Oklahoma 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+0.1448th
  Defense+0.0466th
• 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.
  Offense48.6%81st
  Defense39.5%60th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.109th
  Defense+1.2255th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.0123rd
  Defense+0.0357th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.3371st
  Defense+0.0869th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense54.7%87th
  Defense46.5%46th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense31.5%47th
  Defense24.8%78th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.0648th
  Defense2.9447th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense16.8%58th
  Defense18.0%42nd
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense9.7%93rd
  Defense15.3%41st

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 Oklahoma 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. L
   TLSA
2. W
   ORE
3. W
   MUR
4. W
   WVU
5. W
   UCF

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

Players, 2026

1. Drew MestemakerQB152 plays · +0.129 pts/play · 43rd of 192 QBs
   0.37WAR0.14 to 0.58
2. Caleb HawkinsRB94 plays · +0.154 pts/play · 3rd of 320 RBs
   0.27WAR0.20 to 0.34
3. Wyatt YoungWR31 plays · +0.210 pts/play · 19th of 364 WRs
   0.12WAR0.08 to 0.17
4. Justin BowickWR29 plays · +0.161 pts/play · 53rd of 364 WRs
   0.09WAR0.05 to 0.12
5. Sam KeltnerPK11 plays · +0.219 pts/play · 13th of 82 kickers
   0.05WAR0.01 to 0.07
6. Ayo AdeyiRB25 plays · +0.095 pts/play · 205th of 320 RBs
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.06
7. Miles ColemanWR17 plays · +0.125 pts/play · 185th of 364 WRs
   0.04WAR0.02 to 0.07
8. Terrence LewisWR14 plays · +0.138 pts/play · 197th of 364 WRs
   0.04WAR0.03 to 0.05

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 Oklahoma 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.
  67367365th of 138Roster talent: 673, 65th of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  19319359th of 138Recruiting: 193, 59th of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  0%0%132nd of 136Returning production: 0%, 132nd 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.
  +13.3+13.322nd of 138SP+ rating so far: +13.3, 22nd 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 Oklahoma State's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 2 clear-cut ones account for 0.06 of the 0.08 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. vs OREQ4 3:11 4th & 1 at ORE 13, up 5Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−4.5 pts
2. at WVUQ2 7:56 4th & 1 at WVU 1, down 11Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.6 pts
3. at TLSAQ3 1:52 4th & 7 at TLSA 16, down 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.9 pts
4. vs UCFQ4 0:15 4th & 3 at UCF 21, up 14Went for it; the numbers favored a field goal (close call)−0.3 pts
5. vs OREQ1 10:51 4th & 2 at ORE 2, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
6. vs MURQ4 6:45 4th & 1 at OKST 32, up 59Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
7. vs MURQ2 7:47 4th & 3 at MUR 5, up 21Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

12th of 138 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. L

   TLSA
2. W

   ORE
3. W

   MUR
4. W

   WVU
5. W

   UCF

What moved it, 2026

Every game starts at Oklahoma 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+0.70
• Possession & field position−0.01
• Clock+0.03
• Timeouts+0.03
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff+0.23

Game by game

• TLSAL 10-24 at TLSA78% → 1%Before kickoff +28 · On the field −77: Scoreboard −56
• OREW 39-31 vs ORE4% → 97%Before kickoff −46 · On the field +93: Scoreboard +41, Timeouts +2
• MURW 59-0 vs MUR100% → 100%Before kickoff +50 · On the field 0: Scoreboard +1
• WVUW 41-24 at WVU42% → 99%Before kickoff −8 · On the field +57: Scoreboard +57, Clock +3
• UCFW 42-28 vs UCF74% → 99%Before kickoff +24 · On the field +25: Scoreboard +28, Timeouts +1

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

Closest call

OKST 21-20 BOIS (2021) - Oklahoma State dropped to a 2.2% win probability before pulling it out.