TCU

1-1
Latest
TCU Bans Star-Telegram Over Locker Room Incident Reportingour readTCU Coach Sonny Dykes Criticizes Officials After Loss to North Carolinaour readThe Baylor rivalry

Big 12 · Sonny Dykes, year 5 (37-18) · Amon G. Carter Stadium · 46,000 · 37,600 avg in 2026

The nationunrankedAP / Coaches
The model#52 CFB ZeitgeistSP+ #54 (+3.9) · FPI #41
The marketTCU by 20vs Arkansas State · our model 87% TCU · a number, not a pick

LastW 63–7 vs Grambling · Sat Sep 12 · Jaden Craig 391 pass yds, 4 TD, 53 rush yds

Nextvs Arkansas State · Sat Sep 19 · 8 pm ET · Amon G. Carter Stadium · TCU by 20 · series 2-0, won the last 2 · Game preview

Updated Tue Sep 15 · through week 2

Key stats — 2026 — FBS rank
Points/game
36.5
Pts allowed/game
11.0
Total yards/gm#38 / 138 · 73rd pct
478.5
Rush yards/gm#48 / 138 · 66th pct
195.5
Pass yards/gm#43 / 138 · 69th pct
283.0
Yards allowed/gm#39 / 138 · 72nd pct
266.0
Rush yds allowed/gm#7 / 138 · 95th pct
55.0
SacksT-#38 / 138 · 65th pct
5
InterceptionsT-#29 / 115 · 61st pct
2
3rd-down convT-#79 / 138 · 42nd pct
39.1%
All 83 stats
Offense / Defense
Total yards
Team
957478.5/gm6.84/play#38 / 138 · 73rd pct#26 / 69 · 63rd pct#7 / 16 · 59th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
532266.0/gm4.84/play#39 / 138 · 72nd pct#34 / 69 · 51st pct#9 / 16 · 47th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush yards
Team
391195.5/gm2.79/play#48 / 138 · 66th pct#26 / 69 · 63rd pct#7 / 16 · 59th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
11055.0/gm1.00/play#7 / 138 · 95th pct#6 / 69 · 92nd pct#2 / 16 · 91st pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush carries
Team
7638.0/gmT-#62 / 138 · 53rd pctT-#31 / 69 · 51st pctT-#11 / 16 · 31st pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
5728.5/gmT-#23 / 138 · 83rd pctT-#17 / 69 · 75th pct#5 / 16 · 72nd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Rush TDs
Team
52.5/gmT-#35 / 138 · 70th pctT-#23 / 69 · 60th pctT-#8 / 16 · 47th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
10.5/gmT-#24 / 138 · 73rd pctT-#18 / 69 · 64th pctT-#5 / 16 · 66th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Net pass yards
Team
566283.0/gm4.04/play#43 / 138 · 69th pct#25 / 69 · 64th pct#4 / 16 · 78th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
422211.0/gm3.84/playT-#74 / 138 · 46th pct#46 / 69 · 34th pct#12 / 16 · 28th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Pass attempts
Team
6432.0/gmT-#51 / 138 · 62nd pctT-#25 / 69 · 61st pct#5 / 16 · 72nd pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
5326.5/gmT-#41 / 138 · 69th pctT-#26 / 69 · 60th pctT-#6 / 16 · 62nd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Completions
Team
4422.0/gmT-#46 / 138 · 65th pctT-#24 / 69 · 62nd pct#6 / 16 · 66th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
3015.0/gmT-#36 / 138 · 74th pct#23 / 69 · 67th pct#5 / 16 · 72nd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Pass TDs
Team
42.0/gmT-#48 / 138 · 57th pctT-#33 / 69 · 46th pctT-#7 / 16 · 50th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
10.5/gmT-#13 / 138 · 80th pctT-#11 / 69 · 72nd pctT-#4 / 16 · 66th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Passer rating#41 / 115 · 65th pct#27 / 59 · 55th pct#8 / 14 · 46th pct#2 / 13 · 92nd pct
157.4157.4
Interceptions thrown
Team
00.0/gmT-#92 / 138 · 17th pctT-#42 / 69 · 20th pctT-#11 / 16 · 19th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
21.0/gmT-#77 / 138 · 33rd pctT-#40 / 69 · 29th pctT-#11 / 16 · 25th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Sacks (def)
Team
52.5/gmT-#38 / 138 · 65th pctT-#21 / 69 · 60th pctT-#6 / 16 · 53rd pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp
42.0/gmT-#74 / 138 · 37th pctT-#42 / 69 · 30th pctT-#11 / 16 · 22nd pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
Tackles for loss
Team
147.0/gmT-#29 / 138 · 73rd pctT-#18 / 69 · 68th pctT-#6 / 16 · 62nd pct#11 / 11 · 9th pct
Opp
84.0/gmT-#39 / 138 · 67th pctT-#26 / 69 · 57th pctT-#8 / 16 · 44th pct#1 / 11 · 100th pct
First downs
Team
5125.5/gmT-#32 / 138 · 76th pctT-#20 / 69 · 70th pct#6 / 16 · 66th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
2713.5/gmT-#26 / 138 · 79th pctT-#23 / 69 · 64th pctT-#6 / 16 · 59th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
3rd-down conv
Team
94.5/gmT-#85 / 138 · 32nd pctT-#50 / 69 · 24th pctT-#13 / 16 · 19th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
42.0/gmT-#2 / 138 · 97th pctT-#2 / 69 · 95th pct#1 / 16 · 97th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
3rd-down att
Team
2311.5/gmT-#91 / 138 · 30th pctT-#43 / 69 · 34th pctT-#9 / 16 · 41st pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
2512.5/gmT-#33 / 138 · 73rd pctT-#14 / 69 · 76th pctT-#2 / 16 · 78th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
4th-down conv
Team
31.5/gmT-#23 / 138 · 74th pctT-#12 / 69 · 72nd pctT-#5 / 16 · 69th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
10.5/gmT-#26 / 138 · 66th pctT-#15 / 69 · 62nd pctT-#4 / 16 · 62nd pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
4th-down att
Team
73.5/gmT-#10 / 138 · 91st pctT-#5 / 69 · 92nd pctT-#4 / 16 · 75th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
10.5/gmT-#3 / 138 · 92nd pctT-#2 / 69 · 93rd pctT-#1 / 16 · 94th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct
Time of possession
Team
62:3631:18/gm#58 / 138 · 58th pct#29 / 69 · 59th pct#7 / 16 · 59th pct#13 / 13 · 8th pct
Opp
57:2428:42/gm#49 / 138 · 65th pct#29 / 69 · 59th pct#7 / 16 · 59th pct#1 / 13 · 100th pct

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

Player stats — 2026 season
Quarterbacks
Player#GCmp/AttPctYdsY/ATDINTRateZPRQBRAdj ANY/ASack%
+0.24 EPA/play1244 / 6369.8566
#28 FBS		9.04
#36 FBS		0166.35258.59.26.0
Running Backs
Player#GCarYdsAvgTDLongStuff%10+%
+0.00 EPA/play26234221
#17 FBS		6.5048——
Receivers
Player#GRecYdsAvgTDLong
Possession Receiver · +0.57 EPA/play18214166
#50 FBS		11.9057
Complete TE · +0.34 EPA/play8121013613.62
#24 FBS		37
+0.03 EPA/play6269015152

2026 stat leaders · TCU

through 2 games

Jeremy Payne leads TCU with 221 rushing yards through 2 games.

1. Jeremy Payne RB 221 rushing yards
2. Jaden Craig QB 566 passing yards
3. Ed Small WR 166 receiving yards
4. Max Carroll LB 13 tackles
5. Kari Ashley TE 136 receiving yards
How They Play · 2025

TCU fields a strong pass-first offense behind a solid defense.

Offense
66th pct EPA/play
Run/Pass
52% pass plays
Defense
55th pct EPA allowed

Percentile vs all FBS, based on this season's per-game production. Bar = where this team ranks — right is better.

The Savant Card · TCU · 2025

TCU reads strongest in passing epa (top 23%) and rushing epa allowed (top 27%); the crux lives in passing epa allowed, where TCU sits at the 25th percentile.

offense · strengths lead

EPA / play +0.20
66th
Success Rate +0.44
69th
Explosive Plays +1.28
61st
Rushing EPA +0.06
33rd

defense · higher bar = harder to play against

EPA Allowed +0.14
55th
Success Rate Allowed +0.40
63rd
Explosive Plays Allowed +1.30
31st
Passing EPA Allowed +0.32
25th

hidden math · special situations

Passing EPA +0.38
78th
Rushing EPA Allowed +0.03
74th
Elite · 90+Strong · 70+Average · 40-70Concern · 10-40Bottom · <10
Sources · CFBD tier-2 advanced stats · per-game production · 13 games this season · percentiles vs. up to 136 FBS peers

Home-field advantage · TCU · 2018–present · FBS opponents

TCU is worth +4.8 points more at home than on the road.

Middle of FBS, 64th percentile of 133 programs

60% at home, 50% away against FBS opponents since 2018 (26–17 home, 21–21 away). Interval ±3.8.

95% intervalmodel 2.3 · books ~3Weakest home edge in FBSStrongest

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, TCU has beaten the number by +4.0 more at home than away over 71 games — inside the ±7.1 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.

Amon G. Carter Stadium seats 46,000 and has averaged 98% full (45,224, 26 games reported). Visitors get here easily: a median 271 miles trip since 2018, the 23rd-shortest of 135 FBS venues. There is no travel penalty on visitors here either way. For the home side it is genuinely home ground: 32% of the 2026 roster (37 of 117 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 51 home games since 2018.

Home26–17Away21–21Edge+4.8 ±3.8Visitor trip271 mi

More in this tab

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

Fourth-quarter reliability, corrected

TCU's 4th-quarter offense, before and after garbage time

Raw Q4 EPA/play ranks 73rd percentile in FBS. Strip out snaps taken with a blowout margin and it drops to the 22nd — the correction is the finding, not a footnote.

league medianRaw 4th quarter · 73rd pctileCompetitive snaps only…Worst in FBSBest in FBS
Source CFB Zeitgeist · CFBD play-by-play, garbage-time adjusted by pre-play margin

Standard downs vs. passing downs

Does TCU hold up once the down-and-distance turns against them?

93rd percentile success on standard downs, 8th on passing downs — a 85-point gap between the two.

Fragile off scheduleBalanced, both workStruggles even on scheduleStandard-downs reliantTCUWeak on standard downsElite on standard downsFalls apart off scheduleHolds up off scheduleHawai'i18th standard · 41st passingUNLV51st standard · 7th passingStanford76th standard · 15th passingEastern Michigan52nd standard · 10th passingSan José State54th standard · 22nd passingNew Mexico State45th standard · 75th passingSacramento State23rd standard · 14th passingOklahoma State41st standard · 49th passingDuke20th standard · 29th passingFlorida State28th standard · 65th passingRutgers30th standard · 71st passingKansas70th standard · 35th passingBoston College27th standard · 56th passingNorfolk State16th standard · 9th passingLouisville96th standard · 70th passingMissouri36th standard · 85th passingMemphis69th standard · 65th passingGeorgia Southern24th standard · 45th passingOle Miss94th standard · 50th passingJacksonville State65th standard · 82nd passingNorth Dakota State86th standard · 27th passingArizona92nd standard · 86th passingUSC97th standard · 99th passingWake Forest56th standard · 97th passingTCU93rd standard · 8th passingDelaware70th standard · 31st passingUAB65th standard · 81st passingMichigan State62nd standard · 29th passingSouth Florida91st standard · 52nd passingFlorida International46th standard · 43rd passingNavy98th standard · 59th passingWisconsin13th standard · 18th passingOregon State10th standard · 38th passingSyracuse48th standard · 64th passingOhio State90th standard · 40th passingBall State12th standard · 24th passingPittsburgh30th standard · 76th passingColorado35th standard · 77th passingGeorgia Tech58th standard · 44th passingAuburn75th standard · 55th passingBaylor40th standard · 96th passingNorth Texas49th standard · 68th passingApp State44th standard · 90th passingIowa State4th standard · 23rd passingUTSA99th standard · 29th passingArkansas60th standard · 80th passingBoise State58th standard · 46th passingOregon35th standard · 33rd passingTulsa56th standard · 1st passingTulane31st standard · 2nd passingPurdue83rd standard · 88th passingMiddle Tennessee87th standard · 68th passingVanderbilt80th standard · 12th passingSan Diego State4th standard · 40th passingLSU33rd standard · 98th passingClemson1st standard · 19th passingCentral Michigan16th standard · 6th passingTexas Tech88th standard · 48th passingMichigan2nd standard · 62nd passingWestern Michigan39th standard · 20th passingOhio38th standard · 17th passingBuffalo7th standard · 14th passingTexas72nd standard · 94th passingCoastal Carolina61st standard · 52nd passingColorado State82nd standard · 91st passingWyoming65th standard · 36th passingTexas A&M85th standard · 72nd passingLiberty14th standard · 59th passingFlorida Atlantic43rd standard · 87th passingLouisiana19th standard · 92nd passingSouth Alabama50th standard · 73rd passingTroy22nd standard · 59th passingSam Houston78th standard · 61st passingNevada77th standard · 52nd passingWestern Kentucky25th standard · 34th passingWashington State8th standard · 3rd passingWashington81st standard · 4th passingCalifornia9th standard · 25th passingCharlotte73rd standard · 83rd passingTennessee65th standard · 78th passingUtah State4th standard · 93rd passing
Source CFB Zeitgeist · advanced team stats, Connelly success-rate definition
View all FBS teams as a table
TeamStandard-downs percentilePassing-downs percentile
App State44th90th
Arizona92nd86th
Arkansas60th80th
Auburn75th55th
Ball State12th24th
Baylor40th96th
Boise State58th46th
Boston College27th56th
Buffalo7th14th
California9th25th
Central Michigan16th6th
Charlotte73rd83rd
Clemson1st19th
Coastal Carolina61st52nd
Colorado35th77th
Colorado State82nd91st
Delaware70th31st
Duke20th29th
Eastern Michigan52nd10th
Florida Atlantic43rd87th
Florida International46th43rd
Florida State28th65th
Georgia Southern24th45th
Georgia Tech58th44th
Hawai'i18th41st
Iowa State4th23rd
Jacksonville State65th82nd
Kansas70th35th
LSU33rd98th
Liberty14th59th
Louisiana19th92nd
Louisville96th70th
Memphis69th65th
Michigan2nd62nd
Michigan State62nd29th
Middle Tennessee87th68th
Missouri36th85th
Navy98th59th
Nevada77th52nd
New Mexico State45th75th
Norfolk State16th9th
North Dakota State86th27th
North Texas49th68th
Ohio38th17th
Ohio State90th40th
Oklahoma State41st49th
Ole Miss94th50th
Oregon35th33rd
Oregon State10th38th
Pittsburgh30th76th
Purdue83rd88th
Rutgers30th71st
Sacramento State23rd14th
Sam Houston78th61st
San Diego State4th40th
San José State54th22nd
South Alabama50th73rd
South Florida91st52nd
Stanford76th15th
Syracuse48th64th
TCU93rd8th
Tennessee65th78th
Texas72nd94th
Texas A&M85th72nd
Texas Tech88th48th
Troy22nd59th
Tulane31st2nd
Tulsa56th1st
UAB65th81st
UNLV51st7th
USC97th99th
UTSA99th29th
Utah State4th93rd
Vanderbilt80th12th
Wake Forest56th97th
Washington81st4th
Washington State8th3rd
Western Kentucky25th34th
Western Michigan39th20th
Wisconsin13th18th
Wyoming65th36th

Halftime identity

TCU by half

1st-half offense ranks 66th percentile in FBS; 2nd-half, 33rd — competitive snaps only, garbage time excluded from both halves.

league median1st half · 66th pctile2nd half · 33rd pctileWorst in FBSBest in FBS
Source CFB Zeitgeist · advanced team stats, garbage-time adjusted by pre-play margin
Tendency driftHow this coordinator's calls have drifted since arriving.

Season by season

How TCU’s current staff calls plays, year over year

Defense: Andy Avalos (2024–2026)
1st-down pass rate
2024: 57% → 2026: 49% · 8-pt range · #130 of 203 · a typical amount
Red-zone pass rate
2024: 51% → 2026: 35% · 16-pt range · #81 of 200 · a typical amount
4th-down go rate
2024: 43% → 2025: 48% · 4-pt range · #185 of 189 · less than most
RatingsWhere the public rating systems put this team.

Model Consensus

Where the Models Rank TCU

CFB Zeitgeist

#52

+2.5

SP+

#54

+3.9

FPI

#41

+6.3

Elo

#41

1598

The national models put TCU between 41st and 54th nationally — CFB Zeitgeist agrees, slotting them 52nd.

National rank of 138 FBS teams · 2026 season. SP+/FPI/SRS published; Elo & CFB Zeitgeist ranked by rating.

Comparable teamsPrograms built like this one — tier, prestige band, kind of fanbase, roster size. Not a stat match.

Most similar programs · TCU

Reads like

BYUBig 12Same tier of program · Same prestige band · Similarly-sized rosters up frontOklahoma StateBig 12Same tier of program · Same prestige band · Similarly-sized rosters up frontPittsburghACCSame tier of program · Same prestige band · Similarly-sized rosters up front

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.

ConditionsThe weather and altitude visitors have to deal with.
Venue texture

76°F average kickoff temp; 6% of games had measurable precipitation; 10 mph average wind.

Based on 78 home games with weather data.

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. AI-generated content is labeled and may contain factual errors. All analysis is editorial opinion, not professional reporting. Data sources · About this site