Lindenwood

4-4

Key stats

Key stats · 2026 · FBS rank

Each bar is the team’s national rank as a percentile. A longer bar is better, for defense too.

Points/game95th of 138
23.4
Pts allowed/game59th of 138
23.8
All 17 stats
Other
1st-half EPA/play allowed0.40.1/gm
Pass rate, 1st downs
31.8%31.8%

FBS rankings · 2026 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs

Player stats

Player stats · 2026 season

No player stats logged for this program yet — stats appear once the season is underway.

How scary each game got

Lindenwood lost at Stony Brook after being 95% to win; the closest win was at Eastern Illinois, down to 21%

50%W1L1L2L4L6W7W8W9

Tap a game for its score and win chances.

Each bar runs from the lowest to the highest chance our model gave Lindenwood during that game; the thick mark is where it started. Numbers are the game week.

More in this tab

Scheme claimsFive specific, testable claims about how this team plays.

How much of Lindenwood’s number is the schedule?

Raw EPA/play through week 10 is 0.10; adjusted for opponent strength, it's 0.03. The widest gap came in week 1: 0.17 raw vs. 0.01 adjusted.

0.190.09-0.02Wk 1Wk 6Wk 10Raw EPA/playOpponent-adjusted
0.190.09-0.02Wk 1Wk 6Wk 10RawAdjusted
Source CFB Zeitgeist · season-to-date, opponent-adjusted model
Havoc & trenchesDefense havoc rate 0.145, 30th percentile

Disruption, run-blocking, and down-and-distance efficiency.

Havoc rate (D) 0.145
30th
Havoc allowed (O) 0.185
8th
Front-seven havoc (D) 0.095
46th
Secondary havoc (D) 0.050
25th
Stuff rate (D) 0.170
27th
Stuff rate allowed (O) 0.266
1st
Line yards (O) 2.595
7th
Line yards allowed (D) 2.878
45th
Standard-downs success (O) 0.403
5th
Standard-downs success allowed (D) 0.473
31st
Passing-downs success (O) 0.266
19th
Passing-downs success allowed (D) 0.287
62nd
Screened 12 claims, 12 survived · 2026 season, FBS only, min. 3 games with data this season
CFB Zeitgeist “Go Lions.”
This page may include content derived from public news sources, social media, and fan communities. We relay these sources as-is — we are not reporting them. Sources may be summarized or quoted imperfectly; for anything that matters, go look at the original source directly. The original source may also be wrong. Text written by our model says so in a line beneath it, and it can get facts wrong. All analysis is editorial opinion, not professional reporting. Data sources · About this site