Ohio State

Profile vs. FBS, 2026

Farther out is better on every spoke. Dashed ring: the FBS median.

• EPA per play

  Expected points added on an average snap: how much each play moved the scoring odds.
  Offense+0.3190th
  Defense−0.0792nd
• Success rate

  Share of snaps that stayed on schedule: half the yards needed on 1st down, 70% on 2nd, all of them on 3rd or 4th.
  Offense52.9%97th
  Defense34.9%86th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2447th
  Defense+1.2348th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1250th
  Defense−0.0477th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.5696th
  Defense−0.0894th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense57.7%97th
  Defense38.7%93rd
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense35.9%76th
  Defense28.3%56th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2571st
  Defense2.6875th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense14.6%74th
  Defense19.3%53rd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense12.5%77th
  Defense18.7%81st

Percentiles among the 138 FBS teams this season, where higher is better for the offense and the defense alike (a defense's numbers are what it allowed). The line in each bar is the FBS median. Garbage time excluded. Source: CollegeFootballData.

Drives vs. expectation, 2026

Every snap has an expected-points value: what a drive from that spot, down and distance is worth on average. A drive over expected beat its starting spot; defense counts what Ohio State allowed, so lower is better. The adjusted number fits every team against the opponents it actually played, so it leans toward average early in a season. Ranks are among FBS teams.

Game by game

1. W
   BALL
2. L
   TEX
3. W
   KENT
4. W
   ILL
5. W
   IOWA
6. W
   MD

Bars above the line: better than expected for Ohio State.

Players, 2026

1. Julian SayinQB94 plays · +0.164 pts/play · 63rd of 192 QBs
   0.29WAR0.15 to 0.41
2. Jeremiah SmithWR35 plays · +0.253 pts/play · 3rd of 364 WRs
   0.17WAR0.11 to 0.23
3. Bo JacksonRB39 plays · +0.094 pts/play · 146th of 320 RBs
   0.07WAR0.04 to 0.09
4. Connor HawkinsPK6 plays · +0.273 pts/play · 33rd of 82 kickers
   0.03WAR0.01 to 0.05
5. Ja'Kobi JacksonRB17 plays · +0.091 pts/play · 234th of 320 RBs
   0.03WAR0.02 to 0.04
6. Devin McCuinWR9 plays · +0.166 pts/play · 239th of 364 WRs
   0.03WAR0.02 to 0.04
7. Brandon InnissWR5 plays · +0.140 pts/play · 292nd of 364 WRs
   0.01WAR0.01 to 0.02
8. Joe McGuireP7 plays · +0.061 pts/play · 51st of 84 punters
   0.01WAR0.00 to 0.02

By position group, against FBS

Linemen and defenders are valued as units, in points per game against the median FBS unit, because play-by-play doesn't say who was on the field. Players are valued against a replacement-level backup, so the two aren't added together.

Wins above replacement credits each play's expected points to the players involved, adjusted for the opponent, and compares Ohio State's players with a typical backup; 53 points make a win. Only snaps while the game was in doubt count, so a starter on a team that blows opponents out plays fewer of them: read value per play beside WAR. The line under each player (or the range on a phone) is the 90% interval. Ranks are among FBS teams and players. How this works

What it had and what it did, 2026

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  9649645th of 138Roster talent: 964, 5th of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  2942944th of 138Recruiting: 294, 4th of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  68%68%27th of 136Returning production: 68%, 27th of 136 in FBS
• SP+ rating so far

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +29.5+29.51st of 138SP+ rating so far: +29.5, 1st of 138 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 138 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion so far

Conversion by season

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2026

Each real fourth down is valued three ways (go for it, kick, punt) from the score, clock and field position before the snap, using league-wide odds rather than Ohio State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 1 clear-cut ones account for 0.02 of the 0.03 expected wins. The model sees the situation, not the injury report, so a call it disagrees with can still be right. Ranks are among FBS teams; 1st gave up the least.

Costliest calls against the numbers

1. at TEXQ3 11:55 4th & 4 at TEX 39, up 17Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
2. at TEXQ4 4:16 4th & 4 at TEX 27, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.7 pts
3. vs ILLQ2 14:44 4th & 4 at OSU 28, up 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)<0.1 pts
4. vs KENTQ3 6:31 4th & 5 at KENT 47, up 42Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)<0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

87th of 138 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

Expected wins adds up Ohio State's chance of winning each game as the model saw it at kickoff - a 70% favorite counts 0.7.

1. W

   BALL
2. L

   TEX
3. W

   KENT
4. W

   ILL
5. W

   IOWA
6. W

   MD

What moved it, 2026

Every game starts at Ohio State's pregame chance; everything after that is the field. The model's own breakdown of each game's final play splits the on-field part by what drove it, and the parts add up exactly. How it works →

• Scoreboard+0.25
• Possession & field position−0.03
• Timeouts−0.03
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.24

Game by game

• BALLW 56-3 vs BALL100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• TEXL 23-24 at TEX45% → 20%Before kickoff −5 · On the field −25: Scoreboard −12, Possession & field position −3
• KENTW 59-3 vs KENT100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• ILLW 42-19 vs ILL96% → 100%Before kickoff +46 · On the field +4: Scoreboard +8
• IOWAW 31-14 at IOWA86% → 99%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +13: Scoreboard +22, Clock +1
• MDW 45-16 vs MD97% → 100%Before kickoff +47 · On the field +3: Scoreboard +5

Points of win probability, from Ohio State's side.

Closest call

OSU 52-51 MD (2018) - Ohio State dropped to a 4.3% win probability before pulling it out.