Skip to content

Toledo Rockets

Mid-American·1-1·
Elo
1568#47
SP+
-9.4#103
FPI
-4.0
AP
NR
Nextvs Temple · Wk 3Win prob 61%Model -4.8
Talent #116 (556.3)Recruiting class #12166% production returning

Team Leaders

Latest on Toledo

All news

Alessio Milivojevic had a hand in six of Michigan State's eight explosive plays

Matchup · Sep 5

Cam Edwards and a Toledo Defense Rebuilt From Mercer Up

Matchup · Aug 31

Roster · 106 players

FR 34SO 21JR 24SR 26
#PlayerPosClHtWt
6John Alan RichterQBJR6'3"225
7Khamoni RobinsonQBJR6'1"195
11Walter MosesQBFR6'4"190
13Jake DeHaanQBJR6'2"203
4Autavius IsonRBJR5'11"190
8Connor WalendzakRBSR5'11"208
20Corey SmithRBSO5'10"175
22CJ MillerRBJR5'11"230
23Noah SandersRBFR5'11"170
27Dane NaumanRBSO6'0"210
28Kadale WilliamsRBFR6'1"180
29Tanner RubinsteinFBSR6'3"235
1Rico BondWRSO177
2Trenton JonesWRFR5'10"185
3Adjatay DabbsWRJR6'0"170
5Terrell Crosby Jr.WRSR5'10"182
9Kalvin Gilbert Jr.WRJR6'4"181
10Seth ElchertWRFR6'3"190
12Bryson HammerWRJR5'11"180
13Cooper RuskWRSR5'10"190
14Tashi BracefulWRSO6'2"187
19Daryl Barnett Jr.WRSO6'2"195
83Omar Mims Jr.WRFR6'0"165
85Anthony SimpsonWRSR5'11"186
43Sam LeeTESR6'6"238
80Peyton StricklandTESR6'3"235
81Ethan MalafaTESR6'6"250
87Tucker KelleherTESO6'6"225
88Jacob NewellTESR6'4"245
50Luke RectorOLJR6'5"300
55Ibrahim TraoreOLSR6'5"297
56Jacob KropchakOLSO6'4"296
58Jake PaluckiOLFR6'5"270
60Jake GrimmOLSO6'4"295
62Christian MedlockOLJR6'5"304
63Grant ZimmerlyOLSO6'4"292
65Stephen GalesOLSR6'6"290
67Cade WilhelmiOLFR6'5"290
69Dominic JohnsonOLSO6'3"290
70Nick ThomasOLSR6'4"311
71Matt HoferOLSO6'5"288
73Jonathan HarderOLSR6'4"330
74Ahmad CarwiseOLSO6'5"300
75Preston DazeyOLFR
76Vincenzo PizzoOLFR
78Dylan SendaOLJR6'5"303
0Andrew ZockDEJR6'2"250
2Ezra OdinjorDEJR6'3"240
21Ben SahakianDESR6'3"245
37Desmond OkanteyDEFR6'2"242
51Zackery SamuelDEFR6'1"251
53Samuel TonioloDEFR6'4"245
85Josh LeeDESR6'6"238
90Zach JohnsonDESO6'3"240
92Tommy HussDEJR6'3"227
97Brian Stovall Jr.DEFR6'2"228
93Leonard SharpDLSR6'4"283
95Wayne Peart IIDLSO6'4"265
96Nathaniel ChandlerDLJR6'4"269
35Bryant Weatherspoon Jr.DTFR6'3"250
41Cam GwinnDTFR6'2"256
43Tyrell O'NealDTFR
48Jordin FarrowDTFR6'3"292
52Lucas Lambert-PipkinDTJR6'2"285
91Laith ShammaDTJR6'6"280
94Adrian Love Jr.DTFR6'2"290
98Micah Fils-AimeDTFR5'11"275
99Caden CameseDTSR6'1"285
5Damon Ollison IILBSR6'0"224
6Langston LongLBSR6'3"225
10Julian FoxLBJR6'1"220
13Kari JacksonLBSO6'1"238
19Isaac PrinceLBSR6'0"215
28Sam Smith Jr.LBJR6'4"223
29Jordan FoxLBFR5'11"223
30Hayden RoyLBFR6'1"200
31Maddox ArnoldLBFR6'2"225
36Nathan GershLBFR
44Isaac ZayLBSO6'3"225
1Cam JonesCBJR5'11"190
8KJ ThomasCBSO5'11"180
11Hyajah MillerCBSO6'2"175
20LaDavion OsbornCBSR6'1"183
23Israel PetiteCBSO5'11"170
24Bo JacobsCBFR6'0"185
25Tyrell RussellCBFR5'11"175
38Clarence TuckerCBFR
3Sharard Vaughn IIISFR6'1"200
4Donovan WatkinsSJR5'11"180
7Armorion SmithSSR6'1"212
12Mo ContehSSR6'0"190
15Michael-Arinze EzirimSSO6'1"183
17Kaleb HutchinsonSSR6'0"185
22Nicholas ThompsonSJR6'2"206
26Tyler HackenbrachtSFR6'2"210
27Ziiyahn BlairSFR
33Andrew FineskeSSO6'1"190
39Dylan HohlerSJR6'4"196
39Anthony RugglesPKFR5'9"170
93Reice GriffithPKSR5'11"170
36Emilio DuranPSR6'0"200
46Hunter ProbstPFR6'5"210
47Markus MeinckePJR6'7"220
45Reece StrittmatterLSFR6'5"200
49Max AllenLSFR6'4"205
Nathan Gersh

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
41.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
20.0
scoring defense
Differential
+21.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
421.0#62
Yards / play
7.2#30
Passing yards / game
254.5#58
Rushing yards / game
166.5#66
First downs / game
19.0#90
3rd down %
42.9%#67
4th down %
25.0%#101
Time of possession
25:24#124
Defense
Yards allowed / game
268.0#50
Yards / play allowed
3.8#28
Pass yards allowed / game
156.5#51
Rush yards allowed / game
111.5#72
3rd down % allowed
29.4%#47
Sacks
4#42
Tackles for loss
10#51
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-2#109
Takeaways
1#88
Giveaways
3#95
Penalties / game
6.0#52
Penalty yards / game
42.0#47

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

Toledo is in year 1 under Mike Jacobs. The strengths are defensive, led by 3rd at closing out passing downs.

Toledo 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

  • Defensesurviving second and twelve
    #3
    projected
  • Defensestaying on schedule through the air
    #5
    projected
  • Defenseturning trips inside the 40 into points
    #9
    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
7.05.0
projected final record (now 11)
Exp. wins left
6.0
of 10 games
Bowl odds
87%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
99%
vs Massachusetts
Toughest
25%
vs San Diego State

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.

1234567891011
final winstallest bar = 29% chance
Likeliest finish 7-5 (29%)Bowl eligible 87% · 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
WRTerrell Crosby Jr., Adjatay Dabbs +3
+29.8 EPA
QBJohn Alan Richter
+19.9 EPA
RBConnor Walendzak, CJ Miller +1
+6.6 EPA
TESam Lee
-1.1 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
EPA +19.90.443/play45 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)
Off0.3672nd#39
Def-0.0272nd#39
Explosiveness
Off1.8799th#2
Def1.1273rd#38
Field position
Off69.240th#83
Def70.571st#41
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off5.2582nd#26
Def1.9282nd#25
Turnovers
Won 1Lost 3
Margin -2

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.5375th#35
Off · rush
0.1755th#62

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.1755th#63
Def-0.1271st#41
Passing
Off0.5375th#35
Def0.1656th#61

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.47#114
2nd-level / open-field
0.94 / 2.26
Power / stuff (off)
0.0% / 26.5%
Havoc — total (def)
15.1%#82
Havoc — front 7 / DB
7.5% / 7.5%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.03
Def0.00
Pass downs
Off1.00
Def-0.09

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.00#900.87#30.61#69
Defense-0.09#540.02#550.02#18

Elo Trajectory

@Michigan StateFinal
Elo rating 15971576-21 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.2858th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.0258th
  • Offense success rate29%6th
  • Defense success rate allowed38%53rd

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs28%4th
  • Offense success — passing downs29%35th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs44%45th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs22%63rd

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness2.399th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.169th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs0.9334th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs4.399th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards1.11st
  • Defense line yards allowed2.846th
  • Offense highlight yards3.596th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.3863rd
  • Offense power success0.007th
  • Defense power success allowed0.3385th
  • Offense stuff rate0.441st
  • Defense stuff rate0.2157th

Third down

  • Third down conversion13%4th
  • Third down distance faced8.96th
  • Third down conversion allowed33%60th
  • Third down distance forced6.120th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half-0.305th
  • Net success rate — second half0.1156th

Drives

  • Points per drive2.154th
  • Points per drive allowed2.930th
  • Average starting field position3065th
  • Opponent starting field position3711th
  • Available yards gained130%99th
  • Available yards allowed62%23rd
  • Scoring opportunities per drive70%31st
  • Scoring opportunities allowed90%33rd
  • Points per scoring opportunity3.063rd
  • Points allowed per opportunity3.236th
  • Three-and-out rate40%22nd
  • Three-and-outs forced0%9th

Roster

  • Returning usage56%64th
  • Returning EPA22582nd
  • Team talent composite55616th
  • Recruiting class rank12112th
  • Recruiting class points16312th

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
+0.360#39 · above avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.533#35
Rush EPA/play
+0.170#63
Explosiveness
1.866#2
Pts/opportunity
5.25#26
Success rate
39.0%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.363 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Disruptive defense suppressing opponents below the national average
EPA/play allowed
-0.023#39 · above avg
Havoc rate (total)
15.1%#82
Front-7 havoc
7.5%
DB havoc
7.5%
Big play rate allowed
1.124#38
Success rate allowed
34.7%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

41.5 PPG offense, 20.0 allowed — +21.5 margin/game
Points per game
41.5
Points allowed/game
20.0
Scoring margin/game
+21.5
Turnover margin
-2won 1 · lost 3
Production returning
66%
Talent rank (247)
#116

1-1 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE72thEXPLOSIVENESS99thFINISHING82thFIELD POS40thDEFENSE72thHAVOC41th50th100th
Offense
72th
Explosiveness
99th
Finishing
82th
Field Pos
40th
Defense
72th
Havoc
41th

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
+8.5
#39
Offense
+1.9
#52
Defense
-6.6
#31
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 10 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive2.102.90
Starting field positionown 30.4own 36.5
Available yards130.3%61.6%
Scoring opportunities70.0%90.0%
Points per opportunity3.003.22
Three-and-out rate40.0%0.0%
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
55.0%
Expected, given the spots
56.4%
Over expected
-1.4
Fourth down vs peers
-8
Fourth down vs the model
+0
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Toledo 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 Toledo in 2026

by EPA/play distance
North CarolinaSP+ +5.8
Off EPA/play +0.330Def EPA/play -0.045Elo 1398
Match
98%
MarylandSP+ +9.1
Off EPA/play +0.348Def EPA/play -0.059Elo 1424
Match
98%
Colorado StateSP+ -7.5
Off EPA/play +0.301Def EPA/play -0.025Elo 1336
Match
97%
Iowa StateSP+ +3.1
Off EPA/play +0.303Def EPA/play -0.038Elo 1586
Match
97%
MissouriSP+ +12.9
Off EPA/play +0.319Def EPA/play +0.020Elo 1703
Match
97%
MassachusettsSP+ -25.8
Off EPA/play +0.426Def EPA/play +0.024Elo 1076
Match
96%

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: +15.7, #20 of 1282016: +11.1, #28 of 1282017: +4.2, #53 of 1302018: -3.3, #83 of 1302019: -14.3, #108 of 1302020: +12.3, #22 of 1242021: +4.5, #57 of 1302022: +5.5, #44 of 1312023: +10.7, #32 of 1332024: -0.3, #67 of 1342025: +18.3, #19 of 1362026: +8.5, #39 of 138
20152026
Now +8.5 · #39 of 138Best +18.3 in 2025Worst -14.3 in 2019

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-10-0
50%
1.5-0.5
20258-56-2
62%
9.2-1.2
20248-54-4
62%
6.2+1.8
202311-38-1
79%
10.7+0.3
20229-56-3
64%
10.1-1.1
20217-65-3
54%
8.0-1.0
20204-24-2
67%
4.0-0.0
20196-63-5
50%
5.8+0.2
20187-65-3
54%
7.0-0.0
201711-38-1
79%
9.8+1.2

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

0.6%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-1 so far, projected to finish 7.6-4.8. Wins the Mid-American in 18%.

If they finish with…

22%
1 loss
0.8%
2 losses
0%
3 losses
0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count.

Win out and it is 22%. One bid goes to the best champion outside the four power leagues, so running the table only enters them into that argument.

down 0.8 points since preseasonlost 20-30 to Michigan State against an expected margin of 14, so +3.7 against the number.

  • At 1 loss they are 22% where the average Mid-American team is 27%.
  • The Mid-American takes 0.05 bids in an average season.
  • One bid goes to the best champion outside the P4. They take it in 0.6% of seasons, having won their league in 99% of those.

Toledo’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk4vs San Diego State1.6
  • wk8vs Western Michigan1.5
  • wk13at Ohio1.1
  • wk3vs Temple1.0
  • wk6vs Buffalo0.9
  • wk7at Eastern Michigan0.9

Who to root for

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

  • wk5Utah State over Boise State0.3
  • wk8East Carolina over Memphis0.3
  • wk2UCLA over San Diego State0.3
  • wk3Oklahoma over New Mexico0.3
  • wk6Kent State over Western Michigan0.3
  • wk9Notre Dame over Navy0.3
The full playoff picture →

Mid-American

0-0 in league play, projected 5.5-2.52 of 13 by title odds
18%
Wins the Mid-American
36%
Reaches the title game

The Mid-American sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 46% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk8Western Michigan at Toledo26.8
  • wk13Toledo at Ohio19.8
  • wk6Buffalo at Toledo18.4
  • wk12Bowling Green at Toledo17.4

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Mid-American race →

If not the playoff, then

83%
Bowl eligible
82%
Placed in a bowl
0.6%
In the playoff
18%
Season over in November

Toledo is 0-1 and needs 6 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.

  • GameAbove Sports Bowl17%
  • Arizona Bowl11%
  • Myrtle Beach Bowl9.9%
  • Boca Raton Bowl8.8%
  • Cure Bowl8.3%
  • Famous Idaho Potato Bowl7.8%

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 Toledo a player since 2010 — 42 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Toledo's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Central CatholicPA90
Cass TechnicalMI80
GlenvilleOH60
LakewoodFL41
Penn HillsPA41
ArmwoodFL40
PerryAZ30
WayneOH21
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.