Skip to content

Michigan State Spartans

Big Ten·2-0·
Elo
1468#74
SP+
1.0#71
FPI
1.3
AP
NR
Next@ Notre Dame · Wk 3Win prob 3%Model +27.6
Talent #61 (685.0)Recruiting class #4521% production returning

Roster · 111 players

FR 48SO 18JR 15SR 30
#PlayerPosClHtWt
2Cam FancherQBSR6'0"207
10Kayd CoffmanQBFR6'2"206
11Alessio MilivojevicQBSO6'3"223
15Leo HannanQBFR6'3"221
23Peyton BabbittQBFR6'0"200
0Cam EdwardsRBSR5'11"206
4Jaziun PattersonRBSR5'10"214
7Brandon TullisRBJR6'1"224
20Zion GistRBFR5'11"209
21Marvis ParrishRBSO5'11"209
25Jace ClarizioRBFR5'10"213
26Cedric Williams Jr.RBFR5'9"201
27Darrin Jones Jr.RBFR5'11"206
32Kenneth WilliamsRBJR5'9"191
33Jaxon McCaigRBSO6'1"236
44Jay CoyneFBSR6'2"231
3Rodney Bullard Jr.WRSR5'11"188
5Samson GashWRFR6'0"185
6Fredrick MooreWRJR6'1"187
8KK SmithWRJR6'0"180
13Chrishon McCrayWRSR5'10"180
14Bryson WilliamsWRFR6'2"225
16Zach WashingtonWRFR6'2"188
17Braylon CollierWRFR6'0"187
18Jameel Gardner Jr.WRSR6'0"193
19Charles TaplinWRFR6'1"184
22Jack YanachikWRJR6'2"205
81Colin CharlesWRFR6'0"202
85Rai'Shawn ElmoreWRFR6'2"193
89Nick HardyWRFR6'1"194
12Carson GulkerTESR6'3"245
31Jayden SavouryTEFR6'5"253
48Charlie BakerTESO6'4"252
82Brennan ParachekTEJR6'5"249
84Eddie WhitingTEFR6'6"254
86Ethan MelvilleTEFR6'4"213
87Joe CaudillTEFR6'4"232
88Kai RiosTESR6'6"262
52Nick SharpeOLSR6'2"351
54Antonio JohnsonOLFR6'5"287
55Rakeem JohnsonOLSO6'4"296
56Jack ZiarkoOLFR6'2"286
58Conner MooreOLSR6'6"311
61Collin CampbellOLFR6'6"295
63Trent FraleyOLSR6'1"306
65Cole BertkeOLFR6'5"285
68Eli BickelOLFR6'6"312
70Luka VincicOLSR6'5"306
71Robert Wright Jr.OLJR6'5"294
73Rustin YoungOLSO6'4"308
75Ben MurawskiOLSR6'7"340
76Drew NicholsOLFR6'4"298
77Andrew DennisOLSO6'4"302
79Tristan ComerOLFR6'5"305
8Trey LisleEDGESO6'6"254
9Keahnist ThompsonEDGESR6'3"266
11Anelu LafaeleEDGESO6'2"240
13Isaac SmithEDGESR6'6"260
23Kenny Soares Jr.EDGESR6'2"234
33Cory House Jr.EDGEFR6'3"230
36Leonard Ah YouEDGEFR6'3"250
47Jaxson WilsonEDGEJR6'5"258
51Kekai BurnettEDGESO6'3"262
56Chris PiwowarczykEDGESO6'0"250
94Aidan BoehleEDGEJR6'4"253
25Carlos HazelwoodDLSO6'4"290
52Mikeshun BeelerDLSO6'2"290
55Ben RobertsDLSR6'3"325
57Hudson AultmanDLFR6'4"312
91Jackson PahlDLFR6'2"282
96Eli CoenenDLJR6'6"287
97Cal ThrushDLFR6'5"263
98Derrick SimmonsDLFR6'3"305
5Jordan HallLBSR6'3"249
10DiMari MaloneLBFR6'1"238
12Cam StodghillLBSR6'3"222
16Adam ShawLBFR6'3"223
18Dion CrawfordLBSR6'1"243
39Jack Lansing IIILBFR6'0"213
40DeJae WhiteLBFR6'3"225
44Caleb WheatlandLBSR6'1"244
45Brady PretzlaffLBSO6'3"238
0NiJhay BurtCBSR5'11"188
3Tre BellCBSR6'1"200
14Andrew Brinson IVCBSO6'1"186
19Charles BrantleyCBSR6'0"170
20Keshawn WilliamsCBSO6'0"187
22Tyran ChappellCBSO6'3"189
24Jeremiah FavoriteCBFR5'11"172
27Truth UmenyioraCBFR6'1"194
29KJ DerisoCBFR6'0"160
37Darelle CochranCBFR6'2"175
42Luca GenrichCBFR5'10"187
21Nikai MartinezDBSR5'11"196
2Devin VaughtSJR6'0"212
7Michael RichardSSR5'10"179
15Caleb GashSJR6'0"193
17Jonathan GranbySFR5'10"200
26Trevaughn MartinezSJR5'9"175
28Brayden ThomasSFR6'0"177
30Aveon GroseSSR5'11"187
31Deuce EdwardsSFR6'0"202
32Evan YoungSSO6'0"196
34Khalil MajeedSSR5'11"201
35Eliyjah CaldwellSFR6'0"188
37Liam BoydPKSR6'1"200
85Stephen GonzalesPKFR5'10"182
9Rhys DakinPJR6'4"235
49Alex WeeksPFR6'4"191
50Nick DuzanskyLSJR6'5"197
53Trey SerauskisLSFR5'10"205

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
32.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
13.5
scoring defense
Differential
+19.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
434.5#55
Yards / play
5.6#86
Passing yards / game
230.5#68
Rushing yards / game
204.0#44
First downs / game
25.0#33
3rd down %
48.5%#47
4th down %
83.3%#34
Time of possession
37:19#7
Defense
Yards allowed / game
246.0#38
Yards / play allowed
5.3#80
Pass yards allowed / game
157.0#52
Rush yards allowed / game
89.0#45
3rd down % allowed
33.3%#60
Sacks
6#12
Tackles for loss
13#29
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+1#36
Takeaways
2#53
Giveaways
1#31
Penalties / game
4.0#19
Penalty yards / game
37.5#33

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 · 2 games in

balanced

Michigan State is in year 1 under Pat Fitzgerald, whose offenses have been balanced. The way in is 130th at staying out of the backfield, and they are 127th at hitting chunk plays.

On fourth down he goes for it more often than his peers do from the same spots (+3.6%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −17.0% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Michigan State has played 2 games against a soft slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 22% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Soft spots

  • Offensegetting stopped at the line
    15.9%
    #130 of 138
  • Offensehitting chunk plays
    1.11
    #127 of 138
  • Defensemoving the ball on the ground
    44%
    #120 of 138

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
3.88.2
projected final record (now 20)
Exp. wins left
1.8
of 10 games
Bowl odds
7%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
34%
vs Illinois
Toughest
3%
vs Oregon

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 3-9 (31%)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
QBCam Fancher, Alessio Milivojevic
+23.3 EPA
WRChrishon Mccray, Fredrick Moore +4
+23.2 EPA
TEBrennan Parachek, Kai Rios +1
+7.0 EPA
RBJaziun Patterson, Camryn Edwards +2
-1.6 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 +22.90.342/play67 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)
Off0.1432nd#94
Def0.1923rd#107
Explosiveness
Off1.1121st#109
Def1.4616th#116
Field position
Off62.89th#126
Def78.37th#129
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.5633rd#93
Def3.0061st#55
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 1
Margin +1

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.3044th#78
Off · rush
0.0634th#91

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.0634th#92
Def0.2217th#115
Passing
Off0.3044th#78
Def0.1558th#59

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
3.21#52
2nd-level / open-field
0.94 / 0.94
Power / stuff (off)
64.3% / 15.9%
Havoc — total (def)
23.2%#24
Havoc — front 7 / DB
14.7% / 8.4%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.12
Def-0.02
Pass downs
Off0.21
Def0.56

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.08#670.03#990.36#99
Defense-0.15#470.52#1270.35#71

Elo Trajectory

ToledoFinal
Elo rating 14391530+91 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.0217th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.2819th
  • Offense success rate38%22nd
  • Defense success rate allowed29%79th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs44%30th
  • Offense success — passing downs22%19th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs28%88th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs29%44th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.127th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed2.31st
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs0.9640th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.839th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards2.833rd
  • Defense line yards allowed1.197th
  • Offense highlight yards0.3825th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed3.52nd
  • Offense power success0.3312th
  • Defense power success allowed0.0099th
  • Offense stuff rate0.2125th
  • Defense stuff rate0.4499th

Third down

  • Third down conversion33%26th
  • Third down distance faced6.168th
  • Third down conversion allowed13%93rd
  • Third down distance forced8.983rd

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.3080th
  • Net success rate — second half-0.1120th

Drives

  • Points per drive2.970th
  • Points per drive allowed2.149th
  • Average starting field position3790th
  • Opponent starting field position3034th
  • Available yards gained62%76th
  • Available yards allowed130%1st
  • Scoring opportunities per drive90%70th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed70%75th
  • Points per scoring opportunity3.266th
  • Points allowed per opportunity3.043rd
  • Three-and-out rate0%99th
  • Three-and-outs forced40%81st

Roster

  • Returning usage30%37th
  • Returning EPA52.930th
  • Team talent composite68556th
  • Recruiting class rank45.068th
  • Recruiting class points21468th

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
+0.141#94 · below avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.304#78
Rush EPA/play
+0.058#92
Explosiveness
1.110#109
Pts/opportunity
3.56#93
Success rate
45.3%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.246 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

High-pressure defense — allowing above-average EPA/play
EPA/play allowed
+0.192#107 · below avg
Havoc rate (total)
23.2%#24
Front-7 havoc
14.7%
DB havoc
8.4%
Big play rate allowed
1.457#116
Success rate allowed
37.0%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

32.5 PPG offense, 13.5 allowed — +19.0 margin/game
Points per game
32.5
Points allowed/game
13.5
Scoring margin/game
+19.0
Turnover margin
+1won 2 · lost 1
Production returning
21%
Talent rank (247)
#61

2-0 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE32thEXPLOSIVENESS21thFINISHING33thFIELD POS9thDEFENSE23thHAVOC83th50th100th
Offense
32th
Explosiveness
21th
Finishing
33th
Field Pos
9th
Defense
23th
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
-4.0
#82
Offense
-3.2
#92
Defense
+0.8
#79
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 10 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive2.902.10
Starting field positionown 36.5own 30.4
Available yards61.6%130.3%
Scoring opportunities90.0%70.0%
Points per opportunity3.223.00
Three-and-out rate0.0%40.0%
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
43.0%
Expected, given the spots
45.2%
Over expected
-2.1
Fourth down vs peers
+2
Fourth down vs the model
-20
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Michigan State 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 Michigan State in 2026

by EPA/play distance
MinnesotaSP+ +9.6
Off EPA/play +0.130Def EPA/play +0.191Elo 1510
Match
99%
South AlabamaSP+ -11.4
Off EPA/play +0.140Def EPA/play +0.176Elo 1390
Match
99%
KentuckySP+ +8.5
Off EPA/play +0.155Def EPA/play +0.178Elo 1476
Match
99%
San José StateSP+ -12.8
Off EPA/play +0.126Def EPA/play +0.175Elo 1413
Match
99%
Sam HoustonSP+ -21.5
Off EPA/play +0.168Def EPA/play +0.157Elo 1164
Match
98%
RutgersSP+ -3.6
Off EPA/play +0.124Def EPA/play +0.234Elo 1372
Match
98%

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: +11.1, #33 of 1282016: +2.7, #55 of 1282017: +13.6, #23 of 1302018: +5.4, #41 of 1302019: +10.8, #28 of 1302020: -9.5, #93 of 1242021: +10.0, #37 of 1302022: -7.7, #92 of 1312023: -14.5, #108 of 1332024: -3.8, #80 of 1342025: -8.6, #91 of 1362026: -4.0, #82 of 138
20152026
Now -4.0 · #82 of 138Best +13.6 in 2017Worst -14.5 in 2023

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-00-0
100%
0.5+0.5
20254-81-8
33%
4.5-0.5
20245-73-6
42%
4.5+0.5
20234-82-7
33%
4.3-0.3
20225-73-6
42%
3.9+1.1
202111-27-2
85%
9.2+1.8
20202-52-5
29%
2.6-0.6
20197-64-5
54%
8.3-1.3
20187-65-4
54%
7.2-0.2
201710-37-2
77%
9.4+0.6

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

0.8%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 5.1-6.9.

If they finish with…

52%
2 losses
1.6%
3 losses
0%
4 losses

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

down 0.7 points since preseasonwon 30-20 over Toledo against an expected margin of +14, so 3.7 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 52% 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%.

Michigan State’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk12vs Oregon4.7
  • wk10at Michigan2.8
  • wk8at UCLA2.5
  • wk11vs Washington2.3
  • wk4vs Nebraska1.9
  • wk6vs Illinois1.8

Who to root for

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

  • wk13Georgia Tech over Georgia0.4
  • wk9Northwestern over Oregon0.4
  • wk2Lindenwood over Missouri State0.4
  • wk5Memphis over Charlotte0.4
  • wk11Iowa over Purdue0.4
  • wk2Oklahoma State over Oregon0.3
The full playoff picture →

Big Ten

0-0 in league play, projected 3.2-5.816 of 18 by title odds
0.1%
Wins the Big Ten
0.5%
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.

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

If not the playoff, then

41%
Bowl eligible
38%
Placed in a bowl
0.8%
In the playoff
61%
Season over in November

Michigan State 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 1.9% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • LA Bowl6.1%
  • GameAbove Sports Bowl5.9%
  • Rate Bowl4.9%
  • Pinstripe Bowl4.2%
  • Las Vegas Bowl3.3%
  • Xbox Bowl2.8%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 11 have sent Michigan State a player since 2010 — 25 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Michigan State's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Archbishop MoellerOH50
Cass TechnicalMI50
HarrisonGA21
Hinsdale CentralIL21
BolingbrookIL20
ChaminadeCA20
Pickerington CentralOH20
WayneOH20
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.