In short: Ut Permian Basin Division II college football, 2026 season: 6-3 (Lone Star). Last game: W 20-10 vs Angelo St. on October 31, 2026. Next: vs Tex. A&m-Kingsville, November 14, 2026. Schedule and results, player season stats, stat leaders, unit grades, the CFB Pirate rating and projections.
The number to watch when Ut Permian Basin meets Tex. A&m-Kingsville is Ut Permian Basin's scoring. Ut Permian Basin averaged 45.8 points per game over its first 5 games (4-1), #5 in D-II in that timeframe. Over the stretch of 4 games that followed (2-2), the Falcons have averaged 19.0 points per game, a 59% drop, #124 in D-II in that window. The schedule has a lot to do with it: Ut Permian Basin's last 4 opponents have averaged 29.6 points per game, a #106 scoring defense in D-II on the season, against 41.6 points per game, #152 for the first 5. Measured against those opponents' norms (29.6 points per game), Ut Permian Basin scored 36% less than those defenses usually allow. Meanwhile, Tex. A&m-Kingsville's defense has struggled in recent weeks. The Javelinas have allowed 42.0 points per game over their last 4 games (1-3), #147 in D-II during that time. Those games came against some of the better offenses in D-II (38.1 points per game on the season, which would rank #16). Against those norms, Tex. A&m-Kingsville allowed 10% more than those offenses usually score. Both units come in looking to get right, and whichever does first may decide the game. Ut Permian Basin is 4-0 this season when it scores 35 or more, and 2-3 when it doesn't.
The turnover battle could decide Ut Permian Basin's next game, against Tex. A&m-Kingsville, and the recent returns favor Tex. A&m-Kingsville. Ut Permian Basin forced 3.8 takeaways per game over its first 5 games (4-1), #1 in D-II through those games. Over the stretch of 4 games that followed (2-2), the Falcons have forced 1.8 takeaways per game, a 54% drop, #45 in D-II through that stretch. The schedule has a lot to do with it: Ut Permian Basin's last 4 opponents have averaged 1.6 per game, a #102 offense in D-II on the season, against 1.9 per game, #129 for the first 5. Measured against those opponents' norms (1.6 per game), Ut Permian Basin forced 11% more turnovers than those offenses usually give up. By that measure, the early pace looks more like the outlier than the recent one. Meanwhile, Tex. A&m-Kingsville's ball security has been middle of the pack in recent weeks. The Javelinas have committed 1.5 giveaways per game over their last 4 games (1-3), #71 in D-II over that stretch. Those games came against a middle-of-the-pack set of defenses in D-II (1.5 per game on the season, which would rank #88). Tex. A&m-Kingsville offers Ut Permian Basin a fair measuring stick for whether the trend is real.
NOTES
The biggest worry in Ut Permian Basin's season has been the direction of its ground game. Ut Permian Basin averaged 5.6 yards per carry (759 yards on 136 rushes) over its first 4 games (3-1), #18 in D-II within that period. In the 5 games since that hot start (3-2), the Falcons have averaged 3.1 yards per carry (459 yards on 149 rushes), a 45% drop, #137 in D-II across those games. The schedule has a lot to do with it: Ut Permian Basin's last 5 opponents have averaged 4.3 yards per carry, a #84 run defense in D-II on the season, against 6.1 yards per carry, #156 for the first 4. Measured against those opponents' norms (4.3 yards per carry), Ut Permian Basin ran for 29% less per carry than those run defenses usually allow. On the season, Ut Permian Basin ranks #70 in D-II in rushing. Tex. A&m-Kingsville's run defense sits in the middle of the pack, #94 in D-II (4.4 yards per carry). Up front, CFB Pirate's line ratings give Ut Permian Basin the edge: Ut Permian Basin's offensive line grades +0.3 against Tex. A&m-Kingsville's front at -1.2 (stuffed runs, sacks and early-down success, opponent-adjusted).
Ut Permian Basin's defense from the opening weeks has gone missing since. The Falcons allowed 19.8 points per game over their first 6 games (5-1), #36 in D-II during those games. Over the stretch of 3 games that followed (1-2), Ut Permian Basin has allowed 30.0 points per game, a 51% rise, #103 in D-II during that period. The schedule has a lot to do with it: Ut Permian Basin's last 3 opponents have averaged 36.1 points per game, a #24 offense in D-II on the season, against 30.0 points per game, #61 for the first 6. Measured against those opponents' norms (36.1 points per game), Ut Permian Basin held those offenses 17% below what they usually score. By that measure, the early pace looks more like the outlier than the recent one. On the season, the Falcons rank #55 in D-II in scoring defense. It won't get any easier against Tex. A&m-Kingsville, whose offense ranks #40 in D-II (33.1 points per game). Ut Permian Basin is 6-0 this season when it holds opponents under 34, and 0-3 when it doesn't.
As the schedule has stiffened, Ut Permian Basin has been unable to get off the field. Ut Permian Basin allowed 34.4% of third downs (21-for-61) over its first 4 games (3-1), #48 in D-II during that stretch. In the 5 games since that hot start (3-2), the Falcons have allowed 45.9% of third downs (28-for-61), a 33% rise, #116 in D-II over that period. The schedule has a lot to do with it: Ut Permian Basin's last 5 opponents have averaged 48.4%, a #24 third-down offense in D-II on the season, against 38.7%, #96 for the first 4. Measured against those opponents' norms (48.4%), Ut Permian Basin held those offenses 5% below their usual third-down rate. By that measure, the early pace looks more like the outlier than the recent one. On the season, Ut Permian Basin ranks #80 in D-II in third-down defense. Tex. A&m-Kingsville's third-down offense sits in the middle of the pack, #86 in D-II (39.8%).
The Falcons allowed 3.1 yards per carry (667 yards on 215 rushes) over their first 6 games (5-1), #16 in D-II over that timeframe. Few teams started faster in this department, and few have cooled off as sharply since. Over the stretch of 3 games that followed (1-2), Ut Permian Basin has allowed 4.0 yards per carry (485 yards on 120 rushes), a 30% rise, #77 in D-II over that span. The schedule has a lot to do with it: Ut Permian Basin's last 3 opponents have averaged 5.1 yards per carry, a #36 rushing attack in D-II on the season, against 4.5 yards per carry, #59 for the first 6. Measured against those opponents' norms (5.1 yards per carry), Ut Permian Basin held those rushing attacks 20% below their usual yards per carry. By that measure, the early pace looks more like the outlier than the recent one. On the season, the Falcons rank #27 in D-II in run defense. Tex. A&m-Kingsville's ground game sits in the middle of the pack, #53 in D-II (4.7 yards per carry). Up front, CFB Pirate's line ratings call it close: Ut Permian Basin's front and Tex. A&m-Kingsville's offensive line grade out about even.
Something changed for Ut Permian Basin's third-down offense after its first 4 games. Ut Permian Basin converted 37.2% of third downs (16-for-43) over its first 4 games (3-1), #93 in D-II in that timeframe. In the 5 games since that hot start (3-2), the Falcons have converted 27.8% of third downs (15-for-54), a 25% drop, #147 in D-II in that window. The schedule has a lot to do with it: Ut Permian Basin's last 5 opponents have averaged 40.5%, a #84 third-down defense in D-II on the season, against 44.6%, #118 for the first 4. Measured against those opponents' norms (40.5%), Ut Permian Basin converted third downs 31% less often than those defenses usually allow. On the season, Ut Permian Basin ranks #137 in D-II in third-down offense. Tex. A&m-Kingsville's third-down defense sits in the middle of the pack, #100 in D-II (42.5%).
SCHEDULE STRENGTH
Ut Permian Basin has played a middle-of-the-road schedule in the pool so far (#66 of 160), and what is left is a middle-of-the-road slate (#59 of 132).
Schedule so far · 1 = hardest
#66 of 160
avg opponent rating -2.6 over 10 games · 2 vs top-25 D-II
Schedule ahead · 1 = hardest
#59 of 132
avg opponent rating +1.6 over 1 games · 0 vs top-25
@Utrgv L 0-44Western … W 69-14@Sul Ross… W 66-7@Eastern … W 56-10@Northeas… W 38-27@West Tex… W 24-17Western … L 19-38@Central … L 13-42Angelo S… W 20-10@Midweste…Tex. A&m…
Each bar is one opponent, placed by where its rating ranks in this pool (tall and red = top 10; short and green = bottom half). Hatched bars are games still to play; the dashed line is today.
Every player with a stat on file, listed only where he has one. Open the arrow beside a name for his game-by-game line. Stats through the Oct 31 game; last updated Nov 1; roster and numbers checked Sep 18.
Click a column heading to sort. MIN hides players below that many attempts.
PPG/OPP PPG use every played game on file. YPG/PLAYS-PER-GAME columns only ever come from games with a full box score on file, which can be a smaller sample than GP -- see the coverage note below when that's the case for this team.
Averages use only games with that number on file. SACKS ALW comes from the opponent's box score; TO FORCED is takeaways; TO MAR is takeaways minus giveaways, and its bottom cell is the season total. Dashes mean not on file.
UNIT INDEX
Pass Offense: grade 78.6/100 (+49 yds/gm vs average)
Rush Offense: grade 31.7/100 (-34 yds/gm vs average)
Pass Defense: grade 92.8/100 (-64 yds/gm vs average)
Rush Defense: grade 81.2/100 (-52 yds/gm vs average)
Unit grades: 0-100 league percentile, adjusted for the opponents faced.
OPPONENT TRACKER
(full explanation: Appendix, Note 2)
DATE
SITE
OPPONENT
THEIR RECORD
THEIR PPG
2026-11-07
at
MIDWESTERN ST.
7-2
44.3
2026-11-14
vs
TEX. A&M-KINGSVILLE
4-5
33.1
LAST YEAR
UPB finished 2025 at 11-3. Made the playoffs (4 postseason game(s) on file; exact round/result not available). Notable win: 37-24 over CSU PUEBLO (CSU PUEBLO finished 83% that season). Toughest loss: 28-31 to WESTERN ORE. (3-point margin).
• [CLUB] Ut Permian Basin has gone 15 straight games forcing 1+ turnover (November 1, 2025 through October 31, 2026), going 11-4 over that stretch, a school-record 15 straight in the 5 seasons on record.
• [CLUB] Ut Permian Basin has gone 5 straight games being held under 150 rushing yards (October 3, 2026 through October 31, 2026), going 3-2 over that stretch, matching the program record of 5 straight on record.
• [CLUB] Ut Permian Basin has gone 5 straight games being held under 6.0 yards per play (October 3, 2026 through October 31, 2026), going 3-2 over that stretch, matching the program record of 5 straight on record.
• [CLUB] Ut Permian Basin is 18-0 all time when scoring 40+ points in the games on file (18 such games).
• [CLUB] Ut Permian Basin has gone 8 straight games holding the opponent under 5.0 yards per carry (September 12, 2026 through October 31, 2026), going 6-2 over that stretch, the program's longest such streak since 2025 (12 games).
• [CLUB] Ut Permian Basin has allowed 90 points over its last 3 games (30.0 a game, October 17, 2026 through October 31, 2026) -- its 4th-highest 3-game total on record; the most is 106, from September 3, 2022 through September 17, 2022.
• [PLAYER] Mckyle So'oto has 42 tackles over his last 5 games (8.4 a game, October 3, 2026 through October 31, 2026) -- his most in a 5-game stretch on record.
• [PLAYER] Eli Leiataua has gone 2 straight games making 10 or more tackles, the longest such streak of his career.
• [PLAYER] Nicholas Butler has gone 2 straight games intercepting a pass, the longest such streak of his career.
• [PLAYER] Camden Tyler has never had a game rushing for 100+ yards for Ut Permian Basin, over a 42-game career on record. His career high is 95, set November 1, 2025 against Western N.m. (W, 66-7).
• [PLAYER] Cheno Navarrette has never had a game rushing for 100+ yards for Ut Permian Basin, over a 16-game career on record. His career high is 82, set September 26, 2026 against Eastern N.m. (W, 56-10).
• [PLAYER] Kendrick Jones has never had a game making 10 or more tackles for Ut Permian Basin, over a 38-game career on record. His career high is 8, set September 20, 2025 against Tex. A&m-kingsville (W, 43-30).
TALKING POINTS (15 storylines)
UPB HAS PERFORMED BEST THIS DATA SET WHEN...
• UPB holds its opponents under 7.0 yards per play (.709)
• UPB holds its opponents under 100 rushing yards (.957), and has won 15 straight when doing so
• UPB averages 6.0+ yards per play (.923), and has won 3 straight when doing so
UPB's defense has averaged 2.8 takeaways per game over their last 10 games. Their 58-game average is 1.9 takeaways per game. (+46%)
UPB's defense has averaged 30.0 points allowed per game over their last 3 games. Their 58-game average is 20.9 points allowed per game. (+43%)
UPB's defense has averaged 251.2 pass yards per game over their last 5 games. Their 58-game average is 182.9 pass yards per game. (+37%)
(moved to the Appendix, Data Export 1, to keep this section shorter -- the full spreadsheet-paste table is there unchanged)
APPENDIX
Full-length explanations and full-size data exports for the shortened notes and relocated tables referenced throughout this report, numbered in the order their pointers appear above.
Explanatory Notes
Note 1 -- SEASON OUTLOOK
Every remaining game is projected from schedule-adjusted ratings; already-played games carry their real result. Records are simulated distributions, not a single guess -- MOST LIKELY FINAL is the single most probable record and its own probability, PROJECTED RECORD is the season's expected win total expressed in record form (an average across every simulated outcome, so it can land on a fraction of a game).
Note 2 -- OPPONENT TRACKER -- why some cards have no record shown
Only meaningful for an opponent who is ALSO a tracked team in the library -- an opponent with no games on file here at all shows the date and site alone.
Note 3 -- MOST IMPORTANT NUMBERS -- how a number is scored
Every split this report computes is scored on how strong the number is and how much it sets this team apart from its opponent and the rest of the field, and the top 5 per team are listed. A condition needs at least 8 occurrences to count.
Full Data Exports
Data Export 1 -- TRENDS — TAB-SEPARATED (10 columns)
Where UT PERMIAN BASIN sits among 160 D2 teams on the two Unit Index composites -- Offense Grade 56.4, Defense Grade 86.6.
TURNOVER MARGIN / GAME: UT PERMIAN BASIN VS THE D2
UT PERMIAN BASIN ranks #6 of 160 D2 teams in turnover margin per game (1.22) -- a strength worth a look.
UT PERMIAN BASIN: SP STRENGTH INDEX BY SEASON
The program's index across 4 seasons on file -- -3.6 in 2022 to 9.9 in 2025.
These graphs were chosen by the program from this season's most notable numbers. Build your own -- any stat against any other, for any mix of teams, seasons or players, with a JPEG download -- in the Graph Builder.
2.11 points per offensive possession (122 possessions on file, 2026)
Late & close (4th quarter or later, within one score): 40.0% success rate, 5.0% explosive play rate (20 snaps)
Down & Distance
Plays
Play-Type Mix
1 & short
6
rush 67%, pass 33%
1 & medium
9
rush 56%, pass 33%, sack 11%
1 & long
249
pass 51%, rush 47%, sack 2%
2 & short
23
pass 70%, rush 30%
2 & medium
63
rush 51%, pass 48%, sack 2%
2 & long
98
pass 62%, rush 32%, sack 6%
3 & short
22
pass 50%, rush 45%, sack 5%
3 & medium
39
pass 82%, rush 15%, sack 3%
3 & long
48
pass 65%, rush 21%, sack 15%
4 & short
8
rush 75%, pass 25%
4 & medium
5
rush 60%, pass 40%
4 & long
6
pass 83%, rush 17%
GARBAGE TIME PROFILE
2 of 6 games on file this season hit garbage time
Average margin: -4.7 final vs. -4.7 before garbage time — this team plays about as close as the scoreboard shows (+0.0 pts/game)
Biggest swing: 21 points, vs. Eastern N.M. on 2026-09-26 (+46 final, +25 real)
See the Garbage Time Reality Check page for the full leaderboard. This is informational only — it never changes this team's ranking or projection elsewhere on the site.
Expected Points Added, averaged over every dropback (pass attempt or sack) that has a value on file. Positive means the play typically moved the team closer to scoring more than an average play in that situation would; negative means it cost expected points.
Inputs: Each play's EPA (from CFBD's own model for most FBS/FCS plays, or this project's own trained model for a smaller share of other games) averaged over the QB's dropbacks. The dropback count with an EPA value on file (not every play has one) is always shown alongside the rate, and boards require at least 20 such plays before a QB qualifies -- a thin sample was found live to distort rankings otherwise.
Passing Success Rate
The share of dropbacks that were 'successful' by a standard down-based yardstick, regardless of whether EPA is available for that play.
Inputs: Gained at least 50% of the yards needed on 1st down, 70% on 2nd, or the full distance (or a touchdown) on 3rd/4th -- computed from down, distance, yards gained and touchdown, all structured fields.
Rushing Success Rate
The same down-based success standard as passing success rate, applied to a player's carries.
Inputs: Down, distance, yards gained and touchdown on plays where this player was the ball carrier.
Receiving Success Rate
The same down-based success standard, applied to a player's targets (thrown to him, complete or not).
Inputs: Down, distance, yards gained and touchdown on plays where this player was the targeted receiver.
3rd Down Splits
How a player performed specifically on 3rd down plays this season -- success rate, touchdown rate, and the underlying counting stats, isolated from every other down.
Inputs: Every play on file where down = 3 and this player was involved (passer, rusher, receiver, or a tackle/sack/INT/fumble recovery on defense).
4th Down Splits
The same idea as 3rd Down Splits, isolated to 4th down plays -- the highest-leverage down in football.
Inputs: Every play on file where down = 4 and this player was involved.
Red Zone Splits
How a player performed once his team's offense (or the opponent's, for a defender) reached inside the 20-yard line.
Inputs: Every play on file within 20 yards of the goal line (`distance_to_goal <= 20`) this player was involved in. COVERAGE CAVEAT: true field position is only recorded for about a third of plays leaguewide, concentrated in FBS/FCS games -- a player whose games come from a source without it will show thin or missing red-zone splits even if he played plenty of red-zone snaps. This is a gap in the underlying play-by-play data, not a sign he didn't play there.
Final 2 Minutes of a Half
How a player performed in the last two minutes of either half -- the clock-management, high-pressure stretch at the end of the 2nd and 4th quarters.
Inputs: Every play on file in the 2nd or 4th quarter with 2:00 or less on the clock this player was involved in. Same field-position/clock coverage caveat as Red Zone Splits above -- roughly a third of plays leaguewide carry a usable clock reading, concentrated in FBS/FCS games.
What is "garbage time"?
A 7-tier rule (bigger lead required as the clock runs down) that flags plays happening in a game that is no longer competitive -- e.g. a 30+ point lead right after halftime, or a 12+ point lead inside the final 3 minutes.
Inputs: Quarter, game clock, and the score of both teams at the time of the play. Garbage-time plays are not thrown out -- they count for 35% of a normal play in every "garbage-time-adjusted" figure, so a player who pads stats once a game is decided shows up as such rather than being invisible.
Report Produced by ScorePirate | Commitment and offer data sourced from 247Sports | GENERATED
11/08/2026 17:34
