5offseason
Texas Tech jumps from 2% to 50.5% Big 12 title odds.
Joey McGuire's fourth season opens with a 12-2 record and a #29 talent rank, yet the market now sees Texas Tech as a long shot for Big 12 title contention.
Texas Tech12-2CFP #4Latest
The mood around Texas Tech has soured.
belief cooled ↓ 2.8vs prior week
Fanbase belief
Souring
45/100 · 787 mentions
~ our readGrounding
running on emotion
5% cite a stat · 7% typical ✓ counted
~ our readVolatility
Chaotic
σ 34 pts
Doom window
~ our readThe model
#6
CFB Zeitgeist · +13.4
✓ measured5Hope-Doping·Offseason
Texas Tech spent thirty years as the most entertaining team in Texas that never won anything — then a billionaire booster's checkbook and a 12-2 season delivered the program's first-ever Big 12 title, a 34-7 rout of BYU that turned the wildest fanbase in the league into champions.
CFP Ranking#4 CFP
Fans spent years hearing 'where is Lubbock?' and 'fun to watch, never a contender,' then heard a new version in 2025 — that the title was just bought, that the spending makes the championship hollow.…
offseason · quiet
Roster Reload - Texas Tech
2026 snapshot - 2026-08-06Returning Production59%Moderate continuity
Talent Composite#29 nationally247 composite 757.5
Portal Additions22Primary repair: EDGE
Portal Losses21Primary pressure: WR
Draft Loss9Heavy NFL Draft loss (9) — 1 with a next man up identified below
Recruiting Reload#18Top-25 recruiting class
WRin 4 - Malcolm Simmonsout 6 - Tyson TurnerStarter Risk
current room: 198 lbs avg (2025 roster)
DLin 4 - Mateen Ibirogbaout 4 - Braylon RigsbyEven
current room: 294 lbs avg (2025 roster)
EDGEin 4 - Adam Trickout 2 - Cheta OfiliNeed Filled
CBin 1 - Davin Martinout 3 - Maurion HornStarter Risk
current room: 194 lbs avg (2025 roster)
QBin 2 - Brendan Sorsbyout 1 - Mitch GriffisUpgrade
current room: 212 lbs avg (2025 roster)
LBin 2 - Corey Platt Jr.out 1 - Justin HorneUpgrade
current room: 246 lbs avg (2025 roster)
Next man up
Belief EKG
WinLoss · hover for scorePrior seasonsWire eventStory arc
Approaching
30 days
until kickoff · vs Abilene Christian · Sat Sep 5 · 23:00 UTC
The experience
Texas Tech is the program that birthed the Air Raid, sustained it through Mike Leach's tenure, and refuses to be anything else.
Offense: EliteDefense: EliteDefensive shape: Bend-don't-break
Texas Tech's 2026 Season Balances Talent Loss with Strong Recruitment
Texas Tech enters the 2026 season with a #25 recruiting class and moderate continuity, but faces challenges from a heavy NFL draft loss and portal churn.
- RecruitingTexas Tech's #18 recruiting rank and 250.26 recruiting score indicate a strong incoming class that could bolster the roster.
- Roster reloadThe team experienced a heavy NFL draft loss with 9 players drafted, and faces moderate continuity with 59% of returning players.
Data as of 2026-08-01
·
Validated against program evidence
Raider Red is in the saddle.
Texas Tech · the story right now
20 storylines developing
What Texas Tech's offseason is really about
the open questionwhere does it go from here?
market_swing2026-07-15~readnew
Joey McGuire's fourth season opens with a 12-2 record and a #29 talent rank, yet the market now sees Texas Tech as a long shot for Big 12 title contention.
what happenedTexas Tech Big 12 championship odds shortened — implied probability moved from 2.0% to 50.5% (+48.5pp) between Jul 14 and Jul 15, 2026 (tier C). ✓ fact
the contextwin total up 0.5 — solo market signal, no peers moved the same direction
narrative tension · our read
dynastythis cycle~readnew
Texas Tech has reached elite-tier consistency — a 12-2 record and #29 national talent rank highlight the tension of sustaining a top-15% power rating without a prior season's AP final ranking.
what happenedTexas Tech has climbed into dynasty-caliber territory — into the top 19% of FBS by power rating over the last three seasons, up from the top 24% a year ago. ✓ fact
the contexta 21-15 record over the last three regular seasons
narrative tension · our read
recruitingthis cycle✓ factnew
Texas Tech signed a top-18 recruiting class.
the contextthe No. 1 recruiting class in the Big 12
narrative tension · our read
program_outlookthis cycle~readnew
Texas Tech leaped 51 spots in SP+ — the Air Raid's birthplace hasn't been this high since the 2000s, and McGuire's fourth season must prove it's more than a statistical anomaly.
what happenedTexas Tech enters 2026 rated No. 3 in 2025 SP+ (+27.6), up 51 spots from 2024. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
coordinatorsthis cycle~readnew
Joey McGuire's fourth season begins with a 12-2 winning record, yet the program's identity as the Air Raid's birthplace clashes with coordinator-driven reshaping and fan unease.
what happenedTexas Tech: coordinator change reshaping a unit. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
coordinatorsthis cycle~read★new
Joey McGuire's fifth season begins with a 12-2 record and an uneasy fanbase questioning whether the Air Raid can still drive Texas Tech forward in a reshaped Big 12.
what happenedTexas Tech: coordinator change reshaping a unit. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
short yardagethis cycle✓ factnew
Cameron Dickey converts 3rd/4th-and-short at an elite rate, and he also gets a real share of the team's goal-line carries.
narrative tension · our read
deep threatthis cycle✓ factnew
Reginald Virgil is a real deep-ball threat -- a high share of his targets come on throws past the sticks, and he catches those deep shots at a plus rate.
narrative tension · our read
money downthis cycle✓ factnew
Terrance Carter 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
program_outlookthis cycle~readnew
Texas Tech leaped 51 spots in SP+ — the gap between No. 3 preseason and Joey McGuire's 12-2 season raises the question of sustainability under the Air Raid.
what happenedTexas Tech enters 2025 rated No. 3 in SP+ (+27.6), up 51 spots from 2024. ✓ fact
narrative tension · our read
deep threatthis cycle~attributednew
Caleb Douglas is a real deep-ball threat -- a high share of his targets come on throws past the sticks.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
Caleb Douglas does NOT see a usage spike in garbage time -- his workload holds steady regardless of score.
narrative tension · our read
closerthis cycle~attributednew
Cameron Dickey gets LESS work in the fourth quarter with a lead than his overall workload would predict -- not the trusted closer raw carries might suggest.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
Cameron Dickey does NOT see a usage spike in garbage time -- his workload holds steady regardless of score.
narrative tension · our read
deep threatthis cycle~attributednew
Coy Eakin is used almost exclusively underneath -- a low share of his targets are downfield shots.
narrative tension · our read
closerthis cycle~attributednew
J'Koby Williams gets LESS work in the fourth quarter with a lead than his overall workload would predict -- not the trusted closer raw carries might suggest.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
J'Koby Williams does NOT see a usage spike in garbage time -- his workload holds steady regardless of score.
narrative tension · our read
garbage timethis cycle~attributednew
Reginald Virgil does NOT see a usage spike in garbage time -- his workload holds steady regardless of score.
narrative tension · our read
deep threatthis cycle~attributednew
Terrance Carter is used almost exclusively underneath -- a low share of his targets are downfield shots.
narrative tension · our read
dynastythis cycle~readnew
Texas Tech has reached elite-tier consistency — the program's peak power-rating run in four years raises the question of whether McGuire's fourth season can hold the top-12% SP+ with a 10.5-win market projection.
what happenedTexas Tech has climbed into dynasty-caliber territory — into the top 14% of FBS by power rating over the last three seasons, up from the top 19% a year ago. ✓ fact
the contexta 26-11 record over the last three regular seasons
narrative tension · our read
How past storylines here turned out
ReplacedTexas Tech's defensive coordinator spot turned over again the following season. See who's next →
AnsweredTexas Tech's climb into dynasty-caliber territory didn't last — it slipped back out.
The Offseason Ledger · Texas Tech
6 verified updates · portal · recruiting · staff · news- Recruiting
Five-star OT Felix Ojo commits 2026
Nine players drafted and the first domino McGuire drops is a five-star tackle — the line rebuild starts at the top of the board, not the middle.
- News
Big 12 title odds: -2 → -102 (▲48.5pp implied)
Big 12 title odds improved 48.5pp without an obvious public catalyst.
- News
Big 12 title odds: -102 → -2 (▼48.5pp implied)
Big 12 title odds dropped 48.5pp without an obvious public catalyst.
- News
Big 12 title odds: +100 → -2 (▼48.0pp implied)
Big 12 title odds dropped 48.0pp ahead of any public news — the market moved first.
- News
Court ruling grants 5th-year eligibility for Texas Tech Class of 2022
McGuire just found a workaround to nine draft exits — fifth-year guys who already know the system are worth more than any portal add when the O-line is the hinge of a Big 12 title run.
- News
Texas Tech releases depth chart
Nine guys drafted and McGuire's finally showing his hand — who actually filled those spots tells you whether this top-12% power rating holds or was just offseason math.
Transfer portal snapshot
+8.1 net portal points
(raw ledger: +13.4 — unweighted, no position adjustment)EDGE+7.5
need not filled
CB-6.9
starter risk
QB+4.8
IOL+4.1
low confidence
LB+4.0
P+3.3
low confidence
S-2.3
WR-1.0
starter risk
K-1.0
DL+1.0
TE-0.1
Top 3 commits
2026 class
★★★★★
LaDamion Guyton
#27 national
★★★★☆
Felix Ojo
#49 national
★★★★☆
Chase Campbell
#103 national
Blue-chip pedigree, profiling early as a prototypical wide receiver — 14 of his 25 closest recruiting profiles since 2018 shared the Possession Receiver archetype.~our read · projection from recruiting profile — no college snaps yet
↓
Fan confidence lower than any point since 2025
2nd percentile among FBS programs
Fan vs. market↓
2nd
Fan percentile
(FBS mood rank)
(FBS mood rank)
10.5
Vegas O/U wins
(98th among FBS)
(98th among FBS)
Market 96pp more optimistic than fan mood
Win total consensus · 3 books
Market outlook
Season expectations
Win total3 booksO/U 10.5
CFP championship#10 in field+1600
Big 12 title#1 in market+-121
Sportsbook consensus · best odds across multiple books · 2026-08-06
Texas Tech · Next-Season Outcome Band
Texas Tech · Next-Season Outcome BandFloor / Base / Ceiling
Floor 7-6
Base 10-3
Ceiling 12-2
floor7-6Bowl game.
base10-3Bowl game.
ceiling12-2Conference title + cFP quarterfinal.
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 · Texas Tech · Market Confidence
The market moved on Texas Tech. That's not nothing.
Texas Tech Big 12 championship odds shortened — implied probability moved from 2.0% to 50.5% (+48.5pp) between Jul 14 and Jul 15, 2026 (tier C). It is win total up 0.5 — solo market signal, no peers moved the same direction. The market moved; the fan base is split on what it means. Oddsmakers react to information, not sentiment — but that doesn't mean they're right. The room is divided — bulls and bears both have game-specific cases.
bullish — but with real dissent
where the takes land · dot = how loud
DOUBTBELIEF
Skeptics1 doubt take
Believers4 bull takes
🎪 drama: simmering💬 fans: 19% volume · negative overall
Developing1 new this week
5 days agoCourt ruling grants 5th-year eligibility for Texas Tech Class of 2022 — Reported
last weekBig 12 title odds: -2 → -102 (▲48.5pp implied)
2 weeks agoBig 12 title odds: -102 → -2 (▼48.5pp implied)
3 weeks agoBig 12 title odds: +100 → -2 (▼48.0pp implied)
4 weeks agoTexas Tech releases depth chart — Reported
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Joey McGuire's fourth season opens with a 12-2 record and a #29 talent rank, yet the market now sees Texas Tech as a long shot for Big 12 title contention.
Next · what to watch
Win total moves are the sharpest signal the market sends in the offseason. They don't reflect fan enthusiasm — they reflect information: roster losses, schedule difficulty, injury reports, and coaching staff changes that haven't hit the beat press yet. One-win adjustments are deliberate, not rounding. Watch whether the line moves again — markets don't stop at one adjustment when the signal changes.
Source of record: Texas Tech Big 12 championship odds shortened — implied probability moved from 2.0% to 50.5% (+48.5pp) between Jul 14 and Jul 15, 2026 (tier C) — win total up 0.5 — solo market signal, no peers moved the same direction.
How each room is reacting — tap to expand
🎪The circus“Former five-star recruit Micah Hudson set to be Texas Tech's top” — the saga that won't quit.›
The off-field storyline driving the noise right now. Not analysis — the soap opera, and that's the point.
“Former five-star recruit Micah Hudson set to be Texas Tech's top outside receiver”
Dallas News · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
📣Believers4 bullish/market items -- the case it's working.›
The 'market knows something fans don't' read -- when odds move, it's on information.
“Texas Tech Set Best-Ever Preseason Ranking in Coaches Poll at No. 12”
roundtable.io · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“Our best photos of Texas Tech football's preseason camp practices”
lubbockonline.com · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“Most Wanted: Texas Tech's Top Recruiting Targets in 2028”
Most Wanted · On3 · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
🧐Skeptics“One lingering question for Texas Tech according to USA TODAY Spo” — the real counter.›
The 'markets overcorrect' counter -- lines move on noise too; the receipts may not hold.
“One lingering question for Texas Tech according to USA TODAY Sports”
redraiderswire.usatoday.com · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
💬The boards19% of recent board volume — the fanbase is locked in. Board mood this week: negative overall · anger notable (69%).›
This event was in 222 of 1157 board posts (19%) over the last 60 days — a fanbase consumed by it. Fan text shown verbatim, attributed to the community not the individual poster.
"I spent the offseason building a full 2026 preseason preview for every FBS team, each with its own writeup. Here's the Texas Tech page: ["
r/TexasTechFootball ~ fan take
"I was out on Wells the moment he was hired. I knew we just hired a nobody and he wasn’t a fit at all with Texas Tech."
r/CFB ~ fan take
Board health this week (618 posts): 13% positive · 51% neutral · 36% negative. Team-level weekly mood — not specific to this event. The boards ≠ the fanbase: a self-selected vocal slice.
Following now · Texas Tech · Program power Confidence
Texas Tech's power rating is climbing, and the numbers agree.
Texas Tech has climbed into dynasty-caliber territory — into the top 19% of FBS by power rating over the last three seasons, up from the top 24% a year ago. It is a 21-15 record over the last three regular seasons. Three-year power ratings tell a structural story — the room is split on whether the schedule will confirm it.
bullish — but with real dissent
where the takes land · dot = how loud
DOUBTBELIEF
Skeptics1 doubt take
Believers4 bull takes
🎪 drama: simmering
Developing1 new this week
5 days agoCourt ruling grants 5th-year eligibility for Texas Tech Class of 2022 — Reported
last weekBig 12 title odds: -2 → -102 (▲48.5pp implied)
2 weeks agoBig 12 title odds: -102 → -2 (▼48.5pp implied)
3 weeks agoBig 12 title odds: +100 → -2 (▼48.0pp implied)
4 weeks agoTexas Tech releases depth chart — Reported
CFB Zeitgeist Read · our take
Texas Tech has reached elite-tier consistency — a 12-2 record and #29 national talent rank highlight the tension of sustaining a top-15% power rating without a prior season's AP final ranking.
Next · what to watch
The non-obvious consequence of climbing the power tiers is the expectation tax: the same season that looked like a breakout last year now reads as a disappointment. Watch whether the schedule lets the run actually show up on the field.
Source of record: Texas Tech has climbed into dynasty-caliber territory — into the top 19% of FBS by power rating over the last three seasons, up from the top 24% a year ago — a 21-15 record over the last three regular seasons.
How each room is reacting — tap to expand
🎪The circus“Former five-star recruit Micah Hudson set to be Texas Tech's top” — the saga that won't quit.›
The off-field storyline driving the noise right now. Not analysis — the soap opera, and that's the point.
“Former five-star recruit Micah Hudson set to be Texas Tech's top outside receiver”
Dallas News · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
📣Believers4 bullish/momentum items -- the case it's working.›
The 'resurgence is real' read: the numbers are starting to back the hype.
“Texas Tech Set Best-Ever Preseason Ranking in Coaches Poll at No. 12”
roundtable.io · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“Our best photos of Texas Tech football's preseason camp practices”
lubbockonline.com · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
“Most Wanted: Texas Tech's Top Recruiting Targets in 2028”
Most Wanted · On3 · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
🧐Skeptics“One lingering question for Texas Tech according to USA TODAY Spo” — the real counter.›
The 'wait and see' counter -- power shifts often get overread before the season proves them.
“One lingering question for Texas Tech according to USA TODAY Sports”
redraiderswire.usatoday.com · 2026-08-05 · read ↗
Recent Form · last 10 games
Warming
Four of five. The board favors this trend.
Streak L1Last 5 · 4-1Last 10 · 8-2
The forecast
Opens Sep 5
vs Abilene Christian · at home
Season line10.5 winsover -220
EliteEliteBend-don't-break
✓ fact on line · ~ our read on style
Rival pulse
Texas
Mixed-4
Texas-Texas Tech
Baylor
Hopeful+5
Baylor-Texas Tech
Fan mood index · most recent r/cfb data
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
Recruiting Footprint · 2026
22
TX · 16GA · 2AZ · 1MT · 1OK · 1TN · 1
TX leads the 2026 class with 16 commits. National footprint reaching 6 states.
Where they recruit · 2023-2026
93 signees across 13 states, 2023-2026. TX leads the pull.
Recruiting & portal buzz
CFL closes another door for Brendon Sorsby, won't register former Texas Tech QB
2027 3* ATH Zayden Smith commits to Texas Tech
Top r/cfb community posts · last 12 months
Voter spread
66 of 66 AP voters have them ranked, final AP ballot (2025) — from #5, Keith Farmer (WLEX-TV), to #10, Koki Riley (The (Baton Rouge) Advocate).
Individual AP Top 25 ballots, final AP ballot, 2025 — 66 voters tracked.
National spotlight
13 games with TV coverage: 8 national broadcast, 3 ESPN, 1 cable, 1 streaming
Kickoff windows: 6 noon, 5 afternoon, 2 primetime
Fumble luck
The bounces have gone their way on their own fumbles: 60% recovered, vs. ~51% expected.
9 of 15 own fumbles recovered themselves; 15 of 31 forced fumbles recovered, 2025 only.
Takeaway conversion
Cashing in at a normal clip: 22% of disrupted passes intercepted, close to ~19% league-wide.
16 interceptions of 72 disrupted passes (56 deflected, 16 intercepted), 2025 only.
Penalty battle
The flags haven't favored them: 95 penalties committed vs. 66 drawn on opponents, 268 yards behind.
780 penalty yards committed vs. 512 drawn on opponents, 2025 season total.
The Pulse on Texas Tech
45
Δ -2.8 vs last wk
787
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
"Air Raid"
— Texas Tech fanbase · recurring line
Fanbase Signals
Cohort Divergence5 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 12 corners
Cr/CFB
GGoogle News
LLocked On
WWreck Em Red
CCampus paper
BBluesky
YYouTube
The split, staged
Warmest corner+0.00
Boomers & Gen X
least sour cohort our read
vs
Coldest corner−0.00
Bettors
most skeptical cohort our read
How Texas Tech fans actually talk real · top-upvoted
Rr/CFBthe room
I’m willing to accept the death penalty if it means Paxton never holds another public office
▲ 697 ▼open ↗
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
skeptical
buying in
Boomers & Gen X+0.01
Bettors−0.15
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.
1205 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.
Fan reads
What's in the air
Sorsby's future with the Red Raiders hinges on unresolved NCAA and NFL decisions.
Will Brendan Sorsby ever be cleared to play for Texas Tech?
If you are Texas tech, what sucks is you still have idiots like Cody Campbell and Kirby Hocutt making decisions, 😆 good luck with that circusYouTube · ESPN College Football
These are the same guys who fired Coach Mike Leach, denied him money he had earned and when Leach sued Texas Tech, claimed immunity.YouTube · Texas Tech Red Raiders
Smith is a key addition as Texas Tech looks to rebuild after heavy NFL Draft losses.
Does Zayden Smith's commitment keep Texas Tech's 2027 class in the national top five?
The entire sports world is laughing at you Texas Tech!!!YouTube · Texas Tech Red Raiders
Texas tech fans are looking real pathetic today.YouTube · Josh Pate's College Football Show
Belief checklight on evidence
~ our readTexas Tech fans are down on the program, with a bit less hard evidence than most fanbases.
backed by facts
the mood
✓ counted We read 618 posts from Texas Tech fans this week.
What fans are saying
Fan claims · every quote verified verbatim
program directionLimited signal that season
fans believe Texas Tech has the best defense in decades
First time we've won 5 in a row by 20+ since 1952 on the back of the best defense we've had in at least 50 years.
Statistically this is our best defense since the 60s. No slight against Zach, dude is every bit of the legend he has earned. He didn't have a David Bailey, Lee Hunter, SGH, or Height, let alone all of them. This D is insane.
Based on 3 comments from 2 posters across 3 threads · Sep 20, 2025–Oct 5, 2025 · via CFB
program directionLimited signal that season
fans believe the team's scoring output is too low
Last year we were ranked 133 out of 134 in offense can we please improve that
Based on 1 comment from 1 poster across 1 thread · Aug 29, 2025 · via CFB
coaching decisionLimited signal that season
fans think his past teams underperformed
Bro y’all hired matt wells on your own. Dude was going to get fired at usu til he let Josh heupel call the plays. What did y’all expect?
Based on 1 comment from 1 poster across 1 thread · Aug 23, 2025 · via CFB
Season storylines
Week 6
“Frankly, I don't have a ton of excitement in my daily life. I went to Tech because my dad attended. I as never really a sports fan until I got to go to games with him. He died of heart failure after my freshman year. I've been waiting the better part of 20 years for a tea…”— r/CFB
Week 3
“This is the best defense we've had in my lifetime and it's not close. WE DRINK YOUR FUCKING MILKSHAKE.”— r/CFB
Week 4
“You mean the Curse of Hiring Matt Wells, Texas Tech, went through all these phases for many seasons”— r/CFB
Week 1
“That made me irrationally angry “Coach, your team is getting their cheeks clapped, what’s the plan to get back into this?” “Well first of all I’d like to thank Jesus Christ” wtf? This isn’t the Espys bro you’re ahead coach making millions of dollars”— r/CFB
Week 15
Five Lenses
What people are saying right now
Radio, beat writers & editorial9 posts
News & campus coverage8 posts
CFB analyst takes4 posts
Bluesky · @chrisvannini.com
4w ago
Rent free · r/cfb fan posts, last season
Texas Tech fans this offseason 35% of posts bring up another team▼4pp quieter#11 of 43 saltiest · mostly about Texas
The Rivalry Mirror
2025 season
Texas Tech
×
Texas
434 Texas fan posts mention us · 118 Texas Tech fan posts mention them
← Texas Tech fans, on Texas
Texas fans, on Texas Tech →
sorsbyz 7.1
championz 2.6
brendanz 6.1
winnerz 2.1
carez 3.5
nflz 3.3
qbsz 3.2
their Texas Tech talk is indistinguishable from their everyday talk
“Would love to see Texas tech v Texas week one”
youtube/The Joel Klatt Show: A College Football Podcast · fan post, verbatim
rival-mention windows, weighted log-odds · printed z is the truth — geometry only dramatizes it
Fanbase Health Index · Texas Tech · high confidence
Fanbase Health Index · Texas Tech · high confidenceGrowing (72)
DecliningStableGrowingSurging
On-Field — 12-2 (86% win rate)82
Volume — 3219 effective signal-N100
Cohort Engagement — Divergence 0.05 — quiet35
From the booth
The Lexicon
1,033 posts and articles vs the field · 2025 season
sorsby
×31.6 the field
Signature — ≥10× the rest of college football
sorsby×31.6n=116
brendan×53.8n=95
brendan sorsby×53.7n=83
morton×108.0n=30
hammond×86.2n=23
supplemental×90.0n=23
supplemental draft×94.1n=23
lubbock×73.6n=18
asu×11.4n=29
cody×38.9n=16
“CFL closes another door for Brendon Sorsby, won't register former Texas Tech QB”
reddit/CFB · fan post, verbatim
Fans using SORSBY (8 examples)
Sorsby has crazy talent. He flicks his wrist the ball travels 40 yards. Stafford like,
Let's Go, Brendan Sorsby! The dude is talented and just needs the right playcalls.
https://www.on3.com/news/brendan-sorsby-saga-cfl-will-not-allow-any-team-to-add-former-texas-tech-qb/ Great pickup for
Take a shot every time NIL or Brendan Sorsby are mentioned on a Tech broadcast and you'll be dead by halftime of the Houston
Was there anything keeping Sorsby’s team from filing this petition earlier and learning the NFL wasn’t having another
So Texas Tech QB Brendan Sorsby will not be eligible to enter the NFL in 2026 after all. He will be eligible to
Sorsby actually gambled on CFB games while at Indiana and played at Indiana, Indiana believes
Sorsby accepting defeat and moving on! It could’ve gotten ugly! I’ve not got any blood
Fanbase Voice
781 fan mentions
Measured
vs the 28 highest-volume fanbases - 2026 season
Your Vocabulary Clusteroffense
offense
with 8 other fanbasesKey stats — 2025 — FBS rank
Points/game#6 / 138 · 96th pct39.4
Pts allowed/game#2 / 138 · 99th pct11.8
Total yards/gm#6 / 136 · 96th pct461.6
Rush yards/gm#22 / 136 · 85th pct184.0
Pass yards/gm#7 / 136 · 96th pct277.6
Yards allowed/gm#5 / 136 · 97th pct258.0
Rush yds allowed/gm#1 / 136 · 100th pct70.1
Sacks#6 / 136 · 96th pct41
Interceptions#9 / 136 · 94th pct17
3rd-down conv#12 / 136 · 92nd pct49.3%
All 98 stats
Offense / Defense
Total yards
Team6463461.6/gm6.25/play#6 / 136 · 96th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp3612258.0/gm3.94/play#5 / 136 · 97th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Rush yards
Team2576184.0/gm2.49/play#22 / 136 · 85th pct#8 / 69 · 90th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp98270.1/gm1.07/play#1 / 136 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Rush carries
Team54839.1/gm#21 / 136 · 85th pct#9 / 69 · 88th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp43431.0/gm#47 / 136 · 66th pct#33 / 69 · 54th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Rush TDs
Team302.1/gm#27 / 136 · 81st pct#14 / 69 · 81st pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Opp80.6/gm#4 / 136 · 98th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Net pass yards
Team3887277.6/gm3.76/play#7 / 136 · 96th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp2630187.9/gm2.87/play#45 / 136 · 68th pct#25 / 69 · 65th pct#8 / 16 · 56th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Pass attempts
Team48634.7/gm#17 / 136 · 88th pct#9 / 69 · 88th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp48334.5/gm#131 / 136 · 4th pct#65 / 69 · 7th pct#16 / 16 · 6th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Completions
Team31822.7/gm#12 / 136 · 92nd pct#6 / 69 · 93rd pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp28620.4/gm#122 / 136 · 11th pct#59 / 69 · 16th pct#16 / 16 · 6th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Pass TDs
Team332.4/gm#5 / 136 · 97th pct#3 / 69 · 97th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Opp110.8/gm#7 / 136 · 96th pct#6 / 69 · 93rd pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Passer rating
Team148.0148.0#28 / 136 · 80th pct#21 / 69 · 71st pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp108.3108.3#7 / 136 · 96th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Interceptions thrown
Team100.7/gm#56 / 136 · 60th pct#23 / 69 · 68th pct#6 / 16 · 69th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
Opp171.2/gm#126 / 136 · 8th pct#62 / 69 · 12th pct#14 / 16 · 19th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Sacks (def)
Team412.9/gm#6 / 136 · 96th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 10 · 100th pct
Opp271.9/gm#87 / 136 · 37th pct#42 / 69 · 41st pct#12 / 16 · 31st pct#7 / 10 · 40th pct
Tackles for loss
Team1067.6/gm#4 / 136 · 98th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#2 / 10 · 90th pct
Opp765.4/gm#110 / 136 · 20th pct#60 / 69 · 14th pct#15 / 16 · 12th pct#7 / 10 · 40th pct
First downs
Team31822.7/gm#10 / 136 · 93rd pct#8 / 69 · 90th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Opp19413.9/gm#3 / 136 · 99th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
3rd-down conv
Team1097.8/gm#3 / 136 · 99th pct#3 / 69 · 97th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp654.6/gm#49 / 136 · 65th pct#28 / 69 · 61st pct#6 / 16 · 69th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
3rd-down att
Team22115.8/gm#2 / 136 · 99th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp21615.4/gm#135 / 136 · 1st pct#68 / 69 · 3rd pct#16 / 16 · 6th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
4th-down conv
Team110.8/gm#90 / 136 · 35th pct#49 / 69 · 30th pct#14 / 16 · 19th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Opp141.0/gm#68 / 136 · 51st pct#33 / 69 · 54th pct#4 / 16 · 81st pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
4th-down att
Team221.6/gm#87 / 136 · 37th pct#43 / 69 · 39th pct#15 / 16 · 12th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp423.0/gm#136 / 136 · 1st pct#69 / 69 · 1st pct#16 / 16 · 6th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Time of possession
Team422:2030:10/gm#20 / 136 · 86th pct#11 / 69 · 86th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp417:4029:50/gm#120 / 136 · 12th pct#60 / 69 · 14th pct#15 / 16 · 12th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Kicking & Punting
Field goals#42 / 135 · 70th pct28/34 (82.4%)
Extra points58/61
Punting#65 / 136 · 53rd pct43.5 avg · 44 punts
Turnovers & special teams
Turnovers
Team181.3/gm#43 / 136 · 69th pct#15 / 69 · 80th pct#4 / 16 · 81st pct#8 / 12 · 42nd pct
Opp322.3/gm#136 / 136 · 1st pct#69 / 69 · 1st pct#16 / 16 · 6th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Fumbles lost
Team80.6/gm#25 / 136 · 82nd pct#9 / 69 · 88th pct#4 / 16 · 81st pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Opp151.1/gm#136 / 136 · 1st pct#69 / 69 · 1st pct#16 / 16 · 6th pct#11 / 12 · 17th pct
INT return TDs
Team10.1/gm#36 / 135 · 74th pct#19 / 69 · 74th pct#5 / 16 · 75th pct#5 / 11 · 64th pct
Opp00.0/gm#1 / 136 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
INT return yards
Team21415.3/gm#23 / 136 · 84th pct#14 / 69 · 81st pct#5 / 16 · 75th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Opp282.0/gm#11 / 136 · 93rd pct#6 / 69 · 93rd pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Punt ret yds
Team25518.2/gm#21 / 136 · 85th pct#15 / 69 · 80th pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Opp896.4/gm#50 / 136 · 64th pct#33 / 69 · 54th pct#7 / 16 · 62nd pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct
Punt ret TDs
Team00.0/gm#43 / 135 · 69th pct#23 / 69 · 68th pct#4 / 16 · 81st pct#3 / 10 · 80th pct
Opp00.0/gm#1 / 135 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 10 · 100th pct
Kick ret yds
Team47934.2/gm#56 / 136 · 60th pct#22 / 69 · 70th pct#6 / 16 · 69th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct
Opp24717.6/gm#21 / 136 · 85th pct#14 / 69 · 81st pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Kick ret TDs
Team10.1/gm#7 / 136 · 96th pct#3 / 69 · 97th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#2 / 11 · 91st pct
Opp00.0/gm#1 / 135 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 10 · 100th pct
Penalty yards
Team78055.7/gm#37 / 136 · 74th pct#17 / 69 · 77th pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Opp51236.6/gm#20 / 136 · 86th pct#13 / 69 · 83rd pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct
Other
H1 epa per play opponent#1 / 167 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct-0.1-0.0/gm
Fumbles recovered#1 / 136 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct151.1/gm
Punt returns#7 / 136 · 96th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct271.9/gm
H2 epa per play opponent#8 / 143 · 95th pct#6 / 69 · 93rd pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct0.00.0
Interceptions (def)#9 / 136 · 94th pct#6 / 69 · 93rd pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct171.2/gm
Penalties#17 / 136 · 88th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct956.8/gm
Red zone pass rate#24 / 154 · 85th pct#8 / 69 · 90th pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct0.50.0/gm
Punt ret (opp)#31 / 136 · 78th pct#21 / 69 · 71st pct#4 / 16 · 81st pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct100.7/gm
Penalties (opp)#34 / 136 · 76th pct#20 / 69 · 72nd pct#5 / 16 · 75th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct664.7/gm
Kick ret (opp)#40 / 136 · 71st pct#26 / 69 · 64th pct#4 / 16 · 81st pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct151.1/gm
H2 epa per play#40 / 142 · 73rd pct#24 / 69 · 67th pct#6 / 16 · 69th pct0.20.0/gm
H1 epa per play#43 / 162 · 74th pct#31 / 69 · 57th pct#7 / 16 · 62nd pct0.30.0/gm
Recruiting rating#48 / 138 · 66th pct#48 / 69 · 32nd pct#8 / 16 · 56th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct201.514.4/gm
First down pass rate#50 / 215 · 77th pct#13 / 69 · 83rd pct#4 / 16 · 81st pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct0.50.0/gm
Passes intercepted opponent#64 / 136 · 54th pct#38 / 69 · 46th pct#9 / 16 · 50th pct#2 / 12 · 92nd pct100.7/gm
Kick returns#84 / 136 · 39th pct#39 / 69 · 45th pct#9 / 16 · 50th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct181.3/gm
Fourth down go rate#107 / 138 · 23rd pct#53 / 69 · 25th pct#16 / 16 · 6th pct#10 / 12 · 25th pct0.30.0/gm
Fumbles rec (def)#114 / 136 · 17th pct#62 / 69 · 12th pct#13 / 16 · 25th pct#7 / 12 · 50th pct90.6/gm
Situational
3rd-down conversion
Off49.3%#12 / 136 · 92nd pct#10 / 69 · 87th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Def30.1%#7 / 136 · 96th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
4th-down conversion
Off50.0%#91 / 136 · 34th pct#52 / 69 · 26th pct#13 / 16 · 25th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Def33.3%#4 / 136 · 98th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Turnover margin#4 / 136 · 98th pct#4 / 69 · 96th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct+1.00/gm
Sack rate (def)#21 / 136 · 85th pct#12 / 69 · 84th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#2 / 10 · 90th pct8.5%
Red Zone & Drive Efficiency (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Red zone trips
Team735.2/gm#2 / 167 · 99th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Opp221.6/gm#31 / 166 · 82nd pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Red zone score %
Team84.9%84.9%#40 / 167 · 77th pct#23 / 69 · 68th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp77.3%77.3%#71 / 166 · 58th pct#32 / 69 · 55th pct#10 / 16 · 44th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Points / drive
Team2.90.2/gm#12 / 167 · 93rd pct#10 / 69 · 87th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp0.80.1/gm#2 / 166 · 99th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Yards / drive
Team43.53.1/gm#51 / 167 · 70th pct#31 / 69 · 57th pct#8 / 16 · 56th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Opp26.91.9/gm#2 / 166 · 99th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Plays / drive
Team6.40.5/gm#100 / 167 · 41st pct#50 / 69 · 29th pct#11 / 16 · 38th pct#9 / 12 · 33rd pct
Opp5.70.4/gm#4 / 166 · 98th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Three-and-out rate
Team5.8%5.8%#6 / 167 · 97th pct#3 / 69 · 97th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Opp17.9%17.9%#25 / 166 · 86th pct#13 / 69 · 83rd pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#12 / 12 · 8th pct
Scheme Identity (2014– , play-by-play derived)
Rush rate over expected#104 / 145 · 29th pct#49 / 69 · 30th pct#13 / 16 · 25th pct-3.9%-3.9%
Havoc rate
Team23.6%23.6%#2 / 140 · 99th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct
Opp14.7%14.7%#62 / 140 · 56th pct#30 / 69 · 58th pct#8 / 16 · 56th pct
Standard-downs success
Team47.3%47.3%#83 / 154 · 47th pct#48 / 69 · 32nd pct#10 / 16 · 44th pct
Opp37.7%37.7%#3 / 172 · 99th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct
Passing-downs success
Team32.7%32.7%#52 / 153 · 67th pct#28 / 69 · 61st pct#5 / 16 · 75th pct
Opp24.2%24.2%#9 / 149 · 95th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct
Line yards / carry
Team2.92.9#86 / 143 · 41st pct#43 / 69 · 39th pct#9 / 16 · 50th pct
Opp2.02.0#1 / 155 · 100th pct#1 / 69 · 100th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct
Stuff rate
Team18.1%18.1%#63 / 143 · 57th pct#35 / 69 · 51st pct#7 / 16 · 62nd pct
Opp22.5%22.5%#22 / 155 · 86th pct#12 / 69 · 84th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct
Power success rate
Team82.9%82.9%#8 / 137 · 95th pct#6 / 69 · 93rd pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct
Opp54.5%54.5%#9 / 141 · 94th pct#5 / 69 · 94th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct
Efficiency
Completion %
Off65.4%#35 / 136 · 75th pct#22 / 69 · 70th pct#2 / 16 · 94th pct#3 / 12 · 83rd pct
Def59.2%#34 / 136 · 76th pct#16 / 69 · 78th pct#6 / 16 · 69th pct#4 / 12 · 75th pct
Yards / attempt
Off8.0#36 / 136 · 74th pct#22 / 69 · 70th pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct
Def5.4#4 / 136 · 98th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Yards / completion
Off12.2#45 / 136 · 68th pct#22 / 69 · 70th pct#5 / 16 · 75th pct#6 / 12 · 58th pct
Def9.2#2 / 136 · 99th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct
Yards / carry#42 / 136 · 70th pct#24 / 69 · 67th pct#8 / 16 · 56th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct4.7
Yards / play#26 / 136 · 82nd pct#18 / 69 · 75th pct#3 / 16 · 88th pct#5 / 12 · 67th pct6.25
Scoring margin#2 / 136 · 99th pct#2 / 69 · 99th pct#1 / 16 · 100th pct#1 / 12 · 100th pct+27.6/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 Surgeon · +0.28 EPA/play | 2 | 12 | 219 / 333 | 65.8 | 2780 #49 FBS | 8.3 | 22 #35 FBS | 6 | 154.1 | 67.7 | 8.1 | 4.6 | |
Yards by week → Pocket Surgeon· Money-downHigh-percentage passer who protects the ball. Loses the matchup on improvisation. saves his best for the money downs Watch-list name — on at least one major award watch list, no hardware yet — trending, not yet confirmed. 12 of 183 QBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Completion %68.2% 78th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Rush yards / carry-2.6 bottom 3th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Trait fingerprint Plays like View Behren Morton's full player page | |||||||||||||
| Scrambler · +0.30 EPA/play | 15 | 8 | 68 / 108 | 63.0 | 668 | 6.2 | 7 | 3 | 130.8 | 68.8 | 6 | 1.8 | |
Yards by week → ScramblerMakes plays with feet when the pocket collapses. Efficiency still on the rise. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 45 of 183 QBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Rush usage28.5% 72th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Rush yards / carry7.0 98th percentile · FBS QBs, min. 80 attempts Trait fingerprint Plays like View Will Hammond's full player page | |||||||||||||
| +0.97 EPA/play | 12 | 5 | 26 / 36 | 72.2 | 357 | 9.9 | 2 | 0 | 173.9 | 62.2 | — | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||||
Running Backs
| Player | # | G | Car | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Stuff% | 10+% | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Back · +0.15 EPA/play | 8 | 14 | 211 | 1138 #21 FBS | 5.4 | 14 #20 FBS | 71 | 18.1 | 14.6 | 16.5 | 14.5 | 7.5% (33/438) | |
Yards by week → Balanced Back· Boom-or-bustPlays within the scheme — consistent production without a dominant dimension. his yards come in chunks — feast or famine Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. The most common profile in its group this season — 186 of 349 classified this way. Played in 14 of 21 games this season · sophomore · 3-star, 2024 class our readBreakout: his CFB Index score moved from the 22nd to 94th percentile among FBS RBs our readthe ball security is the one real worry — 2.13 fumbles per 100 touches (top-decile concern) | |||||||||||||
| Complete Back · +0.22 EPA/play | 20 | 14 | 154 | 866 #68 FBS | 5.6 | 6 | 50 | 13.2 | 13.5 | 17.2 | 15.2 | 10.0% (44/438) | |
Yards by week → Complete BackThreatens defenses in every dimension — rushing, receiving, third-down. Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. 3 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / carry6.4 81th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Receiving share18.5% 86th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Trait fingerprint Plays like our readBreakout: his CFB Index score climbed from the 33rd percentile to the 93rd among FBS RBs | |||||||||||||
| Workhorse | 23 | 6 | 45 | 240 | 5.3 | 0 | 36 | 7.2 | 9.6 | — | — | — | |
Yards by week → WorkhorseBuilt to take 20+ carries per game. Volume is the value. 52 of 349 RBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt View Adam Hill's full player pageWeight225 lb 90th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries Rush TD rate0.0% bottom 6th percentile · FBS RBs, min. 40 carries | |||||||||||||
Receivers
| Player | # | G | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | 3rd Dn Use | Pass Dn Use | Tgt Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possession Receiver · +0.35 EPA/play | 5 | 13 | 53 | 830 #59 FBS | 15.7 | 7 #38 FBS | 61 | 11.7 | 11.8 | 20.5% (90/438) | |
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 / reception15.4 70th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Reception volume53 84th percentile · FBS WRs, min. 12 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Caleb Douglas's full player page | |||||||||||
| Possession Receiver · +0.39 EPA/play | 1 | 14 | 57 | 705 | 12.4 | 6 #62 FBS | 42 | 9.8 | 11.2 | 19.9% (87/438) | |
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. The most common profile in its group this season — 332 of 558 classified this way. Played in 14 of 21 games this season · senior View Reginald Virgil's full player page | |||||||||||
| Possession Receiver · +0.69 EPA/play | 3 | 14 | 49 | 653 | 13.3 | 6 #62 FBS | 42 | 4.2 | 6.4 | 12.6% (55/438) | |
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 The most common profile in its group this season — 332 of 558 classified this way. Played in 14 of 21 games this season · junior · 3-star, 2022 class View Coy Eakin's full player page | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.50 EPA/play | 7 | 12 | 55 | 624 | 11.3 | 5 | 50 | 14.4 | 11.1 | 16.4% (72/438) | |
Yards by week → Complete TENo single go-to route — the receiving numbers show up inline and split out alike. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 177 of 223 TEs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Yards / reception11.7 56th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Reception volume55 100th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Terrance Carter's full player page | |||||||||||
| +0.23 EPA/play | 14 | 9 | 8 | 112 | 14 | 2 | 30 | 2.6 | 4.9 | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
| Complete TE · +0.17 EPA/play | 9 | 5 | 9 | 77 | 8.6 | 0 | 17 | 2.9 | 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 / reception8.4 bottom 22th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions TD rate0.0% bottom 10th percentile · FBS TEs, min. 8 receptions Trait fingerprint Plays like View Johncarlos Miller II's full player page | |||||||||||
| +0.08 EPA/play | 85 | 3 | 5 | 76 | 15.2 | 2 | 38 | 6.1 | 1.8 | — | |
Yards by week → | |||||||||||
Defensive Line
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | TFL | Sack | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nose Anchor | 2 | 14 | 42 | 18 | 11 #74 FBS | 3 | 3 |
Nose AnchorThe heaviest frame on the interior. Sack production is intentionally not the point of this profile. National watch / fringe All-American — on the edge of a 1st-team nod. 152 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Weight325 lb 93th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score moved from the 67th to 84th percentile among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 33 | 14 | 40 | 24 | 10 | 4.5 | 7 |
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 readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 34th to 77th to 94th percentile among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| Nose Anchor | 51 | 9 | 25 | 10 | 5 | 1.5 | 0 |
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 Weight315 lb 87th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score climbed from the 22nd percentile to the 60th among FBS IDLs | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | — | 5 | 13 | 9 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 4 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate11.5% bottom 37th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles Plays like our readFading: his CFB Index score went from the 86th percentile among FBS IDLs to the 4th | |||||||
| 3-Tech Penetrator | 8 | 9 | 11 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
3-Tech PenetratorDisruptive interior rusher who lives in the backfield. 269 of 809 IDLs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate18.2% 64th percentile · FBS interior linemen, min. 10 tackles our readAscending: his CFB Index score now sits at the 29th percentile among FBS IDLs, up from the 5th | |||||||
| 88 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
Linebackers
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | Ast | TFL | Sack | PD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage 'Backer | 10 | 14 | 122 | 62 | 60 | 10 | 1 | 6 | 4 #23 FBS |
Coverage 'BackerCarries tight ends and patrols the middle of the field in coverage. Unanimous All-American — 1st team on all five NCAA-recognized selectors. 99 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate4.9% 79th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Tackle volume122 99th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Jacob Rodriguez's full player page | |||||||||
| Coverage 'Backer | 13 | 14 | 88 | 43 | 45 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 4 #23 FBS |
Coverage 'BackerCarries tight ends and patrols the middle of the field in coverage. Starter — over 60% of the snaps, holding the job. 99 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate5.7% 86th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Tackle volume88 91th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readBounce-Back: his CFB Index score shows a real arc: 82nd percentile among FBS LBs, fell to 48th, now back up to 95th | |||||||||
| Coverage 'Backer | 6 | 14 | 73 | 38 | 35 | 3.5 | 0.5 | 4 | 0 |
Coverage 'BackerCarries tight ends and patrols the middle of the field in coverage. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 99 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate5.5% 85th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Tackle volume73 79th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score moved from the 34th to 57th percentile among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Thumper | 31 | 14 | 51 | 32 | 19 | 19.5 #2 FBS | 14.5 #1 FBS | 3 | 0 |
ThumperDownhill striker who fills the run lane and blitzes off the edge. Unanimous All-American — 1st team on all five NCAA-recognized selectors. 97 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate38.2% 100th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Sack rate28.4% 100th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score moved from the 86th to 100th percentile among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Thumper | 9 | 13 | 37 | 19 | 18 | 11 #74 FBS | 9.5 #15 FBS | 1 | 0 |
ThumperDownhill striker who fills the run lane and blitzes off the edge. 97 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt TFL rate29.7% 100th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Sack rate25.7% 100th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score climbed from the 69th percentile to the 97th among FBS LBs | |||||||||
| Sideline-to-Sideline | 3 | 11 | 21 | 14 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Sideline-to-SidelineRanges from hash to hash and makes his own tackles. 102 of 660 LBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Solo tackle rate0.7 94th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Tackle volume21 bottom 15th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint Plays like View Bryce Ramirez's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 41 | 7 | 15 | 7 | 8 | 0 | 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 volume15 bottom 10th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles TFL rate0.0% bottom 10th percentile · FBS linebackers, min. 15 tackles Trait fingerprint View Brock Golwas's full player page | |||||||||
| 11 | 8 | 10 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| 18 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 34 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 94 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 40 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Defensive Backs
| Player | # | G | Tot | PD | INT | TFL | Sack |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Box Safety | 5 | 13 | 75 | 6 | 0 | 5.5 | 1 |
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 volume75 94th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readTwo-star recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile | |||||||
| Box Safety | 7 | 14 | 59 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 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 volume59 79th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readAscending: his CFB Index score climbed from the 19th percentile to the 48th among FBS Ss | |||||||
| Rover | 14 | 13 | 47 | 5 | 5 #6 FBS | 4 | 0 |
RoverHits like a linebacker and still takes the ball away. Part-time starter — splitting the role or filling in on injury. 83 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate10.6% 64th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readSustained Ascent: his CFB Index score shows two real climbs in a row — 13th to 60th to 91st percentile among FBS Ss | |||||||
| Centerfielder | 27 | 13 | 26 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
Centerfielder· Takeaway threatSingle-high range who erases the deep middle of the field. the kind of DB who takes it back the other way 133 of 801 Ss we've classified this way this season. Season receipt PD rate19.2% 93th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readUnranked recruit — top-quartile production against his own recruiting profile | |||||||
| Centerfielder | 20 | 10 | 23 | 5 | 0 | 0.5 | 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 rate21.7% 97th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readFading: his CFB Index score now sits at the 16th percentile among FBS Ss, up from the 87th | |||||||
| Hybrid Nickel | 1 | 8 | 21 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 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 rate4.8% bottom 33th percentile · FBS safeties, min. 15 tackles Plays like our readFading: his CFB Index score climbed from the 55th percentile to the 14th among FBS Ss | |||||||
| 17 | 6 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | |
| 24 | 5 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 16 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
Kicking
| Player | # | G | FG M/A | FG% | XP M/A | Pts | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big Leg | 48 | 14 | 22/28 | 78.6 | 40/41 | 106 | 58 |
| 27 | 7 | 6/6 | 100 | 15/17 | 33 | 33 |
Punting
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | Long | In20 | TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pinner | 41 | 13 | 44 | 1913 | 43.5 | 61 | 21 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complete Back · +0.22 EPA/play | 20 | 14 | 6 | 242 | 40.3 | 1 | 99 |
| +0.23 EPA/play | 14 | 9 | 8 | 154 | 19.3 | 0 | 29 |
Punt Returns
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | TD | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possession Receiver · +0.69 EPA/play | 3 | 14 | 8 | 121 | 15.1 | 0 | 36 |
| 21 | 7 | 10 | 76 | 7.6 | 0 | 19 | |
| Complete Back · +0.22 EPA/play | 20 | 14 | 3 | 27 | 9 | 0 | 16 |
2025 stat leaders
final
2025 stat leaders
1.
Ben Roberts
LB
88.0 tot (def)
2.
Cameron Dickey
RB
1,138 yds (rush)
3.
John Curry
LB
73.0 tot (def)
4.
Brenden Jordan
DB
59.0 tot (def)
5.
Reginald Virgil
WR
705 yds (rec)
Roster
2025
23
players carry a qualified CFB Index Score this season.
David Bailey
LB
#1 of 583
Jacob Rodriguez
LB
#10 of 583
Terrance Carter
TE
#4 of 156
Romello Height
LB
#19 of 583
Ben Roberts
LB
#36 of 583
Cameron Dickey
RB
#23 of 326
+17 more
Texas Tech · 2025 schedule & results12-2Brutal slateAverage opponent win rate 50% · 6 AP top-25 opponents on the schedule. 3 ranked wins banked (time-of-game rank).
| Wk | Date | Us | Opp | Line | Opponent | Result | Record | Conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aug 30 | #17 | #255 | -54.5 | Arkansas-Pine Bluff | W 67–7 119 | 1-0 | 0-0 |
| 2 | Sep 6 | #27 | #251 | -47.5 | Kent State | W 62–14 139 | 2-0 | 0-0 |
| 3 | Sep 13 | #25 | #92 | -23.5 | Oregon State | W 45–14 147 | 3-0 | 0-0 |
| 4 | Sep 20 | #21 | #45 | +3.5 | @UtahTop 25 win | W 34–10 141 | 4-0 | 1-0 |
| 6 | Oct 4 | #16 | #50 | -11.5 | @Houston | W 35–11 143 | 5-0 | 2-0 |
| 7 | Oct 11 | #7 | #45 | -13.5 | Kansas | W 42–17 145 | 6-0 | 3-0 |
| 8 | Oct 18 | #5 | #44 | -8.5 | @Arizona State | L 22–26 148 | 6-1 | 3-1 |
| 9 | Oct 25 | #6 | #176 | -38 | Oklahoma State | W 42–0 132 | 7-1 | 4-1 |
| 10 | Nov 1 | #6 | #26 | -7 | @Kansas State | W 43–20 139 | 8-1 | 5-1 |
| 11 | Nov 8 | #5 | #22 | -13.5 | BYUTop 10 win | W 29–7 140 | 9-1 | 6-1 |
| 12 | Nov 15 | #5 | #70 | -24 | UCF | W 48–9 134 | 10-1 | 7-1 |
| 14 | Nov 29 | #4 | #95 | -24.5 | @West Virginia | W 49–0 148 | 11-1 | 8-1 |
| Conference Championship | ||||||||
| 15 | Dec 6 | #4 | #17 | -13.5 | BYU (N)Top 25 win | W 34–7 133 | 12-1 | 9-1 |
| College Football Playoff | ||||||||
| 18 | Jan 1 | #4 | #3 | -1 | Oregon (N) | L 0–23 | 12-2 | 9-1 |
Advanced box score (EPA, success rate, explosiveness)▼
| Date | Opp | Result | Yds | TO | TOP | EPA/play | Success% | Explosive% | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 1 | Oregon | L 0–23 | — | — | — | -0.060 | 27.0% | 124.4% | Season-low EPA/play |
| Dec 6 | BYU | W 34–7 | 374 | 0 | 31:54 | +0.072 | 37.3% | 127.8% | |
| Nov 29 | @West Virginia | W 49–0 | 572 | 2 | 40:00 | +0.306 | 42.7% | 166.7% | Most explosive |
| Nov 15 | UCF | W 48–9 | 499 | 0 | 29:07 | +0.443 | 56.8% | 114.6% | Blowout win |
| Nov 8 | BYU | W 29–7 | 368 | 0 | 29:25 | -0.005 | 32.5% | 128.5% | |
| Nov 1 | @Kansas State | W 43–20 | 436 | 2 | 33:24 | +0.104 | 37.5% | 147.5% | Defense's roughest night |
| Oct 25 | Oklahoma State | W 42–0 | 370 | 2 | 31:16 | +0.196 | 34.7% | 153.6% | Best defensive stand |
| Oct 18 | @Arizona State | L 22–26 | 276 | 1 | 22:48 | +0.046 | 35.9% | 113.4% | One-score loss |
| Oct 11 | Kansas | W 42–17 | 505 | 1 | 23:48 | +0.384 | 43.3% | 151.4% | |
| Oct 4 | @Houston | W 35–11 | 552 | 1 | 37:58 | +0.263 | 50.6% | 93.9% | |
| Sep 20 | @Utah | W 34–10 | 484 | 2 | 32:15 | +0.160 | 36.5% | 154.8% | |
| Sep 13 | Oregon State | W 45–14 | 601 | 2 | 31:00 | +0.452 | 53.8% | 135.1% | Blowout win |
| Sep 6 | Kent State | W 62–14 | 601 | 1 | 30:03 | +0.341 | 53.1% | 122.8% | Blowout win |
| Aug 30 | Arkansas-Pine Bluff | W 67–7 | 610 | 0 | 27:22 | +0.772 | 71.2% | 123.7% | Season-high EPA/play |
| Season average (14 games) | 481 | 1.1 | +0.248 | 43.8% | 132.7% | ||||
How They Play · 2025
How They Play · 2025Texas Tech fields an elite offense behind an elite, bend-don't-break defense.
Opponent-adjusted percentiles vs all FBS. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.
Team identity · competitive snaps only
How Texas Tech actually scores
77th percentile quality, 31st 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
Texas Tech's 4th-quarter offense, before and after garbage time
Raw Q4 EPA/play ranks 61st percentile in FBS. Strip out snaps taken with a blowout margin and it climbs to the 68th — the correction is the finding, not a footnote.
Standard downs vs. passing downs
Does Texas Tech hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?
45th percentile success on standard downs, 65th on passing downs — a 20-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
Texas Tech by half
1st-half offense ranks 74th percentile in FBS; 2nd-half, 73rd — competitive snaps only, garbage time excluded from both halves.
Schedule mirage
How much of Texas Tech's number is the schedule?
Raw EPA/play through week 21 is 0.25; 81st percentile once opponent strength is stripped out, it's 0.06. The widest gap came in week 1: 0.77 raw vs. 0.07 adjusted.
Texas Tech reads strongest in rushing epa allowed (top 1%) and epa allowed (top 2%); the crux lives in success rate, where Texas Tech sits at the 65th 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 · Texas Tech
Most Similar Programs · Texas TechReads Like
AkronTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontApp StateTier 3 · Prestige T3 · Similarly-sized rosters up frontArkansas StateTier 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 · Texas Tech · 2018-present
Elite
68% home win rate vs 37% on the road. margin runs +14.5 better at home. Jones AT&T Stadium seats 60,454, averaging 95% full (57,571 attendance, 25 games reported).
Home35-16Away15-25
Positional competition · RB room
The carries are split. The job isn’t.
Cameron Dickey and J'Koby Williams split the carries (204/356 vs 152/356) -- but the job isn't split the same way. J'Koby Williams owns the receiving work.
Cameron DickeyJ'Koby Williams
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
Q4, leading (competitive)
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Targets
p = 0.016 -- real, not noise
Top-5-carry share
concentration alone -- EPA/carry doesn't corroborate, read with caution
Screened 4 claims, 1 survived, 3 falsified
Positional competition · WR/TE room
The targets are split. The job isn’t.
Caleb Douglas (WR) and Terrance Carter (TE) split the targets (89/157 vs 68/157) -- but the job isn't split the same way.
Caleb DouglasTerrance Carter
Targets
the baseline -- every row below is tested against this split, not a flat 50/50
3rd-down targets
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Inside the 10
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Garbage-time share
shared -- dots touch, this room really is a committee here
Top-5-catch share
concentration alone -- EPA/target doesn't corroborate, read with caution
Screened 4 claims, 0 survived, 4 falsified
What changed
Texas Tech’s play-calling, before and after the change
Offense: Zach Kittley (2022–2024) → Mack Leftwich (2025)
Play-calling barely moved on the change — every rate held within a few points.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Defense: Tim DeRuyter (2022–2024) → Shiel Wood (2025)
Play-calling barely moved on the change — every rate held within a few points.
1st-down pass rate
Red-zone pass rate
Defensive identity · pass zones
What this defense gives up, by zone.
On short passes, Texas Tech’s defense allows a completion rate above the FBS mean (66.5% vs 65.9% league-wide, shrunk toward the mean for its 193-play sample) — mid-pack, 81 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=193 short-zone plays faced, raw rate 66.8%
Historical echo
Texas Tech’s breakout has happened before — and 4 of the 4 closest programs couldn’t hold it.
Programs whose stature climbed in the same shape. The grey line is their run; the color is what came next for them.
Oklahoma State 2007–2012
fell back
Air Force 1994–1999
fell back
Florida State 1964–1969
fell back
Kansas 2003–2008
fell back
An analogy on the shape of a program’s Zeitgeist stature arc — not a prediction. Interim calibration, medium confidence; matched among current FBS programs at a comparable level.
Venue texture
72°F average kickoff temp; 1% of games had measurable precipitation; 12 mph average wind.
Based on 75 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
Texas Tech's 2014–2025 record is 76-73. The era is still being written; the CFP line is the one the program is arguing for.
All-Time Record
589-471-24
since 1926 · 100 seasons · .543 win rate
HOME
365-176-13
AWAY
201-264-10
NEUTRAL
23-31-1
1920s
1930s
1940s
1950s
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
2010s
2020s
Program résumé
1CFP apps
The program, in full — read the essay
Texas Tech spent thirty years as the most entertaining team in the Big 12 that never won the league. In December 2025, the Red Raiders routed BYU 34-7 for the program's first conference title. Then Oregon shut them out 23-0 in the Playoff. Both things are true.
The Air Raid was born in Lubbock. Mike Leach arrived in 2000 and turned a remote West Texas school into the most prolific passing offense in college football, an offensive philosophy that reshaped how the entire sport plays. What Leach didn't win was the Big 12. Patrick Mahomes put up video-game numbers here from 2014 to 2016. Michael Crabtree's last-second catch beat No. 1 Texas in 2008, one of the sport's iconic moments. But the conference title — the thing that separates a fun program from a serious one — stayed out of reach for a generation.
Joey McGuire's fourth season changed the argument entirely. Backed by Cody Campbell's collective and a roster reported north of $28 million, Texas Tech went 12-2 in 2025, won the Big 12 championship game with a 34-7 rout of BYU, and reached the College Football Playoff. Behren Morton threw for 3,335 yards and 27 touchdowns. The league title is in the trophy case, real and permanent, whatever Oregon's 23-0 shutout in the quarterfinal says about the distance to the sport's top tier.
The 2026 question is sustainability. One faction reads the title as a new standard — McGuire is extended, the infrastructure is built, and Lubbock is a destination now. The other reads the spending as a top-of-market buy that the collective won't maintain at the same level two years running. The Crabtree catch proved Texas Tech could beat the best on a given day. The championship proved it could win a league. The 2026 season is the first data point on whether both can hold.
How they play
Air Raid gunslinger, championship edition — the wide-open, pass-happy, fearless offense that Leach built is still the spine, now paired under McGuire with the roster depth that a heavily-funded collective can assemble. Morton operates from the pocket in a spread system that creates mismatches through tempo and pre-snap motion. Jones AT&T Stadium is loud, weird, and tortilla-stained — one of the sport's most distinctive home environments, now with a conference banner to hang above it.
Rising
Texas Tech 2016–2025. Climbing +1.4 rungs across the last 10 seasons. Slope +0.25 rungs / year — moving up the prestige scale.
CFP Era · Texas Tech
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 · 12-2 · CFP #4 / AP #4
Season Standing · 2025 · 12-2 · CFP #4 / AP #4CFP contender
Texas Tech: Top 5 / CFP-contender. A real championship case is on the table.
R0R1R2R3R4R5R6R7R8R9
Sub-FBSBuildingBowlRankedContenderPlayoff
Big 12 Standing · 2025
1st in the Big 12
Texas Tech sits at the top of the Big 12 at 9-1. Everyone else is chasing.
| # | Program | Record |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Tech | 9-1 |
| 2 | BYU | 8-2 |
| 3 | Utah | 7-2 |
| 4 | Arizona | 7-3 |
| 5 | Arizona State | 6-3 |
| 6 | Houston | 6-3 |
| 7 | Cincinnati | 5-4 |
| 8 | Iowa State | 5-4 |
| 9 | TCU | 5-4 |
| 10 | Kansas State | 5-5 |
| 11 | Baylor | 3-6 |
| 12 | Kansas | 3-6 |
| 13 | UCF | 2-7 |
| 14 | West Virginia | 2-7 |
| 15 | Colorado | 1-8 |
| 16 | Oklahoma State | 0-9 |
Coaching Era · Texas Tech
Coaching Era · Texas TechJoey McGuire
Joey McGuire has held the program for 5 seasons — the era is established.
Era Joey McGuire · 2022–presentPrev: Matt Wells (2020–2021)OC: Mack LeftwichPrev OC: Zach Kittley (2022–2024)DC: Shiel Wood / co-Rob GreenePrev DC: Shiel Wood (2025)
5
years · era
Rituals
Three gameday rituals — the ones outsiders never quite catch.
Guns Up
since 1972
The 'Guns Up' hand sign — index finger and thumb extended in a pistol gesture — is the Texas Tech fan identity marker. Used as greeting between alumni, raised during touchdowns, photographed at every campus event. Texas's 'Hook 'em Horns' is more famous, but 'Guns Up' is just as universal among Red Raiders.
Tortilla Throwing
since 1980s
Red Raider fans throw tortillas onto the field after kickoffs — a tradition dating to the 1980s tortilla-pricing-protest era. The university has alternately discouraged + tolerated; tradition survives. Visiting team players cite it as one of the strangest stadium experiences in the Big 12.
Mike Leach Era Legacy
since 2000
Mike Leach's tenure (2000-2009) defined the program — the Air Raid offense, the 2008 Crabtree catch, multiple top-25 finishes. The 2009 firing (dispute over a player's medical care) didn't erase the Air Raid identity, which became permanent program DNA. The 2022 Leach death (at Mississippi State) was mourned as a Texas Tech tragedy.
Program memory
What this program never forgets
Most weeks vanish. These didn’t.
2008
The Crabtree catch
Michael Crabtree's last-second touchdown beats No. 1 Texas — the most famous moment in program history
2025
The first Big 12 title
A 34-7 rout of BYU delivers Texas Tech's first conference championship and a Playoff bid
2025
The Orange Bowl CFP loss
Oregon shuts out Texas Tech 23-0 in the Playoff quarterfinal — the title run's hard ceiling
Heartbreak
Moment of the Year · Texas Tech · 2025
Moment of the Year · Texas Tech · 2025Postseason · Lost 0-23 vs Oregon
Week 18 of 2025. The single game that defined the season's arc.
Bowl / Postseason Ledger
Bowl / Postseason LedgerRecent postseason (2015-2025): 3-4
Most recent: 2025 — loss 0-23 (home). Last 5 postseason: 3-2.
20252024202320222021
NFL Draft Pipeline
2022–2026
NFL Draft PipelineStrong
16 picks last 5 cycles. 2 first-round picks. Recruits with NFL ambitions notice.
16
picks · 2 R1
#2
David Bailey
Defensive Edge · 2026 · New York · #1/583 final season
#7
Tyree Wilson
Defensive End · 2023 · Las Vegas · #51/548 final season
#43
Jacob Rodriguez
Linebacker · 2026 · Miami · #10/583 final season
#59 all-time · 10 first-round picksthe talent factory →
Unit lineage
Texas Tech’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
2014–2017 · Eric Morris2018 · Kevin Johns / co-Clay McGuire2019–2020 · David Yost2021 · Sonny Cumbie2022–2024 · Zach Kittley2025 (ongoing) · Mack Leftwich
Defense2014–2025
2014 · co-Mike Smith / Matt Wallerstedt (2nd season; first 3 games)2015 · David Gibbs / co-Mike Smith2016–2017 · David Gibbs2018 · David Gibbs / co-Zac Spavital2019 · Keith Patterson2020–2021 · co-Derek Jones / Keith Patterson2022–2024 · Tim DeRuyter2025 · Shiel Wood
Hired for 2026: Shiel Wood / co-Rob Greene — not yet reflected in on-field data.
Elite (≥70th pct)AveragePoor (≤30th pct)
Chronicle Visuals
Average 2025 continuity (59% back) — qb room anchors it, offense is the stress point.
The portal upgraded the EDGE room but opened a hole at WR.
The 2026 draft hit DEFENSIVE EDGE hardest — and the portal hasn't replaced it yet.
Texas Tech sits where recruit talent and draft yield largely match.
r/cfb moments
1.9k
[Postgame Thread] Texas Tech Defeats BYU 29-7
782
[Postgame Thread] Texas Tech Defeats Abilene Christian 52-51 (OT)
647
[Postgame Thread] TCU Defeats Texas Tech 34-24
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