Week 4 · FinalW
vs. Incarnate Word
63–10+53 margin
Pregame comparison unavailable
Game detailsSaturday Index
Loading team intelligenceBringing the latest verified football information into focus.
Saturday Index
Loading team intelligenceBringing the latest verified football information into focus.
Pac-12 · 2026 · Week 8
Photo: Rlmcentee · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Cropped for display
Up next · Week 9
Away
On the road at
Saturday, October 31 · 10:00 PM EDT
The season, taking shape
Final scores show Texas State first. Oldest to newest.
Pregame comparison unavailable
Game details
at San Diego StatePregame 28–27
Game details
vs. Colorado StatePregame comparison unavailable
Game detailsOriginal full-season forecast
This forecast retains the original probabilities for the full schedule. It does not update with completed results or this week’s forecast.
2026 results
Current record, team efficiency, player production, and verified results from completed games.
Current record
4-34 wins · 3 lossesThrough 7 completed gamesLoading player usage…
Original season forecast
The original Pac-12 forecast, retained alongside current results.
Pac-12 projected standing
#3
4-3 projected · 4.3 expected conference wins · #3 of 8.
Preseason baseline
2025 percentiles retained as preseason context; current results and player production lead this page.
2025 FBS percentile scale · 50 is average
Incoming class
National and conference recruiting ranks, confirmed commitments, and the highest-ranked recruits in this class.
Top committed recruits
Texas State2026 transfer movement
Incoming and outgoing transfer activity, with rated FBS-to-FBS moves below.
Incoming Transfers
Texas StateOutgoing Transfers
Texas StateSeason schedule
Completed games show final results. Upcoming games use this week’s forecast where available; later games retain their published season outlook.
Detailed football intelligence
The full team identity, offense, defense, and supporting evidence.
Team identity
Last season, Texas State tried to lean on the running game; the approach consistently kept the offense on schedule.
Why it matters
Neither offensive unit clearly carried the other, so first-down execution decides whether Texas State can stay on plan.
vs. Utah StatePregame 34–24
Game detailsPregame comparisons use preserved published forecasts. Results include wins and losses.
At a glance
Current form leads the outlook.
2026 rates aggregate verified completed-game box scores. EPA is expected points added per play.
| Player | C/ATT | YDS | TD | INT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brad Jackson | 119/175 | 1393 | 13 | 5 |
| Gavin Parkhurst | 8/9 | 114 | 1 | 0 |
| Player | CAR | YDS | AVG | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Torrance Burgess Jr. | 94 | 665 | 7.1 | 1 |
| Davian Jackson | 64 | 315 | 4.9 | 5 |
| Brad Jackson | 63 | 201 | 3.2 | 2 |
| Player | REC | YDS | AVG | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chris Dawn Jr. | 31 | 352 | 11.4 | 4 |
| Beau Sparks | 23 | 282 | 12.3 | 2 |
| Kylen Evans | 11 | 199 | 18.1 | 0 |
| Player | TOT | SOLO | TFL | SACK |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jayden Bradley | 40 | 20 | 0.5 | 0 |
| Ayden Jones | 34 | 16 | 4 | 0 |
| Terrence Cooks II | 33 | 10 | 3.5 | 0 |
Saturday, October 24 · Bobcat Stadium (TX)
Thursday, October 15 · Bobcat Stadium (TX)
Saturday, October 3 · Snapdragon Stadium
Profile high point
Big-play creation held the profile's highest percentile position.Profile low point
Big-play prevention held the lowest percentile position among the profile's strength measures.
The offense's down-to-down consistency is what Texas State can trust most.
Why it matters
That unit is the most credible foundation for sustaining drives after poor field position or an early negative play; defensive control remains the first counter an opponent should test.
Texas State did not show one unit opponents could treat as an automatic target; the defense's control of ordinary downs is only the first place to look.
What matters
Texas State's lowest-rated unit still finished near the national middle last season, so opponents do not have an obvious weakness to attack.
Texas State's best path is to lean on the running game, then keep both the pass and run available because neither part of the offense has to carry the plan alone; extra possessions give that plan time to build.
What matters
Texas State's run-first structure played at a fast pace. Passing finished top-tier and rushing finished strong, without a clear split between them.
Inside the team
Open a section for the football detail and supporting numbers.
The down-to-down question that determines whether the offense can keep both the run and pass available.
Opponents have to win first down before Texas State can keep both answers available.
What matters
Neither the pass nor run separated enough to become the only priority, so first-down execution is the real target.
The pace, play selection, and methods this offense uses to stay on schedule.
Texas State played at a fast pace in 2025.
Why it matters
More possessions give Texas State's strengths additional chances to build, but they also leave more time to recover from mistakes.
Texas State's prior passing record was top-tier.
Why it matters
A repeatable pass game can let Texas State punish loaded boxes without relying on low-frequency deep completions.
Texas State's prior rushing record was strong.
Why it matters
A sustainable run game keeps Texas State's play action credible and limits obvious passing situations.
Texas State's explosive-play upside came with real defensive volatility.
Why it matters
That mix can produce fast scoring swings in either direction and makes missed tackles or coverage busts especially expensive.
How consistently the offense creates manageable situations and the defense prevents them.
Texas State's offense was more consistent down to down than its defense.
Why it matters
Texas State's success rate shows whether it can sustain drives and get stops without relying on sacks, turnovers, or isolated big plays.
Opponent-adjusted EPA identifies the run game as Texas State's stronger offensive unit.
Why it matters
Forcing longer passing situations is the clearest way to move the offense away from its stronger adjusted unit.
Where the defense can create pressure, control the run, and end drives.
Texas State's prior defense was middle-of-the-pack overall and strongest in run front.
Why it matters
Opponents can use efficient throws to stay out of obvious passing downs; Texas State needs its run front to create long-yardage without overloading the box before that plan settles in.
Texas State's available disruption measures ranked in a strong national range last season; a charted pressure rate is not available.
Why it matters
Sustained disruption can create negative plays and give Texas State a better chance to end drives before third down.
Texas State created disruption more consistently than it finished sacks.
Why it matters
Texas State's disruption can hurry an offense; sacks do more by erasing field position and ending passing downs.
Texas State's prior run-defense results were strong.
Why it matters
A dependable run front can let Texas State create obvious passing downs without committing extra bodies to the box.
