Skip to content

Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets

ACC·0-2·
Elo
1553#52
SP+
1.7#66
FPI
3.5
AP
NR
Nextvs Mercer · Wk 3
Talent #34 (751.6)Recruiting class #4113% production returning

Roster · 108 players

FR 28SO 23JR 22SR 35
#PlayerPosClHtWt
9Grady AdamsonQBSO6'2"230
12Cole BergeronQBFR6'5"225
14Graham KnowlesQBJR6'7"230
15Alberto MendozaQBJR6'2"215
18Ben GuthrieQBSR5'10"180
0Malachi HosleyRBSR5'10"200
1Trelain MaddoxRBJR6'2"225
11Chad AlexanderRBSR5'9"190
20J.P. PowellRBSO5'10"200
22Justice HaynesRBSR5'11"210
24Shane MarshallRBSO5'11"210
32Jayden BarrRBSO5'11"200
3Rahkeem SmithWRSR5'9"185
4Jordan AllenWRSO5'9"195
6Debron GatlingWRJR5'11"195
7Dalen PensonWRSO5'11"182
13Isaiah FuhrmannWRJR6'4"210
16Jaiven PlummerWRSR6'3"210
21Darnell CollinsWRFR6'3"190
37Joseph MoseleyWRJR6'0"195
38Wills CampbellWRFR6'3"205
81Cal FaulknerWRSO6'2"200
82Kentrell DavisWRFR6'3"190
84Evan HaynesWRSO6'3"210
85J.J. WinstonWRFR6'2"170
87Coi Jean-NoelWRFR5'11"180
89Chris ElkoWRSR6'1"200
8Gavin HarrisTESR6'3"245
17Chris CorboTESR6'5"250
36Rocco XerogeanesTEFR6'4"245
39Jack RichersonTEFR6'4"230
42Spencer MermansTESR6'6"265
80Connor RoushTESO6'4"255
83Blake RagsdaleTEJR6'4"240
86Kevin Roche Jr.TESO6'9"270
88Nate AgyemangTEFR6'4"250
52Kevin Peay Jr.OLSO6'4"315
55Xavier CanalesOLSO6'4"305
56Jacob BenjaminOLSR6'4"300
58Jimmy BrysonOLSO6'4"295
60Blake BelinOLSO6'3"300
62Courtlin HeardOLFR6'6"360
65Courtney HeardOLFR6'5"320
66Will ReedOLSR6'5"305
68Eli RickellOLFR6'5"285
69Joseph IonataOLJR6'5"305
70Jameson RiggsOLJR6'5"315
71Markell SamuelOLSR6'4"315
72Malachi CarneyOLSR6'4"350
73Favour EdwinOLJR6'7"310
75Andrew RosinskiOLJR6'5"300
76Krew MoledorOLFR6'3"305
77Josh PettyOLSO6'6"300
78Ethan MackennyOLSR6'5"325
79Jordan FloydOLJR6'6"340
8Jordan BoydDEJR6'3"262
9Amontrae BradfordDEJR6'5"265
10Jordan WalkerDESR6'5"285
11Brayden ManleyDESR6'2"255
24Noah CarterDEJR6'5"250
40Jordan WoodsDEFR6'6"265
41Taje McCoyDESR6'1"250
42Lex WillisDEFR6'4"260
88A.J. HofflerDESR6'4"260
91Andre Fuller Jr.DESO6'3"250
93Drew CohenDEJR6'3"245
55Christian GarrettDTSO6'4"305
56Tim GriffinDTSO6'5"300
92Christian SpeakmanDTFR6'4"325
94Derry Norris Jr.DTSO6'4"300
95Tawfiq ThomasDTSR6'4"315
96Shymeik JonesDTSR6'5"310
97Landen MarshallDTJR6'2"305
98Amier ClarkeDTFR6'2"325
99Vincent Carroll-JacksonDTSR6'5"315
0Melvin Jordan IVLBSR5'11"220
1Cayman SpauldingLBSR6'0"225
2E.J. LightseyLBSR6'2"230
30Lawson PritchettLBJR6'3"215
34C.J. GambleLBFR6'1"230
35Braylon OutlawLBFR6'1"225
44Kyle EffordLBSR6'2"225
3Jaylen MbakweCBJR6'0"195
4Daiquan WhiteCBSR5'10"185
5Zachary TobeCBSR6'2"200
6Kelvin HillCBJR5'10"200
12Jon MitchellCBJR5'11"190
14Jonas DuclonaCBSR5'11"190
21Jaedyn TerryCBFR6'2"180
23Trae Stevenson Jr.CBFR6'1"195
25L.J. CrumityCBFR5'11"180
28Elgin SessionsCBSO5'11"195
13Savion RileySSR6'2"215
18Kealan JonesSFR6'0"195
26Chris Hewitt Jr.SFR5'11"205
27Tae HarrisSSO5'11"205
31Fenix FeltonSSO6'1"205
36Kymani MoralesSFR6'1"205
37Alex HuntSFR6'0"185
38Isaac ObroktaSFR6'0"185
39Will KikerSSR6'1"200
33Aidan BirrPKSR6'1"210
41Landon ShafferPKSO5'9"180
40Joshua TaylorPSR6'3"225
46Jonathan GentyPFR6'5"205
47Alex BacchettaPSR6'2"235
48Cal KeelerLSJR6'2"205
50Ronnie Thomas IIILSSR5'10"210

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
18.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
29.5
scoring defense
Differential
-11.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
288.0#121
Yards / play
5.3#100
Passing yards / game
237.0#64
Rushing yards / game
51.0#131
First downs / game
17.0#111
3rd down %
38.5%#88
4th down %
Time of possession
25:51#121
Defense
Yards allowed / game
307.0#66
Yards / play allowed
4.0#38
Pass yards allowed / game
124.0#24
Rush yards allowed / game
183.0#119
3rd down % allowed
41.2%#94
Sacks
1#104
Tackles for loss
6#91
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-1#89
Takeaways
0#118
Giveaways
1#31
Penalties / game
9.0#116
Penalty yards / game
49.0#60

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

run-leaning

Georgia Tech runs it: Brent Key's offenses have been run-leaning across 3 seasons. The strengths are offensive, led by 19th in the push up front. The way in is 132nd at hitting chunk plays.

On fourth down he goes for it about as often as his peers do from the same spots (+0.1%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −27.2% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Georgia Tech has played 1 game against a genuinely tough slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Projected strengths

  • Offensethe push the line gets
    #19
    projected
  • Offensemoving the ball on the ground
    #21
    projected
  • Offensefirst and second down
    #33
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Offensehitting chunk plays
    #132
    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
3.57.5
projected final record (now 02)
Exp. wins left
3.5
of 9 games
Bowl odds
7%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
73%
vs Boston College
Toughest
4%
vs Georgia

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.

0123456789
final winstallest bar = 28% chance
Likeliest finish 3-8 (28%)Bowl eligible 7% · 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
WRJordan Allen, Dalen Penson +1
+15.7 EPA
QBAlberto Mendoza
+11.8 EPA
TEKevin Roche Jr.
+0.4 EPA
RBJustice Haynes, Malachi Hosley
-4.7 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
EPA +11.80.470/play25 snaps
EPA -2.3-0.117/play20 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)
Off0.0720th#110
Def0.0558th#59
Explosiveness
Off1.2039th#84
Def1.1272nd#39
Field position
Off77.293rd#10
Def68.682nd#25
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off0.865th#131
Def2.0081st#27
Turnovers
Won 0Lost 1
Margin -1

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.4361st#54
Off · rush
-0.265th#131

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off-0.265th#131
Def0.0250th#70
Passing
Off0.4361st#54
Def0.0770th#42

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
1.90#129
2nd-level / open-field
0.96 / 0.04
Power / stuff (off)
33.3% / 44.4%
Havoc — total (def)
14.3%#92
Havoc — front 7 / DB
10.4% / 3.9%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off-0.01
Def-0.04
Pass downs
Off0.21
Def0.21

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense-0.13#1170.17#770.32#104
Defense-0.13#50-0.08#330.53#91

Elo Trajectory

Colorado@Georgia
Elo rating 15631553-10 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.0723rd
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.0553rd
  • Offense success rate37%21st
  • Defense success rate allowed38%52nd

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs39%18th
  • Offense success — passing downs33%52nd
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs41%56th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs32%36th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.247th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.164th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs0.9843rd
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.623rd

Trenches

  • Offense line yards1.97th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.751st
  • Offense highlight yards0.049th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.3566th
  • Offense power success0.3312th
  • Defense power success allowed1.023rd
  • Offense stuff rate0.441st
  • Defense stuff rate0.1110th

Third down

  • Third down conversion38%36th
  • Third down distance faced7.428th
  • Third down conversion allowed44%31st
  • Third down distance forced6.528th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.1149th
  • Net success rate — second half-0.0924th

Drives

  • Points per drive0.6714th
  • Points per drive allowed1.662nd
  • Average starting field position3170th
  • Opponent starting field position3222nd
  • Available yards gained37%24th
  • Available yards allowed58%30th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive78%47th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed67%84th
  • Points per scoring opportunity0.8610th
  • Points allowed per opportunity2.362nd
  • Three-and-out rate33%36th
  • Three-and-outs forced22%45th

Roster

  • Returning usage14%14th
  • Returning EPA47.727th
  • Team talent composite75276th
  • Recruiting class rank41.071st
  • Recruiting class points21771st

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 offense — below average EPA/play nationally
EPA/play
+0.074#110 · below avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.428#54
Rush EPA/play
-0.256#131
Explosiveness
1.200#84
Pts/opportunity
0.86#131
Success rate
37.0%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.684 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

EPA/play allowed
+0.052#59 · average
Havoc rate (total)
14.3%#92
Front-7 havoc
10.4%
DB havoc
3.9%
Big play rate allowed
1.125#39
Success rate allowed
37.7%

Disruption comes primarily from the front seven.

📊

Season Signature

18.5 PPG offense, 29.5 allowed — -11.0 margin/game
Points per game
18.5
Points allowed/game
29.5
Scoring margin/game
-11.0
Turnover margin
-1won 0 · lost 1
Production returning
13%
Talent rank (247)
#34

0-2 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE20thEXPLOSIVENESS39thFINISHING5thFIELD POS93thDEFENSE58thHAVOC34th50th100th
Offense
20th
Explosiveness
39th
Finishing
5th
Field Pos
93th
Defense
58th
Havoc
34th

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
+6.8
#44
Offense
+2.9
#45
Defense
-3.8
#51
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 9 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive0.671.56
Starting field positionown 30.8own 31.9
Available yards37.3%58.0%
Scoring opportunities77.8%66.7%
Points per opportunity0.862.33
Three-and-out rate33.3%22.2%
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
51.0%
Expected, given the spots
47.1%
Over expected
+3.9
Fourth down vs peers
-7
Fourth down vs the model
-50
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Georgia Tech 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 Georgia Tech in 2026

by EPA/play distance
Utah StateSP+ -11.5
Off EPA/play +0.052Def EPA/play +0.044Elo 1376
Match
99%
BaylorSP+ +4.9
Off EPA/play +0.054Def EPA/play +0.028Elo 1506
Match
98%
AuburnSP+ +7.0
Off EPA/play +0.028Def EPA/play +0.054Elo 1613
Match
98%
Sacramento StateSP+ -19.1
Off EPA/play +0.070Def EPA/play -0.015Elo 1476
Match
96%
Eastern MichiganSP+ -15.6
Off EPA/play +0.041Def EPA/play +0.117Elo 1353
Match
96%
WashingtonSP+ +12.0
Off EPA/play +0.064Def EPA/play -0.019Elo 1762
Match
96%

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: +4.3, #55 of 1282016: +6.2, #42 of 1282017: +8.1, #39 of 1302018: -1.6, #75 of 1302019: -13.5, #106 of 1302020: -3.6, #78 of 1242021: -19.0, #112 of 1302022: -5.7, #87 of 1312023: +0.5, #58 of 1332024: +9.7, #36 of 1342025: +10.6, #38 of 1362026: +6.8, #44 of 138
20152026
Now +6.8 · #44 of 138Best +10.6 in 2025Worst -19.0 in 2021

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20260-10-0
0%
0.5-0.5
20259-46-2
69%
7.7+1.3
20247-65-3
54%
8.3-1.3
20237-65-3
54%
5.7+1.3
20225-74-4
42%
3.7+1.3
20213-92-7
25%
3.1-0.1
20203-73-6
30%
4.2-1.2
20193-92-6
25%
2.0+1.0
20187-65-3
54%
6.8+0.2
20175-64-4
45%
5.9-0.9

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

1.2%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-1 so far, projected to finish 5.3-6.8. Wins the ACC in 1.0%.

If they finish with…

62%
2 losses
12%
3 losses
2.5%
4 losses

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

down 3.9 points since preseasonlost 13-14 to Colorado against an expected margin of +8, so 8.6 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 62% where the average ACC team is 44%.
  • The ACC takes 1.54 bids in an average season, and four or more in 0.7%.

Georgia Tech’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk13at Georgia4.2
  • wk9at Pittsburgh3.4
  • wk7at Virginia Tech2.9
  • wk10vs Louisville2.7
  • wk11at Clemson2.6
  • wk2vs Tennessee2.4

Who to root for

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

  • wk7Florida State over Miami1.3
  • wk3Wake Forest over Miami1.0
  • wk9North Carolina over Miami0.7
  • wk11Duke over Miami0.6
  • wk6Ohio State over Maryland0.6
  • wk5Clemson over Miami0.5
The full playoff picture →

ACC

0-0 in league play, projected 3.9-4.110 of 17 by title odds
1.0%
Wins the ACC
3.7%
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.

  • wk9Georgia Tech at Pittsburgh2.7
  • wk7Georgia Tech at Virginia Tech2.3
  • wk10Louisville at Georgia Tech2.2
  • wk11Georgia Tech at Clemson2.1

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

If not the playoff, then

44%
Bowl eligible
42%
Placed in a bowl
1.2%
In the playoff
56%
Season over in November

Georgia Tech is 0-1 and needs 6 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.

  • Military Bowl6.6%
  • Pinstripe Bowl5.8%
  • Fenway Bowl5.7%
  • Pop-Tarts Bowl5.0%
  • Sun Bowl3.9%
  • Holiday Bowl3.1%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 13 have sent Georgia Tech a player since 2010 — 39 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Georgia Tech's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
GraysonGA70
NorcrossGA60
Marist SchoolGA40
WestlakeGA40
HillgroveGA30
McEachernGA30
CentralAL20
DutchtownGA20
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.