Skip to content
Sacramento State

Sacramento State Hornets

Mid-American·1-1·
Compare
Elo
1476#71
SP+
-19.1#125
FPI
-18.4
AP
NR
Next@ Fresno State · Wk 2Win prob 37%Model +5.7
Talent #114 (561.4)Recruiting class #125

Team Leaders

Roster · 116 players

FR 37SO 22JR 31SR 26
#PlayerPosClHtWt
6Brian SalazarQBSO6'3"170
8Jackson SharmanQBJR6'1"195
11Jaylen PattersonQBFR6'2"193
17Carson ConklinQBJR6'1"190
18Liam MeekerQBFR6'2"210
0Daniel SwinneyRBJR5'10"225
1Jamar CurtisRBSR5'8"175
3Cincere RhaneyRBSO5'10"210
14Curron BordersRBSO5'7"191
20Bryant CollinsRBJR6'0"191
22Isaiah EneRBFR5'8"212
23Elias BrownRBSR6'0"226
25Davion GodleyRBJR5'8"213
34Montrell RiceRBFR6'0"230
2Matt ColemanWRSR6'0"173
4Kenyon ShabazzWRJR6'4"185
5Raiden BrownWRSO5'11"175
7Khai TaylorWRJR6'2"172
9Ajon BryantWRSO5'6"162
10Jace WilsonWRSR6'4"212
12Onterrio Smith Jr.WRJR6'2"189
13Ellijah WashingtonWRFR5'10"162
14Drey GarnerWRFR6'0"193
15Dezmyn HardyWRFR6'6"188
19Guy Fernandez IIIWRFR6'0"171
21Kenneth PeevyWRFR5'9"160
80Carlton PerrilliatWRFR6'3"185
81Matthew AuauWRFR6'3"185
83Jaxon FresquesWRSO5'7"167
16Jordan WilliamsTESR6'5"222
82Kyle KoontzTESO6'4"224
84Jahlil LindseyTEFR6'6"235
85Elijah HuddleTESO6'3"220
86Jack HodgeTEFR6'4"210
87Luke MeekerTEFR6'2"210
88Cedric AntonTEJR6'2"248
53Elijah OrtizOLSR6'1"305
54Shontrail KeyOLSR6'5"290
55Garrison BlankOLFR6'7"328
56Jeremiah PonceOLFR6'3"305
57Luke SlaterOLSO6'2"275
58Daniel MataeleOLFR6'6"360
63Jamin GuilbertOLJR6'5"311
64Brandon SousaOLSR6'4"313
65Giovanni KovacsOLSO6'4"309
66Hayden FrazierOLJR6'3"286
68Davis MayOLJR6'4"339
70Jaxon MooreOLFR6'6"312
71Bryson SummersOLSR6'5"329
72Shaan LathanOLJR6'4"350
74Vae SoifuaOLSR6'4"308
75DeAnthony SheffieldOLJR6'3"329
76Alex KenwardOLSO6'4"270
77Jeremiah StallworthOLSO6'7"325
78Richard McKayOLJR6'6"300
79Dylan SpencerOLJR6'7"315
5Nick DimitrisDLSR6'4"305
7Kaden BriggsDLJR6'3"285
9Malik TullisDLSR6'0"283
32Peyton McCutcheonDLFR6'3"225
45Xavier WilliamsDLSR6'2"251
50Federico CobarubioDLFR6'2"303
52Isiah ChalaDLJR6'4"275
54Brodie TagaloaDLSR6'5"294
55Miles BaileyDLSR6'4"297
58Jamel HowardDLJR6'2"307
90Austin ChambersDLSO6'2"270
91Maliek RichardsonDLJR6'1"358
93Malachi KindleDLSO6'0"308
94Austin AtenDLFR6'4"240
95Will WeberDLJR6'3"280
96Jadakiss VaokakalaDLJR6'2"280
98Collin KallhoffDLJR6'4"268
99Devyn BlakeDLFR6'1"300
4Dante AntoniniLBSR6'1"226
8Darson JeantyLBSR6'3"215
10Derek HoustonLBJR6'1"223
11Ivan Moore Jr.LBSO6'4"217
15KJ JeffersonLBSO6'0"209
16Leki HolaniLBFR6'0"226
17Dylan GoodenLBSO6'4"215
18Fata PulokaLBJR6'3"224
26Tim ThomasLBSR6'1"236
28Jiah WallsLBFR6'1"212
31Jackson CahoonLBFR6'0"219
33Alex RochaLBSR6'1"213
40Iosefa LealofiLBFR6'0"215
41Pheta TofaeonoLBFR6'1"225
44Diego DavisLBSR6'0"235
2Dionte ThorntonCBSR6'4"183
12Malikai NicholsCBSO5'11"167
21Adam TaylorCBSO5'10"159
22Elias MullicanCBSR6'1"180
24Kyle GurganiousCBSO5'11"180
29Caleb ReeseCBFR5'11"187
30Nikko KlemmCBSO5'11"169
38Tim Edwards Jr.CBFR6'0"170
0Donovan TurnerSSR6'0"190
1Boogsie SilveraSSR5'11"200
3Amari WallaceSFR5'10"185
6Warren Smith Jr.SJR6'2"189
13Diesel GordonSJR6'0"168
14Joshua HolaniSFR5'10"180
19Miles TuckerSJR6'0"188
20Qualyn McQueenSSR5'9"182
23Chakai ScottSFR5'9"172
25Naytel MitchellSFR5'10"191
27Noah KingSFR6'3"209
39Keyon MillsSSO5'11"185
9Saul MarksPKFR6'0"160
49Grant MeadorsPKJR5'11"174
35Jay BrockhausPJR6'1"198
37Hamish AdamsPFR6'2"202
46Mike MelansonPSR5'11"182
47Caden SimLSFR6'1"200
48Kellan SuttonLSJR6'2"201

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
34.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
14.0
scoring defense
Differential
+20.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
360.5#98
Yards / play
5.4#98
Passing yards / game
234.5#66
Rushing yards / game
126.0#97
First downs / game
19.5#85
3rd down %
35.7%#101
4th down %
66.7%#45
Time of possession
30:20#70
Defense
Yards allowed / game
247.5#40
Yards / play allowed
4.1#41
Pass yards allowed / game
161.0#54
Rush yards allowed / game
86.5#41
3rd down % allowed
23.3%#23
Sacks
6#12
Tackles for loss
14#20
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-2#109
Takeaways
2#53
Giveaways
4#118
Penalties / game
7.0#79
Penalty yards / game
60.0#84

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

Sacramento State is in year 1 under Alonzo Carter. No unit here sits far enough from the national average to build a plan around — nothing to lean on, and nothing obvious to attack.

Sacramento State has played 2 games against a genuinely tough slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

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
7.7 – 4.3
projected final record (now 1–1)
Exp. wins left
6.7
of 10 games
Bowl odds
94%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
99%
vs Massachusetts
Toughest
28%
vs Hawai'i

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 = 29% chance
Likeliest finish 8-4 (29%)Bowl eligible 94% · 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
WRJace Wilson, Matthew Coleman +3
+16.2 EPA
QBCarson Conklin, Jackson Sharman
+6.6 EPA
RBJamar Curtis, Cincere Rhaney +2
+1.8 EPA
TEJordan Williams, Cedric Anton +1
-1.0 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
QBJackson Sharman
~$724K
EPA +10.40.434/play24 snaps
QBCarson Conklin
~$420K
EPA -3.8-0.079/play48 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)
Off0.0719th#112
Def-0.0270th#42
Explosiveness
Off1.2038th#86
Def1.2753rd#65
Field position
Off66.822nd#108
Def71.558th#58
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.9345th#77
Def2.8066th#48
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 4
Margin -2

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
—
Defense
—
Off · pass
0.1016th#116
Off · rush
0.0327th#101

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.0327th#101
Def-0.1680th#29
Passing
Off0.1016th#116
Def0.1264th#50

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
1.64#134
2nd-level / open-field
0.71 / 0.85
Power / stuff (off)
70.0% / 32.4%
Havoc — total (def)
17.9%#57
Havoc — front 7 / DB
13.8% / 4.1%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.08
Def-0.03
Pass downs
Off0.05
Def0.02

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense-0.09#1110.06#950.35#100
Defense0.09#102-0.18#230.01#17

Elo Trajectory

@Eastern MichiganFinal
Elo rating 1500 → 1476-24 over season

Team Fingerprint · 2026 · 41 opponent-adjusted metrics · percentile vs 138 FBS teams

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.1334th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed-0.0570th
  • Offense success rate41%34th
  • Defense success rate allowed30%74th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs49%48th
  • Offense success — passing downs24%23rd
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs37%69th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs17%82nd

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.242nd
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.248th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.170th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.413th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards1.86th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.463rd
  • Offense highlight yards1.566th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.9039th
  • Offense power success0.7139th
  • Defense power success allowed0.8826th
  • Offense stuff rate0.334th
  • Defense stuff rate0.1736th

Third down

  • Third down conversion38%36th
  • Third down distance faced6.847th
  • Third down conversion allowed24%77th
  • Third down distance forced8.474th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half-0.0428th
  • Net success rate — second half0.2985th

Drives

  • Points per drive0.8318th
  • Points per drive allowed1.563rd
  • Average starting field position3280th
  • Opponent starting field position2848th
  • Available yards gained26%12th
  • Available yards allowed41%71st
  • Scoring opportunities per drive58%12th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed50%96th
  • Points per scoring opportunity1.423rd
  • Points allowed per opportunity4.020th
  • Three-and-out rate50%12th
  • Three-and-outs forced29%54th

Roster

  • Team talent composite56118th
  • Recruiting class rank1259th
  • Recruiting class points1619th

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

Balanced offense — below average EPA/play nationally
EPA/play
+0.070#112 · bottom 20%
Pass EPA/play
+0.103#116
Rush EPA/play
+0.033#101
Explosiveness
1.195#86
Pts/opportunity
3.93#77
Success rate
35.2%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.069 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Disruptive defense suppressing opponents below the national average
EPA/play allowed
-0.015#42 · above avg
Havoc rate (total)
17.9%#57
Front-7 havoc
13.8%
DB havoc
4.1%
Big play rate allowed
1.274#65
Success rate allowed
32.3%

Disruption comes primarily from the front seven.

📊

Season Signature

34.5 PPG offense, 14.0 allowed — +20.5 margin/game
Points per game
34.5
Points allowed/game
14.0
Scoring margin/game
+20.5
Turnover margin
-2won 2 · lost 4
Talent rank (247)
#114

1-1 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE19thEXPLOSIVENESS38thFINISHING45thFIELD POS22thDEFENSE70thHAVOC59th50th100th
Offense
19th
Explosiveness
38th
Finishing
45th
Field Pos
22th
Defense
70th
Havoc
59th

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
-11.0
#113
Offense
-9.4
#121
Defense
+1.5
#85
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 12 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive0.831.50
Starting field positionown 32.2own 28.1
Available yards25.7%41.0%
Scoring opportunities58.3%50.0%
Points per opportunity1.434.00
Three-and-out rate50.0%28.6%
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
76.7%
Expected, given the spots
59.0%
Over expected
+17.7
Fourth down vs peers
-0
Fourth down vs the model
-50
All play-calling tendencies →

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

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

by EPA/play distance
WashingtonSP+ +12.0
Off EPA/play +0.064Def EPA/play -0.019Elo 1762
Match
100%
BaylorSP+ +4.9
Off EPA/play +0.054Def EPA/play +0.028Elo 1506
Match
98%
MichiganSP+ +12.2
Off EPA/play +0.125Def EPA/play -0.018Elo 1686
Match
97%
Florida InternationalSP+ -13.5
Off EPA/play +0.111Def EPA/play -0.063Elo 1385
Match
97%
Utah StateSP+ -11.5
Off EPA/play +0.052Def EPA/play +0.044Elo 1376
Match
97%
Georgia TechSP+ +1.7
Off EPA/play +0.074Def EPA/play +0.052Elo 1553
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 History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-10-1
50%
1.1-0.1
20257-55-3
58%
7.4-0.4
20243-91-7
25%
3.4-0.4
20238-54-4
62%
7.5+0.5
202212-18-0
92%
10.1+1.9
20219-38-0
75%
0.0+9.0
20199-48-1
69%
0.0+9.0
20182-81-6
20%
0.0+2.0
20177-46-3
64%
0.0+7.0
20162-82-7
20%
0.0+2.0

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

0%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-1 so far, projected to finish 2.5-9.5.

up 0.0 points since preseason — lost 17-28 to Eastern Michigan against an expected margin of −26, so +15.2 against the number.

  • The Mid-American takes 0.05 bids in an average season.
The full playoff picture →

Mid-American

0-1 in league play, projected 1.1-6.913 of 13 by title odds
0.0%
Wins the Mid-American
0.0%
Reaches the title game

The Mid-American sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 46% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Mid-American race →

If not the playoff, then

3.2%
Bowl eligible
2.5%
Placed in a bowl
0%
In the playoff
97%
Season over in November

Sacramento State 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.

  • Salute to Veterans Bowl0.8%
  • Famous Idaho Potato Bowl0.7%
  • Arizona Bowl0.5%
  • 68 Ventures Bowl0.3%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.