Skip to content

Notre Dame Fighting Irish

FBS Independents·2-0·
Elo
2021#2
SP+
26.8#3
FPI
27.0
AP
#3
Nextvs Michigan State · Wk 3Win prob 97%Model -27.6
Talent #6 (953.0)Recruiting class #551% production returning

Roster · 113 players

FR 52SO 25JR 24SR 12
#PlayerPosClHtWt
9Teddy JarrardQBFR6'4"207
10Noah GrubbsQBFR6'4"209
12Blake HebertQBFR6'2"216
13CJ CarrQBSO6'2"215
2Nolan James Jr.RBFR5'10"212
20Jonaz WaltonRBFR5'9"214
21Kedren YoungRBSO5'11"234
22Aneyas WilliamsRBJR5'10"210
26Javian OsborneRBFR5'9"200
37Kurt SmithRBFR5'9"187
46Matt WilliamsRBSR5'9"195
0Quincy PorterWRSO6'4"207
1Jaden GreathouseWRJR6'1"215
3Mylan GrahamWRSO6'1"192
4Bubba FrazierWRFR5'10"182
5Cam WilliamsWRSO6'2"201
6Jordan FaisonWRSR5'11"185
8Jerome Bettis Jr.WRFR6'2"199
11Devin FitzgeraldWRFR6'2"208
14Micah GilbertWRSO6'2"205
15Brayden RobinsonWRFR5'7"168
16Dylan FaisonWRFR6'2"163
17Elijah BurressWRFR6'1"190
18Kaydon FinleyWRFR6'1"207
19Logan SaldateWRSO5'11"185
31Xavier SouthallWRSO6'0"180
33Matt JefferyWRSO5'11"195
7Ty WashingtonTESR6'4"253
24Ian PremerTEFR6'6"240
42Henry GarrityTESR6'4"230
84Preston FryzelTEFR6'4"225
85Jack LarsenTESO6'3"248
86Kaleb JohnsonTEFR6'2"241
87Cooper FlanaganTEJR6'6"250
88James FlaniganTEFR6'6"251
89Austin RatiganTEFR6'4"223
50Sullivan GarvinOLFR6'5"315
51Ben NicholsOLFR6'5"320
52Devan HoustanOLJR6'4"305
54Anthonie KnappOLJR6'5"304
55Chris TerekOLJR6'5"321
56Charles JagusahOLSO6'5"330
57Cam HerronOLFR6'2"291
58Matty AugustineOLFR6'8"310
60Max AndersonOLJR6'3"303
61Robbie WollanOLJR6'4"300
64Joe OttingOLJR6'4"305
65Grayson McKeoghOLFR6'7"298
66Tyler MerrillOLFR6'6"330
67Gregory PatrickOLFR6'6"281
68Charlie ThomOLFR6'7"280
70Ashton CraigOLSR6'5"310
71Styles PrescodOLSO6'6"298
74Will BlackOLFR6'7"316
75Sullivan AbsherOLJR6'7"320
76Guerby LambertOLSO6'7"325
77Peter JonesOLSO6'5"315
78Owen StrebigOLFR6'8"302
0Tionne GrayDLSO6'5"330
5Boubacar TraoreDLJR6'5"253
6Christopher Burgess Jr.DLFR6'4"300
7Francis BrewuDLJR6'1"285
10Loghan ThomasDLJR6'3"215
11Keon KeeleyDLJR6'5"275
14Ebenezer EwetadeDLFR6'4"240
40Dominik HulakDLFR6'3"260
42Cole MullinsDLSO6'4"280
44Rodney DunhamDLFR6'4"242
47Jason OnyeDLSR6'5"295
55Tiki HolaDLFR6'3"310
56Elijah HughesDLSR6'3"295
59Sean Sevillano Jr.DLSO6'2"320
60Davion DixonDLFR6'2"316
88Armel MukamDLJR6'3"296
90Elijah GoldenDLFR6'4"292
91Gordy SulfstedDLFR6'5"275
94Joe ReiffDLFR6'5"264
95Bryce YoungDLJR6'6"260
3Jaylen SneedLBSR6'1"227
4Jaiden AusberryLBJR6'1"226
16Ko'o KiaLBFR6'2"225
19Madden FaraimoLBSO6'2"235
23Ja'Kobe ClapperLBFR6'1"230
27Kyngstonn Viliamu-AsaLBJR6'3"230
34Drayk BowenLBSR6'2"232
35Teddy RezacLBSO6'3"226
38Tommy PowlusLBJR6'1"213
43Kahanu KiaLBJR6'2"225
58Thomas Davis Jr.LBFR6'2"225
1Dallas GoldenCBSO6'0"191
2DJ McKinneyCBSR6'1"185
12Jayden SandersCBSO6'0"195
13Ayden PounceyCBFR6'3"180
15Leonard MooreCBJR6'2"197
21Khary AdamsCBFR6'1"187
24Mark Zackery IVCBSO5'10"184
26Chaz SmithCBFR6'1"172
29Christian GrayCBSR6'0"186
32Nick ReddishCBFR5'10"195
8Adon ShulerSJR6'0"202
9Brauntae JohnsonSSO6'2"200
20Joey O'BrienSFR6'5"203
22Ethan LongSFR6'2"204
25Brandon LoganSFR5'11"197
28Luke TalichSSR6'4"204
30Patrick DownesSFR6'1"204
48Chase YoungSFR6'2"199
35Spencer PorathPKJR6'0"200
36Micah DrescherPKFR6'5"196
18Erik SchmidtPSO6'2"211
39Jasper ScaifePFR6'6"215
49Andrew KrosLSJR6'4"227
96Joseph VinciLSSO6'4"231

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
46.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
6.5
scoring defense
Differential
+40.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
414.0#66
Yards / play
6.6#48
Passing yards / game
299.5#32
Rushing yards / game
114.5#107
First downs / game
22.0#56
3rd down %
47.6%#49
4th down %
66.7%#45
Time of possession
31:57#50
Defense
Yards allowed / game
206.0#23
Yards / play allowed
3.9#32
Pass yards allowed / game
140.5#36
Rush yards allowed / game
65.5#20
3rd down % allowed
28.0%#42
Sacks
3#58
Tackles for loss
14#20
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+6#2
Takeaways
6#3
Giveaways
0#1
Penalties / game
3.0#6
Penalty yards / game
30.5#16

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

Notre Dame is in year 6 under Marcus Freeman, whose offenses have been balanced. The strengths are on both sides of the ball, led by 3rd at holding teams to field goals.

On fourth down he goes for it more often than his peers do from the same spots (+3.9%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −27.2% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

Notre Dame has played 1 game 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

  • Defenseturning trips inside the 40 into points
    #3
    projected
  • Offenserunning it
    #4
    projected
  • Offensesurviving second and twelve
    #4
    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
10.61.4
projected final record (now 20)
Exp. wins left
8.6
of 10 games
Bowl odds
100%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
98%
vs Boston College
Toughest
54%
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 = 39% chance
Likeliest finish 11-1 (39%)Bowl eligible 100% · 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
QBC.J. Carr
+26.3 EPA
WRJaden Greathouse, Mylan Graham +3
+20.4 EPA
RBAneyas Williams, Kedren Young +1
+18.2 EPA
TETy Washington, Cooper Flanagan +2
+0.8 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
QBC.J. Carr
~$900K
EPA +26.30.547/play48 snaps
EPA +8.70.310/play28 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)
Off0.4685th#21
Def-0.2296th#7
Explosiveness
Off1.1530th#97
Def1.3238th#86
Field position
Off72.369th#44
Def72.453rd#66
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off5.2782nd#25
Def0.6094th#9
Turnovers
Won 6Lost 0
Margin +6

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.5881st#27
Off · rush
0.3075th#35

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.3074th#36
Def-0.2990th#15
Passing
Off0.5881st#27
Def-0.1292nd#12

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.89#92
2nd-level / open-field
0.58 / 0.37
Power / stuff (off)
85.7% / 2.3%
Havoc — total (def)
24.1%#18
Havoc — front 7 / DB
18.5% / 5.6%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.51
Def-0.07
Pass downs
Off0.30
Def-0.44

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.28#270.60#180.63#63
Defense-0.34#16-0.45#50.16#33

Elo Trajectory

WisconsinFinal
Elo rating 19952110+115 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.3566th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.0749th
  • Offense success rate46%50th
  • Defense success rate allowed38%50th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs57%76th
  • Offense success — passing downs13%4th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs44%45th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs27%49th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.131st
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.339th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.166th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.310th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards2.831st
  • Defense line yards allowed2.465th
  • Offense highlight yards0.3523rd
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.0099th
  • Offense power success0.7550th
  • Defense power success allowed0.7548th
  • Offense stuff rate0.0398th
  • Defense stuff rate0.2153rd

Third down

  • Third down conversion38%34th
  • Third down distance faced5.681st
  • Third down conversion allowed38%45th
  • Third down distance forced6.018th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.0137th
  • Net success rate — second half0.1768th

Drives

  • Points per drive3.881st
  • Points per drive allowed0.6787th
  • Average starting field position214th
  • Opponent starting field position3315th
  • Available yards gained53%62nd
  • Available yards allowed46%57th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive100%99th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed56%90th
  • Points per scoring opportunity3.878th
  • Points allowed per opportunity2.654th
  • Three-and-out rate33%36th
  • Three-and-outs forced22%45th

Roster

  • Returning usage46%53rd
  • Returning EPA17670th
  • Team talent composite95396th
  • Recruiting class rank5.097th
  • Recruiting class points29997th

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 offense performing above the national average
EPA/play
+0.464#21 · top 20%
Pass EPA/play
+0.582#27
Rush EPA/play
+0.300#36
Explosiveness
1.148#97
Pts/opportunity
5.27#25
Success rate
53.8%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.281 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

High-pressure defense — top 5 nationally in EPA/play allowed
EPA/play allowed
-0.225#7 · elite
Havoc rate (total)
24.1%#18
Front-7 havoc
18.5%
DB havoc
5.6%
Big play rate allowed
1.321#86
Success rate allowed
24.4%

Disruption comes primarily from the front seven.

📊

Season Signature

46.5 PPG offense, 6.5 allowed — +40.0 margin/game
Points per game
46.5
Points allowed/game
6.5
Scoring margin/game
+40.0
Turnover margin
+6won 6 · lost 0
Production returning
51%
Talent rank (247)
#6

2-0 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE85thEXPLOSIVENESS30thFINISHING82thFIELD POS69thDEFENSE96thHAVOC88th50th100th
Offense
85th
Explosiveness
30th
Finishing
82th
Field Pos
69th
Defense
96th
Havoc
88th

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
+26.4
#6
Offense
+13.9
#6
Defense
-12.5
#7
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 9 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive3.780.67
Starting field positionown 20.8own 33.4
Available yards52.6%46.0%
Scoring opportunities100.0%55.6%
Points per opportunity3.782.60
Three-and-out rate33.3%22.2%
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
49.1%
Expected, given the spots
34.8%
Over expected
+14.3
Fourth down vs peers
-9
Fourth down vs the model
-50
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Notre Dame 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 Notre Dame in 2026

by EPA/play distance
TennesseeSP+ +19.9
Off EPA/play +0.501Def EPA/play -0.234Elo 1691
Match
98%
Kennesaw StateSP+ -7.4
Off EPA/play +0.486Def EPA/play -0.253Elo 1373
Match
98%
Southern MissSP+ -14.9
Off EPA/play +0.523Def EPA/play -0.178Elo 1350
Match
96%
Virginia TechSP+ +12.4
Off EPA/play +0.457Def EPA/play -0.147Elo 1421
Match
96%
Air ForceSP+ +1.1
Off EPA/play +0.371Def EPA/play -0.215Elo 1424
Match
96%
VirginiaSP+ +11.5
Off EPA/play +0.430Def EPA/play -0.107Elo 1652
Match
94%

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: +20.9, #8 of 1282016: +8.3, #34 of 1282017: +20.8, #13 of 1302018: +17.0, #17 of 1302019: +20.9, #14 of 1302020: +19.0, #8 of 1242021: +15.9, #13 of 1302022: +6.8, #39 of 1312023: +29.3, #5 of 1332024: +31.5, #2 of 1342025: +38.3, #2 of 1362026: +26.4, #6 of 138
20152026
Now +26.4 · #6 of 138Best +38.3 in 2025Worst +6.8 in 2022

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-00-0
100%
0.9+0.1
202510-20-0
83%
10.3-0.3
202414-20-0
88%
13.2+0.8
202310-30-0
77%
10.6-0.6
20229-41-0
69%
8.7+0.3
202111-25-0
85%
9.8+1.2
202010-29-1
83%
9.1+0.9
201911-20-0
85%
9.8+1.2
201812-10-0
92%
10.5+1.5
201710-30-0
77%
9.2+0.8

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

82%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 10.7-1.3. Top-four bye in 41%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
100%
1 loss
79%
2 losses
3.4%
3 losses
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 4.3 points since preseasonwon 41-13 over Wisconsin against an expected margin of +23, so +5.3 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 79% where the average FBS Independents team is 69%.
  • The 2026 format is worth +2.8 points to them against the 2025 one.

Notre Dame’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk9at Navy41.7
  • wk4at Purdue40.4
  • wk13at Syracuse39.1
  • wk12vs SMU38.9
  • wk5at North Carolina37.6
  • wk7at BYU33.8

Who to root for

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

  • wk8Wisconsin over USC2.1
  • wk9North Carolina over Miami2.1
  • wk7Florida State over Miami2.0
  • wk8UCF over BYU1.9
  • wk7Wisconsin over UCLA1.8
  • wk5TCU over BYU1.7
The full playoff picture →

If not the playoff, then

100%
Bowl eligible
18%
Placed in a bowl
82%
In the playoff
0.1%
Season over in November

Notre Dame is 1-0 and needs 5 more wins from 11 games to reach the six that make a team eligible — at most one of which may come against an FCS opponent.

  • Gator Bowl6.1%
  • Duke's Mayo Bowl4.9%
  • Holiday Bowl2.9%
  • Sun Bowl1.7%
  • Pop-Tarts Bowl1.1%
  • Pinstripe Bowl0.6%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 15 have sent Notre Dame a player since 2010 — 35 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Notre Dame's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Central CatholicPA71
PunahouHI31
Archbishop MoellerOH30
St. John's CollegeDC30
ServiteCA22
De La SalleCA21
HarrisonGA21
Oak RidgeFL21
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.