UTEP
University of Texas at El Paso · 2026 · Mountain West
UTEP is 1-1 and ranked 136th in overall efficiency. Their 120th-ranked offense is the engine, backed by a 138th-ranked defense. They run the ball on 57% of offensive plays with a 106th-ranked rushing attack and pass the ball on the remaining 43% of plays with an 85th-ranked passing attack.
Quadrant record
By opponent strength, adjusted for where the game was played.
Projected wins
Per-game win probabilities combined across the full schedule.
The resume
Every game on the schedule. Click a row for the game breakdown (played) or the matchup projection (upcoming).
| Wk | Opponent | Conf | Opp rank | Result | Exp. margin | Win prob | GameScore | Quad |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | @ Oklahoma | SEC | #15 | L 0–51 | -42.2 | 0% | -32.7 | Q1 |
| 2 | vs Texas Southern | SWAC | — | W 51–10 | +15.5 | 100% | -18.3 | Q4 |
| 3 | @ Michigan | Big Ten | #17 | Preview | -40.6 | 1% | — | Q1 |
| 4 | vs Oregon State | Pac-12 | #83 | Preview | -16.3 | 17% | — | Q4 |
| 5 | @ New Mexico | Mountain West | #61 | Preview | -27.9 | 5% | — | Q3 |
| 6 | vs Nevada | Mountain West | #114 | Preview | -8.5 | 31% | — | Q4 |
| 7 | vs San José State | Mountain West | #124 | Preview | -4.6 | 39% | — | Q4 |
| 9 | @ North Dakota State | Mountain West | #40 | Preview | -32.0 | 3% | — | Q2 |
| 10 | vs Hawai'i | Mountain West | #116 | Preview | -6.7 | 35% | — | Q4 |
| 11 | vs Wyoming | Mountain West | #132 | Preview | -0.6 | 48% | — | Q4 |
| 12 | @ Air Force | Mountain West | #95 | Preview | -18.9 | 13% | — | Q4 |
| 13 | @ Northern Illinois | Mountain West | #129 | Preview | -7.5 | 33% | — | Q4 |
2 played · 1-1. Expected margin and gamescore use the latest ratings — a completed game shows what the model would say now, not that week.
The season
The model’s read on UTEP, recomputed after every week. Toggle between overall, offensive, and defensive efficiency (each with a dot for that week’s game) or the FanBoardHQ CFP rank.
Passing & rushing
Opponent-adjusted, FBS-only. The bar is the blended Eff rank — EPA/play (scoring value), success rate (staying on schedule), and yards/play (explosiveness), each standardized against the FBS field. The three ranks below each bar are those components, so you can see what's driving it.
Their offense vs. what their defense allows.
Scored vs. allowed, all regular-season games.
What kind of team is this?
Every team by offensive and defensive efficiency (points/game vs. an average team, higher is better on both). Click a dot for that team.
Field position 110th · Finishing 119th
Field position 138th · Finishing 122nd
2.04 points per drive on offense, 2.35 allowed — starting, on average, at their own 32.
Play-calling & efficiency
What the offense did, by quarter and by down — raw, not opponent-adjusted.
| Quarter (att.) | Pass / rush | Success | Yd/play |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q1(16) | 38% / 63% | 50% | 9.6 |
| Q2(34) | 44% / 56% | 41% | 3.9 |
| Q3(32) | 41% / 59% | 44% | 5.2 |
| Q4(24) | 38% / 63% | 50% | 9.4 |
| Down (att.) | Avg. to go | Success | Yd/play |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st(17) | 9.9 | 53% | 8.5 |
| 2nd(9) | 6.2 | 67% | 5.4 |
| 3rd(14) | 7.8 | 36% | 5.1 |
| 4th(3) | 5.3 | 33% | 2.7 |
| All (43) | — | 49% | 6.4 |
| Down (att.) | Avg. to go | Success | Yd/play |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st(28) | 10.1 | 46% | 6.1 |
| 2nd(26) | 7.1 | 42% | 7.3 |
| 3rd(8) | 4.4 | 25% | 4.3 |
| 4th(1) | 3.0 | 100% | 10.0 |
| All (63) | — | 43% | 6.4 |
UTEP, all games.