Skip to content
San José State

San José State Spartans

Mountain West·2-1·
Compare
Elo
1413#87
SP+
-12.8#112
FPI
-10.1
AP
NR
Nextvs Fresno State · Wk 3Win prob 8%Model +19.3
Talent #110 (569.3)Recruiting class #1294% production returning

Roster · 102 players

FR 29SO 22JR 27SR 24
#PlayerPosClHtWt
3Luke WeaverQBSR6'3"210
5Daniel RolovichQBFR6'4"210
8Robert McDanielQBFR6'2"205
14Hudson WyattQBJR6'2"200
16CJ LeeQBSO6'1"165
6Jabari BatesRBSR5'7"180
20Viliami TeuRBJR5'10"210
21Isaiah CarlsonRBJR6'2"220
22Tyler JacklichRBJR6'2"220
24Sir AutryRBFR5'10"170
26Courshawn HillRBFR5'10"210
28Aaron Cox Jr.RBFR5'11"205
0Jordan AndersonWRSO5'11"170
1Carson ClarkWRFR5'9"170
2Jerry McClureWRJR6'1"195
4Dominique McKenzieWRSO5'11"180
7Tama AmisoneWRSO5'11"185
9Jase NixWRFR5'9"170
10Anthony IveyWRSR5'11"190
11Malachi RileyWRJR6'1"170
13Cooper HochWRJR6'3"200
17Ryker RuelasWRFR6'3"195
18Trace HernandezWRSO5'10"160
19Cody HallWRSR5'11"180
23Devin OlmandeWRFR6'2"190
33Parris Vernon Jr.WRFR5'10"160
80Jeremiah FungWRFR6'3"210
82Braiden Bachich-DixonTEFR6'4"210
83Kamaehu Kopa-KaawalauoleTEJR6'4"225
84Max FriedmanTEFR6'5"225
85Shane KileyTEFR6'4"215
88Ryan BoultwoodTEJR6'3"230
54Daniel MoleniOLSR6'2"290
55Greg ShadeOLSO6'3"290
56Simeon AfalavaOLSR6'3"285
62Tyler ChenOLJR6'2"280
63Brian TapuOLFR6'5"315
64Nathan BalestrieriOLJR6'1"300
65Johnny NotarianniOLFR6'3"280
66Kamuela WilhelmOLFR6'6"290
67Keenan ParksOLFR6'4"230
68Mitchell BrownOLSO6'3"270
70Ikiansio TupouOLSO6'6"280
72Lavaka TaukeiahoOLSR6'2"320
74Mitchell JonesOLSO6'3"280
75Joseph HarbertOLSR6'3"290
76Manuel SernaOLSO6'5"295
77Daniel TuliauOLFR6'3"305
78David PerezOLSO6'2"290
41Bronx LetuligasenoaDLFR6'3"260
42Ian ShewellDLSR6'3"280
45Jeremiah TuiileilaDLFR6'3"255
48Dejon RoneyDLSR6'1"295
50Star TaimaniDLSO6'3"270
51Solomone LangiDLSR6'0"295
57Justin StearnsDLSR6'2"250
89Etu FinauDLSR6'4"245
90Jayland McGlothenDLJR6'2"280
91Auma JenningsDLFR6'0"310
92Noa SiaosiDLJR6'2"270
94Russell DevanyDLFR6'0"235
95Colton ThomasDLFR6'1"270
99Nate LewisDLSR6'5"260
3Naseri DanielsonLBJR6'0"220
4Dylan LeeLBJR6'1"220
6Ethan PowellLBSR6'2"230
7Aizik MahukaLBJR6'3"225
11Champ KapanuiLBFR6'1"215
15Skylar TiatiaLBFR6'1"230
16Luke RicheyLBSO6'3"225
19Cayden WoolwineLBSO6'1"210
24Malakai HoeftLBSR6'2"220
25Zane CarterLBJR6'4"220
26Viliami LotoaniuLBFR6'2"230
40Blake TabaracciLBSO6'1"215
53Brady Van BennekumLBJR6'2"215
56Sirr BibleLBFR6'2"240
97John NorwoodLBSR6'3"220
0Isaiah BuxtonCBSO6'0"170
5Kejuan Bullard Jr.CBSR6'1"200
8Runye NortonCBSR5'10"170
10Greco CarrilloCBSO5'9"170
12Francois Jones Jr.CBJR6'0"190
14Jayden RobertsonCBJR5'11"170
22Jonathan WattsCBSO6'3"185
28Cole GholarCBFR5'10"185
32Caleb WomackCBSR5'10"180
1Brian Dukes Jr.SSR6'3"215
2Maliki CrawfordSJR6'4"190
13Pierce WalkerSSO5'10"190
21Charles Cox IIISSR6'0"190
23Nassir PittersSJR6'1"205
27Jackson BartonSSO5'11"175
31Hunter NowellSJR6'1"200
39Tuli Tagovailoa-AmosaSSO5'10"200
29Joey FernandezPKJR5'11"170
36Trajan SinatraPKJR5'11"190
99Mathias BrownPKJR6'0"170
49Trent CarrizosaPSR6'4"235
30Jaelen NicholsLSJR5'11"200
44Dylan AguileraLSSR5'10"210
46Sam CowartLSSO6'1"225

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
27.7
scoring offense
Points allowed
27.7
scoring defense
Differential
0.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
394.5#76
Yards / play
5.9#71
Passing yards / game
275.0#43
Rushing yards / game
119.5#104
First downs / game
19.0#90
3rd down %
37.0%#97
4th down %
33.3%#97
Time of possession
26:19#116
Defense
Yards allowed / game
393.0#101
Yards / play allowed
5.5#88
Pass yards allowed / game
257.5#113
Rush yards allowed / game
135.5#87
3rd down % allowed
41.4%#95
Sacks
2#81
Tackles for loss
6#91
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
0#66
Takeaways
2#53
Giveaways
2#68
Penalties / game
7.0#79
Penalty yards / game
57.5#81

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

heavily run-leaning

San José State runs it: Ken Niumatalolo's offenses have been heavily run-leaning across 10 seasons. The way in is 132nd at stuffing runs at the line, and they are 124th at turning trips inside the 40 into points.

On fourth down he goes for it more often than his peers do from the same spots (+3.3%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −17.6% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

San José State has played 2 games against an average slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Projected soft spots

  • Defensegetting stopped at the line
    #132
    projected
  • Offenseturning trips inside the 40 into points
    #124
    projected
  • Defensesacks and tackles for loss
    #123
    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
3.5 – 9.5
projected final record (now 2–1)
Exp. wins left
1.5
of 10 games
Bowl odds
3%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
49%
vs Northern Illinois
Toughest
1%
vs Hawai'i

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 = 38% chance
Likeliest finish 3-10 (38%)Bowl eligible 3% · 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
WRAnthony Ivey, Jerry Mcclure +6
+27.8 EPA
QBLuke Weaver
+27.2 EPA
TEKamaehu Kopa-Kaawalauole
+1.2 EPA
RBJabari Bates, Isaiah Carlson +1
-5.6 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
QBLuke Weaver
~$910K
EPA +27.20.363/play75 snaps
RBJabari Bates
~$149K
EPA +1.50.042/play35 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)
Off0.1329th#98
Def0.1729th#98
Explosiveness
Off1.4582nd#25
Def0.9495th#8
Field position
Off69.645th#76
Def71.361st#55
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.9242nd#81
Def3.7331st#96
Turnovers
Won 2Lost 2
Margin 0

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
—
Defense
—
Off · pass
0.4261st#55
Off · rush
-0.1112th#121

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off-0.1112th#121
Def0.1627th#101
Passing
Off0.4260th#56
Def0.2444th#78

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.77#98
2nd-level / open-field
1.13 / 0.28
Power / stuff (off)
50.0% / 24.1%
Havoc — total (def)
11.6%#117
Havoc — front 7 / DB
4.1% / 7.5%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.02
Def0.18
Pass downs
Off0.27
Def0.16

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense-0.04#1030.12#860.62#66
Defense0.04#930.15#770.51#89

Elo Trajectory

@USCFinal
Elo rating 1411 → 1407-4 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.1741st
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.1830th
  • Offense success rate39%26th
  • Defense success rate allowed48%18th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs44%31st
  • Offense success — passing downs30%36th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs55%10th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs25%55th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.478th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed0.9985th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.274th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.945th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards2.936th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.939th
  • Offense highlight yards0.5830th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.8940th
  • Offense power success0.3312th
  • Defense power success allowed0.9524th
  • Offense stuff rate0.2223rd
  • Defense stuff rate0.1320th

Third down

  • Third down conversion37%30th
  • Third down distance faced7.917th
  • Third down conversion allowed41%36th
  • Third down distance forced5.611th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half-0.219th
  • Net success rate — second half0.0137th

Drives

  • Points per drive2.460th
  • Points per drive allowed2.438th
  • Average starting field position2955th
  • Opponent starting field position2853rd
  • Available yards gained44%35th
  • Available yards allowed49%46th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive83%55th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed83%44th
  • Points per scoring opportunity2.957th
  • Points allowed per opportunity2.944th
  • Three-and-out rate30%40th
  • Three-and-outs forced30%62nd

Roster

  • Returning usage14%13th
  • Returning EPA11.25th
  • Team talent composite56920th
  • Recruiting class rank1297th
  • Recruiting class points1597th

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 — below average EPA/play nationally
EPA/play
+0.126#98 · below avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.416#56
Rush EPA/play
-0.106#121
Explosiveness
1.447#25
Pts/opportunity
3.92#81
Success rate
34.7%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.523 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Disciplined defense — allowing above-average EPA/play
EPA/play allowed
+0.175#98 · below avg
Havoc rate (total)
11.6%#117
Front-7 havoc
4.1%
DB havoc
7.5%
Big play rate allowed
0.944#8
Success rate allowed
46.9%

Disruption comes primarily from the secondary.

📊

Season Signature

27.7 PPG offense, 27.7 allowed — +0.0 margin/game
Points per game
27.7
Points allowed/game
27.7
Scoring margin/game
+0.0
Turnover margin
+0won 2 · lost 2
Production returning
4%
Talent rank (247)
#110

2-1 record through 3 games.

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

OFFENSE29thEXPLOSIVENESS82thFINISHING42thFIELD POS45thDEFENSE29thHAVOC15th50th100th
Offense
29th
Explosiveness
82th
Finishing
42th
Field Pos
45th
Defense
29th
Havoc
15th

Each axis = national percentile rank. 100th = best in FBS, 0th = worst. Defense and Havoc are oriented so higher = better.

The season, week by week · 2026

A season-long average is taken over a period during which the team changed. This is the same numbers as a trajectory, so a mid-season turn is visible instead of averaged away.

Offense EPA/play▲ 0.077 in the second half
0.120.200.27112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

Defense EPA allowed▲ 0.386 in the second half
-0.030.190.40112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

Offense success rate▲ 0.035 in the second half
0.330.410.49112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

Defense success allowed▲ 0.298 in the second half
0.290.480.67112

Line is the season-to-date average — the number the rest of this page reports. Bars are the individual weeks that moved it.

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
+3.6
#57
Offense
-2.2
#88
Defense
-5.8
#38
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 23 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive2.392.44
Starting field positionown 29.0own 27.5
Available yards44.1%49.0%
Scoring opportunities82.6%82.6%
Points per opportunity2.902.95
Three-and-out rate30.4%30.4%
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
53.0%
Expected, given the spots
50.9%
Over expected
+2.1
Fourth down vs peers
-4
Fourth down vs the model
-25
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. San José State 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 San José State in 2026

by EPA/play distance
South AlabamaSP+ -11.4
Off EPA/play +0.140Def EPA/play +0.176Elo 1390
Match
99%
MinnesotaSP+ +9.6
Off EPA/play +0.130Def EPA/play +0.191Elo 1510
Match
99%
Michigan StateSP+ +1.0
Off EPA/play +0.141Def EPA/play +0.192Elo 1468
Match
99%
KentuckySP+ +8.5
Off EPA/play +0.155Def EPA/play +0.178Elo 1476
Match
99%
South FloridaSP+ -3.1
Off EPA/play +0.141Def EPA/play +0.146Elo 1679
Match
98%
Boston CollegeSP+ -7.4
Off EPA/play +0.102Def EPA/play +0.148Elo 1379
Match
98%

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 · 2015–2026 · points per game vs an average FBS team

2015: -4.2, #81 of 1282016: -18.1, #113 of 1282017: -29.8, #128 of 1302018: -18.6, #115 of 1302019: -9.1, #97 of 1302020: +8.0, #36 of 1242021: -5.8, #90 of 1302022: -4.4, #80 of 1312023: +2.5, #53 of 1332024: +3.1, #55 of 1342025: -4.3, #78 of 1362026: +3.6, #57 of 138
20152026
Now +3.6 · #57 of 138Best +8.0 in 2020Worst -29.8 in 2017

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-10-0
50%
1.0+0.0
20253-92-6
25%
4.7-1.7
20247-63-4
54%
6.3+0.7
20237-66-2
54%
7.1-0.1
20227-55-3
58%
5.5+1.5
20215-73-5
42%
5.3-0.3
20207-17-0
88%
5.4+1.6
20195-72-6
42%
5.3-0.3
20181-111-7
8%
1.7-0.7
20172-111-7
15%
2.0-0.0

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

0.1%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-1 so far, projected to finish 6.8-6.3. Wins the Mountain West in 3.1%.

If they finish with…

7.9%
2 losses
0%
3 losses
0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count.

up 0.1 points since preseason — lost 26-42 to USC against an expected margin of −36, so +27.8 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 7.9% where the average Mountain West team is 6.6%.
  • The Mountain West takes 0.23 bids in an average season.
  • One bid goes to the best champion outside the P4. They take it in 0.1% of seasons, having won their league in 95% of those.

San José State’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk12vs UNLV0.5
  • wk11at Air Force0.5
  • wk9vs New Mexico0.5
  • wk8at Nevada0.5
  • wk5at Hawai'i0.4
  • wk3vs Fresno State0.3

Who to root for

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

  • wk4Illinois over Ohio State0.2
  • wk2Missouri State over Lindenwood0.1
  • wk4Lindenwood over Eastern Michigan0.1
  • wk7Nebraska over Oregon0.1
  • wk2Arizona State over Texas A&M0.1
  • wk10Toledo over Sacramento State0.1
The full playoff picture →

Mountain West

0-0 in league play, projected 4.3-4.76 of 10 by title odds
3.1%
Wins the Mountain West
10%
Reaches the title game

The Mountain West sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 35% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk12UNLV at San José State8.1
  • wk9New Mexico at San José State7.7
  • wk11San José State at Air Force6.5
  • wk8San José State at Nevada6.1

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Mountain West race →

If not the playoff, then

74%
Bowl eligible
66%
Placed in a bowl
0.1%
In the playoff
34%
Season over in November

San José State is 1-1 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. In 7.6% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • Famous Idaho Potato Bowl17%
  • Arizona Bowl15%
  • Hawai'i Bowl14%
  • New Mexico Bowl7.1%
  • LA Bowl3.8%
  • Cure Bowl3.8%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 9 have sent San José State a player since 2010 — 38 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of San José State's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Junipero SerraCA80
De La SalleCA60
Long Beach PolyCA50
St. John BoscoCA50
FolsomCA40
JesuitCA40
HeritageCA20
Palo AltoCA20
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.