BallKnowMe college football, by the numbers

Player ratings 2026 season

All positions QB RB WR TE DL LB DB K P All D1 FBS FCS
Pos rankPlayerPos School Grade G2026 season
#5 Andrew Osmun LB Fordham FCS 92 3 29 tkl · 1.5 sacks · 4.0 TFL
#9 Omari Bursey LB Villanova FCS 89 3 34 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 4.5 TFL
#11 Tre Yanez LB Gardner-Webb FCS 88 3 31 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 5.0 TFL
#16 Wyatt Ward LB Wofford FCS 86 3 28 tkl · 2.5 TFL
#17 Sam Oppenheimer LB Maine FCS 86 3 32 tkl · 1.0 TFL
#19 Zyion Brown LB The Citadel FCS 85 3 28 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 3.5 TFL
#20 Christian Magliacano LB Colgate FCS 85 3 20 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 4.0 TFL
#21 Trevor Barry LB New Hampshire FCS 84 3 39 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 2.0 TFL
#23 Rafael Fasolino LB Long Island University FCS 84 3 25 tkl · 3.0 TFL
#25 Jayven Anderson LB Houston Christian FCS 83 3 21 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 7.0 TFL
#27 Mikey D'Amato LB Cal Poly FCS 83 3 36 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 2.0 TFL
#28 Ben Fiegel LB Southern Illinois FCS 83 2 22 tkl · 4.5 TFL
#29 Moses Meus LB Rhode Island FCS 82 3 16 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 1.5 TFL
#32 Nathan Reynolds LB Idaho State FCS 82 3 33 tkl · 3.0 TFL
#33 Myles Mayovsky LB Eastern Washington FCS 82 3 33 tkl · 1.0 TFL
#36 Ja'Wuan Nickson LB Eastern Illinois FCS 81 3 21 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 4.5 TFL
#37 J.R. Flood LB Drake FCS 81 3 35 tkl · 0.5 TFL
#40 Amanuel Dickson LB Robert Morris FCS 80 3 23 tkl · 3.5 TFL
#42 Cam Jessee LB Eastern Kentucky FCS 80 3 23 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 2.5 TFL
#43 Jaiden Letua LB Northern Arizona FCS 80 3 25 tkl · 1.0 TFL
#44 Blake Houser LB Richmond FCS 80 3 26 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 2.0 TFL
#52 Teni Worthen LB Weber State FCS 79 3 25 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#54 Dre Delinois LB East Tennessee State FCS 78 3 32 tkl · 1.0 TFL
#55 Noble Young-Blackgoat LB Northern Arizona FCS 78 3 13 tkl · 1.0 TFL
#56 Rodney Roane LB Howard FCS 78 3 16 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#57 Nick Reinicke LB Western Illinois FCS 78 2 18 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.0 TFL
#58 Tristan Lennon LB Charleston Southern FCS 78 3 19 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 2.5 TFL
#59 Zach Smith LB Weber State FCS 78 3 10 tkl
#60 Malachi Boadi-Aboagye LB St. Thomas-Minnesota FCS 78 3 8 tkl · 1.5 TFL
#64 Tye Niekamp LB Illinois State FCS 77 2 14 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 4.0 TFL
#69 Jacob Perez LB Idaho State FCS 77 3 24 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 2.5 TFL
#70 Ashtyn Williams LB Central Arkansas FCS 77 3 28 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 2.0 TFL
#72 Spencer Rich LB None FCS 77 3 27 tkl · 1.0 TFL
#73 Jyarius Carter LB Mercer FCS 76 3 23 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 0.5 TFL
#75 Beckham Dee LB Lafayette FCS 76 2 16 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.5 TFL
#76 Donovan Jones LB Texas Southern FCS 76 3 22 tkl · 2.5 TFL
#80 Steve Zayachkowsky LB Charleston Southern FCS 76 3 22 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 3.0 TFL
#86 Javario Tinch LB Wofford FCS 75 3 17 tkl · 1.5 TFL
#89 Gerard Culotta LB Tarleton State FCS 75 3 17 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 4.5 TFL
#90 Spencer Conn LB Samford FCS 75 3 23 tkl · 2.5 TFL
#91 John Robinson LB Alabama A&M FCS 75 3 31 tkl · 1.5 TFL
#92 Wade Abrams LB South Dakota FCS 75 3 23 tkl · 2.0 TFL
#93 Donovan Woolen LB North Dakota State FCS 75 3 22 tkl
#94 Peyton Wing LB Montana FCS 75 3 13 tkl · 2.5 TFL
#96 Kennon Loftin LB Nicholls FCS 74 3 24 tkl
#98 Cahari Haynes LB Gardner-Webb FCS 74 3 23 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.0 TFL
#100 Adam Due LB Holy Cross FCS 74 3 27 tkl · 1.5 TFL
#103 Christian Barney LB Incarnate Word FCS 74 2 18 tkl · 1.0 TFL
#104 Trace Carter LB SE Louisiana FCS 74 3 23 tkl
#105 Aidan Foster LB Howard FCS 74 3 19 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 1.0 TFL

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.