Skip to content
SMU

SMU Mustangs

ACC·2-0·
Compare
Elo
1728#22
SP+
11.1#31
FPI
12.1
AP
#17
Next@ Louisville · Wk 3Win prob 56%Model -2.4
Talent #31 (764.5)Recruiting class #3257% production returning

ACC Standings

Standings →
  1. 1Miami1-0
  2. 2SMU1-0
  3. 3Virginia1-0
  4. 4California1-0
  5. 5Duke0-0
  6. 6North Carolina0-0
  7. 7Pittsburgh0-0
  8. 8Virginia Tech0-0

Team Leaders

Latest on SMU

All news →

Florida State's portal math made it a home underdog

Matchup · Sep 1

Roster · 107 players

FR 40SO 19JR 22SR 26
#PlayerPosClHtWt
1Ty HawkinsQBFR6'0"203
7Kevin JenningsQBSR6'0"192
12Cole LeinartQBFR6'3"185
14Charlie FiserQBSR6'1"186
—Mabrey MettauerQBSO6'5"225
4Dramekco GreenRBFR6'0"203
6Kendrick RaphaelRBSR5'11"200
20EJ KellyRBFR5'10"185
21Christian RhodesRBFR6'1"205
24Link RhodesRBSR6'2"200
25William FierroRBJR6'0"182
0Derrick McFallWRSO5'11"187
2Jalen HaleWRJR6'1"198
3Yannick SmithWRJR6'3"207
8Yamir KnightWRSR5'8"186
10Jalen CooperWRSO6'2"180
11Carterrious BrownWRFR6'2"190
13Daylon SingletonWRSO5'11"178
15Aljour Miles IIWRFR6'3"210
16Jakai AndersonWRFR6'0"170
22Jordyn AdamsWRFR6'1"181
26David Kniffen Jr.WRFR6'0"165
27Siler CookeWRFR5'10"175
81Tyrone CrethersWRFR6'0"185
83X'Zavier BarnettWRFR6'3"195
5Randy PittmanTESR6'2"240
9Zack TurnerTEFR6'3"215
18Theo Melin OhrstromTESR6'6"257
42Will LockeTESO6'5"234
84Tripp RiordanTEJR6'5"248
85Andre Nickerson Jr.TEFR6'3"235
86Devon MartinTESR6'5"240
88Trey JacksonTESO6'5"240
89Miles UterTEFR6'5"232
50Graham UterOLSO6'5"304
52Toa KatoaOLFR6'4"335
55Sam UtuOLFR6'5"330
57Henry DouglassOLJR6'3"290
58Abel HoopiiOLSO6'5"340
59PJ WilliamsOLSR6'5"313
60Evan GoodwinOLFR6'7"325
63Addison NicholsOLSR6'5"320
64Joshua BatesOLJR6'3"315
66Hunter RyanOLSR6'2"272
70Paxton BriggleOLJR6'5"295
71Max WrightOLFR6'8"315
74Andrew ChambleeOLSR6'6"308
75Dramodd OdomsOLFR6'6"318
76Drew HillOLFR6'3"288
77Alex WoodsOLJR6'4"300
78Drew EversOLFR6'5"305
79Sione Ma'uOLJR6'6"346
—Bennett JohnsonOLFR6'7"280
6Tavion AtkinsonDEJR6'5"280
9Ira SingletonDEJR6'5"240
14Trey WilsonDESR6'3"275
16Marques WhiteDESR6'2"250
33Amontre HarrisDEFR6'4"220
52Jahkai LangDEJR6'3"255
58Aakil WashingtonDESR6'3"243
92Hudson WoodsDEFR6'3"230
95Wyatt SmithDEFR6'4"225
5Malcolm Alcorn-CrowderDLSR6'6"305
55Woo SpencerDLJR6'4"316
56Tyron WinslowDLFR6'4"275
90Jalen ShiversDLFR6'4"280
93Kevin AllenDLJR6'2"291
94Jonathan JeffersonDLSR6'3"315
96Christian de MoorDLSO6'2"255
97Christian DavisDLJR6'3"328
98Keith DotieDLFR6'4"300
99Dakota DicksonDLFR6'4"315
12Caden MarshallLBSO6'2"215
24I'Zayah YoungLBFR6'0"215
28Brandon BookerLBJR6'1"225
29Brandon MiyazonoLBSR6'1"235
30Kenneth Goodwin IIILBFR6'2"210
32Jamal AndersonLBJR6'3"225
46Xavier WrightLBSO6'0"230
50Marcus BrouseLBFR6'0"200
53Zachary HibnerLBFR6'1"220
54Alexander KilgoreLBSR6'1"230
0William NettlesCBSO6'0"195
2Zadian GentryCBFR6'1"179
3Javion HolidayCBSO6'1"186
4Jayvon ThomasCBSR5'11"196
8Marcellus Barnes Jr.CBJR6'1"180
13Jaelyn Davis-RobinsonCBSR6'1"190
20Deuce GilbertCBFR5'11"180
35Dante Wesley IICBSO6'0"190
44Michael De HoyosCBSR5'10"189
1Jarvis LeeSSR5'11"185
10Tyren PolleySSO6'0"195
11Jaden Milliner-JonesSJR5'11"200
15La'Modrick SpencerSSR6'1"191
21Jimmy WyrickSSR5'10"185
22Sael ReyesSSO6'1"197
26Jaylen MosesSSO5'10"191
27Abdul MuhammadSJR5'8"180
38Jake BallardSSO5'10"184
96Wiley OlsonPKFR5'11"165
99Nick ReedPKJR5'7"180
—Michael SlabaPKSR5'11"195
—Brendan BairdPKFR6'2"186
43Wade McSparronPSO6'3"236
47Cody WillifordLSFR5'10"195
48Morgan TribbettLSJR5'11"230

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
41.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
17.0
scoring defense
Differential
+24.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
566.0#10
Yards / play
9.2#5
Passing yards / game
442.0#1
Rushing yards / game
124.0#101
First downs / game
21.5#63
3rd down %
54.2%#25
4th down %
0.0%#108
Time of possession
27:32#105
Defense
Yards allowed / game
278.5#55
Yards / play allowed
4.4#47
Pass yards allowed / game
148.0#46
Rush yards allowed / game
130.5#84
3rd down % allowed
14.3%#8
Sacks
5#29
Tackles for loss
14#20
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-1#89
Takeaways
3#30
Giveaways
4#118
Penalties / game
6.0#52
Penalty yards / game
51.0#64

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

SMU throws it: Rhett Lashlee's offenses have been pass-leaning across 4 seasons. The strengths are on both sides of the ball, led by 11th at defending the run.

On fourth down he goes for it more often than his peers do from the same spots (+3.0%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −27.5% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

SMU has played 1 game 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

  • Defenserunning it
    #11
    projected
  • Offensethrowing it
    #17
    projected
  • Defenseturning trips inside the 40 into points
    #18
    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 · 10 to play
8.8 – 3.2
projected final record (now 2–0)
Exp. wins left
6.8
of 10 games
Bowl odds
99%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
92%
vs Boston College
Toughest
21%
vs Notre Dame

How the season could finish · 2026 · chance of each final win total · 10 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.

23456789101112
final winstallest bar = 31% chance
Likeliest finish 9-3 (31%)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
QBKevin Jennings
+53.1 EPA
WRJalen Hale, Derrick McFall +3
+17.8 EPA
TERandy Pittman
+11.8 EPA
RBKendrick Raphael, Dramekco Green
+3.8 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
QBKevin Jennings
~$1.2M
EPA +53.10.900/play59 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)
Off0.5693rd#11
Def0.0462nd#53
Explosiveness
Off1.4482nd#26
Def1.4023rd#107
Field position
Off66.019th#112
Def73.045th#77
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.9345th#77
Def3.4047th#73
Turnovers
Won 3Lost 4
Margin -1

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
—
Defense
—
Off · pass
0.9196th#7
Off · rush
0.1142nd#80

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.1141st#82
Def0.0346th#75
Passing
Off0.9196th#7
Def0.0772nd#39

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
3.24#50
2nd-level / open-field
0.95 / 0.74
Power / stuff (off)
50.0% / 16.7%
Havoc — total (def)
18.3%#54
Havoc — front 7 / DB
12.2% / 6.1%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.53
Def-0.21
Pass downs
Off0.64
Def0.56

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.59#8-0.04#1061.44#8
Defense0.07#98-0.04#410.03#20

Elo Trajectory

@Florida StateFinal
Elo rating 1734 → 1734+0 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.3769th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.1928th
  • Offense success rate55%80th
  • Defense success rate allowed37%53rd

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs62%85th
  • Offense success — passing downs40%69th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs40%60th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs30%43rd

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.363rd
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.421st
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs0.8418th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.995th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.360th
  • Defense line yards allowed3.223rd
  • Offense highlight yards0.9752nd
  • Defense highlight yards allowed1.522nd
  • Offense power success0.6738th
  • Defense power success allowed0.3385th
  • Offense stuff rate0.1370th
  • Defense stuff rate0.1215th

Third down

  • Third down conversion57%80th
  • Third down distance faced7.139th
  • Third down conversion allowed14%91st
  • Third down distance forced6.322nd

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.1250th
  • Net success rate — second half0.2480th

Drives

  • Points per drive2.766th
  • Points per drive allowed2.245th
  • Average starting field position2954th
  • Opponent starting field position2757th
  • Available yards gained76%90th
  • Available yards allowed43%66th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive100%99th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed91%27th
  • Points per scoring opportunity2.753rd
  • Points allowed per opportunity2.459th
  • Three-and-out rate0%99th
  • Three-and-outs forced18%34th

Roster

  • Returning usage58%69th
  • Returning EPA22081st
  • Team talent composite76578th
  • Recruiting class rank32.077th
  • Recruiting class points22677th

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

Pass-dominant attack — top 8 nationally by EPA/play
EPA/play
+0.557#11 · elite
Pass EPA/play
+0.913#7
Rush EPA/play
+0.107#82
Explosiveness
1.439#26
Pts/opportunity
3.93#77
Success rate
61.1%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.806 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

EPA/play allowed
+0.037#53 · average
Havoc rate (total)
18.3%#54
Front-7 havoc
12.2%
DB havoc
6.1%
Big play rate allowed
1.396#107
Success rate allowed
32.0%

Disruption comes primarily from the front seven.

📊

Season Signature

41.5 PPG offense, 17.0 allowed — +24.5 margin/game
Points per game
41.5
Points allowed/game
17.0
Scoring margin/game
+24.5
Turnover margin
-1won 3 · lost 4
Production returning
57%
Talent rank (247)
#31

2-0 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE93thEXPLOSIVENESS82thFINISHING45thFIELD POS19thDEFENSE62thHAVOC61th50th100th
Offense
93th
Explosiveness
82th
Finishing
45th
Field Pos
19th
Defense
62th
Havoc
61th

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
+18.0
#16
Offense
+10.8
#11
Defense
-7.1
#28
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 10 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive2.702.18
Starting field positionown 28.9own 27.3
Available yards76.3%42.6%
Scoring opportunities100.0%90.9%
Points per opportunity2.702.40
Three-and-out rate0.0%18.2%
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
53.7%
Expected, given the spots
47.0%
Over expected
+6.8
Fourth down vs peers
-14
Fourth down vs the model
-100
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. SMU 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 SMU in 2026

by EPA/play distance
BYUSP+ +16.8
Off EPA/play +0.520Def EPA/play +0.039Elo 1666
Match
98%
NavySP+ +3.6
Off EPA/play +0.513Def EPA/play +0.085Elo 1550
Match
97%
NevadaSP+ -6.1
Off EPA/play +0.637Def EPA/play -0.000Elo 1462
Match
96%
IndianaSP+ +24.1
Off EPA/play +0.656Def EPA/play +0.010Elo 2113
Match
95%
NebraskaSP+ +12.1
Off EPA/play +0.493Def EPA/play +0.118Elo 1592
Match
95%
NorthwesternSP+ +7.8
Off EPA/play +0.480Def EPA/play +0.128Elo 1549
Match
94%

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 · 2015–2026 · points per game vs an average FBS team

2015: -18.5, #111 of 1282016: -4.0, #82 of 1282017: -3.3, #73 of 1302018: -11.5, #100 of 1302019: +6.0, #41 of 1302020: +0.3, #65 of 1242021: +3.2, #59 of 1302022: -3.3, #77 of 1312023: +13.9, #25 of 1332024: +22.7, #9 of 1342025: +14.6, #27 of 1362026: +18.0, #16 of 138
20152026
Now +18.0 · #16 of 138Best +22.7 in 2024Worst -18.5 in 2015

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20262-01-0
100%
1.8+0.2
20259-46-2
69%
9.0+0.0
202411-38-1
79%
11.0-0.0
202311-39-0
79%
10.7+0.3
20227-65-3
54%
6.5+0.5
20218-44-4
67%
6.9+1.1
20207-34-3
70%
6.2+0.8
201910-36-2
77%
8.7+1.3
20185-74-4
42%
3.7+1.3
20177-64-4
54%
6.7+0.3

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

16%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 8.8-3.4. Top-four bye in 2.7%. Wins the ACC in 9.9%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
99%
1 loss
39%
2 losses
2.6%
3 losses
0.1%
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 1.7 points since preseason — won 27-24 over Florida State against an expected margin of +1, so +2.4 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 39% where the average ACC team is 44%.
  • The ACC takes 1.54 bids in an average season, and four or more in 0.7%.

SMU’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk12at Notre Dame35.1
  • wk3at Louisville22.4
  • wk7vs Virginia21.6
  • wk10vs Virginia Tech18.9
  • wk11vs Wake Forest16.8
  • wk13at Stanford16.4

Who to root for

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

  • wk7Florida State over Miami4.2
  • wk9North Carolina over Miami4.2
  • wk5Clemson over Miami4.0
  • wk4Purdue over Notre Dame3.4
  • wk3Wake Forest over Miami3.4
  • wk11Duke over Miami3.2
The full playoff picture →

ACC

1-0 in league play, projected 6.6-2.42 of 17 by title odds
9.9%
Wins the ACC
29%
Reaches the title game

The ACC sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 37% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk3SMU at Louisville13.9
  • wk7Virginia at SMU13.7
  • wk10Virginia Tech at SMU10.9
  • wk11Wake Forest at SMU9.8

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

If not the playoff, then

96%
Bowl eligible
79%
Placed in a bowl
16%
In the playoff
4.9%
Season over in November

SMU 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. In 1.1% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • Duke's Mayo Bowl13%
  • Holiday Bowl13%
  • Gator Bowl13%
  • Sun Bowl11%
  • Pop-Tarts Bowl8.5%
  • Pinstripe Bowl6.6%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 8 have sent SMU a player since 2010 — 21 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of SMU's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
DeSotoTX40
KatyTX40
St. AugustineLA30
CentralAL20
Cibolo SteeleTX20
FriscoTX20
John TylerTX20
RockwallTX20
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.