Vanderbilt

2-0

SEC · Clark Lea, year 6 (28-36) · FirstBank Stadium · 40,351 · 35,000 avg in 2026

The nationunrankedAP / Coaches
The model#44 CFB ZeitgeistSP+ #27 (+12.1) · FPI #39
The marketVanderbilt by 3vs NC State · our model 56% Vanderbilt · a number, not a pick

LastW 35–26 vs Delaware · Sat Sep 12 · C.J. Heard 2 sacks, 2 TFL, 8 tackles

Nextvs NC State · Sat Sep 19 · 12:45 pm ET · FirstBank Stadium · Vanderbilt by 3 · series 2-1, last win 2012 · Game preview

Updated Tue Sep 15 · through week 2

Key stats — 2026 — FBS rank
Points/game
31.5
Pts allowed/game
17.5
Total yards/gm#97 / 138 · 30th pct
367.5
Rush yards/gm#94 / 138 · 32nd pct
143.5
Pass yards/gmT-#75 / 138 · 46th pct
224.0
Yards allowed/gmT-#33 / 138 · 76th pct
258.0
Rush yds allowed/gmT-#28 / 138 · 80th pct
80.0
SacksT-#2 / 138 · 99th pct
11
InterceptionsT-#29 / 115 · 61st pct
2
3rd-down convT-#104 / 138 · 23rd pct
33.3%
All 85 stats
Offense / Defense
Total yards
Team
735367.5/gm5.57/play#97 / 138 · 30th pct#57 / 69 · 18th pct#13 / 16 · 22nd pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
516258.0/gm4.53/playT-#33 / 138 · 76th pct#30 / 69 · 57th pct#8 / 16 · 53rd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush yards
Team
287143.5/gm2.17/play#94 / 138 · 32nd pct#49 / 69 · 30th pct#12 / 16 · 28th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
16080.0/gm1.40/playT-#28 / 138 · 80th pctT-#22 / 69 · 68th pct#8 / 16 · 53rd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush carries
Team
7638.0/gmT-#62 / 138 · 53rd pctT-#31 / 69 · 51st pct#11 / 16 · 34th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
6130.5/gm#36 / 138 · 74th pct#27 / 69 · 62nd pct#7 / 16 · 59th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush TDs
Team
52.5/gmT-#35 / 138 · 70th pctT-#23 / 69 · 60th pctT-#8 / 16 · 44th pct#12 / 13 · 15th pct
Opp
10.5/gmT-#24 / 138 · 73rd pctT-#18 / 69 · 64th pctT-#6 / 16 · 59th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Net pass yards
Team
448224.0/gm3.39/playT-#75 / 138 · 46th pctT-#48 / 69 · 30th pctT-#12 / 16 · 25th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
356178.0/gm3.12/play#51 / 138 · 63rd pct#36 / 69 · 49th pct#9 / 16 · 47th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Pass attempts
Team
5628.0/gmT-#78 / 138 · 43rd pctT-#45 / 69 · 35th pct#13 / 16 · 22nd pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
5326.5/gmT-#41 / 138 · 69th pctT-#26 / 69 · 60th pct#6 / 16 · 66th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Completions
Team
3517.5/gmT-#80 / 138 · 41st pctT-#48 / 69 · 28th pctT-#13 / 16 · 19th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
2713.5/gmT-#21 / 138 · 85th pctT-#13 / 69 · 81st pct#3 / 16 · 84th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Pass TDs
Team
10.5/gmT-#114 / 138 · 11th pctT-#60 / 69 · 8th pctT-#15 / 16 · 6th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
21.0/gmT-#45 / 138 · 57th pctT-#29 / 69 · 46th pctT-#9 / 16 · 31st pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Passer rating#78 / 115 · 33rd pct#46 / 59 · 23rd pct#13 / 14 · 11th pct#7 / 13 · 54th pct
128.5128.5
Interceptions thrown
Team
00.0/gmT-#92 / 138 · 17th pctT-#42 / 69 · 20th pctT-#12 / 16 · 16th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
21.0/gmT-#77 / 138 · 33rd pctT-#40 / 69 · 29th pctT-#6 / 16 · 38th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Sacks (def)
Team
115.5/gmT-#2 / 138 · 99th pctT-#2 / 69 · 97th pctT-#1 / 16 · 94th pct#10 / 11 · 18th pct
Opp
31.5/gmT-#61 / 138 · 52nd pctT-#35 / 69 · 46th pctT-#8 / 16 · 50th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Tackles for loss
Team
168.0/gmT-#18 / 138 · 86th pctT-#10 / 69 · 84th pctT-#3 / 16 · 81st pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp
84.0/gmT-#39 / 138 · 67th pctT-#26 / 69 · 57th pctT-#5 / 16 · 66th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
First downs
Team
3718.5/gmT-#102 / 138 · 25th pctT-#59 / 69 · 14th pct#15 / 16 · 9th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
2914.5/gmT-#35 / 138 · 74th pct#30 / 69 · 57th pct#7 / 16 · 59th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
3rd-down conv
Team
94.5/gmT-#85 / 138 · 32nd pctT-#50 / 69 · 24th pctT-#12 / 16 · 25th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
42.0/gmT-#2 / 138 · 97th pctT-#2 / 69 · 95th pctT-#2 / 16 · 84th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
3rd-down att
Team
2713.5/gmT-#57 / 138 · 57th pctT-#24 / 69 · 64th pct#5 / 16 · 72nd pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
2512.5/gmT-#33 / 138 · 73rd pctT-#14 / 69 · 76th pct#4 / 16 · 78th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
4th-down conv
Team
42.0/gmT-#13 / 138 · 88th pctT-#7 / 69 · 88th pctT-#1 / 16 · 91st pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
42.0/gmT-#121 / 138 · 9th pctT-#63 / 69 · 7th pctT-#13 / 16 · 16th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
4th-down att
Team
73.5/gmT-#10 / 138 · 91st pctT-#5 / 69 · 92nd pct#1 / 16 · 97th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
52.5/gmT-#98 / 138 · 25th pctT-#54 / 69 · 20th pctT-#11 / 16 · 31st pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Time of possession
Team
64:2732:14/gm#47 / 138 · 66th pct#22 / 69 · 69th pct#6 / 16 · 66th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
55:3327:46/gm#38 / 138 · 73rd pct#22 / 69 · 69th pct#6 / 16 · 66th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct

FBS rankings · 2026 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs

Player stats — 2026 season
Quarterbacks
Player#GCmp/AttPctYdsY/ATDINTRateZPRQBRAdj ANY/ASack%
+0.47 EPA/play2221 / 3167.72708.710151.565.6
+0.15 EPA/play1214 / 2556.01787.100115.81.8
Receivers
Player#GRecYdsAvgTDLong
+0.10 EPA/play29164
#52 FBS
18.2035
Complete TE · +0.50 EPA/play821011711.7031

2026 stat leaders · Vanderbilt

through 2 games

C.J. Heard leads Vanderbilt with 14 tackles through 2 games.

1. C.J. Heard S 14 tackles
2. Junior Sherrill WR 164 receiving yards
3. Nicholas Rinaldi LB 13 tackles
4. Bryan Longwell LB 10 tackles
5. Jayvontay Conner TE 117 receiving yards
How They Play · 2025

Vanderbilt fields an elite offense behind a leaky, gives up the big play defense.

Offense
99th pct EPA/play
Defense
34th pct EPA allowed
Defensive shape
25th pct at limiting explosive plays

Percentile vs all FBS, based on this season's per-game production. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.

The Savant Card · Vanderbilt · 2025

Vanderbilt reads strongest in epa / play (top 1%) and rushing epa (top 2%); the crux lives in passing epa allowed, where Vanderbilt sits at the 16th percentile.

offense · strengths lead

EPA / play +0.41
99th
Success Rate +0.50
97th
Explosive Plays +1.43
97th
Rushing EPA +0.29
99th

defense · higher bar = harder to play against

EPA Allowed +0.18
34th
Success Rate Allowed +0.41
50th
Explosive Plays Allowed +1.32
25th
Passing EPA Allowed +0.36
17th

hidden math · special situations

Passing EPA +0.55
97th
Rushing EPA Allowed +0.00
83rd
Elite · 90+Strong · 70+Average · 40-70Concern · 10-40Bottom · <10
Sources · CFBD tier-2 advanced stats · per-game production · 13 games this season · percentiles vs. up to 136 FBS peers

Home-field advantage · Vanderbilt · 2018–present · FBS opponents

Vanderbilt is worth +1.1 points more at home than on the road.

Bottom tenth of FBS, 6th percentile of 133 programs

41% at home, 24% away against FBS opponents since 2018 (19–27 home, 10–31 away). Interval ±4.7.

95% intervalmodel 2.3 · books ~3Weakest home edge in FBSStrongest

Our model gives every stadium the same flat 2.3-point home edge — per-team modelling was tested and did not survive scrutiny (why) — and the books use about 3. Against the closing line, Vanderbilt has beaten the number by −2.4 more at home than away over 74 games — inside the ±7.6 that many games can resolve. Results here cannot tell the flat number apart from the building, and that is the honest reading of nearly every FBS stadium.

FirstBank Stadium seats 40,351 and has averaged 74% full (29,985, 27 games reported). Visitors cover a median 359 miles to get here since 2018 — 56th-shortest of 135 FBS venues, inside the ordinary range. 14% of the 2026 roster (15 of 111 located players) grew up inside 100 miles of the stadium.

Edge = half the gap between average home margin and average road margin, FBS opponents only, non-neutral games since 2018; the interval is 95%. Market line: closing spread, seasons with lines on file. Trip length is straight-line miles from the visiting team's campus to the venue, measured across all 54 home games since 2018.

Home19–27Away10–31Edge+1.1 ±4.7Visitor trip359 mi

More in this tab

Scheme claimsFive specific, testable claims about how this team plays.

Fourth-quarter reliability, corrected

Vanderbilt's 4th-quarter offense, before and after garbage time

Raw Q4 EPA/play ranks 6th percentile in FBS. Strip out snaps taken with a blowout margin and it drops to the 3rd — the correction is the finding, not a footnote.

league medianRaw 4th quarter · 6th pctileCompetitive snaps only · 3rd pctileWorst in FBSBest in FBS
Source CFB Zeitgeist · CFBD play-by-play, garbage-time adjusted by pre-play margin

Standard downs vs. passing downs

Does Vanderbilt hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?

80th percentile success on standard downs, 12th on passing downs — a 68-point gap between the two.

Fragile off scheduleBalanced, both workStruggles even on scheduleStandard-downs reliantVanderbiltWeak on standard downsElite on standard downsFalls apart off scheduleHolds up off scheduleHawai'i18th standard · 41st passingUNLV51st standard · 7th passingStanford76th standard · 15th passingEastern Michigan52nd standard · 10th passingSan José State54th standard · 22nd passingNew Mexico State45th standard · 75th passingSacramento State23rd standard · 14th passingOklahoma State41st standard · 49th passingDuke20th standard · 29th passingFlorida State28th standard · 65th passingRutgers30th standard · 71st passingKansas70th standard · 35th passingBoston College27th standard · 56th passingNorfolk State16th standard · 9th passingLouisville96th standard · 70th passingMissouri36th standard · 85th passingMemphis69th standard · 65th passingGeorgia Southern24th standard · 45th passingOle Miss94th standard · 50th passingJacksonville State65th standard · 82nd passingNorth Dakota State86th standard · 27th passingArizona92nd standard · 86th passingUSC97th standard · 99th passingWake Forest56th standard · 97th passingTCU93rd standard · 8th passingDelaware70th standard · 31st passingUAB65th standard · 81st passingMichigan State62nd standard · 29th passingSouth Florida91st standard · 52nd passingFlorida International46th standard · 43rd passingNavy98th standard · 59th passingWisconsin13th standard · 18th passingOregon State10th standard · 38th passingSyracuse48th standard · 64th passingOhio State90th standard · 40th passingBall State12th standard · 24th passingPittsburgh30th standard · 76th passingColorado35th standard · 77th passingGeorgia Tech58th standard · 44th passingAuburn75th standard · 55th passingBaylor40th standard · 96th passingNorth Texas49th standard · 68th passingApp State44th standard · 90th passingIowa State4th standard · 23rd passingUTSA99th standard · 29th passingArkansas60th standard · 80th passingBoise State58th standard · 46th passingOregon35th standard · 33rd passingTulsa56th standard · 1st passingTulane31st standard · 2nd passingPurdue83rd standard · 88th passingMiddle Tennessee87th standard · 68th passingVanderbilt80th standard · 12th passingSan Diego State4th standard · 40th passingLSU33rd standard · 98th passingClemson1st standard · 19th passingCentral Michigan16th standard · 6th passingTexas Tech88th standard · 48th passingMichigan2nd standard · 62nd passingWestern Michigan39th standard · 20th passingOhio38th standard · 17th passingBuffalo7th standard · 14th passingTexas72nd standard · 94th passingCoastal Carolina61st standard · 52nd passingColorado State82nd standard · 91st passingWyoming65th standard · 36th passingTexas A&M85th standard · 72nd passingLiberty14th standard · 59th passingFlorida Atlantic43rd standard · 87th passingLouisiana19th standard · 92nd passingSouth Alabama50th standard · 73rd passingTroy22nd standard · 59th passingSam Houston78th standard · 61st passingNevada77th standard · 52nd passingWestern Kentucky25th standard · 34th passingWashington State8th standard · 3rd passingWashington81st standard · 4th passingCalifornia9th standard · 25th passingCharlotte73rd standard · 83rd passingTennessee65th standard · 78th passingUtah State4th standard · 93rd passing
Source CFB Zeitgeist · advanced team stats, Connelly success-rate definition
View all FBS teams as a table
TeamStandard-downs percentilePassing-downs percentile
App State44th90th
Arizona92nd86th
Arkansas60th80th
Auburn75th55th
Ball State12th24th
Baylor40th96th
Boise State58th46th
Boston College27th56th
Buffalo7th14th
California9th25th
Central Michigan16th6th
Charlotte73rd83rd
Clemson1st19th
Coastal Carolina61st52nd
Colorado35th77th
Colorado State82nd91st
Delaware70th31st
Duke20th29th
Eastern Michigan52nd10th
Florida Atlantic43rd87th
Florida International46th43rd
Florida State28th65th
Georgia Southern24th45th
Georgia Tech58th44th
Hawai'i18th41st
Iowa State4th23rd
Jacksonville State65th82nd
Kansas70th35th
LSU33rd98th
Liberty14th59th
Louisiana19th92nd
Louisville96th70th
Memphis69th65th
Michigan2nd62nd
Michigan State62nd29th
Middle Tennessee87th68th
Missouri36th85th
Navy98th59th
Nevada77th52nd
New Mexico State45th75th
Norfolk State16th9th
North Dakota State86th27th
North Texas49th68th
Ohio38th17th
Ohio State90th40th
Oklahoma State41st49th
Ole Miss94th50th
Oregon35th33rd
Oregon State10th38th
Pittsburgh30th76th
Purdue83rd88th
Rutgers30th71st
Sacramento State23rd14th
Sam Houston78th61st
San Diego State4th40th
San José State54th22nd
South Alabama50th73rd
South Florida91st52nd
Stanford76th15th
Syracuse48th64th
TCU93rd8th
Tennessee65th78th
Texas72nd94th
Texas A&M85th72nd
Texas Tech88th48th
Troy22nd59th
Tulane31st2nd
Tulsa56th1st
UAB65th81st
UNLV51st7th
USC97th99th
UTSA99th29th
Utah State4th93rd
Vanderbilt80th12th
Wake Forest56th97th
Washington81st4th
Washington State8th3rd
Western Kentucky25th34th
Western Michigan39th20th
Wisconsin13th18th
Wyoming65th36th
Tendency driftHow this coordinator's calls have drifted since arriving.

Season by season

How Vanderbilt’s current staff calls plays, year over year

Offense: Tim Beck (2024–2026)
1st-down pass rate
2024: 33% → 2026: 39% · 17-pt range · #28 of 184 · more than most
Red-zone pass rate
2024: 34% → 2026: 33% · 3-pt range · #177 of 182 · less than most
4th-down go rate
2024: 25% → 2025: 29% · 4-pt range · #167 of 172 · less than most
Defense: co-Steve Gregory (2024–2026)
1st-down pass rate
2024: 33% → 2026: 39% · 17-pt range · #35 of 203 · more than most
Red-zone pass rate
2024: 34% → 2026: 33% · 3-pt range · #196 of 200 · less than most
4th-down go rate
2024: 25% → 2025: 29% · 4-pt range · #184 of 189 · less than most
RatingsWhere the public rating systems put this team.

Model Consensus

Where the Models Rank Vanderbilt

CFB Zeitgeist

#44

+3.7

SP+

#27

+12.1

FPI

#39

+6.8

Elo

#21

1746

The national models put Vanderbilt between 21st and 39th nationally — CFB Zeitgeist is more skeptical, at 44th.

National rank of 138 FBS teams · 2026 season. SP+/FPI/SRS published; Elo & CFB Zeitgeist ranked by rating.

Comparable teamsPrograms built like this one — tier, prestige band, kind of fanbase, roster size. Not a stat match.

Most similar programs · Vanderbilt

Reads like

Matched on how the programs are built — tier, prestige band, kind of fanbase, conference, voice and roster size — not on this season's stats. A calibration, not a prediction.

Historical echoPrograms whose arc bent the same way -- then what happened.

Historical echo

Vanderbilt’s breakout has happened before — and 1 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.

Western Michigan 1996–2001
fell back
Colorado State 1982–1987
kept climbing
New Mexico 1955–1960
kept climbing
Kansas 1943–1948
kept climbing

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.

ConditionsThe weather and altitude visitors have to deal with.
Venue texture

69°F average kickoff temp; 12% of games had measurable precipitation; 7 mph average wind.

Based on 82 home games with weather data.

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