BallKnowMe college football, by the numbers

Player ratings 2025 season

These are 2025 grades, not 2026.

2026 hasn’t been played and no source has published 2026 rosters yet, so there is nothing to grade for this year. Showing last season’s number as if it described this year’s team would be guessing. These update once real rosters and real games arrive.

All positions QB RB WR TE OL DL LB DB K P All D1 FBS FCS
Pos rankPlayerPosSchool GradeG2025 season
#1 Jared Richardson WR Pennsylvania FCS 99 10 80 rec · 1,033 yds · 12 TD
#2 Skyler Bell WR UConn FBS 99 12 101 rec · 1,278 yds · 13 TD
#3 Nico Brown WR Yale FCS 96 10 71 rec · 1,085 yds · 11 TD
#4 Danny Scudero WR San José State FBS 95 12 88 rec · 1,291 yds · 10 TD
#5 Makai Lemon WR USC FBS 94 12 79 rec · 1,156 yds · 11 TD
#6 Jeremiah Smith WR Ohio State FBS 93 12 80 rec · 1,086 yds · 11 TD
#7 Eric McAlister WR TCU FBS 92 11 64 rec · 1,121 yds · 10 TD
#8 Treyvhon Saunders WR Colgate FCS 91 6 50 rec · 700 yds · 6 TD
#9 Jackson Harris WR Hawai'i FBS 91 10 49 rec · 963 yds · 12 TD
#10 Camden Brown WR Georgia Southern FBS 90 12 63 rec · 1,049 yds · 14 TD
#11 Easton Messer WR Florida Atlantic FBS 90 12 104 rec · 1,052 yds · 6 TD
#12 Josh Derry WR Monmouth FCS 89 12 73 rec · 1,101 yds · 13 TD
#13 Beau Sparks WR Texas State FBS 89 12 80 rec · 1,113 yds · 9 TD
#14 Elijah Sarratt WR Indiana FBS 88 10 51 rec · 687 yds · 12 TD
#15 Denzel Boston WR Washington FBS 88 10 56 rec · 755 yds · 10 TD
#16 Malachi Toney WR Miami FBS 88 12 84 rec · 970 yds · 7 TD
#17 Carnell Tate WR Ohio State FBS 87 10 48 rec · 838 yds · 9 TD
#18 Junior Vandeross III WR Toledo FBS 87 12 75 rec · 947 yds · 11 TD
#19 Jordyn Tyson WR Arizona State FBS 87 9 61 rec · 711 yds · 8 TD
#20 Chris Bell WR Louisville FBS 86 11 72 rec · 917 yds · 6 TD
#21 Samuel Gbatu Jr. WR UC Davis FCS 86 12 64 rec · 1,070 yds · 11 TD
#22 Daniel Sobkowicz WR Illinois State FCS 86 12 65 rec · 842 yds · 14 TD
#23 Chris Brazzell II WR Tennessee FBS 86 12 62 rec · 1,017 yds · 9 TD
#24 Evan James WR Furman FCS 86 9 65 rec · 796 yds · 7 TD
#25 Jacob De Jesus WR California FBS 85 12 99 rec · 892 yds · 5 TD
#26 Wyatt Young WR North Texas FBS 85 13 63 rec · 1,209 yds · 10 TD
#27 Jalen Walthall WR Incarnate Word FCS 85 10 70 rec · 847 yds · 8 TD
#28 Josh Cameron WR Baylor FBS 85 12 69 rec · 872 yds · 9 TD
#29 KJ Duff WR Rutgers FBS 84 12 60 rec · 1,084 yds · 7 TD
#30 Kolbe Katsis WR Northern Arizona FCS 84 12 60 rec · 1,016 yds · 10 TD
#31 Chase Hendricks WR Ohio FBS 84 11 67 rec · 950 yds · 7 TD
#32 Amare Thomas WR Houston FBS 84 12 59 rec · 906 yds · 10 TD
#33 Marquis Buchanan WR Rhode Island FCS 84 14 78 rec · 1,337 yds · 8 TD
#34 Ted Hurst III WR Georgia State FBS 83 11 71 rec · 1,004 yds · 6 TD
#35 Isaiah Sategna III WR Oklahoma FBS 83 12 65 rec · 948 yds · 7 TD
#36 Geoffrey Jamiel WR Lehigh FCS 83 12 73 rec · 1,067 yds · 8 TD
#37 Omar Cooper Jr. WR Indiana FBS 83 12 58 rec · 804 yds · 11 TD
#38 James Tyre WR Western Carolina FCS 83 12 68 rec · 832 yds · 11 TD
#39 Tony Diaz WR — FCS 83 12 67 rec · 881 yds · 11 TD
#40 Malachi Henry WR Central Arkansas FCS 82 12 69 rec · 889 yds · 10 TD
#41 KC Concepcion WR Texas A&M FBS 82 12 57 rec · 886 yds · 9 TD
#42 Ivan Hoyt WR Davidson FCS 82 11 60 rec · 842 yds · 10 TD
#43 Iverson Hooks WR UAB FBS 82 12 72 rec · 927 yds · 7 TD
#44 Jordan Hudson WR SMU FBS 82 10 56 rec · 749 yds · 6 TD
#45 Kylon Harris WR Stephen F. Austin FCS 82 14 86 rec · 1,068 yds · 10 TD
#46 Duce Robinson WR Florida State FBS 82 12 56 rec · 1,081 yds · 6 TD
#47 Cooper Barkate WR Duke FBS 82 13 68 rec · 1,069 yds · 6 TD
#48 Max Tomczak WR Youngstown State FCS 81 13 70 rec · 1,021 yds · 8 TD
#49 Joey Isabella WR Duquesne FCS 81 12 63 rec · 839 yds · 11 TD
#50 Randall King WR Campbell FCS 81 8 59 rec · 689 yds · 5 TD

What this grade is. Box-score production, adjusted for who it came against, shrunk toward the positional average when a player has few games, then ranked within position — so 50 is average for that spot and 85+ is elite. A 90 quarterback and a 90 corner are each elite for their position; the numbers aren’t comparable across positions in any other way.

What it isn’t. It has no charting or play-by-play grading behind it, so it rewards production rather than technique — a back on a run-heavy team gets more chances to produce than an equally good back who touches it half as often. Offensive line grades are team-inferred: college football publishes no individual OL box stats anywhere, so those rows carry the team’s offensive rating and are flagged, not a measurement of the player. Kickers and punters are graded on volume-light stats and are the least reliable.