Pocket Pickems
Pocket
Pickems
DashboardJT POLLResearch CenterLeaguesRelease 2
Log InSign Up
Menu+
DashboardJT POLLResearch CenterLeaguesRelease 2
Log InSign Up
CurrentWeekly HistorySeason OutlookHistorical Teams
Pocket Pickems
Pocket Pickems
College football, picked together.

Independent pick'em competition

Pocket Pickems
Pocket
Pickems
DashboardJT POLLResearch CenterLeaguesRelease 2
Log InSign Up
Menu+
DashboardJT POLLResearch CenterLeaguesRelease 2
Log InSign Up
2026 · Canonical snapshots

JT POLL ARCHIVE

How JT's view of college football changed week by week.

Selected archive

Snapshot Entering Week 6

Movement compares with Week 5

Available weeks
Week 4Week 5Week 6Week 7Week 8Week 9
Archived national board

Top 25

Rankings and team profiles are preserved from this canonical weekly publication. Movement reflects JT rank only.

Rank
1
—
Ohio State logo
Ohio State
Big Ten
Offense
82
Percentile
Defense
90
Percentile
Special Teams
49
2026 percentile
JT Rating
29.9
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #5
JT +4 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
52.0%
Early-down success
52.2%
Third-down success
46.7%
Yards/play
7.62
Explosive pass rate
16.7%
Explosive rush rate
11.5%
Sack allowed rate
5.5%

Defense

Success allowed
35.0%
Early-down success allowed
34.2%
Third-down success allowed
38.2%
Yards/play allowed
4.24
Explosive pass allowed
5.3%
Explosive rush allowed
10.2%
Sack generated
5.1%

Style

Pass rate
49.4%
Early-down pass rate
46.8%
Plays/drive
6.28

Model Details

JT Rating
29.87
Market Power
29.03
Model Adjustment
+0.84

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

Rank
2
▲ 1
Notre Dame logo
Notre Dame
FBS Independents
Offense
81
Percentile
Defense
96
Percentile
Special Teams
55
2026 percentile
JT Rating
29.7
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #3
JT +1 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
52.5%
Early-down success
54.2%
Third-down success
39.8%
Yards/play
6.86
Explosive pass rate
16.9%
Explosive rush rate
9.5%
Sack allowed rate
1.5%

Defense

Success allowed
34.8%
Early-down success allowed
32.0%
Third-down success allowed
38.3%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
3
▲ 3
Texas logo
Texas
SEC
Offense
34
Percentile
Defense
93
Percentile
Special Teams
37
2026 percentile
JT Rating
27.7
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #1
JT -2 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
45.5%
Early-down success
44.2%
Third-down success
48.9%
Yards/play
5.36
Explosive pass rate
7.9%
Explosive rush rate
13.8%
Sack allowed rate
8.2%

Defense

Success allowed
34.7%
Early-down success allowed
35.4%
Third-down success allowed
33.2%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
4
▼ 2
Georgia logo
Georgia
SEC
Offense
95
Percentile
Defense
95
Percentile
Special Teams
71
2026 percentile
JT Rating
26.9
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #2
JT -2 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
53.7%
Early-down success
52.6%
Third-down success
58.4%
Yards/play
7.84
Explosive pass rate
14.8%
Explosive rush rate
17.7%
Sack allowed rate
3.8%

Defense

Success allowed
33.7%
Early-down success allowed
32.4%
Third-down success allowed
37.3%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
5
▲ 2
Miami logo
Miami
ACC
Offense
97
Percentile
Defense
96
Percentile
Special Teams
42
2026 percentile
JT Rating
26.1
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #4
JT -1 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
56.7%
Early-down success
57.4%
Third-down success
49.5%
Yards/play
8.21
Explosive pass rate
17.2%
Explosive rush rate
17.7%
Sack allowed rate
3.8%

Defense

Success allowed
34.4%
Early-down success allowed
34.6%
Third-down success allowed
33.7%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
6
▼ 2
Indiana logo
Indiana
Big Ten
Offense
94
Percentile
Defense
98
Percentile
Special Teams
49
2026 percentile
JT Rating
25.5
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #7
JT +1 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
51.7%
Early-down success
50.9%
Third-down success
51.1%
Yards/play
7.95
Explosive pass rate
19.7%
Explosive rush rate
20.4%
Sack allowed rate
5.7%

Defense

Success allowed
31.0%
Early-down success allowed
31.1%
Third-down success allowed
29.1%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
7
▼ 2
Oregon logo
Oregon
Big Ten
Offense
73
Percentile
Defense
86
Percentile
Special Teams
51
2026 percentile
JT Rating
21.8
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #13
JT +6 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
46.3%
Early-down success
46.3%
Third-down success
49.4%
Yards/play
6.97
Explosive pass rate
16.3%
Explosive rush rate
13.4%
Sack allowed rate
4.8%

Defense

Success allowed
35.2%
Early-down success allowed
37.9%
Third-down success allowed
19.5%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
8
▲ 1
Alabama logo
Alabama
SEC
Offense
86
Percentile
Defense
87
Percentile
Special Teams
54
2026 percentile
JT Rating
21.3
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #6
JT -2 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
51.0%
Early-down success
50.6%
Third-down success
49.8%
Yards/play
7.27
Explosive pass rate
19.3%
Explosive rush rate
16.5%
Sack allowed rate
8.3%

Defense

Success allowed
35.0%
Early-down success allowed
35.8%
Third-down success allowed
28.0%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
9
▼ 1
LSU logo
LSU
SEC
Offense
81
Percentile
Defense
98
Percentile
Special Teams
47
2026 percentile
JT Rating
21.2
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #10
JT +1 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
49.1%
Early-down success
46.5%
Third-down success
55.2%
Yards/play
6.88
Explosive pass rate
15.1%
Explosive rush rate
14.0%
Sack allowed rate
3.5%

Defense

Success allowed
30.3%
Early-down success allowed
30.6%
Third-down success allowed
30.8%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
10
▲ 3
Florida logo
Florida
SEC
Offense
85
Percentile
Defense
57
Percentile
Special Teams
68
2026 percentile
JT Rating
19.4
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #16
JT +6 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
49.2%
Early-down success
48.6%
Third-down success
48.0%
Yards/play
7.19
Explosive pass rate
16.7%
Explosive rush rate
16.5%
Sack allowed rate
3.8%

Defense

Success allowed
42.1%
Early-down success allowed
40.8%
Third-down success allowed
42.8%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
11
▲ 1
Tennessee logo
Tennessee
SEC
Offense
38
Percentile
Defense
87
Percentile
Special Teams
61
2026 percentile
JT Rating
17.8
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #15
JT +4 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
45.3%
Early-down success
45.7%
Third-down success
38.6%
Yards/play
5.98
Explosive pass rate
8.3%
Explosive rush rate
18.8%
Sack allowed rate
10.0%

Defense

Success allowed
38.5%
Early-down success allowed
40.0%
Third-down success allowed
35.9%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
12
▲ 4
Ole Miss logo
Ole Miss
SEC
Offense
77
Percentile
Defense
25
Percentile
Special Teams
40
2026 percentile
JT Rating
17.8
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #9
JT -3 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
52.7%
Early-down success
53.1%
Third-down success
41.4%
Yards/play
6.61
Explosive pass rate
10.1%
Explosive rush rate
15.5%
Sack allowed rate
2.4%

Defense

Success allowed
46.1%
Early-down success allowed
45.4%
Third-down success allowed
48.1%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
13
▲ 1
Oklahoma logo
Oklahoma
SEC
Offense
25
Percentile
Defense
98
Percentile
Special Teams
56
2026 percentile
JT Rating
17.2
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
40.8%
Early-down success
40.7%
Third-down success
40.4%
Yards/play
5.60
Explosive pass rate
14.4%
Explosive rush rate
7.9%
Sack allowed rate
6.2%

Defense

Success allowed
31.0%
Early-down success allowed
31.7%
Third-down success allowed
25.2%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
14
▲ 8
Texas Tech logo
Texas Tech
Big 12
Offense
65
Percentile
Defense
69
Percentile
Special Teams
35
2026 percentile
JT Rating
17.1
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #11
JT -3 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
47.9%
Early-down success
48.3%
Third-down success
44.9%
Yards/play
6.13
Explosive pass rate
9.9%
Explosive rush rate
18.2%
Sack allowed rate
5.1%

Defense

Success allowed
37.5%
Early-down success allowed
37.2%
Third-down success allowed
40.3%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
15
▼ 5
USC logo
USC
Big Ten
Offense
87
Percentile
Defense
59
Percentile
Special Teams
52
2026 percentile
JT Rating
16.3
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #19
JT +4 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
51.5%
Early-down success
50.9%
Third-down success
50.0%
Yards/play
6.67
Explosive pass rate
14.1%
Explosive rush rate
15.1%
Sack allowed rate
2.6%

Defense

Success allowed
42.0%
Early-down success allowed
42.7%
Third-down success allowed
36.5%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
16
▼ 5
Texas A&M logo
Texas A&M
SEC
Offense
29
Percentile
Defense
58
Percentile
Special Teams
36
2026 percentile
JT Rating
15.7
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
43.2%
Early-down success
42.9%
Third-down success
42.2%
Yards/play
4.95
Explosive pass rate
5.8%
Explosive rush rate
14.9%
Sack allowed rate
5.1%

Defense

Success allowed
37.0%
Early-down success allowed
39.2%
Third-down success allowed
28.0%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
17
▼ 2
Penn State logo
Penn State
Big Ten
Offense
39
Percentile
Defense
84
Percentile
Special Teams
47
2026 percentile
JT Rating
14.7
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
42.3%
Early-down success
42.4%
Third-down success
38.5%
Yards/play
6.16
Explosive pass rate
14.5%
Explosive rush rate
8.6%
Sack allowed rate
3.9%

Defense

Success allowed
37.2%
Early-down success allowed
38.8%
Third-down success allowed
27.7%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
18
▲ 10
Missouri logo
Missouri
SEC
Offense
59
Percentile
Defense
81
Percentile
Special Teams
51
2026 percentile
JT Rating
13.2
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #14
JT -4 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
42.6%
Early-down success
42.0%
Third-down success
44.6%
Yards/play
6.57
Explosive pass rate
15.6%
Explosive rush rate
12.4%
Sack allowed rate
2.8%

Defense

Success allowed
35.7%
Early-down success allowed
35.7%
Third-down success allowed
33.7%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
19
▲ 12
Nebraska logo
Nebraska
Big Ten
Offense
87
Percentile
Defense
93
Percentile
Special Teams
51
2026 percentile
JT Rating
13.0
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
49.8%
Early-down success
49.0%
Third-down success
52.3%
Yards/play
6.87
Explosive pass rate
12.6%
Explosive rush rate
19.6%
Sack allowed rate
2.8%

Defense

Success allowed
34.9%
Early-down success allowed
35.7%
Third-down success allowed
26.2%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
20
▲ 1
Auburn logo
Auburn
SEC
Offense
37
Percentile
Defense
81
Percentile
Special Teams
64
2026 percentile
JT Rating
12.9
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
42.7%
Early-down success
41.3%
Third-down success
46.2%
Yards/play
5.81
Explosive pass rate
10.1%
Explosive rush rate
17.0%
Sack allowed rate
9.2%

Defense

Success allowed
39.5%
Early-down success allowed
39.3%
Third-down success allowed
34.1%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
21
▲ 2
Washington logo
Washington
Big Ten
Offense
27
Percentile
Defense
82
Percentile
Special Teams
50
2026 percentile
JT Rating
12.8
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
42.8%
Early-down success
45.2%
Third-down success
29.9%
Yards/play
6.28
Explosive pass rate
11.0%
Explosive rush rate
12.6%
Sack allowed rate
8.1%

Defense

Success allowed
37.2%
Early-down success allowed
38.5%
Third-down success allowed
31.0%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
22
▲ 2
Kansas State logo
Kansas State
Big 12
Offense
92
Percentile
Defense
90
Percentile
Special Teams
62
2026 percentile
JT Rating
12.5
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
52.3%
Early-down success
48.2%
Third-down success
66.4%
Yards/play
6.91
Explosive pass rate
10.3%
Explosive rush rate
19.7%
Sack allowed rate
0.0%

Defense

Success allowed
30.7%
Early-down success allowed
29.5%
Third-down success allowed
33.4%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
23
▲ 2
Iowa logo
Iowa
Big Ten
Offense
40
Percentile
Defense
91
Percentile
Special Teams
68
2026 percentile
JT Rating
12.4
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #20
JT -3 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
42.9%
Early-down success
43.1%
Third-down success
41.2%
Yards/play
6.15
Explosive pass rate
4.4%
Explosive rush rate
15.4%
Sack allowed rate
3.1%

Defense

Success allowed
35.4%
Early-down success allowed
36.1%
Third-down success allowed
33.8%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
24
▼ 7
Michigan logo
Michigan
Big Ten
Offense
17
Percentile
Defense
95
Percentile
Special Teams
60
2026 percentile
JT Rating
12.2
AP Poll · Week 6
AP NR
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
41.6%
Early-down success
41.5%
Third-down success
39.7%
Yards/play
5.33
Explosive pass rate
9.5%
Explosive rush rate
8.1%
Sack allowed rate
6.8%

Defense

Success allowed
33.2%
Early-down success allowed
32.6%
Third-down success allowed
33.4%
Yards/play allowed
Rank
25
▲ 4
Utah logo
Utah
Big 12
Offense
87
Percentile
Defense
95
Percentile
Special Teams
41
2026 percentile
JT Rating
11.8
AP Poll · Week 6
AP #12
JT -13 vs AP
Team Breakdown+

Offense

Success rate
51.2%
Early-down success
50.3%
Third-down success
54.2%
Yards/play
7.26
Explosive pass rate
13.2%
Explosive rush rate
16.4%
Sack allowed rate
2.4%

Defense

Success allowed
30.9%
Early-down success allowed
30.8%
Third-down success allowed
28.5%
Yards/play allowed
4.36
Explosive pass allowed
6.7%
Explosive rush allowed
5.6%
Sack generated
9.7%

Style

Pass rate
44.6%
Early-down pass rate
43.8%
Plays/drive
6.30

Model Details

JT Rating
29.71
Market Power
29.18
Model Adjustment
+0.53

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.43
Explosive pass allowed
6.5%
Explosive rush allowed
10.8%
Sack generated
10.1%

Style

Pass rate
48.1%
Early-down pass rate
42.9%
Plays/drive
6.59

Model Details

JT Rating
27.68
Market Power
27.69
Model Adjustment
0.00

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.32
Explosive pass allowed
5.8%
Explosive rush allowed
6.3%
Sack generated
7.5%

Style

Pass rate
47.4%
Early-down pass rate
43.7%
Plays/drive
5.01

Model Details

JT Rating
26.95
Market Power
26.35
Model Adjustment
+0.59

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.30
Explosive pass allowed
6.0%
Explosive rush allowed
6.1%
Sack generated
8.9%

Style

Pass rate
48.5%
Early-down pass rate
45.0%
Plays/drive
5.91

Model Details

JT Rating
26.10
Market Power
25.36
Model Adjustment
+0.74

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.55
Explosive pass allowed
10.5%
Explosive rush allowed
5.1%
Sack generated
11.0%

Style

Pass rate
38.8%
Early-down pass rate
33.6%
Plays/drive
5.88

Model Details

JT Rating
25.47
Market Power
25.78
Model Adjustment
-0.31

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.25
Explosive pass allowed
11.9%
Explosive rush allowed
6.3%
Sack generated
5.7%

Style

Pass rate
54.6%
Early-down pass rate
48.9%
Plays/drive
5.85

Model Details

JT Rating
21.79
Market Power
21.60
Model Adjustment
+0.20

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.40
Explosive pass allowed
15.5%
Explosive rush allowed
7.7%
Sack generated
9.6%

Style

Pass rate
45.7%
Early-down pass rate
41.8%
Plays/drive
5.70

Model Details

JT Rating
21.31
Market Power
20.41
Model Adjustment
+0.91

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.18
Explosive pass allowed
9.9%
Explosive rush allowed
10.0%
Sack generated
14.0%

Style

Pass rate
45.5%
Early-down pass rate
41.8%
Plays/drive
6.56

Model Details

JT Rating
21.23
Market Power
21.00
Model Adjustment
+0.24

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.75
Explosive pass allowed
10.7%
Explosive rush allowed
10.5%
Sack generated
6.8%

Style

Pass rate
44.1%
Early-down pass rate
41.6%
Plays/drive
6.06

Model Details

JT Rating
19.38
Market Power
20.56
Model Adjustment
-1.18

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.99
Explosive pass allowed
5.1%
Explosive rush allowed
18.3%
Sack generated
13.8%

Style

Pass rate
39.6%
Early-down pass rate
40.0%
Plays/drive
5.80

Model Details

JT Rating
17.83
Market Power
18.11
Model Adjustment
-0.28

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

6.05
Explosive pass allowed
13.8%
Explosive rush allowed
11.6%
Sack generated
4.9%

Style

Pass rate
59.2%
Early-down pass rate
58.3%
Plays/drive
6.05

Model Details

JT Rating
17.83
Market Power
18.28
Model Adjustment
-0.45

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.41
Explosive pass allowed
9.2%
Explosive rush allowed
10.0%
Sack generated
14.1%

Style

Pass rate
48.7%
Early-down pass rate
43.1%
Plays/drive
5.33

Model Details

JT Rating
17.17
Market Power
18.31
Model Adjustment
-1.14

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.21
Explosive pass allowed
6.2%
Explosive rush allowed
15.3%
Sack generated
5.3%

Style

Pass rate
45.9%
Early-down pass rate
43.1%
Plays/drive
5.58

Model Details

JT Rating
17.11
Market Power
18.26
Model Adjustment
-1.15

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

6.09
Explosive pass allowed
11.3%
Explosive rush allowed
11.3%
Sack generated
6.6%

Style

Pass rate
50.2%
Early-down pass rate
48.5%
Plays/drive
7.08

Model Details

JT Rating
16.27
Market Power
17.31
Model Adjustment
-1.04

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

6.12
Explosive pass allowed
14.8%
Explosive rush allowed
12.7%
Sack generated
4.5%

Style

Pass rate
46.0%
Early-down pass rate
44.0%
Plays/drive
6.39

Model Details

JT Rating
15.66
Market Power
14.73
Model Adjustment
+0.93

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.04
Explosive pass allowed
5.0%
Explosive rush allowed
13.6%
Sack generated
5.5%

Style

Pass rate
47.6%
Early-down pass rate
44.1%
Plays/drive
5.59

Model Details

JT Rating
14.72
Market Power
15.70
Model Adjustment
-0.97

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.09
Explosive pass allowed
10.1%
Explosive rush allowed
14.3%
Sack generated
8.2%

Style

Pass rate
46.5%
Early-down pass rate
39.5%
Plays/drive
5.30

Model Details

JT Rating
13.25
Market Power
12.87
Model Adjustment
+0.38

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.03
Explosive pass allowed
8.0%
Explosive rush allowed
12.3%
Sack generated
10.5%

Style

Pass rate
45.4%
Early-down pass rate
42.0%
Plays/drive
6.52

Model Details

JT Rating
13.04
Market Power
14.24
Model Adjustment
-1.20

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.95
Explosive pass allowed
10.5%
Explosive rush allowed
9.4%
Sack generated
8.5%

Style

Pass rate
52.8%
Early-down pass rate
49.8%
Plays/drive
6.07

Model Details

JT Rating
12.89
Market Power
13.80
Model Adjustment
-0.91

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

5.08
Explosive pass allowed
7.4%
Explosive rush allowed
12.6%
Sack generated
6.5%

Style

Pass rate
57.6%
Early-down pass rate
53.7%
Plays/drive
5.27

Model Details

JT Rating
12.75
Market Power
11.98
Model Adjustment
+0.77

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.65
Explosive pass allowed
8.7%
Explosive rush allowed
19.8%
Sack generated
11.9%

Style

Pass rate
47.8%
Early-down pass rate
45.7%
Plays/drive
6.49

Model Details

JT Rating
12.49
Market Power
12.87
Model Adjustment
-0.38

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.66
Explosive pass allowed
12.7%
Explosive rush allowed
5.0%
Sack generated
8.4%

Style

Pass rate
53.5%
Early-down pass rate
50.6%
Plays/drive
5.48

Model Details

JT Rating
12.35
Market Power
12.47
Model Adjustment
-0.12

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.42
Explosive pass allowed
7.9%
Explosive rush allowed
7.8%
Sack generated
8.6%

Style

Pass rate
43.2%
Early-down pass rate
40.0%
Plays/drive
5.63

Model Details

JT Rating
12.16
Market Power
13.40
Model Adjustment
-1.23

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.

4.11
Explosive pass allowed
4.2%
Explosive rush allowed
12.8%
Sack generated
6.4%

Style

Pass rate
44.7%
Early-down pass rate
45.2%
Plays/drive
5.78

Model Details

JT Rating
11.80
Market Power
11.49
Model Adjustment
+0.31

Model Adjustment shows how much the team's current underlying performance profile moves its rating above or below the market-power baseline.