Iowa · Week 2 analysis

Where the team stands

Iowa ranks No. 5 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of +17.29 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 1; this update moves it -4 places and -7.51 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 2 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 2–0. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: -0.783. Prior-season margin: +19.855.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0092; EPA/play net: +0.0554; success-rate net: +0.0321; explosiveness net: +0.6049. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 2 eligible games. Excluded games contribute no fabricated EP observation. Opponent results can move a rating even during a bye.

The result and the reconstructed expectation

Iowa beat Iowa State by 3 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of +24.26; the result was -21.26 points relative to that expectation.

This is a newly reconstructed forecast under the frozen EP model. It is not represented as a prediction published before the game, and it does not replace the original published grade.

Next scheduled test

The next scheduled opponent at this snapshot is Northern Iowa on 2026-09-19. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 284 versus 255; Net passing yards: 191 versus 117; Rushing yards: 93 versus 138; First downs: 13 versus 9

Completions–attempts: 21-30 versus 10-19; Rush attempts: 29 versus 34; Yards per pass: 6.4 versus 6.2; Yards per rush: 3.2 versus 4.1

Read production alongside workload: more attempts can raise a yardage total without raising efficiency. The model uses opponent-adjusted rate signals, not this box score alone.

Defense and possession

The opponent scored 13 points and recorded 255 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 0 versus 0; Tackles for loss: 3 versus 1; Third downs: 5-15 versus 4-13; Fourth downs: 0-1 versus 0-0

Turnovers: 0 versus 0; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 0 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 4-25 versus 6-45; Possession time: 29:42 versus 30:18

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 2–0. The expected final record is 10.4–1.6 over 12 scheduled games.

Expected wins add recorded results to the estimated win probabilities of remaining games. They are not a list of certain winners. Probabilities use a symmetric approximation from historical development residuals; independent calibration has not been established.

The comparison around the ranking

Nearby in this same snapshot: No. 4 Notre Dame (+18.78); No. 6 Alabama (+17.01).

PSR compares predictive strength rather than sorting teams by wins. A team can win and move down, or lose and move up, as its performance and opponents change the adjusted evidence.

How to read this assessment

This is a fresh assessment under the frozen EP model, using this period's eligible inputs. Earlier published releases remain preserved separately; the reconstructed archive is not presented as a prediction published before those games.

Scoring margin, prior-season margin, first-down efficiency, EPA per play, success rate and explosiveness contribute together. Correlated signals should not be interpreted as independent proof of an advantage, and a model disagreement with a betting line is not proof of profit.