Player ratings 2026 season

Pos rankPlayerPos School Grade G2026 season
#1 Nate Sheppard RB Duke FBS 99 2 374 rush yds · 3 TD · 8 rec
#1 KJ Duff WR Rutgers FBS 99 2 17 rec · 333 yds · 5 TD
#1 Blake Fletcher LB Air Force FBS 99 2 21 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.5 TFL
#2 Kingston Lopa DB California FBS 99 2 11 tkl · 4 INT
#1 Alex McLaughlin DB Washington FBS 99 2 15 tkl · 2 PD · 2 INT
#1 Xavier Lewis DL North Carolina FBS 99 2 12 tkl · 4.0 sacks · 6.5 TFL
#2 Khalid Bueno DL Stony Brook FCS 99 3 21 tkl · 4.5 sacks · 8.5 TFL
#1 Lincoln Kienholz QB Louisville FBS 98 2 639 pass yds · 4 TD · 0 INT
#3 Jordan Ross DL LSU FBS 98 2 7 tkl · 1.5 sacks · 4.0 TFL
#2 Noah Kjar WR Weber State FCS 98 3 22 rec · 385 yds · 6 TD
#2 Alonzo Jackson Jr. LB Louisiana Tech FBS 97 2 16 tkl · 3.0 sacks · 5.0 TFL
#1 Hunter Tipton TE Memphis FBS 97 3 14 rec · 291 yds · 2 TD
#3 Joseph Garcia DB Stony Brook FCS 97 3 34 tkl · 1 INT
#4 Princewill Umanmielen DL LSU FBS 96 2 11 tkl · 4.5 sacks · 6.0 TFL
#2 Luke Yoder RB Lehigh FCS 96 3 419 rush yds · 9 TD · 3 rec
#4 Parker Vance DB Southern Utah FCS 96 3 18 tkl · 4 PD · 3 INT
#1 Mason Lindberg K Idaho State FCS 95 3 7 FG · 15 XP · 36 pts
#3 Jesse Legree WR Oregon State FBS 95 2 13 rec · 376 yds · 3 TD
#3 Anthony Palano LB Boston College FBS 95 2 22 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#5 Mi'Quise Humphrey-Grace DL Kentucky FBS 95 2 6 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.5 TFL
#5 Bryce Smith DB Eastern Washington FCS 95 3 30 tkl · 3 PD · 1 INT
#6 Jayden Earley DL 94 3 12 tkl · 1.5 TFL
#4 Reed Harris WR Arizona State FBS 94 2 15 rec · 326 yds · 4 TD
#6 Bryson Adamoh DB Central Arkansas FCS 94 2 5 tkl · 3 PD · 3 INT
#1 Max Zuluaga P UT Martin FCS 94 3 8 punts · 51.4 yd avg
#3 Tylan Hines RB Tarleton State FCS 94 3 575 rush yds · 4 TD · 6 rec
#4 Elijah Melendez LB Auburn FBS 94 2 18 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#7 Lesroy Tittle DL 93 1 4 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#7 Michael Henderson DB Arkansas-Pine Bluff FCS 93 3 21 tkl · 3 PD · 1 INT
#2 Kevin Jennings QB SMU FBS 93 2 767 pass yds · 8 TD · 2 INT
#8 Elijah Kinsler DL Memphis FBS 93 3 18 tkl · 3.5 sacks · 4.5 TFL
#5 Collin Dixon WR Illinois FBS 92 2 17 rec · 236 yds · 5 TD
#2 Luke Reynolds TE Virginia Tech FBS 92 2 13 rec · 158 yds · 3 TD
#5 Andrew Osmun LB Fordham FCS 92 3 29 tkl · 1.5 sacks · 4.0 TFL
#8 Jaylen Thomas DB Washington State FBS 92 2 7 tkl · 2 INT
#9 Thomas Davis DL Tulsa FBS 92 2 7 tkl · 3.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#4 Eli Gillman RB Montana FCS 92 3 328 rush yds · 7 TD · 5 rec
#9 Dillon Williams DB Abilene Christian FCS 92 3 29 tkl · 1 PD
#6 Chance Morrow WR Buffalo FBS 92 2 18 rec · 221 yds · 5 TD
#10 Marco Jones DL Texas A&M FBS 92 2 5 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.0 TFL
#6 Zach Mowchan LB Eastern Michigan FBS 91 3 30 tkl · 2.0 TFL
#11 Jimmy Mulholland DL 91 1 9 tkl
#10 Jeremiah Hudson-Davis DB Alabama A&M FCS 91 3 35 tkl · 2 PD · 1 INT
#7 Jeremiah Smith WR Ohio State FBS 91 2 16 rec · 315 yds · 3 TD
#5 Jaylin Carter RB Memphis FBS 91 3 375 rush yds · 6 TD · 2 rec
#7 Nick Rinaldi LB Vanderbilt FBS 90 2 13 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#11 Tae Martin DB North Alabama FCS 90 3 23 tkl · 4 PD
#12 Zarion Walters DL North Carolina Central FCS 90 3 17 tkl · 3.0 sacks · 6.0 TFL
#3 Darian Mensah QB Miami FBS 90 2 653 pass yds · 8 TD · 0 INT
#2 Conor Talty K Alabama FBS 90 2 5 FG · 10 XP · 25 pts

What this grade is. Box-score production, adjusted for who it came against, shrunk toward the positional average when a player has few games, then ranked within position — so 50 is average for that spot and 85+ is elite. A 90 quarterback and a 90 corner are each elite for their position; the numbers aren’t comparable across positions in any other way.

What it isn’t. It has no charting or play-by-play grading behind it, so it rewards production rather than technique — a back on a run-heavy team gets more chances to produce than an equally good back who touches it half as often. Kickers and punters are graded on volume-light stats and are the least reliable.

Why there is no offensive line. College football publishes no individual OL box stats anywhere, so the only OL number we could build is the team’s offensive rating stamped on a lineman — and a lineman only reaches the ratings at all by recording a stray stat, like falling on a fumble. In 2026 that came to 134 linemen across 106 of 289 teams — so 63% of teams would have none, and the rest one or two of five starters, picked by accident. Ranking that would rank offenses with a lineman’s name attached, so we don’t publish it as a position. A team’s own page still shows those rows, flagged, where the claim is only about that team.