season proves them.
Nothing in our corpus yet — this door stays open for when there is.
Texas A&M signed a top-9 recruiting class. It is eighth consecutive top-20 recruiting class. A top-9 class is a program-level investment. Development timelines decide the return. The bulls are loud — the coverage treats this class as a program-level statement.
The off-field storyline driving the noise right now. Not analysis — the soap opera, and that's the point.
The optimistic read: the class is real, the program is a destination again.
The 'rankings don't tell the whole story' counter -- development gaps, position holes still open.
Nothing in our corpus yet — this door stays open for when there is.
This event was in 242 of 1847 board posts (13%) over the last 60 days — a fanbase consumed by it. Fan text shown verbatim, attributed to the community not the individual poster.
Board health this week (722 posts): 15% positive · 58% neutral · 27% negative. Team-level weekly mood — not specific to this event. The boards ≠ the fanbase: a self-selected vocal slice.
Recent Form · last 10 games
Three of five. Trending up, not yet hot.
Opens Sep 5
vs Missouri State · at home
✓ fact on line · ~ our read on style
Fan mood index · most recent r/cfb data
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
TX leads the 2026 class with 9 commits. National footprint reaching 12 states.
Where they recruit · 2023-2026
89 signees across 19 states, 2023-2026. TX leads the pull.
Top r/cfb community posts · last 12 months
66 of 66 AP voters have them ranked, final AP ballot (2025) — from #7, Eric Hansen (The South Bend Tribune), to #14, Chad Bishop (Atlanta Journal-Constitution).
Individual AP Top 25 ballots, final AP ballot, 2025 — 66 voters tracked.
12 games with TV coverage: 5 national broadcast, 5 ESPN, 2 conference network
Kickoff windows: 3 noon, 3 afternoon, 6 primetime
Recovering 20% of their own fumbles — running cold vs. the ~51% league rate.
1 of 5 own fumbles recovered themselves; 6 of 10 forced fumbles recovered, 2025 only.
Getting hands on the ball but not cashing in: 7% of disruptions converted, vs. the ~19% league rate.
3 interceptions of 43 disrupted passes (40 deflected, 3 intercepted), 2025 only.
Losing the penalty battle: 94 penalties committed vs. 78 drawn on opponents, a 135-yard deficit.
789 penalty yards committed vs. 654 drawn on opponents, 2025 season total.
What moved it — fall camp · last 14 days
Fanbase Signals
Position = mood · width = volume · color = the kind of feeling
Inside the fanbase — all 12 corners
The split, staged
How Texas A&M 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.
Loudest in the room this week real · by engagement
All 12 corners of the fanbase
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.
~ our readTexas A&M fans are down on the program, and they're backing it with about as much hard evidence as anyone.
✓ counted We read 722 posts from Texas A&M fans this week.
Fan mood across the 2025 season, both sides — our read
Shaded weeks show whose fanbase read warmer, our measure of what fans actually said, not a poll.
Fan claims · every quote verified verbatim
I’m so sick of SEC refs calling holding on basically every punt return. Let the guys play ffs
Based on 1 comment from 1 poster across 1 thread · Oct 11, 2025 · via CFB
This team is the exact opposite of what you would expect. Elko led defense and a loaded RB room, but can’t run and the defense sucks.
Based on 1 comment from 1 poster across 1 thread · Sep 6, 2025 · via CFB
“It’s early, but Abell looks like a phenomenal hire by Rice. They do what they need to do and they are halfway to a bowl with enough winnable games left on their schedule to make it there.”— r/CFB
“Y'all's 2017 season finish has to be like a trivia answer. Lost the final 3 games of the season, all by double digits, still finished ranked #13. I'm genuinely curious how many (if any) other teams have finished ranked at all after closing out with 3 losses. I definitely can…”— r/CFB
“I told myself if we won this game, I'm buying in and putting my BAS to rest until proven otherwise this is a top 5 football team in the country this is the best defense in the country. if you get to 3rd down, you may as well bring out the punt team this offense has explosiv…”— r/CFB
“This is the year. Arch Manning has improved so much under this new offense. He’s focused, he’s having fun. I wouldn’t be surprised if he is a dark horse for the Heisman.”— r/CFB
“Idk how I'll handle 4 straight losses from here. What am I saying, Tito's always has my back”— r/CFB
Five Lenses
What people are saying right now
Fanbase Health Index · Texas A&M · high confidence
FBS rankings · 2025 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs
| Player | # | G | Cmp/Att | Pct | Yds | Y/A | TD | INT | Rate | QBR | Adj ANY/A | Sack% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dual Threat · +0.36 EPA/play | 10 | 13 | 234 / 377 | 62.1 | 3169 #25 FBS | 8.4 | 25 #19 FBS | 12 | 148.2 | 71.4 | 7.8 | 3.6 | |
Yards by week → Dual ThreatDangerous with both arm and legs — defenses can't just pin the ears back. National Player-of-the-Year finalist — invited to the closing-night ceremony — trending, not yet confirmed. 10 of 183 QBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Rush yards / carry4.7 87th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Yards / attempt9.6 95th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Trait fingerprint Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score moved from the 69th to 94th percentile among FBS QBs | |||||||||||||
| -0.43 EPA/play | 16 | 3 | 7 / 14 | 50 | 120 | 8.6 | 1 | 2 | 117.0 | 12.5 | — | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||||
| -0.05 EPA/play | 13 | 2 | 5 / 10 | 50 | 62 | 6.2 | 0 | 0 | 102.1 | 25.6 | — | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||||
| Player | # | G | Car | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Stuff% | 10+% | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Back · +0.20 EPA/play | 4 | 12 | 119 | 639 | 5.4 | 5 | 57 | 8.9 | 7.9 | 14.0 | 12.3 | 4.9% (16/327) | |
Yards by week → Balanced BackPlays within the scheme — consistent production without a dominant dimension. Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. 186 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry6.1 74th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Yards / reception10.0 76th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like View Rueben Owens II's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Balanced Back · +0.16 EPA/play | 8 | 7 | 77 | 404 | 5.2 | 6 | 38 | 8.2 | 8.7 | 12.7 | 15.2 | — | |
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 / carry6.2 bottom 50th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Receiving share2.5% bottom 8th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Plays like View Le'Veon Moss's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Speed Merchant · +0.14 EPA/play | 5 | 10 | 41 | 216 | 5.3 | 1 | 41 | 6.1 | 4.4 | — | — | — | |
Yards by week → Speed MerchantCuts upfield fast. Designed to find the crease, not run through the line. 48 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry6.4 84th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Receiving share4.7% bottom 14th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Plays like View Amari Daniels's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Balanced Back · +0.15 EPA/play | 22 | 9 | 44 | 205 | 4.7 | 4 | 17 | 11 | 5.2 | — | — | — | |
Yards by week → Balanced BackPlays within the scheme — consistent production without a dominant dimension. 186 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry5.4 bottom 46th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Rush TD rate9.1% 97th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Plays like View E.J. Smith's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Balanced Back · -0.00 EPA/play | 23 | 11 | 43 | 182 | 4.2 | 1 | 23 | 4.2 | 6.2 | — | — | — | |
Yards by week → Balanced BackPlays within the scheme — consistent production without a dominant dimension. 186 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry4.6 bottom 18th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Yards / reception13.3 95th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint View Jamarion Morrow's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Player | # | G | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slot Technician · +0.55 EPA/play | 7 | 13 | 61 | 919 #37 FBS | 15.1 | 9 #17 FBS | 48 | 12.1 | 11.7 | 28.7% (94/327) | |
Yards by week → Slot Technician· Return threatRuns precise routes in tight quarters. Volume player who keeps chains moving. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The rare part: the passing game runs through him — and every touch moves the offense, too 97 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Reception volume61 92th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Total EPA (college ability)54.0 97th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions — the part the label misses Trait fingerprint Plays like our readBounce-Back: his CFB Index score shows a real arc: 92nd percentile among FBS WRs, fell to 66th, now back up to 94th | |||||||||||
| Deep Threat · +0.64 EPA/play | 1 | 12 | 58 | 911 #39 FBS | 15.7 | 4 | 86 | 12.7 | 15.4 | 25.1% (82/327) | |
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 Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 100 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception16.3 79th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Reception volume58 90th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score went from the 39th percentile among FBS WRs to the 92nd | |||||||||||
| Deep Threat · +0.67 EPA/play | 3 | 10 | 24 | 503 | 21.0 | 5 | 76 | 7.5 | 5.9 | 10.7% (35/327) | |
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 / reception22.1 99th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions TD rate20.8% 98th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Ashton Bethel-Roman's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.83 EPA/play | 87 | 11 | 20 | 204 | 10.2 | 3 | 28 | 4.1 | 4 | 7.0% (23/327) | |
Yards by week → Complete TENo single go-to route — the receiving numbers show up inline and split out alike. The most common profile in its group this season — 177 of 223 classified this way. Played in 11 of 21 games this season · senior View Nate Boerkircher's full player page | |||||||||||
| Possession Receiver · +0.54 EPA/play | 2 | 12 | 18 | 195 | 10.8 | 1 | 34 | 1.3 | 2.8 | 7.0% (23/327) | |
Yards by week → Possession ReceiverReliable target who converts on critical downs. Not flashy; consistently productive. 332 of 558 WRs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception10.8 bottom 26th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Reception volume18 bottom 18th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Terry Bussey's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +1.36 EPA/play | 17 | 9 | 19 | 168 | 8.8 | 1 | 28 | 0 | 0 | — | |
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 / reception11.3 54th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions EPA / play (adj)1.4 99th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Theo Melin Ohrstrom's full player page | |||||||||||
| +1.20 EPA/play | 84 | 4 | 5 | 69 | 13.8 | 0 | 23 | 1.9 | 1.3 | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
| -0.26 EPA/play | — | 2 | 7 | 64 | 9.1 | 1 | 27 | 7.4 | 6.7 | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | TFL | Sack | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nose Anchor | 17 | 13 | 49 | 18 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
Nose AnchorThe heaviest frame on the interior. Sack production is intentionally not the point of this profile. Impact starter — above-average production for the conference. 152 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Weight317 lb 88th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Albert Regis's full player page | |||||||
| Two-Gap Base | 11 | 13 | 48 | 19 | 9 | 3 | 2 |
Two-Gap BaseStout at the point of attack — steady tackle-for-loss production without a standout pass-rush number. Impact starter — above-average production for the conference. The most common profile in its group this season — 388 of 809 classified this way. Played in 13 of 21 games this season · senior our readBounce-Back: his CFB Index score shows a real arc: 93rd percentile among FBS IDLs, fell to 56th, now back up to 97th | |||||||
| Finisher | 9 | 13 | 32 | 21 | 15 #21 FBS | 12.5 #3 FBS | 5 |
FinisherTurns pressure into sacks — when he gets there, he finishes. Unanimous All-American — 1st team on all five NCAA-recognized selectors. 16 of 200 EDGEs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Pressure-to-sack conversion0.7 91th percentile · FBS EDGE, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Cashius Howell's full player page | |||||||
| Versatile End | 18 | 12 | 31 | 13 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 2 |
Versatile EndNo single standout number, but nothing missing either — competent across the board. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. The most common profile in its group this season — 139 of 200 classified this way. Played in 12 of 21 games this season · junior View T.J. Searcy's full player page | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 5 | 11 | 26 | 13 | 6.5 | 3 | 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 rate25.0% 86th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 10th to 43rd to 91st percentile among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| Versatile End | 10 | 8 | 21 | 10 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 0 |
Versatile EndNo single standout number, but nothing missing either — competent across the board. 139 of 200 EDGEs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate16.7% bottom 39th percentile · FBS EDGE, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Marco Jones's full player page | |||||||
| Pressure Merchant | 50 | 11 | 17 | 12 | 4 | 3.5 | 6 |
Pressure MerchantCollapses the pocket even when the sack doesn't come. 23 of 200 EDGEs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Hurry rate0.4 93th percentile · FBS EDGE, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Dayon Hayes's full player page | |||||||
| Versatile End | 15 | 8 | 14 | 8 | 3.5 | 2 | 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 · sophomore · 3-star, 2023 class View Rylan Kennedy's full player page | |||||||
| 99 | 4 | 9 | 3 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 | |
| 55 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 | |
| 30 | 4 | 7 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | |
| 88 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | Ast | TFL | Sack | PD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Linebacker | 21 | 13 | 72 | 32 | 40 | 7 | 1 | 3 | 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 volume72 77th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles PD rate4.2% 71th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Taurean York's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 27 | 12 | 57 | 26 | 31 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 1 |
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 · junior · 4-star, 2023 class our readBreakout: his CFB Index score went from the 44th percentile among FBS LBs to the 90th | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | — | 6 | 19 | 9 | 10 | 4.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume19 bottom 13th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles TFL rate23.7% 98th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Scooby Williams's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 23 | 7 | 16 | 6 | 10 | 2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. 362 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume16 bottom 11th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles PD rate0.0% bottom 18th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Noah Mikhail's full player page | |||||||||
| 54 | 6 | 12 | 8 | 4 | 3.5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| Player | # | G | Tot | PD | INT | TFL | Sack |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Box Safety | 3 | 13 | 66 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
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 volume66 87th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like View Marcus Ratcliffe's full player page | |||||||
| Box Safety | 25 | 12 | 61 | 1 | 1 | 5.5 | 3 |
Box SafetyLives near the line of scrimmage as a de facto extra linebacker. 166 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume61 82th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like View Dalton Brooks's full player page | |||||||
| Perimeter Tackler | 4 | 12 | 50 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
Perimeter TacklerTargeted often and asked to tackle in space on the perimeter. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 42 of 270 CBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Tackle volume50 93th percentile · FBS corners, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Will Lee III's full player page | |||||||
| Cover Corner | 7 | 11 | 34 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 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 11 of 21 games this season · senior · 3-star, 2021 class View Tyreek Chappell's full player page | |||||||
| Cover Corner | 2 | 11 | 26 | 5 | 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 11 of 21 games this season · sophomore View Dezz Ricks's full player page | |||||||
| Cover Corner | 8 | 7 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 2.5 | 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 7 of 21 games this season · sophomore our readFading: his CFB Index score moved from the 57th to 20th percentile among FBS CBs | |||||||
| 33 | 6 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 6 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1.5 | 0 | |
| 29 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Player | # | G | FG M/A | FG% | XP M/A | Pts | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steady | 47 | 10 | 12/19 | 63.2 | 36/36 | 72 | 49 |
| 99 | 7 | 4/7 | 57.1 | 19/20 | 31 | 39 |
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | Long | In20 | TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steady | 37 | 13 | 49 | 2158 | 44 | 63 | 18 | 2 |
Net average is unavailable — CFBD's punting feed carries gross yards only, with no return-yardage or touchback deduction.
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possession Receiver · +0.54 EPA/play | 2 | 12 | 18 | 421 | 23.4 | 0 | 45 |
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slot Technician · +0.55 EPA/play | 7 | 13 | 25 | 456 | 18.2 | 2 | 80 |
| Possession Receiver · +0.54 EPA/play | 2 | 12 | 7 | 62 | 8.9 | 0 | 29 |
| -0.26 EPA/play | — | 2 | 3 | 7 | 2.3 | 0 | 7 |
2025 stat leaders
finalRoster
2025+19 more
| Wk | Date | Us | Opp | Line | Opponent | Result | Record | Conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aug 30 | #13 | #15 | -24 | UTSA | W 42–24 126 | 1-0 | 0-0 |
| 2 | Sep 6 | #10 | #168 | -34.5 | Utah State | W 44–22 145 | 2-0 | 0-0 |
| 3 | Sep 13 | #14 | #1 | +6.5 | @Notre DameTop 10 win | W 41–40 140 | 3-0 | 0-0 |
| 5 | Sep 27 | #9 | #36 | -6.5 | Auburn | W 16–10 126 | 4-0 | 1-0 |
| 6 | Oct 4 | #11 | #68 | -17.5 | Mississippi State | W 31–9 125 | 5-0 | 2-0 |
| 7 | Oct 11 | #12 | #19 | -6.5 | Florida | W 34–17 129 | 6-0 | 3-0 |
| 8 | Oct 18 | #10 | #55 | -8.5 | @Arkansas | W 45–42 132 | 7-0 | 4-0 |
| 9 | Oct 25 | #9 | #15 | -1.5 | @LSUTop 25 win | W 49–25 127 | 8-0 | 5-0 |
| 11 | Nov 8 | #8 | #20 | -7 | @MissouriTop 25 win | W 38–17 124 | 9-0 | 6-0 |
| 12 | Nov 15 | #8 | #44 | -16.5 | South Carolina | W 31–30 132 | 10-0 | 7-0 |
| 13 | Nov 22 | #11 | #247 | -53.5 | Samford | W 48–0 128 | 11-0 | 7-0 |
| 14 | Nov 29 | #12 | #25 | -2.5 | @Texas | L 17–27 132 | 11-1 | 7-1 |
| College Football Playoff | ||||||||
| 17 | Dec 20 | #15 | #7 | -3 | Miami | L 3–10 | 11-2 | 7-1 |
| Date | Opp | Result | Yds | TO | TOP | EPA/play | Success% | Explosive% | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 20 | Miami | L 3–10 | — | — | — | -0.037 | 37.7% | 99.4% | Season-low EPA/play |
| Nov 29 | @Texas | L 17–27 | 337 | 2 | 32:15 | +0.075 | 37.9% | 106.6% | |
| Nov 22 | Samford | W 48–0 | 475 | 2 | 33:04 | +0.251 | 45.1% | 120.7% | Best defensive stand |
| Nov 15 | South Carolina | W 31–30 | 503 | 4 | 30:16 | +0.077 | 44.9% | 143.5% | One-score win |
| Nov 8 | @Missouri | W 38–17 | 464 | 1 | 35:44 | +0.219 | 44.9% | 122.4% | |
| Oct 25 | @LSU | W 49–25 | 426 | 2 | 30:12 | +0.364 | 53.2% | 134.0% | |
| Oct 18 | @Arkansas | W 45–42 | 497 | 0 | 33:48 | +0.525 | 55.2% | 129.9% | Season-high EPA/play |
| Oct 11 | Florida | W 34–17 | 417 | 1 | 33:42 | +0.308 | 45.6% | 107.5% | |
| Oct 4 | Mississippi State | W 31–9 | 483 | 1 | 38:17 | +0.272 | 48.7% | 110.5% | |
| Sep 27 | Auburn | W 16–10 | 414 | 1 | 34:06 | +0.053 | 43.8% | 96.4% | One-score win |
| Sep 13 | @Notre Dame | W 41–40 | 488 | 1 | 26:53 | +0.383 | 39.1% | 159.9% | Most explosive |
| Sep 6 | Utah State | W 44–22 | 554 | 1 | 34:14 | +0.267 | 53.2% | 117.1% | |
| Aug 30 | UTSA | W 42–24 | 399 | 0 | 26:19 | +0.346 | 42.4% | 159.0% | |
| Season average (13 games) | 455 | 1.3 | +0.239 | 45.5% | 123.6% | ||||
Texas A&M fields a strong offense behind a strong, gives up the big play defense.
Opponent-adjusted percentiles vs all FBS. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.
Team identity · competitive snaps only
82nd percentile quality, 14th percentile boom-dependency. Garbage time excluded from both axes — the same correction that changes the Q4 story below.
| 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
Raw Q4 EPA/play ranks 42nd percentile in FBS. Strip out snaps taken with a blowout margin and it climbs to the 59th — the correction is the finding, not a footnote.
Standard downs vs. passing downs
88th percentile success on standard downs, 59th on passing downs — a 29-point gap between the two.
| 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
1st-half offense ranks 82nd percentile in FBS; 2nd-half, 85th — competitive snaps only, garbage time excluded from both halves.
Schedule mirage
Raw EPA/play through week 21 is 0.24; 81st percentile once opponent strength is stripped out, it's 0.06. The widest gap came in week 1: 0.35 raw vs. 0.03 adjusted.
Texas A&M reads strongest in success rate allowed (top 4%) and passing epa allowed (top 10%); the crux lives in explosive plays allowed, where Texas A&M sits at the 10th percentile.
offense · strengths lead
defense · higher bar = harder to play against
hidden math · special situations
Most Similar Programs · Texas A&M
Static-attribute similarity across tier, archetype, conference, and voice. Not a prediction — a calibration.
Home-Field Advantage · Texas A&M · 2018-present
79% home win rate vs 39% on the road. margin runs +18.8 better at home. Kyle Field seats 102,733, averaging 98% full (101,027 attendance, 27 games reported).
Positional competition · RB room
Rueben Owens II and Le'Veon Moss split the carries (116/195 vs 79/195) -- but the job isn't split the same way.
Positional competition · WR/TE room
Kevin Concepcion (WR) and Nate Boerkircher (TE) split the targets (89/110 vs 21/110) -- but the job isn't split the same way.
What changed
The biggest shift: red-zone pass rate moved down 7 points. The rest held closer to steady.
The biggest shift: red-zone pass rate moved down 7 points. The rest held closer to steady.
Season by season
Defensive identity · pass zones
On short passes, Texas A&M’s defense allows a completion rate below the FBS mean (60.1% vs 65.9% league-wide, shrunk toward the mean for its 96-play sample) — mid-pack, 4 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.
75°F average kickoff temp; 6% of games had measurable precipitation; 8 mph average wind.
Based on 81 home games with weather data.
12 seasons inside the CFP era, no bids yet — the era the program is still trying to break into.
Texas A&M's 2014–2025 record is 95-55. The era is still being written; the CFP line is the one the program is arguing for.
Week-by-week rivalry heat isn't tracked yet for this matchup — check back as the 2026-27 season approaches and real fan-intel signal accumulates.
Who's more worked up right now
Cross-fanbase rivalry sentiment for this matchup hasn't been measured yet this week — both sides show as neutral until real signal comes in.
THE LAST 5 · year-by-year
All-Time Record
since 1902 · 124 seasons · .588 win rate
Texas A&M started 11-0 for the first time since 1992, reached No. 3 in the Playoff rankings — the highest in program history — earned the program's first-ever CFP berth, and lost 10-3 to Miami in the first round. The cathedral finally hosted Playoff football. The question is whether that was the floor of a new era or its ceiling.
The 12th Man tradition began in 1922 when a student came out of the stands ready to play. A century later, the entire student body still stands for all four quarters of every home game at Kyle Field — 102,700 seats, the largest stadium in the SEC — and the Corps of Cadets still marches before kickoff, and Midnight Yell Practice still fills the building the night before the game. No program treats tradition as more literally structural. A&M's culture is the program's argument: that belief at this scale, built this carefully, is a competitive weapon. The football just needed to catch up to the cathedral.
Mike Elko's second season was the closest the football has come to matching it. The 11-0 start was real, not scheduled. Then Texas handed A&M a 27-17 loss in the rivalry finale, knocking the Aggies out of the SEC Championship Game despite a 7-1 conference record. The CFP bid came anyway — 12 seedings, first berth in program history — and Miami ended it 10-3 in a game A&M never led. Elko signed a new six-year extension. The internal fracture is clean: one faction says 2025 proved the program has arrived and the 10-3 loss is a data point, not a verdict; the other says nothing has truly changed until a title comes, and the only title that counts since 1939 is the one they haven't won.
The 2026 season is Elko's third, with returning pieces and a fanbase whose patience for the next rung is no longer theoretical. A&M has now shown it can start 11-0. The question for 2026 is whether the program that built the country's most ritualized football culture can sustain a CFP-contender identity year over year — and whether the answer to the Texas loss is a different fourth quarter or a different December.
Elko's Texas A&M is defense-first, physically built, and identity-anchored — a program that plays football meant to honor the apparatus around it rather than flash past it. The Aggies recruit the state of Texas comprehensively and use Kyle Field's 12th Man atmosphere as a genuine home-field multiplier; Midnight Yell the night before games is as much preparation as tradition. The scheme is built around stopping the run, controlling the line of scrimmage, and keeping games close enough for the talent to close.
Texas A&M 2016–2025. Holding the line. The 10-year slope (+0.08 rungs / yr) doesn't tilt either way — the program lives at roughly Tier 4.
12 seasons on file
down middle peak CFP year
Season Standing · 2025 · 11-2 · CFP #7 / AP #7
Texas A&M: Top 15 nationally. NY6-bowl conversation.
SEC Standing · 2025
Texas A&M sits 4th of 16 in the SEC at 7-1. Mid-conference — moves up or down depend on rivalry results and the late-season closing run.
| # | Program | Record |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ole Miss | 8-1 |
| 2 | Alabama | 8-2 |
| 3 | Georgia | 8-2 |
| 4 | Texas A&M | 7-1 |
| 5 | Texas | 6-2 |
| 6 | Vanderbilt | 6-2 |
| 7 | Oklahoma | 6-3 |
| 8 | Missouri | 4-4 |
| 9 | Tennessee | 4-4 |
| 10 | LSU | 3-5 |
| 11 | Florida | 2-6 |
| 12 | Kentucky | 2-6 |
| 13 | Auburn | 1-7 |
| 14 | Mississippi State | 1-7 |
| 15 | South Carolina | 1-7 |
| 16 | Arkansas | 0-8 |
Coaching Era · Texas A&M
Mike Elko in year 3 of the rebuild. The methodology is taking shape.
The rituals that anchor a Saturday in this program's world.
since 1931
Yell Leaders (not cheerleaders — Aggies don't use that word) lead 35,000+ students through coordinated yell sequences at Kyle Field the night before kickoff. The volume is real; the choreography is older than the football team's current ranking history. A ritual that defines what 'Aggie' means more than any game does.
since 1922
Every student stands for the entire game — origin story: 1922 Cotton Bowl, E. King Gill came down from the stands in case the depleted team needed him. The 12th Man tradition outsizes most programs' entire identity. Tradition is the brand more than wins are.
since 1889
Not strictly football, but the cultural anchor that explains the fanbase. Seniors receive their Aggie rings in mass ceremonies; the rings are dipped in tradition-protocol elaborate enough to make outsiders laugh and Aggies misty. Football is downstream of the institution; the institution is the brand.
Program memory
Most weeks vanish. These didn’t.
The program's only championship, still the standard the cathedral was built to match
2012
A&M's SEC statement game in Tuscaloosa, launching the Manziel legend
2025
An 11-0 start and program-high No. 3 ranking, then a 10-3 Playoff loss to Miami
Wound
Moment of the Year · Texas A&M · 2025
Week 17 of 2025. The single game that defined the season's arc.
Bowl / Postseason Ledger
Most recent: 2025 — loss 3-10 (home). Last 5 postseason: 2-3.
NFL Draft Pipeline
2022–202624 picks last 5 cycles. 3 first-round picks. Recruits with NFL ambitions notice.
Unit lineage
FBS-relative efficiency percentile per season (2014–2025), same population as the Coordinator Mirror board. Dashed vertical lines mark a coordinator change.
Hired for 2026: Holmon Wiggins — not yet reflected in on-field data.
Hired for 2026: co-Elijah Robinson / Lyle Hemphill — not yet reflected in on-field data.
All-time top community posts · ranked by upvotes
Texas A&M · Next-Season Outcome Band
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
Fanbase Health Index · Texas A&M · high confidence
2025 stat leaders
How They Play · 2025
Most Similar Programs · Texas A&M
Season Standing · 2025 · 11-2 · CFP #7 / AP #7
Coaching Era · Texas A&M
Moment of the Year · Texas A&M · 2025
Bowl / Postseason Ledger
NFL Draft Pipeline