Michigan
2-0AP #19Big Ten · Kyle Whittingham, year 1 (2-0) · Michigan Stadium · 107,601 · 111,059 avg in 2026
LastW 17–10 vs Oklahoma · Sat Sep 12 · John Henry Daley 1 sacks, 3 TFL, 8 tackles
Nextvs UTEP · Sat Sep 19 · 3:30 pm ET · Michigan Stadium · Michigan by 35 · first meeting on record · Game preview
Updated Tue Sep 15 · through week 2
All 88 stats
FBS rankings · 2026 season · all stats vs 136 FBS programs
| Player | # | G | Cmp/Att | Pct | Yds | Y/A | TD | INT | Rate | ZPR | QBR | Adj ANY/A | Sack% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +0.45 EPA/play | 19 | 2 | 21 / 39 | 53.8 | 281 | 7.2 | 1 | 1 | 117.7 | 48 | 74.4 | — | — | |
Yards by week → | ||||||||||||||
| Player | # | G | Car | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | Stuff% | 10+% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +0.20 EPA/play | 23 | 2 | 22 | 76 | 3.5 | 1 | 15 | — | — | |
Yards by week → | ||||||||||
| Player | # | G | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | Long | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +1.04 EPA/play | 6 | 2 | 8 | 174 #43 FBS | 21.8 | 1 | 47 | |
Yards by week → | ||||||||
| +0.03 EPA/play | 3 | 2 | 5 | 28 | 5.6 | 0 | 12 | |
Yards by week → | ||||||||
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | TFL | Sack | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Versatile End | 90 | 2 | 11 | 4 | 3 #30 FBS | 1 | 1 |
Versatile EndNo single standout number, but nothing missing either — competent across the board. National watch / fringe All-American — on the edge of a 1st-team nod. The most common profile in its group this season — 9 of 12 classified this way. Played in 2 of 3 games this season · senior View John Henry Daley's full player page | |||||||
| Pressure Merchant | 8 | 2 | 10 | 4 | 3 #30 FBS | 2 #26 FBS | 3 |
Pressure MerchantCollapses the pocket even when the sack doesn't come. 1 of 12 EDGEs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Hurry rate0.3 86th percentile · FBS EDGE, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Dominic Nichols's full player page | |||||||
| 17 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 91 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 95 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | |
| Player | # | G | Tot | Solo | Ast | TFL | Sack | PD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Balanced Linebacker | 18 | 2 | 21 | 11 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. The most common profile in its group this season — 46 of 84 classified this way. Played in 2 of 3 games this season · senior View Troy Bowles's full player page | |||||||||
| Balanced Linebacker | 44 | 2 | 16 | 7 | 9 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Balanced LinebackerSolid in every phase without a signature dimension. The most common profile in its group this season — 46 of 84 classified this way. Played in 2 of 3 games this season · senior View Nathaniel Staehling's full player page | |||||||||
| 29 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | |
| Player | # | G | Tot | PD | INT | TFL | Sack |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid Nickel | 7 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Hybrid NickelMoves between deep coverage and the slot — the modern positionless DB. The most common profile in its group this season — 22 of 46 classified this way. Played in 2 of 3 games this season · junior View Chris Bracy's full player page | |||||||
| Press Corner | — | 2 | 12 | 0 | 1 #22 FBS | 1 | 0 |
Press CornerLong and physical; jams receivers off their route at the line. 6 of 24 CBs we've classified this way this season. Season receipt Height6'2" 90th percentile · FBS corners, min. 10 tackles Plays like View Jyaire Hill's full player page | |||||||
| 10 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Player | # | G | FG M/A | FG% | XP M/A | Pts | Long |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 99 | 2 | 1/1 | 100 | 3/3 | 6 | 40 |
| Player | # | G | No | Yds | Avg | Long | In20 | TB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33 | 2 | 13 | 564 | 43.4 | 51 | 8 | 0 |
Net average is unavailable — CFBD's punting feed carries gross yards only, with no return-yardage or touchback deduction.
2026 stat leaders · Michigan
through 2 games
2026 stat leaders · MichiganTroy Bowles leads Michigan with 21 tackles through 2 games.
How They Play · 2025Michigan fields a capable run-heavy, methodical, ball-control offense behind a strong, bend-don't-break defense.
Percentile vs all FBS, based on this season's per-game production. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.
Michigan reads strongest in explosive plays allowed (top 5%) and rushing epa (top 14%); the crux lives in explosive plays, where Michigan sits at the 13th percentile.
offense · strengths lead
defense · higher bar = harder to play against
hidden math · special situations
Home-field advantage · Michigan · 2018–present · FBS opponents
Michigan is worth +4.2 points more at home than on the road.
Middle of FBS, 52nd percentile of 133 programs
87% at home, 69% away against FBS opponents since 2018 (48–7 home, 25–11 away). Interval ±4.2.
Our model gives every stadium the same flat 2.3-point home edge — per-team modelling was tested and did not survive scrutiny (why) — and the books use about 3. Against the closing line, Michigan has beaten the number by −0.6 more at home than away over 73 games — inside the ±7.0 that many games can resolve. Results here cannot tell the flat number apart from the building, and that is the honest reading of nearly every FBS stadium.
Michigan Stadium seats 107,601 and has averaged 103% full (110,429, 31 games reported). Visitors cover a median 321 miles to get here since 2018 — 43rd-shortest of 135 FBS venues, inside the ordinary range. 10% of the 2026 roster (11 of 115 located players) grew up inside 100 miles of the stadium.
Edge = half the gap between average home margin and average road margin, FBS opponents only, non-neutral games since 2018; the interval is 95%. Market line: closing spread, seasons with lines on file. Trip length is straight-line miles from the visiting team's campus to the venue, measured across all 55 home games since 2018.
More in this tab
Scheme claims
Standard downs vs. passing downs
Does Michigan hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?
2nd percentile success on standard downs, 62nd on passing downs — a 60-point gap between the two.
View all FBS teams as a table
| Team | Standard-downs percentile | Passing-downs percentile |
|---|---|---|
| App State | 44th | 90th |
| Arizona | 92nd | 86th |
| Arkansas | 60th | 80th |
| Auburn | 75th | 55th |
| Ball State | 12th | 24th |
| Baylor | 40th | 96th |
| Boise State | 58th | 46th |
| Boston College | 27th | 56th |
| Buffalo | 7th | 14th |
| California | 9th | 25th |
| Central Michigan | 16th | 6th |
| Charlotte | 73rd | 83rd |
| Clemson | 1st | 19th |
| Coastal Carolina | 61st | 52nd |
| Colorado | 35th | 77th |
| Colorado State | 82nd | 91st |
| Delaware | 70th | 31st |
| Duke | 20th | 29th |
| Eastern Michigan | 52nd | 10th |
| Florida Atlantic | 43rd | 87th |
| Florida International | 46th | 43rd |
| Florida State | 28th | 65th |
| Georgia Southern | 24th | 45th |
| Georgia Tech | 58th | 44th |
| Hawai'i | 18th | 41st |
| Iowa State | 4th | 23rd |
| Jacksonville State | 65th | 82nd |
| Kansas | 70th | 35th |
| LSU | 33rd | 98th |
| Liberty | 14th | 59th |
| Louisiana | 19th | 92nd |
| Louisville | 96th | 70th |
| Memphis | 69th | 65th |
| Michigan | 2nd | 62nd |
| Michigan State | 62nd | 29th |
| Middle Tennessee | 87th | 68th |
| Missouri | 36th | 85th |
| Navy | 98th | 59th |
| Nevada | 77th | 52nd |
| New Mexico State | 45th | 75th |
| Norfolk State | 16th | 9th |
| North Dakota State | 86th | 27th |
| North Texas | 49th | 68th |
| Ohio | 38th | 17th |
| Ohio State | 90th | 40th |
| Oklahoma State | 41st | 49th |
| Ole Miss | 94th | 50th |
| Oregon | 35th | 33rd |
| Oregon State | 10th | 38th |
| Pittsburgh | 30th | 76th |
| Purdue | 83rd | 88th |
| Rutgers | 30th | 71st |
| Sacramento State | 23rd | 14th |
| Sam Houston | 78th | 61st |
| San Diego State | 4th | 40th |
| San José State | 54th | 22nd |
| South Alabama | 50th | 73rd |
| South Florida | 91st | 52nd |
| Stanford | 76th | 15th |
| Syracuse | 48th | 64th |
| TCU | 93rd | 8th |
| Tennessee | 65th | 78th |
| Texas | 72nd | 94th |
| Texas A&M | 85th | 72nd |
| Texas Tech | 88th | 48th |
| Troy | 22nd | 59th |
| Tulane | 31st | 2nd |
| Tulsa | 56th | 1st |
| UAB | 65th | 81st |
| UNLV | 51st | 7th |
| USC | 97th | 99th |
| UTSA | 99th | 29th |
| Utah State | 4th | 93rd |
| Vanderbilt | 80th | 12th |
| Wake Forest | 56th | 97th |
| Washington | 81st | 4th |
| Washington State | 8th | 3rd |
| Western Kentucky | 25th | 34th |
| Western Michigan | 39th | 20th |
| Wisconsin | 13th | 18th |
| Wyoming | 65th | 36th |
Ratings
Comparable teams
Most similar programs · Michigan
Most similar programs · MichiganReads like
Matched on how the programs are built — tier, prestige band, kind of fanbase, conference, voice and roster size — not on this season's stats. A calibration, not a prediction.
Historical echo
Historical echo
Michigan’s breakout has happened before — and 2 of the 4 closest programs couldn’t hold it.
Programs whose stature climbed in the same shape. The grey line is their run; the color is what came next for them.
An analogy on the shape of a program’s Zeitgeist stature arc — not a prediction. Interim calibration, medium confidence; matched among current FBS programs at a comparable level.
Conditions
59°F average kickoff temp; 12% of games had measurable precipitation; 9 mph average wind.
Based on 84 home games with weather data.