Skip to content
Kansas

Kansas Jayhawks

Big 12·1-1·
Compare
Elo
1473#73
SP+
7.5#41
FPI
4.0
AP
NR
Nextvs Arizona State · Wk 3Win prob 40%Model +4.2
Talent #62 (684.5)Recruiting class #6118% production returning

Roster · 114 players

FR 46SO 20JR 27SR 21
#PlayerPosClHtWt
8Isaiah MarshallQBSO6'0"210
10Chase JenkinsQBJR6'0"195
15Cole BallardQBJR6'2"220
16Jaylen MasonQBFR6'2"200
18Braylen RooneyQBFR6'5"230
20Connor HanikaQBFR6'2"200
1Dylan EdwardsRBJR5'9"175
2Kory AmachreeRBFR6'0"210
4Jalen DupreeRBSO6'0"215
6Yasin WillisRBJR6'1"230
22Micah JohnsonRBSO5'10"195
24John KellyRBFR6'1"205
25Justin ThurmanRBFR6'0"200
30Jack ReevesRBFR6'0"205
0Nahzae CoxWRSR6'3"215
3Keaton KubeckaWRJR6'2"205
5Nik McMillanWRSR6'1"195
7Cam PickettWRSR6'0"195
11Tate NagyWRSO5'10"170
12Bryson HayesWRFR6'0"190
13Nate SimsWRFR6'1"185
17Tyren ParkerWRFR6'3"195
19Corbin GlascoWRFR5'9"185
23AJ BatisteWRFR6'1"185
80Griffin BakerWRFR6'3"195
82Isreal Moses VWRJR6'2"205
86Donald CollierWRSO5'10"195
89Jackson CookWRFR6'2"195
9Jailen ButlerTESR6'4"250
14Mikey PauleyTESR6'5"245
35Jack UtzTEFR6'5"235
44Carson BruhnTESO6'6"260
81Quinton ConleyTESR6'6"245
83Conlee HoveyTEFR6'5"250
85Carter MosesTESR6'5"245
87Leyton CureTESR6'3"250
88Kevin SullivanTEFR6'6"245
51Kasen CarpenterOLJR6'3"310
52Nick MorrowOLJR6'8"330
53Kaden MoodyOLFR6'6"310
54Tavake TuikolovatuOLJR6'6"325
55Trezelle Jenkins Jr.OLSO6'6"310
56Amir HerringOLJR6'3"310
58Marco MohajirOLFR6'1"275
64Kaden SnyderOLFR6'6"290
67Eli RichmondOLFR6'4"305
68Max ManskeOLFR6'3"265
71James LivingstonOLSR6'7"310
72DeAndre HarperOLSO6'6"320
73Anderson KoppOLFR6'4"305
74Jack TannerOLSO6'6"315
75Calvin ClementsOLJR6'7"325
76Antonio WilsonOLJR6'6"320
77Malachi MillsOLFR6'5"305
78Brandon SolisOLJR6'7"315
79Connor StrohOLJR6'7"350
9Dakyus BrinkleyDESO6'3"255
33Leroy Harris IIIDEJR6'5"270
44David SantiagoDEJR6'4"255
45Garrett MartinDEFR6'4"250
50Wyatt BrungardtDEFR6'5"240
53Draeden PuntDEFR6'7"250
90Adrian HolleyDEFR6'4"255
91Alex BrayDESR6'4"265
97Hunter HigginsDEFR6'5"265
70Jason StricklandDLSO6'3"270
56Marcus CalvinDTJR6'2"305
71Grady SeyfertDTJR6'1"300
88Kevin OatisDTFR6'3"305
92Nakwaine CarterDTFR6'1"290
93Josiah HammondDTFR6'4"290
94Blake HeroldDTJR6'3"300
95Tre'von McAlpineDTSR6'3"310
96Jibriel CondeDTJR6'5"300
98Jalen AtkinsDTSO6'3"285
99Eamon SmallsDTJR6'2"335
4Trey LathanLBSR6'1"230
7Bam CrouchLBSR6'1"225
8Josh GalbreathLBFR6'3"225
11Malachi CurveyLBFR6'4"245
13Quincy DavisLBJR6'1"230
14Jaron WillisLBSR6'2"235
18Joseph CreditLBFR6'1"220
25Jibreel Al-AminLBSR6'3"225
30Parker SchwarzLBFR6'1"230
32Xander BlasingLBFR6'2"230
41Ezra VedralLBJR6'2"225
59Jett KohanzoLBFR6'2"220
0Austin AlexanderCBSO6'0"190
1Jalen ToddCBJR6'1"195
2Syeed GibbsCBSR6'0"195
5Roman PearsonCBSR6'2"205
6Jahlil HurleyCBJR6'2"185
10Elijah CannonCBSO6'0"190
17Trey BrownCBFR6'0"190
19Chris McCorkleCBFR6'1"185
26Robert ReddickCBFR6'2"185
36Jameer MooreCBSO6'3"200
3Corey GordonSSR6'2"205
12Jaden HarrisSSR6'0"205
16Brandon SchmelzleSFR6'2"210
20Christian PritchettSJR6'2"200
22Khijohnn Cummings-ColemanSSO5'11"200
23Mason EllisSSR6'2"200
24Darrion JonesSFR6'3"190
27Taylor DavisSJR6'0"205
34Dillon MarshallSSO6'2"205
40Colter McDanielSSO6'2"190
29Martin ConningtonPKSO6'0"200
98Dane EfirdPKFR6'3"200
33Ben ShipleyPFR6'5"200
99Matthew GillPFR6'3"195
39Rino MonteforteLSSR5'7"210
49Hollis MoellerLSSO6'0"220

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
36.0
scoring offense
Points allowed
22.0
scoring defense
Differential
+14.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
434.0#52
Yards / play
6.1#70
Passing yards / game
255.0#52
Rushing yards / game
179.0#62
First downs / game
23.5#44
3rd down %
39.3%#77
4th down %
62.5%#60
Time of possession
30:53#60
Defense
Yards allowed / game
307.5#62
Yards / play allowed
5.0#63
Pass yards allowed / game
201.5#68
Rush yards allowed / game
106.0#60
3rd down % allowed
31.0%#46
Sacks
3#79
Tackles for loss
16#16
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-2#108
Takeaways
2#75
Giveaways
4#105
Penalties / game
8.5#114
Penalty yards / game
74.5#118

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

Kansas runs it: Lance Leipold's offenses have been run-leaning across 11 seasons. The strengths are offensive, led by 9th in the push up front. The way in is 132nd at keeping everything in front of them, and they are 128th 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 −25.7% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Kansas has not played an FBS opponent yet, so this is the projection: last season regressed toward the mean, plus returning production, recruiting, talent and whether the staff is the same one.

Projected strengths

  • Offensethe push the line gets
    #9
    projected
  • Offensemoving the ball on the ground
    #25
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Defensehitting chunk plays
    #132
    projected
  • Offensehitting chunk plays
    #128
    projected
  • Defensethrowing it
    #108
    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
5.3 – 6.7
projected final record (now 1–1)
Exp. wins left
4.3
of 10 games
Bowl odds
44%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
86%
vs Middle Tennessee
Toughest
12%
vs BYU

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.

1234567891011
final winstallest bar = 27% chance
Likeliest finish 5-7 (27%)Bowl eligible 44% · 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
QBIsaiah Marshall, Cole Ballard
+25.2 EPA
WRCam Pickett, Nik McMillan +3
+21.5 EPA
RBDylan Edwards, Yasin Willis +1
+7.9 EPA
TECarson Bruhn, Jalen Butler
-0.1 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
QBIsaiah Marshall
~$882K
EPA +24.70.338/play73 snaps
RBYasin Willis
~$231K
EPA +5.40.256/play21 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)
Off0.3172nd#40
Def0.0760th#56
Explosiveness
Off1.5596th#6
Def1.558th#127
Field position
Off71.969th#43
Def65.199th#2
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off4.4061st#54
Def3.4049th#71
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 4
Margin -2

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
—
Defense
—
Off · pass
0.4668th#45
Off · rush
0.1653rd#65

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.1655th#63
Def-0.0970th#42
Passing
Off0.4667th#46
Def0.4814th#119

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.87#96
2nd-level / open-field
0.95 / 0.63
Power / stuff (off)
66.7% / 12.5%
Havoc — total (def)
21.9%#24
Havoc — front 7 / DB
16.4% / 5.5%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.23
Def0.03
Pass downs
Off0.45
Def0.11

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.06#790.41#350.55#67
Defense-0.06#630.13#700.48#89

Elo Trajectory

Long Island UniversityFinal
Elo rating 1510 → 1473-37 over season

Team Fingerprint · 2026 · 31 opponent-adjusted metrics · percentile vs 138 FBS teams

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.5791st
  • Defense EPA/play allowed-0.1887th
  • Offense success rate59%89th
  • Defense success rate allowed22%91st

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs62%88th
  • Offense success — passing downs47%81st
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs25%93rd
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs19%74th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.366th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.082nd
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.161st
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.480th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.986th
  • Defense line yards allowed1.296th
  • Offense highlight yards0.6738th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.0388th
  • Offense power success0.5022nd
  • Defense power success allowed1.023rd
  • Offense stuff rate0.0299th
  • Defense stuff rate0.3793rd

Third down

  • Third down conversion62%86th
  • Third down distance faced6.847th
  • Third down conversion allowed17%89th
  • Third down distance forced9.286th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.4695th
  • Net success rate — second half0.2884th

Roster

  • Returning usage16%16th
  • Returning EPA59.532nd
  • Team talent composite68555th
  • Recruiting class rank61.056th
  • Recruiting class points19756th

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 performing above the national average
EPA/play
+0.310#40 · above avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.461#46
Rush EPA/play
+0.165#63
Explosiveness
1.555#6
Pts/opportunity
4.40#54
Success rate
41.3%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.297 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

EPA/play allowed
+0.066#56 · average
Havoc rate (total)
21.9%#24
Front-7 havoc
16.4%
DB havoc
5.5%
Big play rate allowed
1.554#127
Success rate allowed
30.1%

Disruption comes primarily from the front seven.

📊

Season Signature

36.0 PPG offense, 22.0 allowed — +14.0 margin/game
Points per game
36.0
Points allowed/game
22.0
Scoring margin/game
+14.0
Turnover margin
-2won 2 · lost 4
Production returning
18%
Talent rank (247)
#62

1-1 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE72thEXPLOSIVENESS96thFINISHING61thFIELD POS69thDEFENSE60thHAVOC83th50th100th
Offense
72th
Explosiveness
96th
Finishing
61th
Field Pos
69th
Defense
60th
Havoc
83th

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
+2.2
#63
Offense
+3.3
#44
Defense
+1.1
#81
Full CORE ratings →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Kansas 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 Kansas in 2026

by EPA/play distance
UTSASP+ +2.9
Off EPA/play +0.302Def EPA/play +0.053Elo 1522
Match
99%
ColoradoSP+ +2.1
Off EPA/play +0.302Def EPA/play +0.032Elo 1406
Match
98%
West VirginiaSP+ -4.4
Off EPA/play +0.319Def EPA/play +0.100Elo 1365
Match
98%
Arizona StateSP+ +8.7
Off EPA/play +0.348Def EPA/play +0.057Elo 1572
Match
98%
MissouriSP+ +12.9
Off EPA/play +0.319Def EPA/play +0.020Elo 1703
Match
97%
TCUSP+ +3.9
Off EPA/play +0.264Def EPA/play +0.081Elo 1595
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 · 2015–2026 · points per game vs an average FBS team

2015: -31.6, #128 of 1282016: -21.1, #120 of 1282017: -19.0, #119 of 1302018: -4.8, #93 of 1302019: -9.6, #100 of 1302020: -25.1, #119 of 1242021: -23.1, #118 of 1302022: +10.1, #33 of 1312023: +17.7, #14 of 1332024: +13.2, #28 of 1342025: +4.9, #57 of 1362026: +2.2, #63 of 138
20152026
Now +2.2 · #63 of 138Best +17.7 in 2023Worst -31.6 in 2015

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-10-0
50%
1.1-0.1
20255-73-6
42%
6.7-1.7
20245-74-5
42%
7.4-2.4
20239-45-4
69%
10.7-1.7
20226-73-6
46%
6.9-0.9
20212-101-8
17%
1.7+0.3
20200-90-8
0%
0.3-0.3
20193-91-8
25%
3.9-0.9
20183-91-8
25%
2.8+0.2
20171-110-9
8%
1.6-0.6

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

3.6%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-0 so far, projected to finish 6.2-5.9. Top-four bye in 0.6%. Wins the Big 12 in 1.8%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
97%
1 loss
37%
2 losses
2.4%
3 losses
0.0%
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 0.1 points since preseason.

  • At 2 losses they are 37% where the average Big 12 team is 46%.
  • The Big 12 takes 1.61 bids in an average season, and four or more in 1.0%.

Kansas’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk12vs BYU8.6
  • wk6at Utah8.5
  • wk7at Kansas State8.3
  • wk2vs Missouri8.2
  • wk9at TCU7.5
  • wk3vs Arizona State6.3

Who to root for

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

  • wk5North Carolina over Notre Dame0.9
  • wk5Colorado over Texas Tech0.8
  • wk4Purdue over Notre Dame0.8
  • wk2UL Monroe over UAB0.7
  • wk10UL Monroe over Arkansas State0.6
  • wk8Cincinnati over Texas Tech0.6
The full playoff picture →

Big 12

0-0 in league play, projected 3.9-5.111 of 16 by title odds
1.8%
Wins the Big 12
5.4%
Reaches the title game

The Big 12 sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 45% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk12BYU at Kansas4.7
  • wk6Kansas at Utah4.4
  • wk7Kansas at Kansas State4.1
  • wk9Kansas at TCU3.8

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Big 12 race →

If not the playoff, then

60%
Bowl eligible
51%
Placed in a bowl
3.6%
In the playoff
45%
Season over in November

Kansas 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 5.2% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • First Responder Bowl7.0%
  • Independence Bowl6.6%
  • Rate Bowl6.4%
  • Liberty Bowl6.2%
  • Pop-Tarts Bowl5.5%
  • Texas Bowl4.9%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 5 have sent Kansas a player since 2010 — 8 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Kansas's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Blue SpringsMO20
Lake DallasTX20
St. AugustineLA20
ManorTX10
Wheaton Warrenville SouthIL10
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.