Skip to content
Tulsa

Tulsa Golden Hurricane

American Athletic·2-0·
Compare
Elo
1268#121
SP+
-2.3#75
FPI
-3.4
AP
NR
Nextvs East Texas A&M · Wk 3
Talent #84 (622.8)Recruiting class #9341% production returning

Roster · 111 players

FR 38SO 19JR 25SR 29
#PlayerPosClHtWt
5Dexter Williams IIQBSR6'1"220
8Kyden BarkerQBFR6'1"215
10Baylor HayesQBSO6'0"185
12Connor DantzlerQBFR6'1"205
15Kincayde EngQBFR6'3"200
16Andrew AlfordQBFR6'0"200
19Barrett MullenQBFR6'2"185
4D.J. McKinneyRBJR5'9"190
6Damari AlstonRBSR5'10"205
20Trequan JonesRBSR5'9"180
21Jamarcea PlaterRBFR5'9"190
22Kelvin WashingtonRBFR5'9"170
23Seth DavisRBJR5'7"185
28Sevion MorrisonRBSR6'0"225
0Donnell Gee Jr.WRSO5'11"180
1David Wells Jr.WRJR6'2"170
2Oran Singleton Jr.WRSR6'0"165
3Micah TeaseWRJR6'0"190
7Jimmy CallowayWRSR6'0"190
9Javon RossWRJR5'8"170
13Joshua RushingWRFR6'3"195
15Josh SmithWRSO6'4"225
18Courtney Lewis Jr.WRFR6'0"170
19Grayson TempestWRSR5'10"190
26Kainon GibsonWRFR5'9"170
85Cole GreeneWRJR5'9"180
88Xavier GreenWRFR5'10"165
11Grant McAteeTEJR6'5"220
32Max MooreTEFR6'4"210
82Chris Gacayan IITEJR6'3"245
84Jewlyen RobertsTESO6'5"255
86Luke TevisTEFR6'5"240
87Jackson ShockleyTEFR6'3"235
89Kuba MaleckiTEFR6'8"245
50Malachi PreciadoOLSR6'2"305
51Javion AntaiOLFR6'4"300
52Ian MayesOLSO6'3"300
53Jack HoodOLSO6'5"295
54Ross JohnstonOLJR6'6"315
56Colten ChristianOLSO6'4"320
58Dawson MatthewsOLFR6'4"280
60Hunter ErbOLSR6'6"330
61Brooks BarronOLFR6'5"300
63Chaden SullivanOLJR6'2"300
65Nick AnciauxOLFR6'5"260
66Will MorrisOLJR6'3"300
69Ryley KesterOLFR6'3"290
70Alan PondOLJR6'5"300
73Cam EastOLSR6'8"330
74Logan RichOLFR6'8"280
75Evan McClureOLSO6'4"310
76Josh LoveOLSO6'2"295
77Brody DuffelOLJR6'5"310
78Davis DotsonOLSR6'6"305
0Kyran DuhonDLJR6'2"265
10Arias NashDLSR6'2"275
11Jaylen GeorgeDLSR6'3"295
15Thomas DavisDLSR6'2"235
21Aquavious DunbarDLSO6'1"255
30Maruio White Jr.DLSO6'3"225
32Hudson BallDLSO6'3"255
40Tristan LawyerDLFR6'4"245
41Will UpshawDLSO6'3"255
44Kadin FossungDLFR6'3"220
56Nathan PriceDLSO6'1"310
58Tyler RichDLJR6'2"290
88Dailen HowardDLSR6'1"275
90Jayden MadkinsDLSR6'2"275
91Carson DempseyDLFR6'3"225
99Tai NewhouseDLSR6'3"320
6Chris Thompson Jr.LBSR6'3"245
9Dax CollinsLBJR6'0"210
10Ty AndersonLBSR6'1"210
18Raymir ConeyLBFR6'1"225
24Devin HightowerLBSR6'1"230
25Sam StoneLBFR6'1"225
33William AlexanderLBJR6'2"230
34Elijah WilsonLBJR6'1"240
35C.J. TurnerLBJR6'1"220
38Jack WattsLBFR6'2"225
53Caleb BowersLBSO6'4"240
3JD DrewCBSR6'0"170
7Elijah GreenCBJR6'2"195
8Korbyn GreenCBSR6'0"185
13NuNu CampbellCBSR5'11"180
16Caldra WillifordCBSR5'9"190
23Willie GoodwynCBSO5'11"185
26Julian ByrdCBFR6'1"190
29Keynan FarleyCBFR6'0"200
39Zach ClatonCBFR6'0"170
2Devin RobinsonDBJR6'0"210
22Ty WilliamsDBSR6'1"200
27Zane WoodhamDBSR6'0"195
37Rohon KazadiDBFR6'2"190
42Reilarean PhillipsDBFR6'0"210
1Zach WilliamsSJR6'2"195
4Tyson WilliamsSSR5'10"190
5Ashton WilliamsSJR6'0"205
12Dedaunte ScottSSO6'0"185
19Rylan LeathersSSO6'0"190
20RJ McIntoshSFR6'1"190
28Carter LangenderferSFR6'1"195
46Luke BussmanSFR5'10"185
47Austin BussmanSFR5'10"185
10Owen CareyPKFR6'2"215
18Marlon HauckPKSR6'2"200
95Evan GuenthnerPKJR5'10"165
29Max TulenPJR6'2"200
44Henry SimonPSO6'3"205
41Joel BazinetLSFR5'10"210
42Aidan FediganLSSR5'11"205

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
23.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
13.5
scoring defense
Differential
+10.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
361.0#97
Yards / play
6.3#59
Passing yards / game
227.0#69
Rushing yards / game
134.0#90
First downs / game
15.0#122
3rd down %
9.1%#135
4th down %
100.0%#1
Time of possession
28:55#91
Defense
Yards allowed / game
368.0#89
Yards / play allowed
4.3#44
Pass yards allowed / game
241.0#104
Rush yards allowed / game
127.0#82
3rd down % allowed
31.3%#54
Sacks
2#81
Tackles for loss
3#126
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+3#14
Takeaways
4#14
Giveaways
1#31
Penalties / game
9.0#116
Penalty yards / game
102.0#132

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

Tulsa is in year 2 under Tre Lamb. The way in is 126th at staying out of the backfield, and they are 109th at throwing it.

Tulsa has played 1 game against a genuinely tough slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Projected soft spots

  • Offensegetting stopped at the line
    #126
    projected
  • Offensethrowing it
    #109
    projected
  • Offensesurviving second and twelve
    #106
    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 · 9 to play
6.2 – 4.8
projected final record (now 2–0)
Exp. wins left
4.2
of 9 games
Bowl odds
68%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
88%
vs Charlotte
Toughest
23%
vs Arkansas

How the season could finish · 2026 · chance of each final win total · 9 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.

234567891011
final winstallest bar = 28% chance
Likeliest finish 6-5 (28%)Bowl eligible 68% · 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
QBBaylor Hayes
+12.3 EPA
WRJimmy Calloway, Oran Singleton Jr. +3
+9.2 EPA
RBDamari Alston, DJ McKinney
+1.4 EPA
TEChris Gacayan II
-0.3 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
QBBaylor Hayes
~$745K
EPA +12.30.409/play30 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)
Off0.1942nd#80
Def-0.0780th#29
Explosiveness
Off1.0918th#113
Def1.0384th#23
Field position
Off64.113th#120
Def79.23rd#134
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.0023rd#106
Def2.0081st#27
Turnovers
Won 4Lost 1
Margin +3

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
—
Defense
—
Off · pass
0.4464th#51
Off · rush
0.0430th#97

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.0428th#99
Def-0.1270th#42
Passing
Off0.4464th#51
Def0.1558th#58

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.76#100
2nd-level / open-field
0.85 / 0.61
Power / stuff (off)
100.0% / 15.2%
Havoc — total (def)
10.2%#126
Havoc — front 7 / DB
5.7% / 4.5%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.32
Def-0.28
Pass downs
Off-0.07
Def0.33

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.08#670.35#50-0.06#130
Defense-0.36#110.26#970.19#38

Elo Trajectory

Oklahoma StateFinal
Elo rating 1240 → 1277+37 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.1944th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed-0.0775th
  • Offense success rate41%36th
  • Defense success rate allowed36%55th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs58%77th
  • Offense success — passing downs10%3rd
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs36%72nd
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs37%22nd

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.126th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.079th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.046th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.054th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards2.831st
  • Defense line yards allowed2.847th
  • Offense highlight yards0.6134th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.3172nd
  • Offense power success1.099th
  • Defense power success allowed0.5079th
  • Offense stuff rate0.1551st
  • Defense stuff rate0.2260th

Third down

  • Third down conversion10%3rd
  • Third down distance faced8.59th
  • Third down conversion allowed33%60th
  • Third down distance forced6.526th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half-0.0330th
  • Net success rate — second half0.1055th

Drives

  • Points per drive2.258th
  • Points per drive allowed0.9180th
  • Average starting field position3790th
  • Opponent starting field position2196th
  • Available yards gained50%56th
  • Available yards allowed47%52nd
  • Scoring opportunities per drive100%99th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed64%87th
  • Points per scoring opportunity2.237th
  • Points allowed per opportunity1.481st
  • Three-and-out rate18%73rd
  • Three-and-outs forced9%15th

Roster

  • Returning usage40%47th
  • Returning EPA89.644th
  • Team talent composite62339th
  • Recruiting class rank93.033rd
  • Recruiting class points17933rd

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

EPA/play
+0.186#80 · average
Pass EPA/play
+0.443#51
Rush EPA/play
+0.038#99
Explosiveness
1.085#113
Pts/opportunity
3.00#106
Success rate
41.4%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.405 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Coverage-heavy defense suppressing opponents below the national average
EPA/play allowed
-0.071#29 · above avg
Havoc rate (total)
10.2%#126
Front-7 havoc
5.7%
DB havoc
4.5%
Big play rate allowed
1.031#23
Success rate allowed
36.4%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

23.5 PPG offense, 13.5 allowed — +10.0 margin/game
Points per game
23.5
Points allowed/game
13.5
Scoring margin/game
+10.0
Turnover margin
+3won 4 · lost 1
Production returning
41%
Talent rank (247)
#84

2-0 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE42thEXPLOSIVENESS18thFINISHING23thFIELD POS13thDEFENSE80thHAVOC9th50th100th
Offense
42th
Explosiveness
18th
Finishing
23th
Field Pos
13th
Defense
80th
Havoc
9th

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
+0.1
#69
Offense
-4.3
#105
Defense
-4.4
#47
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 11 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive2.180.91
Starting field positionown 36.5own 20.5
Available yards49.6%47.2%
Scoring opportunities100.0%63.6%
Points per opportunity2.181.43
Three-and-out rate18.2%9.1%
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
42.9%
Expected, given the spots
45.9%
Over expected
-3.0
Fourth down vs peers
+2
Fourth down vs the model
+0
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Tulsa 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 Tulsa in 2026

by EPA/play distance
ArkansasSP+ +3.3
Off EPA/play +0.176Def EPA/play -0.075Elo 1547
Match
99%
SyracuseSP+ +2.7
Off EPA/play +0.213Def EPA/play -0.087Elo 1288
Match
98%
OklahomaSP+ +21.7
Off EPA/play +0.175Def EPA/play -0.099Elo 1799
Match
98%
BuffaloSP+ -11.6
Off EPA/play +0.152Def EPA/play -0.050Elo 1365
Match
98%
Texas A&MSP+ +23.9
Off EPA/play +0.224Def EPA/play -0.097Elo 1849
Match
98%
PittsburghSP+ +10.1
Off EPA/play +0.193Def EPA/play -0.009Elo 1681
Match
97%

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: -7.6, #90 of 1282016: +7.1, #39 of 1282017: -18.6, #117 of 1302018: -13.9, #107 of 1302019: +2.9, #49 of 1302020: +7.2, #37 of 1242021: +5.1, #55 of 1302022: -5.4, #85 of 1312023: -17.5, #118 of 1332024: -29.4, #132 of 1342025: -8.2, #90 of 1362026: +0.1, #69 of 138
20152026
Now +0.1 · #69 of 138Best +7.2 in 2020Worst -29.4 in 2024

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20261-00-0
100%
1.0+0.0
20254-81-7
33%
5.0-1.0
20243-91-7
25%
3.1-0.1
20234-82-6
33%
5.4-1.4
20225-73-5
42%
5.0+0.0
20217-65-3
54%
8.0-1.0
20206-36-1
67%
6.2-0.2
20194-82-6
33%
6.0-2.0
20183-92-6
25%
3.6-0.6
20172-101-7
17%
3.6-1.6

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

4.3%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 8.4-3.9. Wins the American Athletic in 11%.

If they finish with…

93%
0 losses
37%
1 loss
2.3%
2 losses
0.0%
3 losses
0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count. Better than even up to 0.

Win out and it is 93%. One bid goes to the best champion outside the four power leagues, so running the table only enters them into that argument.

up 3.2 points since preseason — won 24-10 over Oklahoma State against an expected margin of −11, so +24.6 against the number.

  • At 1 loss they are 37% where the average American Athletic team is 52%.
  • The American Athletic takes 0.34 bids in an average season.
  • One bid goes to the best champion outside the P4. They take it in 4.2% of seasons, having won their league in 92% of those.

Tulsa’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk4at Arkansas9.5
  • wk6at Navy9.0
  • wk13at UTSA8.0
  • wk10at Tulane7.1
  • wk8vs Army6.5
  • wk11vs Florida Atlantic5.3

Who to root for

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

  • wk9Notre Dame over Navy1.4
  • wk3Oklahoma over New Mexico1.3
  • wk6Kent State over Western Michigan1.3
  • wk6Fresno State over Boise State1.1
  • wk13Charlotte over Navy1.0
  • wk10Colorado State over Boise State0.9
The full playoff picture →

American Athletic

0-0 in league play, projected 5.1-2.94 of 14 by title odds
11%
Wins the American Athletic
23%
Reaches the title game

The American Athletic sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 33% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk6Tulsa at Navy17.9
  • wk13Tulsa at UTSA17.4
  • wk10Tulsa at Tulane14.8
  • wk8Army at Tulsa13.9

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

If not the playoff, then

92%
Bowl eligible
79%
Placed in a bowl
4.3%
In the playoff
17%
Season over in November

Tulsa 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. In 8.7% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • Gasparilla Bowl20%
  • Military Bowl13%
  • Fenway Bowl11%
  • Armed Forces Bowl8.6%
  • Birmingham Bowl7.8%
  • First Responder Bowl7.2%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 3 have sent Tulsa a player since 2010 — 9 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Tulsa's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
TempleTX40
ManvelTX30
Klein CollinsTX20
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.