Skip to content

Oregon Ducks

Big Ten·1-1·
Elo
1873#7
SP+
23.9#7
FPI
22.7
AP
#6
Nextvs Portland State · Wk 3
Talent #3 (984.3)Recruiting class #375% production returning

Roster · 114 players

FR 51SO 24JR 20SR 19
#PlayerPosClHtWt
5Dante MooreQBJR6'3"206
8Dylan RaiolaQBJR6'3"230
11Akili Smith Jr.QBFR6'5"231
12Brock ThomasQBJR5'11"191
14Ryder HayesQBSO6'2"193
16TC ManumaleunaQBFR
0Jordon DavisonRBSO6'0"236
4Tradarian BallRBFR
6Dierre Hill Jr.RBSO5'11"205
21Da'Jaun RiggsRBSO6'0"205
22Simeon PriceRBSR6'0"215
26Brandon SmithRBFR
27Killian SombeRBFR
40Zander QuinnRBJR5'7"170
1Dakorien MooreWRSO5'11"195
2Iverson HooksWRSR5'10"175
3Jeremiah McClellanWRSO6'0"195
7Evan StewartWRSR6'0"170
10Jalen LottWRFR
13Gatlin BairWRFR
15Messiah HamptonWRFR
24Hunter VaughnWRFR
30Aaron BidwellWRFR6'5"190
80Dillon GreshamWRSO6'0"190
82Nathan McCoy IIWRFR5'10"185
83Hudson LewisWRFR
84Jovon McRae IIWRFR6'1"218
88Jack ResslerWRSO5'11"195
89Brady BidwellWRSO6'3"205
9Jamari JohnsonTEJR6'5"257
17Markus DixonTEJR6'4"265
18Kendre HarrisonTEFR
19Andrew OleshTEFR6'5"226
81Dayton RaiolaTEFR
85Cole NewtonTEFR
87A.J. PuglianoTESO6'3"250
50Demetri ManningOLFR6'6"330
53Devin BrooksOLSO6'4"290
54Aiden LeweyOLFR
55Douglas UtuOLFR6'4"335
56Trent FergusonOLSO6'5"320
57Zac StascauskyOLFR6'6"285
58Ziyare AddisonOLFR6'5"315
59Fox CraderOLSO6'6"315
65Solomon KroekerOLFR
66Bryce BoultonOLJR6'2"300
67Beau CressAllenOLJR6'4"317
68Auston MimsOLJR6'2"316
70Koloi KeliOLFR
72Iapani LalouluOLSR6'2"329
73Kawika RogersOLSR6'5"320
74Dave IuliOLSR6'3"332
75Michael Bennett IIIOLSR6'5"302
77Tommy TofiOLFR
78Gernorris WilsonOLJR6'5"318
79Immanuel IheanachoOLFR
55Matthew JohnsonDEFR6'5"295
0D'Antre RobinsonDLJR6'4"315
1Bear AlexanderDLSR6'3"302
32Tony CumberlandDLFR
42Aydin BrelandDLSO6'5"304
52A'Mauri WashingtonDLSR6'3"330
90Anthony JonesDLFR
91Derrick Brown Jr.DLSR6'5"295
99Jerome SimmonsDLSR6'4"330
6Jerry MixonLBSR6'2"240
9Devon JacksonLBSR6'2"235
10Matayo UiagaleleiLBSR6'5"272
11Dylan WilliamsLBSO6'2"230
13Gavin NixLBFR6'0"230
19Braylon HodgeLBFR
23Brayden PlattLBSO6'2"235
25Tristan PhillipsLBFR
27Bleu DantzlerLBFR6'2"241
28Anthony Jones Jr.LBFR
31Nasir WyattLBSO6'2"228
35Brody ThomasLBFR6'2"205
38Will StratonLBJR6'0"215
41Dutch HoriskLBFR
44Teitum TuiotiLBSR6'3"263
45Hudson CoeLBFR
46Jay HardenLBFR6'2"219
47Elijah RushingLBSO6'6"275
51Prince TavizonLBFR
2Na'eem OffordDBSO6'1"195
3Koi PerichDBJR6'1"200
4Brandon Finney Jr.DBSO6'2"203
5Davon BenjaminDBFR
7Ify ObidegwuDBSO6'1"203
8Trey McNuttDBFR6'0"195
12Peyton WoodyardDBJR6'2"208
14Aaron Scott Jr.DBJR6'0"195
15Carl Williams IVDBJR6'1"192
16Azel BanagDBFR
17Tre WatsonDBJR
18Dorian BrewDBFR6'0"200
20Xavier LherisseDBFR
21Aaron FlowersDBSO6'0"208
22Devin JacksonDBFR
24Jett WashingtonDBFR
29Arlo HendersonDBJR5'10"
30Xavier BarksdaleDBJR6'2"182
33Zach GrishamDBSR5'11"204
34Cruz RushingDBSR6'1"225
37Braxton SingletonDBFR
39Cole ThomasDBFR
25Rocco GrazianoPKFR6'2"205
35Keaton EmmettPKJR6'0"198
97Gage HurychPKSO6'1"189
36Michael SbuttoniPSR5'9"193
39Bailey EttridgePSO5'11"207
49Jack NicoliPFR
64Thomas DonkerbrookLSFR
71RJ ToddLSSR6'2"189

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
32.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
33.0
scoring defense
Differential
-0.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
389.0#80
Yards / play
6.4#58
Passing yards / game
284.5#38
Rushing yards / game
104.5#114
First downs / game
15.0#122
3rd down %
34.6%#103
4th down %
0.0%#108
Time of possession
25:36#123
Defense
Yards allowed / game
414.0#113
Yards / play allowed
5.6#93
Pass yards allowed / game
249.0#109
Rush yards allowed / game
165.0#108
3rd down % allowed
28.1%#43
Sacks
3#58
Tackles for loss
6#91
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
0#66
Takeaways
2#53
Giveaways
2#68
Penalties / game
8.5#107
Penalty yards / game
78.0#119

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

pass-leaning

Oregon throws it: Dan Lanning's offenses have been pass-leaning across 4 seasons. The strengths are offensive, led by 1st at moving the ball on the ground.

On fourth down he goes for it more often than his peers do from the same spots (+11.0%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −16.1% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

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

Projected strengths

  • Offensemoving the ball on the ground
    #1
    projected
  • Offensethrowing it
    #2
    projected
  • Offensefirst and second down
    #2
    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
8.32.7
projected final record (now 11)
Exp. wins left
7.3
of 9 games
Bowl odds
99%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
97%
vs Michigan State
Toughest
47%
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.

12345678910
final winstallest bar = 34% chance
Likeliest finish 8-3 (34%)Bowl eligible 99% · 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
WREvan Stewart, Jeremiah McClellan +2
+25.1 EPA
QBDante Moore
+21.7 EPA
TEJamari Johnson
+3.8 EPA
RBJordon Davison, Dierre Hill Jr. +1
+0.5 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
QBDante Moore
~$849K
EPA +21.70.289/play75 snaps
EPA +4.30.187/play23 snaps
EPA -3.5-0.105/play33 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)
Off0.2247th#74
Def0.0754th#64
Explosiveness
Off1.5795th#8
Def1.0977th#33
Field position
Off67.025th#104
Def70.074th#36
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.6334th#92
Def3.3150th#69
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 2
Margin 0

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.2942nd#80
Off · rush
0.1040th#83

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.1039th#84
Def0.1139th#85
Passing
Off0.2942nd#80
Def0.0575th#35

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
3.20#54
2nd-level / open-field
1.00 / 0.76
Power / stuff (off)
83.3% / 13.7%
Havoc — total (def)
12.3%#112
Havoc — front 7 / DB
3.9% / 8.4%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.14
Def0.15
Pass downs
Off0.36
Def-0.13

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.15#530.40#430.41#92
Defense0.11#1060.19#88-0.27#7

Elo Trajectory

Boise StateFinal
Elo rating 18801838-42 over season

Team Fingerprint · 2026 · 43 opponent-adjusted metrics · percentile vs 138 FBS teams

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.2855th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.1143rd
  • Offense success rate45%47th
  • Defense success rate allowed36%55th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs49%45th
  • Offense success — passing downs37%61st
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs43%48th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs20%73rd

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.588th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.081st
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.285th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.482nd

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.254th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.938th
  • Offense highlight yards1.360th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.0099th
  • Offense power success0.6738th
  • Defense power success allowed1.023rd
  • Offense stuff rate0.1372nd
  • Defense stuff rate0.1214th

Third down

  • Third down conversion33%26th
  • Third down distance faced6.753rd
  • Third down conversion allowed27%74th
  • Third down distance forced6.118th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.2270th
  • Net success rate — second half-0.0233rd

Drives

  • Points per drive2.868th
  • Points per drive allowed2.341st
  • Average starting field position3791st
  • Opponent starting field position2757th
  • Available yards gained59%74th
  • Available yards allowed43%67th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive77%41st
  • Scoring opportunities allowed75%64th
  • Points per scoring opportunity3.775th
  • Points allowed per opportunity3.043rd
  • Three-and-out rate0%99th
  • Three-and-outs forced42%85th

Roster

  • Returning usage67%79th
  • Returning EPA37399th
  • Team talent composite98499th
  • Recruiting class rank3.099th
  • Recruiting class points30399th

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

EPA/play
+0.217#74 · average
Pass EPA/play
+0.292#80
Rush EPA/play
+0.097#84
Explosiveness
1.567#8
Pts/opportunity
3.63#92
Success rate
38.4%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.195 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

EPA/play allowed
+0.069#64 · average
Havoc rate (total)
12.3%#112
Front-7 havoc
3.9%
DB havoc
8.4%
Big play rate allowed
1.090#33
Success rate allowed
40.3%

Disruption comes primarily from the secondary.

📊

Season Signature

32.5 PPG offense, 33.0 allowed — -0.5 margin/game
Points per game
32.5
Points allowed/game
33.0
Scoring margin/game
-0.5
Turnover margin
+0won 2 · lost 2
Production returning
75%
Talent rank (247)
#3

1-1 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE47thEXPLOSIVENESS95thFINISHING34thFIELD POS25thDEFENSE54thHAVOC19th50th100th
Offense
47th
Explosiveness
95th
Finishing
34th
Field Pos
25th
Defense
54th
Havoc
19th

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
+24.6
#7
Offense
+14.7
#4
Defense
-10.0
#13
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 13 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive2.852.25
Starting field positionown 37.1own 27.3
Available yards59.5%42.6%
Scoring opportunities76.9%75.0%
Points per opportunity3.703.00
Three-and-out rate0.0%41.7%
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
60.0%
Expected, given the spots
45.1%
Over expected
+14.9
Fourth down vs peers
+12
Fourth down vs the model
-25
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Oregon 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 Oregon in 2026

by EPA/play distance
CincinnatiSP+ +5.9
Off EPA/play +0.241Def EPA/play +0.070Elo 1516
Match
99%
Old DominionSP+ -6.2
Off EPA/play +0.244Def EPA/play +0.043Elo 1336
Match
98%
TroySP+ -11.4
Off EPA/play +0.233Def EPA/play +0.027Elo 1420
Match
98%
Kent StateSP+ -27.5
Off EPA/play +0.168Def EPA/play +0.101Elo 1056
Match
97%
Coastal CarolinaSP+ -12.1
Off EPA/play +0.219Def EPA/play +0.125Elo 1270
Match
97%
VanderbiltSP+ +12.1
Off EPA/play +0.167Def EPA/play +0.022Elo 1753
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: +14.2, #23 of 1282016: -3.4, #80 of 1282017: +12.4, #24 of 1302018: +0.9, #60 of 1302019: +23.9, #10 of 1302020: +14.9, #16 of 1242021: +15.1, #16 of 1302022: +15.1, #15 of 1312023: +40.9, #1 of 1332024: +23.9, #7 of 1342025: +34.6, #4 of 1362026: +24.6, #7 of 138
20152026
Now +24.6 · #7 of 138Best +40.9 in 2023Worst -3.4 in 2016

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-00-0
100%
0.9+0.1
202513-28-1
87%
12.7+0.3
202413-110-0
93%
11.5+1.5
202312-28-2
86%
12.7-0.7
202210-37-2
77%
10.5-0.5
202110-47-3
71%
9.8+0.2
20204-34-2
57%
5.0-1.0
201912-29-1
86%
11.3+0.7
20189-45-4
69%
7.5+1.5
20177-64-5
54%
7.4-0.4

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

59%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 9.9-2.4. Top-four bye in 23%. Wins the Big Ten in 17%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
100%
1 loss
89%
2 losses
15%
3 losses
0.0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count. Better than even up to 2.

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

down 10.7 points since preseasonwon 34-27 over Boise State against an expected margin of +27, so 19.5 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 89% where the average Big Ten team is 72%.
  • The Big Ten takes 3.19 bids in an average season, and four or more in 37%.

Oregon’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk2at Oklahoma State44.6
  • wk6vs UCLA42.8
  • wk11vs Michigan42.5
  • wk4at USC42.3
  • wk13vs Washington42.0
  • wk12at Michigan State41.6

Who to root for

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

  • wk5Boise State over Utah State2.9
  • wk2Boise State over Memphis2.8
  • wk6Maryland over Ohio State2.7
  • wk4Boise State over Western Michigan2.7
  • wk6Boise State over Fresno State2.5
  • wk12Nebraska over Ohio State2.4
The full playoff picture →

Big Ten

0-0 in league play, projected 6.8-2.23 of 18 by title odds
17%
Wins the Big Ten
31%
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.

  • wk10Oregon at Ohio State31.4
  • wk4Oregon at USC17.7
  • wk13Washington at Oregon16.1
  • wk6UCLA at Oregon15.8

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

If not the playoff, then

99%
Bowl eligible
40%
Placed in a bowl
59%
In the playoff
1.4%
Season over in November

Oregon is 1-0 and needs 5 more wins from 11 games to reach the six that make a team eligible — at most one of which may come against an FCS opponent.

  • Citrus Bowl10%
  • ReliaQuest Bowl8.0%
  • Music City Bowl6.2%
  • Las Vegas Bowl5.0%
  • Pinstripe Bowl3.3%
  • Rate Bowl2.5%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 14 have sent Oregon a player since 2010 — 65 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Oregon's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Mater DeiCA120
Central CatholicPA111
LibertyNV71
Bishop GormanNV50
Junipero SerraCA50
ChandlerAZ40
St. John BoscoCA40
Deerfield BeachFL31
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.