Skip to content

Tennessee Volunteers

SEC·2-0·
Elo
1691#25
SP+
19.9#12
FPI
15.3
AP
#18
Nextvs Kennesaw State · Wk 3Win prob 91%Model -20.4
Talent #13 (885.9)Recruiting class #835% production returning

Roster · 112 players

FR 42SO 34JR 18SR 18
#PlayerPosClHtWt
8Ryan StaubQBJR6'1"204
11Faizon BrandonQBFR6'4"225
12George MacIntyreQBFR6'6"208
13Mason PhillipsQBFR6'1"188
2Justin BakerRBSO5'10"210
6Javin GordonRBSO5'10"212
17Daune MorrisRBSO5'10"200
18DeSean BishopRBJR5'10"215
24Hunter BarnesRBSR6'0"200
34Will RajeckiRBFR5'11"208
1Travis Smith Jr.WRSO6'3"215
3Radarious JacksonWRSO6'2"208
4Mike MatthewsWRJR6'1"198
5TK KeysWRFR6'2"198
9Joakim DodsonWRFR6'0"197
14Braylon StaleyWRSO6'0"190
19Tyreek KingWRFR5'11"175
26Doren SachaWRJR6'1"180
29Jack-Henry JakobikWRJR6'4"198
30Jacolby CooperWRFR6'0"170
31Lane CopeWRFR5'9"180
35Ben PetermannWRFR6'3"208
36Nathan RobertsWRJR6'4"209
38Brayden CarrollWRFR6'1"188
81Ian DuarteWRJR5'10"181
85Luke ThompsonWRFR6'1"193
88Deon HardinWRSR6'0"189
0Ethan DavisTEJR6'5"247
7DaSaahn BrameTESO6'5"240
44Drake MartinezTESR6'3"245
80Cole HarrisonTESO6'5"239
82Trent ThomasTEJR6'5"252
87Luca WolfTEFR6'5"255
51Jeremias HeardOLSO6'8"335
55Antoni OgumoroOLSO6'4"320
56Sam PendletonOLJR6'4"315
58Nic MooreOLFR6'3"313
59Charlie Powell IIIOLFR6'3"314
60Thomas StormOLFR6'4"281
63Jeremy George-ElOLFR6'4"310
65Michael KostantonovOLSO6'4"322
66Kamari BlairOLFR6'6"290
69Donovan HaslamOLSR6'3"350
70David Sanders Jr.OLSO6'6"310
71Ed BakerOLFR6'4"322
72Jesse PerryOLSO6'6"320
74Shamurad UmarovOLJR6'7"321
75Wendell Moe Jr.OLSR6'2"330
77Ory WilliamsOLSO6'8"330
78Gage GintherOLSO6'5"310
79Gabriel OsendaOLFR6'8"330
2Xavier GilliamDLSO6'2"305
5Daevin HobbsDLSR6'4"290
9Mariyon DyeDLSO6'5"270
17Ethan UtleyDLSO6'4"287
18Tyree WeathersbyDLJR6'5"268
19Nathan RobinsonDLJR6'7"295
26JJ FinchDLFR6'3"293
33Jordan NormanDLJR6'4"265
35Carson GentleDLSO6'3"265
36Carter GoodenDLFR6'4"267
37Kedric Golston IIDLFR6'3"243
39Darryl RiversDLFR6'5"287
44Christian GassDLFR6'3"245
47Isaiah CampbellDLSO6'4"295
55Mike Bethea IIDLSR6'1"221
56Zach GrovesDLFR6'4"250
59Dereon AlbertDLFR6'1"309
85CJ EdwardsDLFR6'3"230
87Nuk SimmonsDLFR6'3"300
95Breeze CarterDLFR6'3"255
97Hezekiah HarrisDLFR6'6"248
99Charles House IIIDLFR6'3"290
0Amare CampbellLBSR6'0"230
7Arion CarterLBSR6'1"238
11Jordan BurnsLBSO6'1"227
12Jaedon HarmonLBSO6'0"225
13Edwin SpillmanLBSO6'1"225
22Jeremiah TelanderLBSR6'2"235
27Jadon PerlotteLBSO6'4"214
28Brayden RouseLBFR6'3"225
50Ryan ScottLBSO6'1"220
51TJ WhiteLBFR6'2"237
57Grier ShortLBSO6'1"222
1TJ MetcalfDBSR6'1"205
3Tre Poteat IIIDBSO6'0"192
4Ty RedmondDBSO6'3"200
6Qua MossDBSR5'10"188
8Jadais RichardDBSR6'1"202
10Dejuan LaneDBJR6'2"215
14Kayin LeeDBSR5'11"190
15Edrees FarooqDBJR6'0"202
20Tevis MetcalfDBSO5'10"202
21Jamyan TheodoreDBFR6'0"173
23Sidney WaltonDBSO6'1"197
24Dylan LewisDBSO6'0"197
25Tim MerrittDBSO6'1"194
29Isaiah HardgeDBJR5'10"182
30Javonte SmithDBFR6'0"183
31Joel WyattDBFR6'4"210
34Zay AndersonDBFR6'0"175
38Jowell CombayDBFR6'1"200
40KJ McClainDBFR6'0"188
42DJ BurksDBSR6'0"196
43Jackson MathewsDBSO6'0"196
28Cooper RanvierPKSO6'2"199
93Grady DangerfieldPKFR6'0"215
94Josh TurbyvillePKSR6'2"195
98Jackson RossPSR6'4"203
99Logan FoleyPFR6'6"234
48Bennett BradyLSSR6'1"210
53Blake HowardLSJR6'2"222

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
50.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
16.5
scoring defense
Differential
+34.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
542.5#11
Yards / play
7.8#16
Passing yards / game
228.5#69
Rushing yards / game
314.0#6
First downs / game
26.5#19
3rd down %
52.0%#26
4th down %
75.0%#31
Time of possession
30:25#69
Defense
Yards allowed / game
288.5#48
Yards / play allowed
4.5#45
Pass yards allowed / game
132.0#19
Rush yards allowed / game
156.5#105
3rd down % allowed
39.3%#87
Sacks
10#4
Tackles for loss
19#7
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
0#69
Takeaways
2#76
Giveaways
2#47
Penalties / game
10.5#135
Penalty yards / game
101.0#135

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

Tennessee is in year 6 under Josh Heupel, whose offenses have been balanced. The strengths are offensive, led by 5th at moving the ball on the ground. The way in is 107th at hitting chunk plays.

On fourth down he goes for it more often than his peers do from the same spots (+4.2%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −12.7% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Tennessee 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

  • Offensemoving the ball on the ground
    #5
    projected
  • Offensefirst and second down
    #7
    projected
  • Offensegetting stopped at the line
    #8
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Offensehitting chunk plays
    #107
    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
6.85.2
projected final record (now 20)
Exp. wins left
4.8
of 10 games
Bowl odds
83%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
91%
vs Kennesaw State
Toughest
13%
vs Texas A&M

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 = 28% chance
Likeliest finish 7-5 (28%)Bowl eligible 83% · 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
QBFaizon Brandon
+31.5 EPA
RBDeSean Bishop, Daune Morris +1
+17.8 EPA
WRMike Matthews, Braylon Staley +3
+9.3 EPA
TEEthan Davis, Trent Thomas +1
+6.2 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 +31.50.606/play52 snaps
EPA +14.00.468/play30 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)
Off0.3577th#32
Def-0.0686th#20
Explosiveness
Off1.3977th#33
Def1.0683rd#24
Field position
Off68.334th#92
Def72.452nd#67
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off6.2199th#3
Def2.2582nd#25
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 2
Margin 0

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.4770th#42
Off · rush
0.3988th#18

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.3988th#18
Def0.267th#129
Passing
Off0.4769th#43
Def-0.2599th#2

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
3.72#21
2nd-level / open-field
1.50 / 1.84
Power / stuff (off)
77.8% / 12.2%
Havoc — total (def)
24.2%#14
Havoc — front 7 / DB
15.2% / 9.1%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.36
Def-0.17
Pass downs
Off0.32
Def0.16

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.18#430.46#250.90#19
Defense0.02#91-0.48#30.70#115

Elo Trajectory

FurmanFinal
Elo rating 16911729+38 over season

Team Fingerprint · 2026 · 46 opponent-adjusted metrics · percentile vs 138 FBS teams

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.4087th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed-0.0680th
  • Offense success rate51%76th
  • Defense success rate allowed35%61st

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs55%78th
  • Offense success — passing downs37%68th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs41%58th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs25%61st

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.366th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.175th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.288th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.728th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.787th
  • Defense line yards allowed3.53rd
  • Offense highlight yards2.386th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed1.516th
  • Offense power success0.8267th
  • Defense power success allowed0.5078th
  • Offense stuff rate0.1280th
  • Defense stuff rate0.1731st

Third down

  • Third down conversion54%84th
  • Third down distance faced6.853rd
  • Third down conversion allowed41%38th
  • Third down distance forced8.383rd

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.1466th
  • Net success rate — second half0.1473rd

Drives

  • Points per drive4.596th
  • Points per drive allowed1.085th
  • Average starting field position3588th
  • Opponent starting field position2484th
  • Available yards gained70%92nd
  • Available yards allowed48%55th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive100%99th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed70%75th
  • Points per scoring opportunity4.590th
  • Points allowed per opportunity2.463rd
  • Three-and-out rate0%99th
  • Three-and-outs forced30%65th

CORE

  • CORE offense7.993rd
  • CORE defense-5.177th
  • CORE overall13.091st

Roster

  • Returning usage37%43rd
  • Returning EPA18673rd
  • Team talent composite88691st
  • Recruiting class rank8.095th
  • Recruiting class points29195th

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 performing above the national average
EPA/play
+0.345#32 · above avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.466#43
Rush EPA/play
+0.390#18
Explosiveness
1.390#33
Pts/opportunity
6.21#3
Success rate
45.7%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.075 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

High-pressure defense suppressing opponents below the national average
EPA/play allowed
-0.059#20 · top 20%
Havoc rate (total)
24.2%#14
Front-7 havoc
15.2%
DB havoc
9.1%
Big play rate allowed
1.057#24
Success rate allowed
37.9%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

50.5 PPG offense, 16.5 allowed — +34.0 margin/game
Points per game
50.5
Points allowed/game
16.5
Scoring margin/game
+34.0
Turnover margin
+0won 2 · lost 2
Production returning
35%
Talent rank (247)
#13

2-0 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE77thEXPLOSIVENESS77thFINISHING99thFIELD POS34thDEFENSE86thHAVOC91th50th100th
Offense
77th
Explosiveness
77th
Finishing
99th
Field Pos
34th
Defense
86th
Havoc
91th

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
+20.5
#14
Offense
+12.6
#10
Defense
-7.9
#32
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 10 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive4.501.00
Starting field positionown 34.8own 24.1
Available yards70.3%47.5%
Scoring opportunities100.0%70.0%
Points per opportunity4.502.43
Three-and-out rate0.0%30.0%
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
33.9%
Expected, given the spots
43.3%
Over expected
-9.5
Fourth down vs peers
+1
Fourth down vs the model
-50
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Tennessee 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 Tennessee in 2026

by EPA/play distance
MarylandSP+ +9.1
Off EPA/play +0.348Def EPA/play -0.059Elo 1424
Match
100%
South CarolinaSP+ +16.7
Off EPA/play +0.347Def EPA/play -0.047Elo 1742
Match
99%
North CarolinaSP+ +5.8
Off EPA/play +0.330Def EPA/play -0.046Elo 1398
Match
99%
ToledoSP+ -9.4
Off EPA/play +0.368Def EPA/play -0.077Elo 1568
Match
98%
Air ForceSP+ +1.1
Off EPA/play +0.315Def EPA/play -0.011Elo 1424
Match
97%
MissouriSP+ +12.9
Off EPA/play +0.319Def EPA/play +0.021Elo 1703
Match
95%

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: +17.2, #16 of 1282016: +9.3, #32 of 1282017: -6.6, #86 of 1302018: -2.9, #82 of 1302019: +6.5, #38 of 1302020: -1.8, #72 of 1242021: +18.7, #9 of 1302022: +24.1, #6 of 1312023: +19.8, #13 of 1332024: +17.7, #13 of 1342025: +15.0, #26 of 1362026: +20.5, #14 of 138
20152026
Now +20.5 · #14 of 138Best +24.1 in 2022Worst -6.6 in 2017

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20262-00-0
100%
2.0+0.0
20258-54-4
62%
9.2-1.2
202410-36-2
77%
9.8+0.2
20239-44-4
69%
8.8+0.2
202211-26-2
85%
9.7+1.3
20217-64-4
54%
8.1-1.1
20203-73-7
30%
3.3-0.3
20198-55-3
62%
7.6+0.4
20185-72-6
42%
4.4+0.6
20174-80-8
33%
3.4+0.6

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

29%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 8.4-3.8. Top-four bye in 9.0%. Wins the SEC in 5.9%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
100%
1 loss
97%
2 losses
21%
3 losses
0.0%
4 losses

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

Win out and it is 100%. Running the table settles it.

up 6.5 points since preseason.

  • At 3 losses they are 21% where the average SEC team is 41%.
  • The SEC takes 4.08 bids in an average season, and four or more in 75%.

Tennessee’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk4vs Texas38.3
  • wk11at Texas A&M37.6
  • wk12vs LSU35.6
  • wk7vs Alabama34.1
  • wk8at South Carolina32.7
  • wk13at Vanderbilt27.7

Who to root for

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

  • wk13Georgia Tech over Georgia2.5
  • wk9Mississippi State over Texas2.2
  • wk13Arkansas over LSU2.1
  • wk7Mississippi State over LSU2.1
  • wk3Florida State over Alabama2.0
  • wk10Washington over Penn State1.9
The full playoff picture →

SEC

0-0 in league play, projected 5.3-3.77 of 16 by title odds
5.9%
Wins the SEC
14%
Reaches the title game

The SEC sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 49% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk4Texas at Tennessee11.6
  • wk11Tennessee at Texas A&M10.6
  • wk12LSU at Tennessee10.2
  • wk7Alabama at Tennessee8.8

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

If not the playoff, then

93%
Bowl eligible
64%
Placed in a bowl
29%
In the playoff
6.4%
Season over in November

Tennessee is 2-0 and needs 4 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.

  • ReliaQuest Bowl9.6%
  • Citrus Bowl9.5%
  • Gator Bowl9.3%
  • Duke's Mayo Bowl8.7%
  • Music City Bowl7.7%
  • Texas Bowl6.8%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 8 have sent Tennessee a player since 2010 — 27 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Tennessee's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Knoxville CatholicTN81
Montgomery Bell AcademyTN51
EnsworthTN40
Peachtree RidgeGA30
North GwinnettGA21
Greater Atlanta Christian SchoolGA20
MariettaGA20
NortheastPA11
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.