Skip to content

Wyoming Cowboys

Mountain West·1-1·
Elo
1300#116
SP+
-15.2#121
FPI
-17.6
AP
NR
Next@ Central Michigan · Wk 3Win prob 37%Model +5.3
Talent #127 (528.3)Recruiting class #11423% production returning

Team Leaders

Latest on Wyoming

All news

Hauss Hejny was responsible for 30 of Colorado State's 35 points

Matchup · 6d ago

Wyoming's edge rides on a quarterback nobody has seen

Matchup · Sep 2

Roster · 112 players

FR 38SO 25JR 29SR 20
#PlayerPosClHtWt
6Tyler HughesQBSR6'0"214
7Mason DrubeQBFR6'3"220
14Landon SimsQBJR6'3"217
15Taylor HasselbeckQBFR6'2"191
34Tyler FranklinQBFR6'3"190
1Samuel HarrisRBSO5'11"202
8Markell HolmanRBSR6'0"214
20Jaden LawrenceRBFR5'10"203
21Nico HamiltonRBSO5'10"210
22Diore HubbardRBSO5'10"188
26Dontae BurchRBSO5'7"196
28Nikos VarelasRBJR5'10"190
29Ryken BanksRBFR6'0"206
2Eric RichardsonWRSR5'11"181
3Deion DeBlancWRSO5'10"185
4Ke'Lyn WashomWRFR6'1"205
5Justin PopovichWRSR6'3"203
9Jackson HolmanWRJR6'3"205
11Jayden Williams (WR)WRFR5'8"171
12Bricen BrantleyWRJR6'3"190
13Pierre JacksonWRFR5'11"172
16Joaquin SandovalWRSO5'10"184
19Charlie CoenenWRSR6'0"195
23Tyler NystromWRSO6'2"189
24Jarell GaryWRFR5'11"196
81Jordan StylesWRFR6'0"207
44Tyler HamptonTESR6'4"247
80Tyler SiddonsTESR6'5"254
82Gage BrookTEJR6'4"249
83Kyle FrendtTESO6'5"240
85Ishmael MuhammadTEFR6'3"226
86Colin FordTEFR6'4"232
87Isaac SchoenfeldTESR6'5"260
88Landon PaceTEFR6'3"247
89Jake WilsonTESO6'5"243
50Giovanni PanozzoOLSO6'5"314
51Jason MaciejczakOLJR6'3"310
52Chandler DonawayOLSR6'1"305
54Jonathan PearcyOLFR6'3"301
55Kalvin JanssenOLFR6'3"307
60Grant LottOLFR6'4"300
62Spencer RathbunOLSO6'4"275
63Braylon JenkinsOLSO6'4"315
64Brandt RiceOLJR6'5"305
65Nathan GeigerOLJR6'5"303
66Johnathan BushOLFR6'2"310
68Jackson GarrettOLFR6'3"310
70Rex JohnsenOLSR6'5"308
72Pierce DeckerOLFR6'7"295
73Caleb HallOLSO6'5"305
74Tariq MillerOLFR6'3"302
75Cooper LawsonOLFR6'4"300
77Josiah PetaiaOLJR6'3"313
71Jake DaviesOTJR6'7"308
76Quinn Grovesteen-MatcheyOTJR6'6"310
11Esaia BogarDESR6'2"255
21Jack DunkleyDESR6'4"253
39Eltoum MurgusDESO6'3"220
47Jason HandyDEFR6'4"247
51Thaddeus GianarisDESR6'2"252
55Kevin SjogrenDEJR6'5"251
58Jordan TurnbullDEJR6'5"256
90Cade BrookDEFR6'3"256
94Beck HaswellDEFR6'3"252
99Donnie WingateDESR6'3"251
53Tegen SeedsDLSO6'0"302
97Alex HaswellDLSO6'5"295
44Ja'Quan RedfernDTJR6'3"288
50Tanielu Maafala-BarbasaDTFR6'1"281
54MacGregor ByersDTFR6'4"271
68Cody CrawfordDTJR6'1"290
91Xavier JacksonDTFR6'2"289
92Dante DrakeDTJR6'3"296
93Mohanad NahhasDTJR6'3"293
95Caleb RobinsonDTSR6'2"298
96Henry RehbergDTFR6'2"287
98Jayden Williams (DT)DTJR6'3"294
16Karson ButtsLBSO6'2"237
26Gary RutherfordLBSO6'1"237
28Boston GableLBFR6'0"216
33Parker MooreLBFR6'2"238
34Steven PerezLBFR6'1"231
40Dante BruleyLBFR6'1"232
41Mason WrightLBFR6'3"242
42Ethan StuhlsatzLBSR6'4"237
46Dash BaumanLBSO6'2"237
0Tyson Shamsid-DeenCBSO5'10"180
3Ian BellCBJR6'1"190
7Junus McGrawCBJR6'0"191
8Logan MackeyCBJR5'10"193
9BJ InmonCBJR5'11"190
12Kendall GriffinCBFR5'11"190
15David LeonardDBSO5'11"188
24Drew JacksonDBSO5'11"187
1Desman HearnsSSR6'0"190
2Travis Franklin Jr.SSR5'11"185
4Jett VincentSJR6'2"203
5Brooklyn CheekSSO6'1"205
6Kaiden Kimble-TurnerSFR5'10"197
13Elvin AmpofoSFR6'0"182
18Da'Marion BrownleeSJR6'1"210
19Nathanial WatsonSJR5'10"180
20Lafai PurcellSJR5'11"185
22Jaden DaCostaSJR6'0"205
23Jones ThomasSJR6'2"205
25Therman WilliamsSFR5'10"186
47Erik SandvikPKJR6'1"201
99Keelan AndersonPKSO5'10"178
18Bart EdmistonPSR6'0"200
43Gavyn HelmPSO6'3"209
45Charlie HoustonLSFR5'10"206
49Nathan CurryLSSR6'0"206

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
17.0
scoring offense
Points allowed
24.0
scoring defense
Differential
-7.0
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
288.5#119
Yards / play
5.1#109
Passing yards / game
139.5#121
Rushing yards / game
149.0#79
First downs / game
16.5#115
3rd down %
25.0%#123
4th down %
50.0%#67
Time of possession
29:23#81
Defense
Yards allowed / game
370.5#90
Yards / play allowed
5.7#101
Pass yards allowed / game
224.0#94
Rush yards allowed / game
146.5#97
3rd down % allowed
40.7%#92
Sacks
3#58
Tackles for loss
12#33
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
-4#133
Takeaways
2#53
Giveaways
6#133
Penalties / game
6.5#71
Penalty yards / game
53.5#71

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

Wyoming is in year 3 under Jay Sawvel. The way in is 129th at surviving second and twelve, and they are 129th at turning trips inside the 40 into points.

Wyoming has played 2 games 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

  • Offensesurviving second and twelve
    #129
    projected
  • Offenseturning trips inside the 40 into points
    #129
    projected
  • Offensethrowing it
    #127
    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
5.07.0
projected final record (now 11)
Exp. wins left
4.0
of 10 games
Bowl odds
35%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
78%
vs Northern Illinois
Toughest
11%
vs UNLV

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 35% · 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
TEIsaac Schoenfeld, Jake Wilson +1
+5.2 EPA
QBTyler Hughes
+4.2 EPA
WRCharlie Coenen, Jackson Holman +2
+1.5 EPA
RBNico Hamilton, Jaden Lawrence +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
QBTyler Hughes
~$498K
EPA +4.20.141/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)
Off0.0720th#111
Def0.1731st#95
Explosiveness
Off0.984th#132
Def1.1667th#46
Field position
Off67.829th#98
Def69.777th#33
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off3.0925th#104
Def2.8364th#51
Turnovers
Won 0Lost 4
Margin -4

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
Defense
Off · pass
0.2336th#89
Off · rush
0.0739th#85

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.0735th#90
Def-0.0356th#61
Passing
Off0.2334th#92
Def0.4320th#111

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
3.08#65
2nd-level / open-field
1.25 / 0.69
Power / stuff (off)
100.0% / 17.9%
Havoc — total (def)
15.4%#78
Havoc — front 7 / DB
9.2% / 6.2%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.02
Def0.12
Pass downs
Off0.20
Def0.28

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

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense-0.03#990.29#570.10#122
Defense-0.03#770.14#760.61#100

Elo Trajectory

@Colorado StateFinal
Elo rating 13631309-54 over season

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

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play-0.0313th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.3017th
  • Offense success rate42%39th
  • Defense success rate allowed49%16th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs48%42nd
  • Offense success — passing downs23%22nd
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs51%20th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs41%15th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness0.904th
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.252nd
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs0.779th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs1.836th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards3.467th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.560th
  • Offense highlight yards0.6134th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed1.426th
  • Offense power success1.099th
  • Defense power success allowed1.023rd
  • Offense stuff rate0.1274th
  • Defense stuff rate0.2156th

Third down

  • Third down conversion0%1st
  • Third down distance faced10.01st
  • Third down conversion allowed47%26th
  • Third down distance forced5.915th

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.0341st
  • Net success rate — second half-0.0529th

Drives

  • Points per drive1.023rd
  • Points per drive allowed3.524th
  • Average starting field position2742nd
  • Opponent starting field position2942nd
  • Available yards gained35%19th
  • Available yards allowed58%32nd
  • Scoring opportunities per drive70%31st
  • Scoring opportunities allowed100%16th
  • Points per scoring opportunity1.423rd
  • Points allowed per opportunity3.532nd
  • Three-and-out rate50%12th
  • Three-and-outs forced40%81st

Roster

  • Returning usage28%30th
  • Returning EPA36.821st
  • Team talent composite5288th
  • Recruiting class rank11418th
  • Recruiting class points17018th

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
+0.071#111 · bottom 20%
Pass EPA/play
+0.232#92
Rush EPA/play
+0.068#90
Explosiveness
0.980#132
Pts/opportunity
3.09#104
Success rate
41.9%

Pass efficiency edge: 0.164 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

Disruptive defense — allowing above-average EPA/play
EPA/play allowed
+0.169#95 · below avg
Havoc rate (total)
15.4%#78
Front-7 havoc
9.2%
DB havoc
6.2%
Big play rate allowed
1.157#46
Success rate allowed
43.1%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

17.0 PPG offense, 24.0 allowed — -7.0 margin/game
Points per game
17.0
Points allowed/game
24.0
Scoring margin/game
-7.0
Turnover margin
-4won 0 · lost 4
Production returning
23%
Talent rank (247)
#127

1-1 record through 2 games.

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

OFFENSE20thEXPLOSIVENESS4thFINISHING25thFIELD POS29thDEFENSE31thHAVOC44th50th100th
Offense
20th
Explosiveness
4th
Finishing
25th
Field Pos
29th
Defense
31th
Havoc
44th

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
-12.9
#123
Offense
-9.8
#123
Defense
+3.1
#95
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 10 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive1.003.50
Starting field positionown 26.8own 29.3
Available yards34.6%57.6%
Scoring opportunities70.0%100.0%
Points per opportunity1.433.50
Three-and-out rate50.0%40.0%
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
38.0%
Expected, given the spots
53.8%
Over expected
-15.8
Fourth down vs peers
+25
Fourth down vs the model
+0
All play-calling tendencies →

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

Each dot = one FBS team. Wyoming 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 Wyoming in 2026

by EPA/play distance
CaliforniaSP+ -3.4
Off EPA/play +0.057Def EPA/play +0.169Elo 1349
Match
99%
UNLVSP+ +2.3
Off EPA/play +0.041Def EPA/play +0.186Elo 1589
Match
98%
Boston CollegeSP+ -7.4
Off EPA/play +0.102Def EPA/play +0.148Elo 1379
Match
98%
Bowling GreenSP+ -12.8
Off EPA/play +0.025Def EPA/play +0.147Elo 1340
Match
98%
San José StateSP+ -12.8
Off EPA/play +0.126Def EPA/play +0.175Elo 1413
Match
97%
Jacksonville StateSP+ -7.0
Off EPA/play +0.100Def EPA/play +0.120Elo 1432
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 · 20152026 · points per game vs an average FBS team

2015: -16.1, #105 of 1282016: -1.1, #66 of 1282017: -9.3, #93 of 1302018: +2.5, #52 of 1302019: +2.2, #53 of 1302020: +3.6, #50 of 1242021: +0.7, #71 of 1302022: -9.5, #99 of 1312023: -1.8, #70 of 1332024: -20.4, #123 of 1342025: -15.3, #111 of 1362026: -12.9, #123 of 138
20152026
Now -12.9 · #123 of 138Best +3.6 in 2020Worst -20.4 in 2024

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20260-10-0
0%
0.0-0.0
20254-82-6
33%
3.8+0.2
20243-92-5
25%
3.9-0.9
20239-45-3
69%
7.3+1.7
20227-65-3
54%
6.0+1.0
20217-62-6
54%
7.6-0.6
20202-42-4
33%
3.1-1.1
20198-54-4
62%
7.2+0.8
20186-64-4
50%
6.2-0.2
20178-55-3
62%
6.6+1.4

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

0.0%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

0-1 so far, projected to finish 5.3-6.7. Wins the Mountain West in 1.4%.

If they finish with…

0.9%
2 losses
0%
3 losses
0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count.

down 0.7 points since preseasonlost 13-35 to Colorado State against an expected margin of 2, so 20.4 against the number.

  • At 2 losses they are 0.9% 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 0.0% of seasons, having won their league in 100% of those.

Wyoming’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk10at UNLV0.4
  • wk12vs New Mexico0.2
  • wk8vs Air Force0.1
  • wk6at San José State0.1
  • wk4vs Hawai'i0.1
  • wk13vs UConn0.1

Who to root for

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

  • wk4Delaware over Virginia0.1
  • wk4Lindenwood over Eastern Michigan0.1
  • wk2Utah State over Washington0.1
  • wk13Charlotte over Navy0.1
  • wk2Georgia State over Kennesaw State0.1
  • wk4Akron over UNLV0.1
The full playoff picture →

Mountain West

0-0 in league play, projected 3.3-4.77 of 10 by title odds
1.4%
Wins the Mountain West
4.9%
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.

  • wk10Wyoming at UNLV7.0
  • wk12New Mexico at Wyoming5.0
  • wk8Air Force at Wyoming3.5
  • wk4Hawai'i at Wyoming2.9

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

If not the playoff, then

45%
Bowl eligible
41%
Placed in a bowl
0.0%
In the playoff
59%
Season over in November

Wyoming 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 4.0% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • Famous Idaho Potato Bowl11%
  • Arizona Bowl9.5%
  • Hawai'i Bowl8.3%
  • New Mexico Bowl4.6%
  • Cure Bowl2.9%
  • LA Bowl2.3%

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 Wyoming a player since 2010 — 5 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of Wyoming's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
Valor ChristianCO30
Mansfield LegacyTX11
Montgomery Bell AcademyTN11
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.