Skip to content

Utah Utes

Big 12·2-0·
Elo
1817#15
SP+
13.0#21
FPI
11.2
AP
#20
Nextvs Utah State · Wk 3Win prob 76%Model -11.1
Talent #58 (695.7)Recruiting class #2768% production returning

Team Leaders

Latest on Utah

All news

Arkansas's defense holds everywhere except over the top

Matchup · 5d ago

Utah Threw Deep All Night. The 66 Points Came From Everything Else

Matchup · Sep 4

Roster · 112 players

FR 30SO 35JR 19SR 28
#PlayerPosClHtWt
4Devon DampierQBSR5'11"210
9Kane ArcherQBFR6'1"200
13Michael JohnsonQBFR6'0"175
14Brandon RoseQBSR6'2"212
15Byrd FicklinQBSO6'1"200
1Wayshawn ParkerRBJR5'10"205
3Nate JohnsonRBSR6'1"200
5Daniel BrayRBSO5'10"180
20Mateaki HeluRBSO6'1"224
25Steve Chavez-SotoRBSO6'0"205
26LaMarcus BellRBFR6'0"200
28Anthony HernandezRBJR5'10"192
84Jojo WardRBFR6'2"225
0Kyri ShoelsWRSR6'0"182
2Creed WhittemoreWRSR5'11"182
6Daidren ZippererWRSR6'0"175
7Braden PeganWRSR6'3"210
8Mana CarvalhoWRSO5'9"175
11Ricky JohnsonWRSO6'2"185
12Larry SimmonsWRSR6'1"190
18Tobias MerriweatherWRSR6'5"200
30Matt ClarkWRJR5'11"181
37Peyton RiceWRSR5'10"180
39Junior CoughlinWRSO6'0"176
80Bryson BakerWRSO6'1"185
82Max AusmusWRSO6'1"185
10Hunter AndrewsTEJR6'3"230
33Kana'i LopesTEJR6'3"228
44Sione MotuapuakaTESO5'11"276
46Teague MatthewsTEFR6'6"240
81Bear FisherTEFR6'5"240
85Broderick ReddenTESO6'4"233
86Will MonneyTEJR6'4"230
89Noah BenneeTESR6'4"240
99Semi TaulangaTESO5'11"317
54Milz AsiataOLFR6'5"331
55Kelvin ObotOLFR6'5"295
56Isaiah KemaOLFR6'3"312
57Moses SparksOLFR6'4"305
61Cyrus NielsenOLFR6'5"315
62Solatoa Moea'iOLSR6'4"325
63Devin EntsmingerOLFR6'4"300
64Reece ParmenterOLJR6'5"319
66Will FryOLFR6'4"315
67Soren ShinofieldOLSO6'6"304
70Mataalii BenjaminOLFR6'7"340
71Rowdy PearceOLFR6'3"295
72Isaiah GarciaOLJR6'5"310
73Cedric JeffersonOLJR6'5"300
74Keith OlsonOLSR6'6"307
75Roger AldermanOLSR6'4"302
76Zereoue WilliamsOLSR6'8"305
77Nick HallockOLSO6'4"275
79Alex HarrisonOLSR6'5"309
8Ethan DayDEJR6'4"250
15Lance HoltzclawDESR6'3"245
16PJ TakitakiDEFR6'3"223
40Paul FitzgeraldDESR6'4"256
46Mauka BernardDEFR6'4"215
47Jared FredrickDEFR6'3"220
48Alex ClowardDEFR6'3"247
58Fameitau SialeDEFR6'3"265
92Nicholas IgweDESO6'4"255
93Kash DillonDEJR6'5"252
45Pupu SepulonaDTSO6'2"298
51Karson KaufusiDTSO6'6"305
57Stanley RaassDTFR6'0"290
90Jireh MoeDTSO6'0"280
94Mike TauteoliDTJR6'4"300
96Dilan BattleDTSO6'2"320
97Lucas SamsulaDTSO6'4"306
99Jamal WallaceDTSR6'3"313
0Cyrus PoluLBSO6'1"225
7Johnathan HallLBSR6'1"226
10Trey ReynoldsLBSR6'1"231
35Preston PittsLBFR6'4"225
41LaGary MitchellLBFR6'2"212
43Grady MarekoLBJR6'1"231
53Brock FonoimoanaLBSO6'1"200
53Jed JudkinsLBFR6'2"215
54Tayson ReidLBSO6'0"230
83Elijah EllissLBJR6'2"225
2Rock CaldwellCBSR6'3"190
4JC HartCBSR6'2"202
5James Chenault Jr.CBJR6'0"180
9Elijah DavisCBSR6'0"185
11Elijah ReedCBSR6'3"200
13Nick BrownCBSO6'0"170
13Nick BrownCBSO6'0"170
18Earl ParkerCBJR6'2"186
19Dylan WatersCBFR6'0"185
20King LongCBFR5'9"180
27Brandon HolmesCBSO6'1"180
29Major HinchenCBFR6'2"175
1Rabbit EvansSSR6'1"205
6Nate RitchieSSR6'2"207
12Davis AndrewsSFR6'3"200
14Cole StandageSSO6'2"200
21Nate TilmonSSO6'1"196
23Jackson BenneeSJR6'2"190
24Marcus WimberlySFR6'1"185
25Manny FullerSSO6'0"190
28Luke BryantSFR6'2"200
31Jack EvansSSO6'0"192
32Josh SovereignSSO5'11"198
34Ashton OlevaoSSO6'0"200
38Tommy NelsonSSO6'3"193
17Dillon CurtisPKSO6'2"190
88Tanner CragunPKJR6'2"205
92Orion PhillipsPJR6'3"180
65Logan CastorLSSR6'6"240
69Gage VictorLSSO6'1"215

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
54.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
12.0
scoring defense
Differential
+42.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
537.5#12
Yards / play
7.8#14
Passing yards / game
285.0#32
Rushing yards / game
252.5#16
First downs / game
28.5#9
3rd down %
61.9%#10
4th down %
50.0%#70
Time of possession
31:12#53
Defense
Yards allowed / game
265.0#38
Yards / play allowed
3.9#20
Pass yards allowed / game
181.5#54
Rush yards allowed / game
83.5#32
3rd down % allowed
33.3%#54
Sacks
5#38
Tackles for loss
11#63
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+2#24
Takeaways
3#46
Giveaways
1#21
Penalties / game
4.0#17
Penalty yards / game
30.0#11

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

Utah is in year 1 under Morgan Scalley. The strengths are offensive, led by 1st at running it. The way in is 130th at keeping everything in front of them.

Utah has played 1 game against a genuinely tough slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Projected strengths

  • Offenserunning it
    #1
    projected
  • Offensethe push the line gets
    #1
    projected
  • Offensesurviving second and twelve
    #6
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Defensehitting chunk plays
    #130
    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
8.93.1
projected final record (now 20)
Exp. wins left
6.9
of 10 games
Bowl odds
99%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
91%
vs West Virginia
Toughest
37%
vs BYU

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 = 29% chance
Likeliest finish 9-3 (29%)Bowl eligible 99% · 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
QBDevon Dampier, Byrd Ficklin
+38.3 EPA
RBWayshawn Parker, Daniel Bray
+19.2 EPA
WRLarry Simmons, Braden Pegan +2
+13.4 EPA
TENoah Bennee, Hunter Andrews
+7.8 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 +33.40.697/play48 snaps
EPA +19.00.704/play27 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)
Off0.5696th#7
Def0.1247th#73
Explosiveness
Off1.3772nd#39
Def1.4317th#115
Field position
Off61.24th#132
Def76.99th#126
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off6.0096th#7
Def2.6773rd#38
Turnovers
Won 3Lost 1
Margin +2

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.7594th#9
Off · rush
0.4291st#13

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.4291st#13
Def0.1917th#115
Passing
Off0.7593rd#10
Def-0.0189th#16

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
4.00#8
2nd-level / open-field
1.52 / 0.67
Power / stuff (off)
75.0% / 14.3%
Havoc — total (def)
20.6%#30
Havoc — front 7 / DB
8.5% / 12.1%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.42
Def-0.16
Pass downs
Off1.22
Def0.44

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.32#130.72#81.03#13
Defense-0.28#180.28#950.56#99

Elo Trajectory

IdahoFinal
Elo rating 18171874+57 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.4390th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.1144th
  • Offense success rate54%87th
  • Defense success rate allowed33%74th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs54%69th
  • Offense success — passing downs55%98th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs35%82nd
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs30%40th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.472nd
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.414th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.393rd
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.726th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.788th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.650th
  • Offense highlight yards1.258th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.5264th
  • Offense power success0.7346th
  • Defense power success allowed0.8324th
  • Offense stuff rate0.1848th
  • Defense stuff rate0.1626th

Third down

  • Third down conversion62%93rd
  • Third down distance faced5.099th
  • Third down conversion allowed32%66th
  • Third down distance forced8.485th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.2991st
  • Net success rate — second half0.1781st

Drives

  • Points per drive4.293rd
  • Points per drive allowed1.085th
  • Average starting field position3588th
  • Opponent starting field position2487th
  • Available yards gained70%91st
  • Available yards allowed35%84th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive100%99th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed80%51st
  • Points per scoring opportunity4.286th
  • Points allowed per opportunity1.389th
  • Three-and-out rate20%64th
  • Three-and-outs forced40%88th

Roster

  • Returning usage72%87th
  • Returning EPA27993rd
  • Team talent composite69658th
  • Recruiting class rank27.081st
  • Recruiting class points22781st

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 attack — top 5 nationally by EPA/play
EPA/play
+0.557#7 · elite
Pass EPA/play
+0.746#10
Rush EPA/play
+0.425#13
Explosiveness
1.367#39
Pts/opportunity
6.00#7
Success rate
58.0%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.321 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

EPA/play allowed
+0.117#73 · average
Havoc rate (total)
20.6%#30
Front-7 havoc
8.5%
DB havoc
12.1%
Big play rate allowed
1.432#115
Success rate allowed
31.6%

Disruption comes primarily from the secondary.

📊

Season Signature

54.5 PPG offense, 12.0 allowed — +42.5 margin/game
Points per game
54.5
Points allowed/game
12.0
Scoring margin/game
+42.5
Turnover margin
+2won 3 · lost 1
Production returning
68%
Talent rank (247)
#58

2-0 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE96thEXPLOSIVENESS72thFINISHING96thFIELD POS4thDEFENSE47thHAVOC79th50th100th
Offense
96th
Explosiveness
72th
Finishing
96th
Field Pos
4th
Defense
47th
Havoc
79th

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
+27.4
#7
Offense
+16.5
#5
Defense
-10.9
#16
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 10 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive4.201.00
Starting field positionown 34.9own 23.8
Available yards70.0%34.8%
Scoring opportunities100.0%80.0%
Points per opportunity4.201.25
Three-and-out rate20.0%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
52.9%
Expected, given the spots
46.6%
Over expected
+6.3
Fourth down vs peers
+15
Fourth down vs the model
-50
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Utah 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 Utah in 2026

by EPA/play distance
NebraskaSP+ +12.1
Off EPA/play +0.557Def EPA/play +0.077Elo 1592
Match
98%
SMUSP+ +11.1
Off EPA/play +0.557Def EPA/play +0.037Elo 1728
Match
96%
NorthwesternSP+ +7.8
Off EPA/play +0.480Def EPA/play +0.128Elo 1549
Match
95%
BYUSP+ +16.8
Off EPA/play +0.520Def EPA/play +0.039Elo 1666
Match
95%
CincinnatiSP+ +5.9
Off EPA/play +0.449Def EPA/play +0.123Elo 1516
Match
93%
LouisvilleSP+ +10.0
Off EPA/play +0.474Def EPA/play +0.197Elo 1668
Match
93%

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: +8.0, #43 of 1282016: +4.0, #50 of 1282017: +5.8, #48 of 1302018: +14.0, #21 of 1302019: +25.6, #8 of 1302020: +1.9, #61 of 1242021: +20.8, #7 of 1302022: +16.5, #12 of 1312023: -0.1, #62 of 1332024: +2.3, #59 of 1342025: +29.1, #7 of 1362026: +27.4, #7 of 138
20152026
Now +27.4 · #7 of 138Best +29.1 in 2025Worst -0.1 in 2023

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20262-00-0
100%
2.0+0.0
202511-27-2
85%
10.6+0.4
20245-72-7
42%
6.6-1.6
20238-55-4
62%
8.7-0.7
202210-48-2
71%
9.6+0.4
202110-49-1
71%
10.2-0.2
20203-23-2
60%
3.7-0.7
201911-38-2
79%
11.2-0.2
20189-56-4
64%
9.2-0.2
20177-63-6
54%
7.4-0.4

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

32%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 9.3-3.0. Top-four bye in 10%. Wins the Big 12 in 17%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
99%
1 loss
52%
2 losses
2.3%
3 losses
0.1%
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 17.4 points since preseason.

  • At 2 losses they are 52% where the average Big 12 team is 56%.
  • The Big 12 takes 1.77 bids in an average season, and four or more in 1.9%.

Utah’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk10vs BYU34.6
  • wk11at Arizona33.1
  • wk9at Cincinnati30.9
  • wk12at TCU30.7
  • wk8vs Houston30.5
  • wk7at Colorado29.9

Who to root for

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

  • wk5UAB over Samford2.6
  • wk13Arkansas over LSU2.4
  • wk6Arkansas over Tennessee2.2
  • wk5Arkansas over Texas A&M2.1
  • wk3Iowa State over Bowling Green2.1
  • wk5North Carolina over Notre Dame2.1
The full playoff picture →

Big 12

0-0 in league play, projected 6.3-2.73 of 16 by title odds
17%
Wins the Big 12
33%
Reaches the title game

The Big 12 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.

  • wk10BYU at Utah21.8
  • wk11Utah at Arizona17.9
  • wk8Houston at Utah16.6
  • wk12Utah at TCU16.5

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Big 12 race →

If not the playoff, then

96%
Bowl eligible
63%
Placed in a bowl
32%
In the playoff
5.2%
Season over in November

Utah 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. In 1.5% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • Alamo Bowl15%
  • Texas Bowl11%
  • Pop-Tarts Bowl8.9%
  • Liberty Bowl7.1%
  • Rate Bowl5.5%
  • Independence Bowl4.7%

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 Utah a player since 2010 — 28 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Utah's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
BinghamUT90
Pleasant GroveUT51
San ClementeCA40
Mission ViejoCA30
St. LouisHI30
Frisco Lone StarTX20
HebronTX11
CrenshawCA10
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.