Skip to content

Louisiana Tech Bulldogs

Sun Belt·1-1·
Elo
1405#88
SP+
-3.8#80
FPI
-6.6
AP
NR
Next@ Baylor · Wk 3Win prob 22%Model +12.1
Talent #124 (543.0)Recruiting class #9964% production returning

Team Leaders

Latest on Louisiana Tech

All news

LSU's power game is Tech's one soft spot

Matchup · 6d ago

Eighty Points, Twelve Plays

Matchup · Sep 6

Roster · 110 players

FR 43SO 24JR 27SR 16
#PlayerPosClHtWt
2Trey KukukQBSR6'1"201
5Blake BakerQBJR6'5"220
7Jackson BradleyQBFR6'3"220
13Michael KirbyQBFR6'2"200
14Brady VodickaQBFR6'2"215
19Mason WelchQBJR6'5"227
0Andrew BurnetteRBSR6'2"225
0Jaden MillerRBJR6'0"202
20Rayshun HurtRBFR5'10"185
22Demarcus BeltonRBFR5'11"200
23Sergio SniderRBSO5'11"200
24Kenny ThomasRBFR5'9"170
26Dylone BrooksRBFR5'10"200
28Harrison WilliamsRBFR6'0"185
36Riley SmallRBSO5'10"190
3Dedrick LatulasWRJR5'7"165
6Marcus Calwise Jr.WRJR5'10"190
8David PierroWRSR5'11"185
11Jalen MickensWRSO5'9"187
15Luke WatkinsWRSO6'4"205
17Dane BenedixWRSR6'0"195
31Brayden CurryWRSO5'7"161
47Jay WilkersonWRSR6'1"175
83Carter HarrisWRFR6'4"190
85Johnny Casey Jr.WRFR5'9"165
86Talyn ShettronWRJR6'2"195
88Johnnie Thiel IVWRFR5'11"175
89Chase GrosfeldWRJR6'2"200
9Joshua BrantleyTEFR6'4"220
45Skylar KirkTEFR6'3"235
80Deven MunizTEJR6'3"223
81William MayesTEFR6'6"240
82Luke SeibTEJR6'4"220
84Eli FinleyTESR6'6"246
87Brayden BocklerTEJR6'4"237
50Tazio RossoOLFR6'1"271
52Troy Smith IIIOLJR6'3"301
53Austin EllisOLSO6'4"305
56Andrew RichardOLSO6'3"304
57Tadan BinghamOLFR6'5"290
58Tye HyltonOLSO6'5"290
60Roy Brackins IIIOLJR6'3"308
61Ervin SmithOLFR6'1"292
63Kaleb CampbellOLFR6'7"305
66Will HutchensOLJR6'3"305
72Hayden ChristmanOLJR6'6"331
73Jackson SpeerOLFR6'5"280
74Jamon Lee Jr.OLJR6'3"300
75Jacob McRaeOLFR6'5"285
76Cyler CornOLSO6'4"314
77Aric AdcockOLFR6'3"290
78Bryson WeathersOLFR6'6"293
79Ashanti ColeOLSR6'3"312
11Emmanuel OgunsDLSR6'5"260
44Kaleb ColemanDLSO6'4"255
46Daylin PageDLFR6'4"236
48Kaden McIverDLJR6'3"230
51Amery EdwardsDLJR6'2"285
54Justice WilliamsDLSR6'3"310
90Jojo OdomDLSO6'4"265
91Za'Qwaun NunnDLFR6'1"285
92Lane CondryDLSO6'4"270
93Jacob BradfordDLSO6'1"290
94Amari WilksDLFR6'3"240
96Ashton DawsonDLFR6'2"285
98Donovan RiemanDLSR6'4"265
99Judd RouyeaDLJR6'2"267
10Kolbe FieldsLBSR6'0"225
21Zheric HillLBSO6'0"230
22Jadon MayfieldLBSO5'11"225
23Alonzo Jackson Jr.LBSO6'1"227
25Colton DeckardLBJR6'2"220
27Grayson HardyLBFR6'3"215
28Jeremiah SmithLBFR6'1"220
33Jaylon ParnellLBFR5'11"224
35Cole WatsonLBSO6'0"220
36Zander HayesLBFR5'10"194
40Ayden CombsLBFR6'2"220
45Nate JacksonLBFR6'2"230
49James PredtechenskisLBSO6'1"200
0Jordan McRaeDBJR5'11"180
1Sam FongangDBSR6'2"195
2Amari ButlerDBSR5'10"186
3Kameron CarterDBSR6'1"175
4Kam FranklinDBJR6'2"211
5Ahkhari JohnsonDBJR5'11"191
7Janard LockhardtDBJR6'1"180
13MJ Moultrie IIDBJR5'11"195
14Damien Richard IIDBFR6'0"170
15Franklin Morgan Jr.DBFR5'10"170
16Taeden RogersDBSO6'0"170
17Demario BookhartDBSO6'1"175
18Jaitlin HamptonDBJR5'11"170
19AJ TarvinDBFR6'1"175
20Ty JonesDBSR6'2"200
24Javari LockhartDBFR6'1"170
26Nathan GreenDBFR5'11"175
32Emanual CollinsDBFR5'11"170
37Zachary JacksonDBSO5'10"170
39Jacoryian CroweDBSO5'10"175
41Jake KimDBFR5'11"175
43Justin ThomasDBFR5'11"165
31Hunter RiouxPKJR5'10"170
38Kaegan KentPKFR5'8"160
46Hunter FoxPKFR6'1"185
29Lexington MatthewsPJR6'3"196
30Reuben EdwardsPFR6'6"240
41Ean BurchLSSR6'0"215
59Jake RiggsLSSO5'11"188
69Trent SimsLSSO6'3"210

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
47.0
scoring offense
Points allowed
25.5
scoring defense
Differential
+21.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
334.0#110
Yards / play
5.9#79
Passing yards / game
219.5#79
Rushing yards / game
114.5#116
First downs / game
15.5#122
3rd down %
40.0%#73
4th down %
33.3%#99
Time of possession
25:22#133
Defense
Yards allowed / game
328.5#73
Yards / play allowed
4.5#46
Pass yards allowed / game
212.0#76
Rush yards allowed / game
116.5#70
3rd down % allowed
34.3%#63
Sacks
6#20
Tackles for loss
24#2
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+2#24
Takeaways
5#9
Giveaways
3#74
Penalties / game
3.5#11
Penalty yards / game
32.5#17

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

Louisiana Tech is in year 5 under Sonny Cumbie, whose offenses have been balanced. The strengths are defensive, led by 20th at stuffing runs at the line. The way in is 115th at keeping everything in front of them, and they are 106th at staying on schedule through the air.

On fourth down he goes for it about as often as his peers do from the same spots (+1.8%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −15.8% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Louisiana Tech has played 1 game 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

  • Defensegetting stopped at the line
    #20
    projected
  • Defenserunning it
    #31
    projected
  • Defensefirst and second down
    #31
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Defensehitting chunk plays
    #115
    projected
  • Offensestaying on schedule through the air
    #106
    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
6.35.7
projected final record (now 11)
Exp. wins left
5.3
of 10 games
Bowl odds
71%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
78%
vs Arkansas State
Toughest
22%
vs Baylor

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 = 25% chance
Likeliest finish 6-6 (25%)Bowl eligible 71% · 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
WRJay Wilkerson, Talyn Shettron +3
+19.6 EPA
QBBlake Baker, Trey Kukuk
+9.8 EPA
TEEli Finley, Josh Brantley +1
+8.5 EPA
RBDylone Brooks, Jaden Miller
-0.3 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
QBBlake Baker
~$749K
EPA +12.60.341/play37 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)
Off0.2251st#68
Def-0.0075th#35
Explosiveness
Off1.9699th#1
Def1.4220th#111
Field position
Off64.010th#124
Def65.896th#7
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off5.2184th#23
Def3.5838th#86
Turnovers
Won 5Lost 3
Margin +2

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.5276th#34
Off · rush
-0.0117th#115

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off-0.0117th#115
Def-0.1276th#34
Passing
Off0.5275th#35
Def0.1073rd#38

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.21#131
2nd-level / open-field
1.10 / 2.53
Power / stuff (off)
100.0% / 26.7%
Havoc — total (def)
27.3%#5
Havoc — front 7 / DB
18.0% / 9.3%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.07
Def0.03
Pass downs
Off0.44
Def-0.06

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.19#390.07#1000.50#72
Defense-0.10#470.16#76-0.11#5

Elo Trajectory

Northwestern StateFinal
Elo rating 14541405-49 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.1634th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed-0.0985th
  • Offense success rate30%3rd
  • Defense success rate allowed32%78th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs31%1st
  • Offense success — passing downs31%42nd
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs36%78th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs24%64th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.799th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.169th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.285th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.695th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards2.49th
  • Defense line yards allowed1.794th
  • Offense highlight yards1.151st
  • Defense highlight yards allowed1.036th
  • Offense power success0.5017th
  • Defense power success allowed0.7146th
  • Offense stuff rate0.2028th
  • Defense stuff rate0.2885th

Third down

  • Third down conversion43%53rd
  • Third down distance faced7.231st
  • Third down conversion allowed38%45th
  • Third down distance forced7.969th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.1674th
  • Net success rate — second half-0.204th

Drives

  • Points per drive0.549th
  • Points per drive allowed2.543rd
  • Average starting field position2951st
  • Opponent starting field position451st
  • Available yards gained18%2nd
  • Available yards allowed62%21st
  • Scoring opportunities per drive46%3rd
  • Scoring opportunities allowed93%15th
  • Points per scoring opportunity1.211th
  • Points allowed per opportunity3.138th
  • Three-and-out rate62%1st
  • Three-and-outs forced33%74th

Roster

  • Returning usage49%56th
  • Returning EPA13960th
  • Team talent composite54310th
  • Recruiting class rank99.028th
  • Recruiting class points17728th

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
+0.222#68 · average
Pass EPA/play
+0.516#35
Rush EPA/play
-0.011#115
Explosiveness
1.958#1
Pts/opportunity
5.21#23
Success rate
31.3%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.527 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

High-pressure defense suppressing opponents below the national average
EPA/play allowed
-0.000#35 · above avg
Havoc rate (total)
27.3%#5
Front-7 havoc
18.0%
DB havoc
9.3%
Big play rate allowed
1.418#111
Success rate allowed
35.1%

Disruption comes primarily from the front seven.

📊

Season Signature

47.0 PPG offense, 25.5 allowed — +21.5 margin/game
Points per game
47.0
Points allowed/game
25.5
Scoring margin/game
+21.5
Turnover margin
+2won 5 · lost 3
Production returning
64%
Talent rank (247)
#124

1-1 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE51thEXPLOSIVENESS100thFINISHING84thFIELD POS10thDEFENSE75thHAVOC97th50th100th
Offense
51th
Explosiveness
100th
Finishing
84th
Field Pos
10th
Defense
75th
Havoc
97th

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
-3.2
#81
Offense
-13.8
#134
Defense
-10.6
#19
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 13 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive0.542.47
Starting field positionown 28.9own 45.1
Available yards17.8%62.3%
Scoring opportunities46.2%93.3%
Points per opportunity1.173.14
Three-and-out rate61.5%33.3%
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
53.1%
Expected, given the spots
57.8%
Over expected
-4.7
Fourth down vs peers
+9
Fourth down vs the model
+0
All play-calling tendencies →

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

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

by EPA/play distance
TroySP+ -11.4
Off EPA/play +0.225Def EPA/play -0.008Elo 1416
Match
100%
PittsburghSP+ +10.1
Off EPA/play +0.193Def EPA/play -0.009Elo 1678
Match
98%
Iowa StateSP+ +3.1
Off EPA/play +0.178Def EPA/play -0.004Elo 1588
Match
97%
Old DominionSP+ -6.2
Off EPA/play +0.245Def EPA/play +0.045Elo 1289
Match
97%
AuburnSP+ +7.0
Off EPA/play +0.171Def EPA/play -0.007Elo 1678
Match
97%
UCLASP+ +9.2
Off EPA/play +0.263Def EPA/play +0.045Elo 1487
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: +10.8, #34 of 1282016: +8.0, #35 of 1282017: -0.7, #66 of 1302018: -2.7, #80 of 1302019: +1.8, #54 of 1302020: -15.2, #113 of 1242021: -7.2, #95 of 1302022: -20.4, #124 of 1312023: -15.9, #112 of 1332024: -11.0, #102 of 1342025: -2.2, #70 of 1362026: -3.2, #81 of 138
20152026
Now -3.2 · #81 of 138Best +10.8 in 2015Worst -20.4 in 2022

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-10-0
50%
1.0-0.0
20258-55-3
62%
8.9-0.9
20245-84-4
38%
4.9+0.1
20233-92-6
25%
4.2-1.2
20223-92-6
25%
3.8-0.8
20213-92-6
25%
4.1-1.1
20205-54-2
50%
2.8+2.2
201910-36-2
77%
8.4+1.6
20188-55-3
62%
7.0+1.0
20177-64-4
54%
8.1-1.1

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

0.7%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-1 so far, projected to finish 6.9-5.4. Wins the Sun Belt in 12%.

If they finish with…

45%
1 loss
4.3%
2 losses
0.0%
3 losses
0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count.

Win out and it is 45%. One bid goes to the best champion outside the four power leagues, so running the table only enters them into that argument.

up 0.2 points since preseason.

  • At 1 loss they are 45% where the average Sun Belt team is 36%.
  • The Sun Belt takes 0.20 bids in an average season.
  • One bid goes to the best champion outside the P4. They take it in 0.7% of seasons, having won their league in 99% of those.

Louisiana Tech’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk3at Baylor3.0
  • wk5vs Army1.4
  • wk13at Georgia Southern1.4
  • wk10at Troy1.3
  • wk6vs Louisiana1.2
  • wk9at South Alabama1.2

Who to root for

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

  • wk8Washington State over Boise State0.5
  • wk3Oklahoma over New Mexico0.3
  • wk7Kent State over South Florida0.3
  • wk9Fresno State over Oregon State0.3
  • wk7Miami over Florida State0.3
  • wk3Syracuse over Pittsburgh0.3
The full playoff picture →

Sun Belt

West division · 0-0 in league play, projected 5.1-2.93 of 14 by title odds
12%
Wins the Sun Belt
27%
Reaches the title game

The Sun Belt keeps divisions (East and West) and sends the winner of each — so Louisiana Tech can finish with the league’s second-best record and still stay home. The last berth is level on percentage in 46% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk6Louisiana at Louisiana Tech18.5
  • wk10Louisiana Tech at Troy16.1
  • wk9Louisiana Tech at South Alabama15.0
  • wk12Arkansas State at Louisiana Tech14.3

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

If not the playoff, then

73%
Bowl eligible
72%
Placed in a bowl
0.7%
In the playoff
27%
Season over in November

Louisiana Tech is 1-1 and needs 5 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.

  • Frisco Bowl11%
  • New Orleans Bowl9.2%
  • Myrtle Beach Bowl8.7%
  • Cure Bowl8.5%
  • Boca Raton Bowl7.9%
  • Salute to Veterans Bowl7.6%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 10 have sent Louisiana Tech a player since 2010 — 25 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Louisiana Tech's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
St. AugustineLA50
Edna KarrLA40
Evangel Christian AcademyLA31
AllenTX30
LancasterTX20
NevilleLA20
ParkwayLA20
Southern LabLA20
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.