Skip to content

Pittsburgh Panthers

ACC·2-0·
Elo
1681#27
SP+
10.1#32
FPI
11.5
AP
NR
Nextvs Syracuse · Wk 3Win prob 76%Model -11.1
Talent #64 (675.0)Recruiting class #4440% production returning

Roster · 112 players

FR 48SO 21JR 18SR 25
#PlayerPosClHtWt
6Mason HeintschelQBSO6'2"215
8Angelo RendaQBFR6'0"180
11Holden GerinerQBSR6'3"215
12Beau JacksonQBFR6'3"220
16Corey DaileyQBFR6'6"200
19Davin FriedmanQBFR6'3"195
5Justin CookRBSR5'10"175
20Synkwan SmithRBFR5'7"185
25Ja'Kyrian TurnerRBSO5'9"195
26Damon Ferguson Jr.RBFR5'11"190
27Jaylin BrownRBFR5'10"210
29La'Vell WrightRBSR5'11"215
34Ethan ShineRBJR5'10"225
2Tony KinslerWRSO5'11"175
3Cataurus HicksWRJR5'10"185
4Bryce YatesWRSO6'0"185
10Censere LeeWRSR5'11"170
14Benny HaselrigWRJR5'11"195
18Malik KnightWRSR6'1"185
22Bryan HamiltonWRFR5'11"165
24Tyreek RobinsonWRSO5'10"180
30Jack LesniewiczWRFR6'2"175
40Amah AgwuWRSO6'3"190
41Jake SassicWRSO5'10"180
81Rodney DunbarWRFR6'5"185
83Dylan WesterWRFR5'9"175
84Cam SappWRFR5'10"175
87Demetrice McCrayWRFR6'0"205
32Truitt BrownTESO6'4"235
44Adam HowanitzTEJR6'4"240
82Elijah LaggTESR6'2"235
85Carson KentTESR6'4"250
86Max HuntTEFR6'4"225
88Wyatt VillarrealTEFR6'5"230
50Shep TurkOLFR6'4"310
51Jiavani CooleyOLSO6'4"315
53Kendall StanleyOLSR6'5"305
55BJ WilliamsOLSR6'4"320
56Keylen DavisOLSR6'2"325
58Mason LindsayOLSO6'6"320
60Akram ElnagmiOLFR6'6"315
61Sean FranklinOLFR6'6"300
62Jordan FieldsOLFR6'4"265
63Ty BancoOLJR6'0"320
64Josh NindlOLFR6'3"295
66Keith GouveiaOLSR6'4"305
68Torian ChesterOLFR6'4"310
70Ryan BaerOLSR6'7"325
71Ryan CarrettaOLJR6'5"320
72Isaiah MontgomeryOLSR6'4"300
74Netinho OlivieriOLSR6'4"310
76Mike van der OordOLFR6'7"285
77John CurranOLFR6'3"310
78Nick HowardOLFR6'5"350
2Isaiah NealDLJR6'2"250
5Zach CrothersDLSO6'4"265
11Nick JamesDLSR6'2"295
20Josh PittmanDLFR6'3"240
35JuJu AndersonDLFR6'4"245
40Ty MillhimesDLJR6'2"240
44Jimmy ScottDLSR6'3"265
45Jeremiah WarrenDLJR6'2"305
49Charlie DonehueDLFR6'1"275
50Denim CookDLFR6'3"245
55Sean FitzSimmonsDLSR6'3"300
56Jaeden MooreDLJR6'4"250
58Reston LehmanDLFR6'4"235
66Ben KauffmanDLFR6'3"240
76Lincoln HokeDLFR6'2"285
77Dylan PitzerDLFR6'7"285
90Trevor SommersDLFR6'2"280
93Ty YuhasDLSO6'3"285
95Eliyt NairneDLJR6'1"290
0Braylan LovelaceLBSR6'2"225
10Alex Sanford Jr.LBSR6'1"235
19Jayden BonsuLBJR6'2"215
24Cameron LindseyLBSO6'1"210
30John WetzelLBFR5'11"210
31DeMarco WardLBJR6'1"230
32Jeremiah MarcelinLBSO6'2"235
34Marcus JenningsLBFR6'2"220
37Davin BrewtonLBSO6'0"230
38Emmanuel TaylorLBSO6'1"205
46Zach ZollersLBJR6'2"225
48Desmond JohnsonLBFR6'1"210
52Abe IbrahimLBSR6'1"225
54Justin ThompsonLBFR6'2"235
3Shawn Lee Jr.DBSO5'10"180
4Rashan MurrayDBSR6'2"185
6Raion StraderDBSR6'0"190
12Cruce BrookinsDBJR6'0"205
14Josh GuerrierDBSO5'10"185
15Tony ForneyDBFR6'1"195
17Cole WoodsonDBFR6'1"210
21Shadarian HarrisonDBJR6'1"200
22Zion FergusonDBSO6'1"180
23Kanye ThompsonDBSR6'0"170
25Kentrail McRae Jr.DBFR6'2"175
26Allen BryantDBSO6'0"180
27Nigel MaynardDBSO5'11"180
29Da'Ron BarksdaleDBFR5'10"195
39D'Angelo StockerDBSR5'10"170
41Isaac PattersonDBFR6'0"190
43Valdez StuvaintsDBFR5'10"200
47Jaxson MarkDBFR6'0"170
91Sam HunsakerPKJR5'9"175
93Antonio ChadhaPKSR5'9"200
94Carter GenchiPKFR5'10"160
92Kaemon TijerinaPFR6'0"215
98Gabe RussoPJR6'0"235
57Alex RudolphLSFR5'9"200
59Justin SchmidtLSFR6'2"235

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
35.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
10.5
scoring defense
Differential
+25.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
480.5#31
Yards / play
6.5#48
Passing yards / game
346.0#6
Rushing yards / game
134.5#98
First downs / game
24.0#38
3rd down %
42.9%#65
4th down %
50.0%#71
Time of possession
35:04#14
Defense
Yards allowed / game
247.5#27
Yards / play allowed
4.5#43
Pass yards allowed / game
223.5#95
Rush yards allowed / game
24.0#3
3rd down % allowed
26.9%#29
Sacks
5#38
Tackles for loss
11#62
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+1#42
Takeaways
1#107
Giveaways
0#1
Penalties / game
6.5#61
Penalty yards / game
51.0#53

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

Pittsburgh is in year 12 under Pat Narduzzi, whose offenses have been balanced. The strengths are defensive, led by 6th at holding the line of scrimmage. The way in is 121st at staying out of the backfield, and they are 120th at keeping everything in front of them.

On fourth down he goes for it about as often as his peers do from the same spots (−0.9%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −28.4% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Pittsburgh has played 2 games 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

  • Defensethe push the line gets
    #6
    projected
  • Defensemoving the ball on the ground
    #7
    projected
  • Defensefirst and second down
    #11
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Offensegetting stopped at the line
    #121
    projected
  • Defensehitting chunk plays
    #120
    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
7.04.0
projected final record (now 20)
Exp. wins left
5.0
of 9 games
Bowl odds
88%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
87%
vs North Carolina
Toughest
12%
vs Miami

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.

234567891011
final winstallest bar = 29% chance
Likeliest finish 7-4 (29%)Bowl eligible 88% · 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
QBMason Heintschel
+32.2 EPA
WRCensere Lee, Cataurus Hicks +2
+18.7 EPA
RBJa'Kyrian Turner, Damon Ferguson Jr. +1
+6.9 EPA
TEElijah Lagg
+1.9 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 +32.20.442/play73 snaps
EPA -2.5-0.100/play25 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)
Off0.1944th#78
Def-0.0180th#29
Explosiveness
Off1.3159th#57
Def1.635th#131
Field position
Off69.751st#68
Def75.520th#111
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.4328th#100
Def2.8069th#43
Turnovers
Won 1Lost 0
Margin +1

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.5072nd#39
Off · rush
-0.0612th#122

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off-0.0612th#121
Def-0.3899th#3
Passing
Off0.5072nd#40
Def0.2345th#77

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.67#111
2nd-level / open-field
0.73 / 0.78
Power / stuff (off)
66.7% / 21.7%
Havoc — total (def)
18.6%#44
Havoc — front 7 / DB
11.5% / 7.1%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.01
Def-0.20
Pass downs
Off0.55
Def0.24

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.06#790.08#970.56#66
Defense-0.06#63-0.32#80.41#78

Elo Trajectory

Miami (OH)Final
Elo rating 15761678+102 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.4378th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.1142nd
  • Offense success rate55%77th
  • Defense success rate allowed32%66th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs54%61st
  • Offense success — passing downs57%93rd
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs36%70th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs27%51st

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.373rd
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.512th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.157th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.058th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.255th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.273rd
  • Offense highlight yards1.670th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.0583rd
  • Offense power success0.6029th
  • Defense power success allowed1.023rd
  • Offense stuff rate0.2031st
  • Defense stuff rate0.1634th

Third down

  • Third down conversion64%90th
  • Third down distance faced6.750th
  • Third down conversion allowed31%66th
  • Third down distance forced9.894th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.1252nd
  • Net success rate — second half0.3088th

Drives

  • Points per drive4.995th
  • Points per drive allowed1.374th
  • Average starting field position2956th
  • Opponent starting field position2663rd
  • Available yards gained79%93rd
  • Available yards allowed30%87th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive100%99th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed73%68th
  • Points per scoring opportunity4.991st
  • Points allowed per opportunity1.873rd
  • Three-and-out rate17%75th
  • Three-and-outs forced45%88th

Roster

  • Returning usage51%61st
  • Returning EPA15063rd
  • Team talent composite67554th
  • Recruiting class rank44.069th
  • Recruiting class points21469th

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
+0.193#78 · average
Pass EPA/play
+0.499#40
Rush EPA/play
-0.056#121
Explosiveness
1.314#57
Pts/opportunity
3.43#100
Success rate
41.6%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.555 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Disruptive defense suppressing opponents below the national average
EPA/play allowed
-0.009#29 · above avg
Havoc rate (total)
18.6%#44
Front-7 havoc
11.5%
DB havoc
7.1%
Big play rate allowed
1.633#131
Success rate allowed
28.0%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

35.5 PPG offense, 10.5 allowed — +25.0 margin/game
Points per game
35.5
Points allowed/game
10.5
Scoring margin/game
+25.0
Turnover margin
+1won 1 · lost 0
Production returning
40%
Talent rank (247)
#64

2-0 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE44thEXPLOSIVENESS59thFINISHING28thFIELD POS51thDEFENSE80thHAVOC69th50th100th
Offense
44th
Explosiveness
59th
Finishing
28th
Field Pos
51th
Defense
80th
Havoc
69th

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
+15.3
#23
Offense
+8.4
#23
Defense
-6.9
#29
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 12 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive4.921.27
Starting field positionown 29.2own 26.1
Available yards79.4%29.5%
Scoring opportunities100.0%72.7%
Points per opportunity4.921.75
Three-and-out rate16.7%45.5%
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
64.0%
Expected, given the spots
50.6%
Over expected
+13.4
Fourth down vs peers
-12
Fourth down vs the model
-100
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Pittsburgh 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 Pittsburgh in 2026

by EPA/play distance
Iowa StateSP+ +3.1
Off EPA/play +0.178Def EPA/play -0.004Elo 1586
Match
99%
AuburnSP+ +7.0
Off EPA/play +0.174Def EPA/play -0.007Elo 1613
Match
99%
Louisiana TechSP+ -3.8
Off EPA/play +0.222Def EPA/play -0.000Elo 1454
Match
98%
VanderbiltSP+ +12.1
Off EPA/play +0.167Def EPA/play +0.022Elo 1753
Match
98%
IowaSP+ +18.0
Off EPA/play +0.166Def EPA/play -0.040Elo 1847
Match
98%
BaylorSP+ +4.9
Off EPA/play +0.166Def EPA/play -0.043Elo 1506
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 · 20152026 · points per game vs an average FBS team

2015: +5.3, #53 of 1282016: +10.3, #29 of 1282017: +3.1, #59 of 1302018: +6.4, #37 of 1302019: +6.3, #39 of 1302020: +3.5, #51 of 1242021: +15.6, #14 of 1302022: +16.4, #14 of 1312023: +0.2, #60 of 1332024: 0.0, #66 of 1342025: +16.8, #23 of 1362026: +15.3, #23 of 138
20152026
Now +15.3 · #23 of 138Best +16.8 in 2025Worst 0.0 in 2024

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-00-0
100%
1.0+0.0
20258-56-2
62%
8.2-0.2
20247-63-5
54%
6.5+0.5
20233-92-6
25%
4.3-1.3
20229-45-3
69%
9.3-0.3
202111-38-1
79%
10.6+0.4
20206-55-5
55%
6.1-0.1
20198-54-4
62%
7.3+0.7
20187-76-3
50%
6.4+0.6
20175-73-5
42%
6.0-1.0

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

15%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 8.5-3.7. Top-four bye in 3.2%. Wins the ACC in 7.0%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
97%
1 loss
33%
2 losses
1.0%
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.

up 8.8 points since preseasonwon 59-14 over Miami (OH) against an expected margin of +13, so +32.4 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 33% where the average ACC team is 44%.
  • The ACC takes 1.54 bids in an average season, and four or more in 0.7%.

Pittsburgh’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk8at Miami36.1
  • wk12at Louisville22.5
  • wk5at Virginia Tech20.1
  • wk6vs North Carolina17.4
  • wk11vs Florida State17.4
  • wk9vs Georgia Tech16.4

Who to root for

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

  • wk7Florida State over Miami2.7
  • wk11Duke over Miami2.4
  • wk9North Carolina over Miami2.3
  • wk3Wake Forest over Miami1.9
  • wk9Navy over Notre Dame1.8
  • wk5Clemson over Miami1.6
The full playoff picture →

ACC

0-0 in league play, projected 5.7-3.34 of 17 by title odds
7.0%
Wins the ACC
16%
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.

  • wk8Pittsburgh at Miami22.8
  • wk12Pittsburgh at Louisville11.1
  • wk5Pittsburgh at Virginia Tech9.2
  • wk6North Carolina at Pittsburgh7.7

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

If not the playoff, then

93%
Bowl eligible
77%
Placed in a bowl
15%
In the playoff
7.7%
Season over in November

Pittsburgh 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.

  • Gator Bowl15%
  • Duke's Mayo Bowl12%
  • Holiday Bowl11%
  • Sun Bowl9.3%
  • Pop-Tarts Bowl8.0%
  • Pinstripe Bowl6.5%

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 Pittsburgh a player since 2010 — 32 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Pittsburgh's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Central CatholicPA61
DeMatha CatholicMD60
LakelandFL41
Miami NorthwesternFL31
Penn HillsPA31
Cardinal GibbonsFL30
Deerfield BeachFL30
Imhotep InstitutePA20
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.