Skip to content

Wisconsin Badgers

Big Ten·1-1·
Elo
1475#72
SP+
-1.5#74
FPI
3.8
AP
NR
Nextvs Eastern Michigan · Wk 3Win prob 79%Model -13.1
Talent #30 (767.7)Recruiting class #7831% production returning

Team Leaders

Latest on Wisconsin

All news

Notre Dame's 20.5 isn't about the quarterbacks

Matchup · Sep 2

Roster · 116 players

FR 41SO 30JR 24SR 21
#PlayerPosClHtWt
1Colton JosephQBJR6'2"212
5Carter SmithQBFR6'4"208
8Deuce AdamsQBSO6'2"204
10Ryan HopkinsQBFR6'3"201
18Danny O'NeilQBJR6'0"205
3Abu Sama IIIRBSR5'11"211
6Darrion DupreeRBJR5'11"214
15Nate PalmerRBSO5'10"205
20Juju PopeRBFR5'11"195
21Bryan Jackson IIRBJR6'2"240
32Harrison BortolottiRBSO5'9"202
38Mason LaneRBSO6'1"222
41McCoy SmithFBFR5'11"231
0Tyrell HenryWRSR6'0"180
2Chris Brooks Jr.WRSR6'2"220
7Shamar RigbyWRJR6'4"196
9Jaylon DomingeauxWRSR6'3"208
11Kash BrockWRFR6'3"184
12Zion KearneyWRJR6'3"215
13Eugene Hilton Jr.WRSO6'2"206
14Keeyshawn TabuteauWRFR5'11"187
16Malachi ColemanWRJR6'5"205
19Langdon NordgaardWRSO6'3"208
22Dorsett SteckerWRFR5'9"165
24Zion LegreeWRFR5'11"202
26Eli AdamsWRSO6'0"185
81Mason KelleyWRFR6'1"195
87Jackson McGohanWRJR6'4"224
17Nizyi DavisTEFR6'5"235
37Treve StoffelTEFR6'4"214
42Tyler JanseyTEJR6'1"236
49Aydon FickellTEFR6'4"242
82Emmett BorkTEFR6'6"255
84Ryan SchwendemanTESR6'4"254
85Grant StecTESO6'6"260
86Jack SieversTEFR6'4"248
89Jacob HarrisTEJR6'6"270
50Ryan CoryOLSO6'4"311
51Austin KaweckiOLSR6'4"311
52Hardy WattsOLFR6'5"315
53Cam ClarkOLFR6'7"300
54Brady BekkenhuisOLFR6'7"310
55Kevin HeywoodOLSO6'9"318
58Michael RoeskeOLFR6'8"328
60Nolan DavenportOLFR6'6"303
64Evan BrownOLJR6'4"315
65Aiden DirksenOLFR6'6"338
70Barrett NelsonOLSR6'6"305
71PJ WilkinsOLJR6'6"340
72Lucas Simmons-JohanssonOLJR6'7"323
73Blake CherryOLSO6'5"308
75Emerson MandellOLSO6'5"324
76Stylz BlackmonOLJR6'4"316
77Peyton LangeOLJR6'9"345
78Colin CubberlyOLSO6'6"324
79Logan PowellOLFR6'5"303
30Charles PerkinsDLSR6'2"330
76Dillan JohnsonDLJR6'2"316
85Hayden MetzgerDLSO6'4"280
90Djidjou BahDLFR6'3"265
91Hammond Russell IVDLSR6'4"314
92Nolan VilsDLJR6'2"304
93DeNigel CooperDLSO6'3"265
94Xavier UkponuDLFR6'3"318
95Jacob AndersonDLSR6'4"305
96Arthur Scott IIIDLFR6'3"306
97Junior PoyserDLJR6'2"328
98Torin PettawayDLFR6'5"298
0Justus BooneLBSR6'5"280
7Tyreese FearbryLBSR6'4"252
8Mason PosaLBSO6'3"237
12Nicolas ClaytonLBSO6'5"245
14Liam DanitzLBSR6'4"242
15Sebastian CheeksLBSR6'3"243
19Thomas HeibergerLBSO6'4"230
22Jaylen WilliamsLBFR6'5"272
23Landon GauthierLBSO6'3"244
28Jon Jon KamaraLBSO6'4"242
34Ashton FickellLBFR6'4"248
39Jayden LoftinLBFR6'4"250
43Taylor SchaeferLBJR6'3"242
44Cooper CatalanoLBSO6'1"232
45Yahya GaadLBFR6'4"260
47Evan Van Dyn HovenLBJR6'3"242
49Ben WenzelLBFR6'4"216
50Sam LatejuLBFR6'5"240
51Micheal GarnerLBSR6'7"309
55Drew BraamLBSO6'1"226
59Aaron WittLBSR6'6"240
77Will McDonaldLBJR6'4"273
1Eric Fletcher Jr.CBSO6'1"193
2Javan RobinsonCBSR5'11"180
3Cai BatesCBSO6'3"202
5Bryce WestCBSO5'11"198
10Jahmare WashingtonCBFR6'3"175
17Carsen ElomsCBFR6'0"183
18Donovan DunmoreCBFR6'1"200
24Jai'mier ScottCBFR6'1"192
31Dashaun MossCBFR6'0"180
4Marvin Burks Jr.SSR6'2"208
11Carson Van DinterSSO6'2"204
13Matthew TraynorSJR6'2"206
16Grant DeanSSO6'1"200
20Luke EmmerichSFR6'2"200
21Cairo SkanesSSO6'2"195
25Will MikonowiczSFR6'0"212
26Kah'Ni WattsSFR6'2"183
27Raphael DunnSSO6'4"218
29Matthew JungSSR6'3"213
94Brady MelumPKFR6'0"221
97Gavin LahmPKSR6'1"223
90Will KellyPFR5'11"165
91Sean WestPSO6'2"204
98Ethan TranelPJR6'1"224
46James RoeLSJR6'0"215
48Andrew GoodmanLSSR5'11"225

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
24.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
25.0
scoring defense
Differential
-0.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
344.5#104
Yards / play
6.1#67
Passing yards / game
195.0#97
Rushing yards / game
149.5#85
First downs / game
16.0#117
3rd down %
41.7%#69
4th down %
50.0%#71
Time of possession
26:44#115
Defense
Yards allowed / game
326.0#71
Yards / play allowed
5.3#82
Pass yards allowed / game
193.5#64
Rush yards allowed / game
132.5#86
3rd down % allowed
29.2%#39
Sacks
1#125
Tackles for loss
4#133
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-2#108
Takeaways
0#126
Giveaways
2#49
Penalties / game
5.0#33
Penalty yards / game
41.5#37

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

Wisconsin is in year 4 under Luke Fickell, whose offenses have been balanced. The strengths are defensive, led by 11th at keeping everything in front of them. The way in is 127th at moving the ball on the ground, and they are 125th at turning trips inside the 40 into points.

On fourth down he goes for it about as often as his peers do from the same spots (−0.5%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −28.5% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

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

Projected strengths

  • Defensehitting chunk plays
    #11
    projected
  • Defensegetting stopped at the line
    #30
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Offensemoving the ball on the ground
    #127
    projected
  • Offenseturning trips inside the 40 into points
    #125
    projected
  • Offensefirst and second down
    #124
    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
5.36.8
projected final record (now 11)
Exp. wins left
4.3
of 10 games
Bowl odds
42%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
79%
vs Eastern Michigan
Toughest
7%
vs USC

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 = 28% chance
Likeliest finish 5-7 (28%)Bowl eligible 42% · 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
QBColton Joseph
+14.8 EPA
WRTyrell Henry, Chris Brooks Jr. +2
+10.8 EPA
RBAbu Sama III, Darrion Dupree +1
+6.6 EPA
TEGrant Stec, Jacob Harris +1
-2.5 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 +14.80.251/play59 snaps
RBAbu Sama III
~$198K
EPA +5.10.222/play23 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)
Off0.1121st#109
Def0.2415th#117
Explosiveness
Off1.5495th#8
Def1.0191st#13
Field position
Off67.423rd#107
Def78.81st#136
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off2.074th#132
Def4.3015th#118
Turnovers
Won 0Lost 2
Margin -2

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.1418th#114
Off · rush
0.1140th#83

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.1138th#86
Def0.1332nd#94
Passing
Off0.1415th#118
Def0.3424th#105

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
2.77#102
2nd-level / open-field
0.76 / 2.04
Power / stuff (off)
66.7% / 17.6%
Havoc — total (def)
10.3%#131
Havoc — front 7 / DB
4.0% / 6.3%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.26
Def0.28
Pass downs
Off-0.13
Def0.11

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.13#58-0.10#1190.38#96
Defense0.14#1190.27#930.20#39

Elo Trajectory

@Notre DameFinal
Elo rating 15011455-46 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.0723rd
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.3514th
  • Offense success rate38%24th
  • Defense success rate allowed46%22nd

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs44%31st
  • Offense success — passing downs27%30th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs57%6th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs13%92nd

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.361st
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.166th
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs1.047th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.053rd

Trenches

  • Offense line yards2.415th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.848th
  • Offense highlight yards0.007th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.3566th
  • Offense power success0.7550th
  • Defense power success allowed0.7548th
  • Offense stuff rate0.2128th
  • Defense stuff rate0.031st

Third down

  • Third down conversion38%36th
  • Third down distance faced6.072nd
  • Third down conversion allowed38%47th
  • Third down distance forced5.612th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half-0.0134th
  • Net success rate — second half-0.1711th

Drives

  • Points per drive0.6714th
  • Points per drive allowed3.820th
  • Average starting field position3385th
  • Opponent starting field position2193rd
  • Available yards gained46%44th
  • Available yards allowed53%36th
  • Scoring opportunities per drive56%9th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed100%16th
  • Points per scoring opportunity2.647th
  • Points allowed per opportunity3.824th
  • Three-and-out rate22%59th
  • Three-and-outs forced33%70th

Roster

  • Returning usage47%54th
  • Returning EPA29.813th
  • Team talent composite76879th
  • Recruiting class rank78.044th
  • Recruiting class points18744th

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

Balanced offense — below average EPA/play nationally
EPA/play
+0.114#109 · below avg
Pass EPA/play
+0.136#118
Rush EPA/play
+0.107#86
Explosiveness
1.536#8
Pts/opportunity
2.07#132
Success rate
34.7%

Near-equal efficiency edge: 0.030 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Coverage-heavy defense — allowing above-average EPA/play
EPA/play allowed
+0.235#117 · bottom 20%
Havoc rate (total)
10.3%#131
Front-7 havoc
4.0%
DB havoc
6.3%
Big play rate allowed
1.007#13
Success rate allowed
42.6%

Disruption comes primarily from the secondary.

📊

Season Signature

24.5 PPG offense, 25.0 allowed — -0.5 margin/game
Points per game
24.5
Points allowed/game
25.0
Scoring margin/game
-0.5
Turnover margin
-2won 0 · lost 2
Production returning
31%
Talent rank (247)
#30

1-1 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE21thEXPLOSIVENESS95thFINISHING4thFIELD POS23thDEFENSE15thHAVOC5th50th100th
Offense
21th
Explosiveness
95th
Finishing
4th
Field Pos
23th
Defense
15th
Havoc
5th

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
+0.6
#67
Offense
-4.4
#106
Defense
-5.0
#42
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 9 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive0.673.78
Starting field positionown 33.4own 20.8
Available yards46.0%52.6%
Scoring opportunities55.6%100.0%
Points per opportunity2.603.78
Three-and-out rate22.2%33.3%
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
47.1%
Expected, given the spots
58.1%
Over expected
-11.1
Fourth down vs peers
-28
Fourth down vs the model
-40
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Wisconsin 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 Wisconsin in 2026

by EPA/play distance
RutgersSP+ -3.6
Off EPA/play +0.124Def EPA/play +0.234Elo 1372
Match
99%
ArkansasSP+ +3.3
Off EPA/play +0.138Def EPA/play +0.253Elo 1547
Match
98%
MinnesotaSP+ +9.6
Off EPA/play +0.130Def EPA/play +0.191Elo 1510
Match
97%
Michigan StateSP+ +1.0
Off EPA/play +0.141Def EPA/play +0.192Elo 1468
Match
97%
RiceSP+ -10.4
Off EPA/play +0.060Def EPA/play +0.229Elo 1196
Match
97%
East CarolinaSP+ -8.1
Off EPA/play +0.174Def EPA/play +0.257Elo 1477
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: +14.1, #24 of 1282016: +18.6, #12 of 1282017: +26.5, #8 of 1302018: +15.0, #18 of 1302019: +33.0, #5 of 1302020: +3.9, #48 of 1242021: +18.1, #10 of 1302022: +10.6, #28 of 1312023: +7.4, #38 of 1332024: -4.0, #81 of 1342025: -3.3, #72 of 1362026: +0.6, #67 of 138
20152026
Now +0.6 · #67 of 138Best +33.0 in 2019Worst -4.0 in 2024

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20260-10-0
0%
0.1-0.1
20254-82-7
33%
4.1-0.1
20245-73-6
42%
4.8+0.2
20237-65-4
54%
6.4+0.6
20227-64-5
54%
8.8-1.8
20219-46-3
69%
9.0-0.0
20204-33-3
57%
4.8-0.8
201910-47-3
71%
11.1-1.1
20188-55-4
62%
8.1-0.1
201713-19-1
93%
13.0+0.0

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

0.5%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-1 so far, projected to finish 5.6-6.4.

If they finish with…

43%
2 losses
0.8%
3 losses
0.0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count.

down 2.1 points since preseasonlost 13-41 to Notre Dame against an expected margin of 23, so 5.3 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 43% where the average Big Ten team is 72%.
  • The Big Ten takes 3.19 bids in an average season, and four or more in 37%.

Wisconsin’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk4at Penn State3.0
  • wk9at Iowa2.3
  • wk8vs USC1.9
  • wk7at UCLA1.6
  • wk11at Maryland1.2
  • wk13vs Minnesota1.0

Who to root for

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

  • wk11Hawai'i over North Dakota State0.3
  • wk8SMU over California0.3
  • wk4Eastern Michigan over Lindenwood0.3
  • wk2Oregon State over Texas Tech0.2
  • wk7South Florida over Kent State0.2
  • wk5Iowa over Ohio State0.2
The full playoff picture →

Big Ten

0-0 in league play, projected 3.6-5.415 of 18 by title odds
0.2%
Wins the Big Ten
0.9%
Reaches the title game

The Big Ten sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 50% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk4Wisconsin at Penn State1.1

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Big Ten race →

If not the playoff, then

50%
Bowl eligible
45%
Placed in a bowl
0.5%
In the playoff
54%
Season over in November

Wisconsin 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. In 4.6% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • LA Bowl7.6%
  • GameAbove Sports Bowl6.9%
  • Rate Bowl5.6%
  • Pinstripe Bowl4.6%
  • Xbox Bowl3.8%
  • Las Vegas Bowl3.6%

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 Wisconsin a player since 2010 — 7 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Wisconsin's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
HamiltonAZ40
BolingbrookIL20
FlanaganFL11
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.