Skip to content

Iowa Hawkeyes

Big Ten·2-0·
Elo
1847#11
SP+
18.0#16
FPI
11.0
AP
#21
Nextvs Northern Iowa · Wk 3
Talent #44 (722.7)Recruiting class #2634% production returning

Roster · 111 players

FR 25SO 24JR 32SR 30
#PlayerPosClHtWt
3Jimmy SullivanQBSO6'1"205
4Tradon BessingerQBFR6'5"213
9Hank BrownQBSR6'4"218
10Jeremy HecklinskiQBJR5'11"201
16Ryan FitzgeraldQBSO6'2"221
5Nathan McNeilRBSO5'11"202
15O'Lontae DeanRBSO6'0"212
21L.J. Phillips Jr.RBSR5'8"211
22Braeden JacksonRBSO5'11"206
23Brevin DollRBJR6'0"213
26Xavier WilliamsRBJR5'10"228
28Kamari MoultonRBSR5'9"211
0Jarriett BuieWRJR6'2"198
1KJ ParkerWRJR5'10"191
2Reece Vander ZeeWRJR6'4"220
6Xavier StinsonWRFR6'2"202
7Dayton HowardWRSR6'5"215
8Evan JamesWRSO5'10"170
11Brody SchafferWRFR6'1"195
12Diondre SmithWRFR5'10"160
14Tony DiazWRJR5'10"184
17Alex EichmannWRSR6'2"210
83Jackson NaeveWRJR6'0"195
84Apollo PayneWRSO6'3"214
88Lance BeeghleyWRJR6'2"197
89Isaiah OliverWRFR5'11"199
18Luke BrewerTEFR6'4"239
19Mason WoodsTESO6'2"230
48Zach OrtwerthTESR6'4"247
80Michael BurtTEJR6'5"252
81DJ VonnahmeTEJR6'4"241
82Dylan SteckerTESO6'4"233
85Thomas MeyerTESO6'4"248
86Eli JohnsonTESO6'5"250
87Addison OstrengaTESR6'4"249
52Will HahnOLSO6'1"294
53Michael MyslinskiOLSR6'2"299
58Kade PieperOLSR6'3"298
59Trevor LauckOLSR6'5"314
60Lucas AllgeyerOLSO6'5"297
61Cael WinterOLSR6'3"294
63Josh JanowskiOLJR6'2"294
64Leighton JonesOLSR6'2"288
65Trent WilsonOLSO6'3"290
68Will NolanOLJR6'6"313
70Hudson ParliamentOLFR6'4"313
71Jack DotzlerOLSR6'6"309
72Owen LinderOLFR6'6"294
73Colin WhittersOLFR6'3"329
74Bodey McCaslinOLJR6'6"303
75Cannon LeonardOLSR6'8"309
77George NahasOLSR6'3"295
78Gene RiordanOLFR6'5"302
79Carson NielsenOLFR6'7"311
13Drew CampbellDEJR6'4"252
40Chima ChinekeDEJR6'4"262
84Joseph AndersonDEJR6'6"241
32Sawyer JezierskiDLFR6'3"285
42David FasonDLFR6'0"268
43Kahmari BrownDLJR6'2"259
44Kenneth MerrieweatherDLSR6'3"270
45Jack JandaDLFR6'5"272
50Will LockhartDLSO6'3"250
51Luke GaffneyDLSR6'2"288
56Maddux Borcherding-JohnsonDLSR6'3"299
57Will HubertDLSR6'3"291
88Emmanuel OlagbajuDLSR6'2"314
91Devan KennedyDLJR6'3"281
92Brice StevensonDLSR6'0"287
95Lance IngoldDLJR6'5"251
96Bryce HawthorneDLSR6'3"298
97Iose EpenesaDLSO6'3"269
99Brad FitzgibbonDLSO6'3"288
4Julian MansonLBFR6'3"225
9Kasen ThomasLBFR6'2"230
10Burke GautcherLBSO6'3"231
12Billy WeivodaLBFR6'2"226
15Carson CooneyLBSO6'3"222
22Derek WeisskopfLBJR6'3"233
23Landyn Van KekerixLBSR6'2"238
31Nolan DeLongLBSR6'0"231
33Cam BuffingtonLBJR6'3"238
36Jayden MontgomeryLBSR5'11"227
37Brayton AlfordLBFR6'0"211
46Preston RiesLBJR6'1"226
47Jack LaughlinLBSR6'1"224
0Cody HaddadDBSO5'11"186
1Darion JonesDBFR6'1"181
2Tyler BrownDBJR5'10"201
3Jaylen WatsonDBJR5'11"187
5Anthony HawkinsDBJR6'3"202
6Zach LutmerDBSR6'1"203
7Rashad Godfrey Jr.DBJR6'1"202
8Deshaun LeeDBSR5'10"189
11Jacob WallaceDBSO5'10"186
14Alex MotaDBSR6'0"195
16Ronnie HillDBFR5'11"192
18Xavier StylesDBJR6'1"207
19Kyler GerardyDBJR6'0"199
20Ty HudkinsDBJR6'0"201
21Marcello VittiDBFR5'10"201
26Eli RobbinsDBFR6'0"193
29Noah DanielDBFR6'0"197
30Eli KampmanDBFR6'2"197
34Drew MacPhersonDBSO6'1"204
25Eli OzickPKSR5'11"199
92Caden BuhrPKSO5'10"203
35Tanner PhilpottPJR6'1"210
49Boston EverittPSO6'0"199
54Matty McLaughlinLSFR6'1"195
69Ike SpeltzLSJR6'0"233

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
28.0
scoring offense
Points allowed
6.5
scoring defense
Differential
+21.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
395.5#76
Yards / play
5.8#82
Passing yards / game
204.5#92
Rushing yards / game
191.0#48
First downs / game
19.5#90
3rd down %
37.9%#87
4th down %
0.0%#114
Time of possession
31:47#47
Defense
Yards allowed / game
187.5#7
Yards / play allowed
3.5#10
Pass yards allowed / game
115.0#6
Rush yards allowed / game
72.5#18
3rd down % allowed
25.0%#22
Sacks
6#20
Tackles for loss
10#79
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+1#41
Takeaways
2#76
Giveaways
1#21
Penalties / game
5.5#37
Penalty yards / game
42.5#40

Rank is national among all FBS teams (#1 = best), oriented so higher rank = better even for defensive and discipline metrics. Bars show percentile.

Scouting Report · 2026 projection

balanced

Iowa is in year 13 under Kirk Ferentz, whose offenses have been balanced. The strengths are on both sides of the ball, led by 3rd at keeping everything in front of them. The way in is 138th at hitting chunk plays.

On fourth down he goes for it less often than his peers do from the same spots (−4.5%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −43.4% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Iowa has played 2 games against an average slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Projected strengths

  • Defensehitting chunk plays
    #3
    projected
  • Offensegetting stopped at the line
    #6
    projected
  • Defensesurviving second and twelve
    #8
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Offensehitting chunk plays
    #138
    projected

Each bar is where this team sits in the country. Before the season has produced enough football these are PROJECTIONS — last season regressed to the mean, plus talent, returning production, recruiting and whether the staff is the same one — and the season replaces them as it is played. Head coaches only — there is no free feed for coordinators, so on a program where the head coach does not call the offense this describes the staff he hired. Play-calling identity is a style, not a grade: throwing more than the situations warrant is not better than throwing less than they warrant.

2026 Season Projection

model win prob · 9 to play
6.24.8
projected final record (now 20)
Exp. wins left
4.2
of 9 games
Bowl odds
70%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
75%
vs Purdue
Toughest
12%
vs Ohio State

How the season could finish · 2026 · chance of each final win total · 9 games left

Every remaining game simulated from the model's win probability for it. Tallest bar is the single likeliest finish, not a prediction that it happens.

234567891011
final winstallest bar = 28% chance
Likeliest finish 6-5 (28%)Bowl eligible 70% · marked on the axis at 6

Player Value

EPA contribution by position group + estimated NIL market value (derived from position rates and on-field production — not actual deal figures).

Unit Value — Total EPA
QBHank Brown, Jeremy Hecklinski
+18.9 EPA
RBKamari Moulton, Xavier Williams +2
+8.8 EPA
WRJarriett Buie, Evan James +1
+6.1 EPA
TEAddison Ostrenga, Zach Ortwerth +2
+2.6 EPA

Total EPA produced by each positional group this season. OL value is captured via the rush/pass efficiency of skill players; OL-specific EPA isn't separately reported.

Estimated NIL Market Value
ESTIMATED
QBHank Brown
~$781K
EPA +15.50.259/play60 snaps
WRTony Diaz
~$262K
EPA +5.60.244/play23 snaps
EPA +13.00.420/play31 snaps

Estimated from position-group market rates and on-field EPA contribution. Actual NIL valuations depend on social media following, brand fit, and market negotiations — these figures are directional only.

The Five Factors

ranked vs. FBS · bar = better
Efficiency (PPA)
Off0.1734th#91
Def-0.0482nd#25
Explosiveness
Off1.1423rd#106
Def1.1176th#34
Field position
Off64.212th#122
Def76.89th#125
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off2.8715th#118
Def3.2552nd#67
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 1
Margin +1

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.2639th#85
Off · rush
0.1655th#62

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.1653rd#66
Def-0.1786th#20
Passing
Off0.2637th#87
Def0.2147th#73

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
3.21#47
2nd-level / open-field
1.00 / 1.64
Power / stuff (off)
50.0% / 14.0%
Havoc — total (def)
17.7%#53
Havoc — front 7 / DB
9.7% / 8.0%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.15
Def-0.13
Pass downs
Off0.21
Def0.10

PPA on each down type (off vs. def).

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.20#350.00#1090.45#86
Defense-0.33#110.16#760.15#30

Elo Trajectory

Northern IllinoisFinal
Elo rating 17911845+54 over season

Team Fingerprint · 2026 · 46 opponent-adjusted metrics · percentile vs 138 FBS teams

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.0413th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed-0.1393rd
  • Offense success rate40%31st
  • Defense success rate allowed23%98th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs48%45th
  • Offense success — passing downs20%9th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs25%99th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs20%81st

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.113th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.247th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs0.9126th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.945th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.153rd
  • Defense line yards allowed2.279th
  • Offense highlight yards1.668th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.4472nd
  • Offense power success0.439th
  • Defense power success allowed0.7543rd
  • Offense stuff rate0.1937th
  • Defense stuff rate0.2149th

Third down

  • Third down conversion38%34th
  • Third down distance faced6.370th
  • Third down conversion allowed26%83rd
  • Third down distance forced7.455th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.1774th
  • Net success rate — second half0.1472nd

Drives

  • Points per drive2.151st
  • Points per drive allowed0.2598th
  • Average starting field position3692nd
  • Opponent starting field position2390th
  • Available yards gained50%49th
  • Available yards allowed19%99th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive92%81st
  • Scoring opportunities allowed58%96th
  • Points per scoring opportunity2.336th
  • Points allowed per opportunity0.9396th
  • Three-and-out rate29%40th
  • Three-and-outs forced67%99th

CORE

  • CORE offense-0.8239th
  • CORE defense-7.893rd
  • CORE overall6.976th

Roster

  • Returning usage40%47th
  • Returning EPA80.441st
  • Team talent composite72369th
  • Recruiting class rank26.082nd
  • Recruiting class points22982nd

Every metric is opponent-adjusted and ranked so that higher is always better — a defensive rate that is good when low is ranked accordingly. Sack and tackle-for-loss composition are deliberately absent: their relationship to team quality is a measured null, so they carry a style rather than a rank, and they appear in the pressure signature instead.

Intelligence Report

Offensive DNA

Balanced offense — below average EPA/play nationally
EPA/play
+0.166#91 · below avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.258#87
Rush EPA/play
+0.159#66
Explosiveness
1.137#106
Pts/opportunity
2.87#118
Success rate
42.3%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.100 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Disruptive defense suppressing opponents below the national average
EPA/play allowed
-0.040#25 · top 20%
Havoc rate (total)
17.7%#53
Front-7 havoc
9.7%
DB havoc
8.0%
Big play rate allowed
1.107#34
Success rate allowed
22.1%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

28.0 PPG offense, 6.5 allowed — +21.5 margin/game
Points per game
28.0
Points allowed/game
6.5
Scoring margin/game
+21.5
Turnover margin
+1won 2 · lost 1
Production returning
34%
Talent rank (247)
#44

2-0 record through 2 games.

Team Shape · percentile vs. FBS · dashed = 50th

OFFENSE34thEXPLOSIVENESS23thFINISHING15thFIELD POS12thDEFENSE82thHAVOC62th50th100th
Offense
34th
Explosiveness
23th
Finishing
15th
Field Pos
12th
Defense
82th
Havoc
62th

Each axis = national percentile rank. 100th = best in FBS, 0th = worst. Defense and Havoc are oriented so higher = better.

CORE efficiency · situation and opponent removed

Points per 100 plays above average, after the game state is regressed out of every snap and the schedule is solved out across the whole league. The version of this team’s efficiency that can be compared to a team it never played.

Overall
+16.6
#22
Offense
+2.5
#51
Defense
-14.2
#7
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 24 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive2.080.25
Starting field positionown 35.8own 23.0
Available yards49.7%19.4%
Scoring opportunities91.7%58.3%
Points per opportunity2.270.93
Three-and-out rate29.2%66.7%
Every team’s drive efficiency →

Play-calling identity

Against what the league calls from the same down, distance, field position, score and clock — so this is the staff, not the game script.

Pass rate
54.6%
Expected, given the spots
51.1%
Over expected
+3.5
Fourth down vs peers
-16
Fourth down vs the model
-60
All play-calling tendencies →

National Landscape · 2026 FBS · offense vs. defense EPA/play

Each dot = one FBS team. Iowa is highlighted. Tap or hover a dot for details.

ELITEDEF. FORTRESSOFF. POWERHOUSEREBUILDING-0.100.00+0.10+0.20+0.30-0.050.00+0.10+0.20Offensive EPA/play← worsebetter →Defensive EPA allowed/play← worsebetter →

Similar Programs

Teams with the closest offense + defense efficiency profile to Iowa in 2026

by EPA/play distance
BaylorSP+ +4.9
Off EPA/play +0.166Def EPA/play -0.043Elo 1506
Match
100%
AuburnSP+ +7.0
Off EPA/play +0.171Def EPA/play -0.007Elo 1613
Match
98%
Iowa StateSP+ +3.1
Off EPA/play +0.178Def EPA/play -0.004Elo 1586
Match
98%
Florida InternationalSP+ -13.5
Off EPA/play +0.147Def EPA/play -0.003Elo 1385
Match
98%
PittsburghSP+ +10.1
Off EPA/play +0.193Def EPA/play -0.009Elo 1681
Match
98%
SyracuseSP+ +2.7
Off EPA/play +0.158Def EPA/play -0.087Elo 1288
Match
97%

Similarity = normalized Euclidean distance on season offensive and defensive EPA/play. Teams within ±0.02 EPA/play on both units score >90%.

Program Trajectory · CORE rating · 20152026 · points per game vs an average FBS team

2015: +11.4, #30 of 1282016: +4.8, #47 of 1282017: +9.8, #33 of 1302018: +13.7, #22 of 1302019: +12.8, #24 of 1302020: +10.8, #26 of 1242021: +4.9, #56 of 1302022: +10.1, #31 of 1312023: -2.0, #71 of 1332024: +6.1, #45 of 1342025: +16.7, #24 of 1362026: +16.6, #22 of 138
20152026
Now +16.6 · #22 of 138Best +16.7 in 2025Worst -2.0 in 2023

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20262-00-0
100%
1.6+0.4
20259-46-3
69%
9.4-0.4
20248-56-3
62%
8.4-0.4
202310-47-3
71%
7.8+2.2
20228-55-4
62%
6.9+1.1
202110-47-3
71%
7.0+3.0
20206-26-2
75%
6.3-0.3
201910-36-3
77%
7.7+2.3
20189-45-4
69%
8.6+0.4
20178-54-5
62%
7.9+0.1

xW = expected wins from per-game dominance. Luck = actual − expected (positive = won close games).

12%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

2-0 so far, projected to finish 8.3-3.8. Top-four bye in 1.9%. Wins the Big Ten in 2.5%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
96%
1 loss
34%
2 losses
0.4%
3 losses
0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count. Better than even up to 1.

Win out and it is 100%. Running the table settles it.

down 5.6 points since preseasonwon 40-0 over Northern Illinois against an expected margin of +34, so +5.8 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 34% where the average Big Ten team is 69%.
  • The Big Ten takes 2.71 bids in an average season, and four or more in 18%.

Iowa’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk5vs Ohio State30.4
  • wk4at Michigan20.7
  • wk13vs Nebraska17.2
  • wk6at Washington17.1
  • wk12at Illinois15.3
  • wk10at Northwestern14.7

Who to root for

Games Iowa is not in that move its odds most. Same units, much smaller scale.

  • wk6Iowa State over BYU2.4
  • wk4Iowa State over Utah2.2
  • wk11Northwestern over Ohio State1.8
  • wk12Nebraska over Ohio State1.6
  • wk13Georgia Tech over Georgia1.6
  • wk4Illinois over Ohio State1.5
The full playoff picture →

Big Ten

0-0 in league play, projected 5.2-3.86 of 18 by title odds
2.5%
Wins the Big Ten
7.9%
Reaches the title game

The Big Ten sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 50% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk5Ohio State at Iowa9.1
  • wk4Iowa at Michigan4.1
  • wk13Nebraska at Iowa3.5
  • wk6Iowa at Washington3.5

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Big Ten race →

If not the playoff, then

93%
Bowl eligible
78%
Placed in a bowl
12%
In the playoff
9.4%
Season over in November

Iowa is 2-0 and needs 4 more wins from 10 games to reach the six that make a team eligible — at most one of which may come against an FCS opponent. In 2.9% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • Las Vegas Bowl10%
  • Music City Bowl9.4%
  • Pinstripe Bowl9.0%
  • ReliaQuest Bowl8.8%
  • Citrus Bowl8.6%
  • Rate Bowl8.3%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 6 have sent Iowa a player since 2010 — 8 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Iowa's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
GonzagaDC20
Hinsdale CentralIL20
HarrisonGA11
Lake DallasTX11
MarshallTX11
BeltonTX10
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.