UCLA

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+0.1964th
  Defense−0.1799th
• 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.
  Offense46.8%71st
  Defense33.3%94th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2344th
  Defense+1.2445th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2894th
  Defense−0.2499th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.0719th
  Defense−0.0590th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense51.5%72nd
  Defense40.2%87th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense33.3%59th
  Defense20.7%94th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.6499th
  Defense2.3393rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense12.6%87th
  Defense25.7%91st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.3%54th
  Defense21.0%93rd

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 UCLA 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
   CAL
2. W
   SDSU
3. W
   PUR
4. W
   MD
5. W
   ORE

Bars above the line: better than expected for UCLA.

Players, 2026

1. Wayne KnightRB77 plays · +0.188 pts/play · 3rd of 320 RBs
   0.27WAR0.21 to 0.34
2. Nico IamaleavaQB150 plays · +0.047 pts/play · 120th of 192 QBs
   0.13WAR−0.09 to 0.36
3. Anthony WoodsRB41 plays · +0.109 pts/play · 99th of 320 RBs
   0.08WAR0.06 to 0.11
4. Jaivian ThomasRB31 plays · +0.106 pts/play · 162nd of 320 RBs
   0.06WAR0.04 to 0.08
5. Semaj MorganWR28 plays · +0.091 pts/play · 157th of 364 WRs
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.08
6. Curtis GerrandP19 plays · +0.117 pts/play · 3rd of 84 punters
   0.04WAR0.01 to 0.08
7. Brian Rowe Jr.WR25 plays · +0.081 pts/play · 195th of 364 WRs
   0.04WAR0.01 to 0.07
8. Landon EllisWR10 plays · +0.178 pts/play · 215th of 364 WRs
   0.03WAR0.02 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 UCLA'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.
  77477425th of 138Roster talent: 774, 25th of 138 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  19119160th of 138Recruiting: 191, 60th of 138 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  57%57%48th of 136Returning production: 57%, 48th 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.
  +15.3+15.318th of 138SP+ rating so far: +15.3, 18th 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 UCLA'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 0.01 of the 0.02 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 MDQ3 12:42 4th & 1 at UCLA 34, up 17Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
2. vs PURQ2 9:55 4th & 4 at PUR 24, up 7Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.2 pts
3. at OREQ1 10:47 4th & 2 at ORE 2, tiedKicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
4. at OREQ1 2:17 4th & 6 at ORE 44, down 3Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.1 pts
5. vs SDSUQ1 12:10 4th & 7 at UCLA 43, tiedWent for it; the numbers favored punting (close call)−0.1 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2026

2nd of 138 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

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

1. W

   CAL
2. W

   SDSU
3. W

   PUR
4. W

   MD
5. W

   ORE

What moved it, 2026

Every game starts at UCLA'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+1.84
• Possession & field position+0.05
• Clock+0.06
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.02

Game by game

• CALW 45-24 at CAL57% → 100%Before kickoff +7 · On the field +43: Scoreboard +46, Clock +2
• SDSUW 28-10 vs SDSU79% → 99%Before kickoff +29 · On the field +20: Scoreboard +24, Timeouts +1
• PURW 52-38 vs PUR82% → 99%Before kickoff +32 · On the field +17: Scoreboard +21, Timeouts +1
• MDW 54-3 at MD54% → 100%Before kickoff +4 · On the field +46: Scoreboard +51, Timeouts −2
• OREW 17-15 at ORE20% → 87%Before kickoff −30 · On the field +67: Scoreboard +42, Clock +4

Points of win probability, from UCLA's side.

Closest call

UCLA 67-63 WSU (2019) - UCLA dropped to a 0.4% win probability before pulling it out.