← All Teams
TENN
Tennessee
VolunteersRun-HeavySoutheastern Conference1-0#35 (+5.32)
Early-season ratings are provisional. Opponent adjustment relies on a thin schedule graph until teams are connected through more games; expect movement through late September.
Grades
Percentile grades against every FBS team this season — 99 is best. Curved so an average team reads C, not F.
74· BOverall
Offense
64· CRating
68· CPer play
77· BConsistency
85· BBig plays
Defense
81· BRating
89· BPer play
83· BConsistency
Situational
81· BRed-zone O
57· C3rd down O
31· D3rd down D
Analytical Fingerprint
SS-native team profile — opponent-adjusted and garbage-filtered EPA, success, and explosiveness.
Opp-Adj Offense
+0.011
Opp-Adj Defense
+0.057
higher = better
Offensive EPA/play
+0.195
Defensive EPA/play
-0.500
lower = better
Off Success Rate
58.1%
Def Success Rate
34.5%
allowed · lower = better
Explosive Rate
29.5%
pass EPA > 1.0 · rush > 0.8
Explosive Allowed
0.0%
lower = better
Net EPA/play
+0.695
net · higher = better
Recent EPA Trend
0.000
last 3 weeks
Points / Drive
4.67
Special Teams
Opponent-adjusted special-teams component of the Final Rating, in expected points per game — positive = better. The four units sum to the net.
Net ST Rating
-0.31
expected pts/game
Kicking
+0.15
own kicking game
Kick Defense
-0.37
vs opponent kicks
Returns
-0.13
own return game
Return Defense
+0.04
vs opponent returns
Peer Context
Where Tennessee ranks among all FBS teams in 2026 (percentile).
Opp-adjusted offense54th
Opp-adjusted defense86th
Offensive EPA/play69th
Defensive EPA/play90th
Offensive success rate85th
Explosiveness86th
Defensive havoc98th
Points per drive77th
Historical Fingerprint
Most statistically similar team-seasons, 2017–2025, by the same 44-feature profile The Archive uses. Descriptive context, not a forecast.
1Toledo2023OA +0.030 / +0.045similar: defensive success rate, defensive EPA, offensive EPA3692Texas A&M2024OA +0.023 / +0.028similar: turnover rate, rushing offense, defensive success rate3543Michigan2018OA +0.092 / +0.163similar: takeaway rate, defensive EPA, offensive EPA3494Notre Dame2018OA +0.118 / +0.129similar: defensive EPA, run defense, defensive success rate3485UTSA2023OA -0.019 / -0.006similar: rushing offense, takeaway rate, havoc rate346
2026 Schedule & Results
12 games
| Wk | Opponent | Score | W/L | Spread | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | vs Furman | 56-9 | W | -48.5 | L | 66.5 | U |
| 2 | @ Georgia Tech | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 3 | vs Kennesaw State | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 4 | vs Texas | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 5 | vs Auburn | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 6 | @ Arkansas | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 7 | vs Alabama | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 8 | @ South Carolina | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 10 | vs Kentucky | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 11 | @ Texas A&M | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 12 | vs LSU | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 13 | @ Vanderbilt | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Betting Profile
ATS Record
0-1
0.0%
O/U Record
0-1
0.0%
Straight Up
1-0
100.0%
Home ATS0-1
Away ATS0-0
Favorite ATS0-1
Underdog ATS0-0
Last 5 ATS
L
Graded against consensus market lines (median across multiple sportsbooks). Games the market never lined — mostly early-season non-FBS matchups — are excluded from ATS and O/U records; individual games may grade differently than closing-line sources.
Situational Profile
Situational EPA percentile across 8 phases (the larger the shape, the more dominant). Within-FBS ranks.
| Situation | OFF EPA | OFF Rank | DEF EPA | DEF Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | +0.115 | 67th | -0.371 | 93th |
| Red Zone | +0.452 | 82th | - | 0th |
| Third Down | +0.190 | 58th | +0.155 | 31th |
| No Garbage Time | +0.195 | 72th | -0.500 | 93th |
| First Half | +0.195 | 71th | -0.500 | 91th |
| Second Half | -0.002 | 45th | -0.241 | 73th |
| Early Downs | +0.125 | 71th | -0.474 | 93th |
| Passing Downs | +0.224 | 63th | +0.051 | 36th |
| Standard Downs | +0.082 | 61th | -0.690 | 99th |
| Goal to Go | +0.361 | 55th | - | 0th |
Style & Tendencies
Pass 36.5%Rush 63.5%
Havoc/Game
24.0
Havoc Rate
40.7%
TO Margin
-2.0
Explosive/G
13.0
Yards/Game
638.0
Pts/Drive
4.67
3rd Down%
45.5%
3&Out%
0.0%
Team Statistics
2026 season totals across 1 games — Tennessee vs. the combined line of every opponent in those games.
| Stat | Tennessee | Opponents |
|---|---|---|
| Scoring | ||
| Points | 56 | 9 |
| Points / Game | 56.0 | 9.0 |
| First Downs | ||
| Total | 29 | 10 |
| Rushing | 15 | 9 |
| Passing | 13 | 0 |
| Penalty | 1 | 1 |
| Rushing | ||
| Attempts | 47 | 36 |
| Yards | 329 | 177 |
| Yards / Carry | 7.0 | 4.9 |
| Yards / Game | 329.0 | 177.0 |
| Touchdowns | 4 | 1 |
| Passing | ||
| Attempts | 27 | 22 |
| Completions | 21 | 11 |
| Completion % | 77.8% | 50.0% |
| Yards | 309 | 43 |
| Yards / Attempt | 11.4 | 2.0 |
| Touchdowns | 4 | 0 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 0 |
| Passer Rating | 222.80 | 66.42 |
| Total Offense | ||
| Plays | 74 | 58 |
| Yards | 638 | 220 |
| Yards / Play | 8.6 | 3.8 |
| Yards / Game | 638.0 | 220.0 |
| Punt Returns | ||
| Returns | 1 | 0 |
| Yards | 12 | 0 |
| Average | 12.0 | — |
| Touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Kickoff Returns | ||
| Returns | 2 | 3 |
| Yards | 43 | 51 |
| Average | 21.5 | 17.0 |
| Touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Punting | ||
| Punts | 2 | 8 |
| Yards | 89 | 333 |
| Average | 44.5 | 41.6 |
| Interception Returns | ||
| Returns | 0 | 0 |
| Yards | 0 | 0 |
| Touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
| Fumbles | ||
| Fumbles | 2 | 1 |
| Lost | 2 | 0 |
| Penalties | ||
| Penalties | 7 | 5 |
| Yards | 60 | 45 |
| Yards / Game | 60.0 | 45.0 |
| Time of Possession | ||
| Per Game | 32:02 | 27:51 |
| Third Downs | ||
| Attempts | 11 | 15 |
| Conversions | 5 | 4 |
| Conversion % | 45.5% | 26.7% |
| Fourth Downs | ||
| Attempts | 3 | 2 |
| Conversions | 2 | 0 |
| Conversion % | 66.7% | 0.0% |
| Red Zone | ||
| Trips | 4 | 0 |
| Scores (TD + FG) | 4 | 0 |
| Score % | 100.0% | — |
| Touchdowns | 4 | 0 |
| TD % | 100.0% | — |
| Field Goals | ||
| Attempts | 0 | 1 |
| Made | 0 | 1 |
| Pct | — | 100.0% |
| PAT Kicking | ||
| Attempts | 8 | 0 |
| Made | 8 | 0 |
| Pct | 100.0% | — |
| Two-Point Conversions | ||
| Attempts | 0 | 1 |
| Made | 0 | 0 |
Official-stats conventions: rushing includes sacks as negative attempts (NCAA), so Total Offense = rush + pass. Red-zone Score % counts touchdowns and field goals per trip.