University of Washington Offensive Rate Stats - Big10 Conference Games Only
This is something I like to look at each year to see how UW compares to the rest of the conference as well as what the YoY trending looks like. I look at conference only games (including the B10 title game) to eliminate the noise of non-conference play and with the way that the Big10 set up the 5-year schedule rotation, these schedules should generally be fairly representative year after year.
The format for each stat will be the same (Conference Rank, UW-2025, YoY, B10 average, B10 #'s for CFP teams) …
OFFENSIVE STATS
Yards per Carry
Conference Rank: 12th
2025 UW: 4.12
2024 UW: 3.62; +14% YoY
B10 Avg: 4.26
B10 CFP Teams: Indiana (4.99 - 3rd); Ohio St (4.43 - 8th); Oregon (5.38 - 1st)
Yards per Pass Attempt
Conference Rank: 7th
2025 UW: 7.89
2024 UW: 7.29; +8% YoY
B10 Avg: 7.15
B10 CFP Teams: Indiana (9.56 - 1st); Ohio St (8.94 - 2nd); Oregon (8.17 - 5th)
Yards per Pass Completion
Conference Rank: 6th
2025 UW: 11.47
2024 UW: 10.38; +10% YoY
B10 Avg: 11.11
B10 CFP Teams: Indiana (13.44 - 2nd); Ohio St (11.43 - 7th); Oregon (11.26 - 8th)
Yards per Offensive Play
Conference Rank: 6th
2025 UW: 5.89
2024 UW: 5.45; +8% YoY
B10 Avg: 5.58
B10 CFP Teams: Indiana (6.79 - 1st); Ohio St (6.49 - 4th); Oregon (6.60 - 2nd)
Points per Game
Conference Rank: 7th
2025 UW: 26.4
2024 UW: 20.7; +28% YoY
B10 Avg: 24.2
B10 CFP Teams: Indiana (38.9 - 1st); Ohio St (33.3 - 2nd); Oregon (32.1 - 3rd)
Points per 100 Yards of Offense (Efficiency Metric)
Conference Rank: 9th
2025 UW: 7.07
2024 UW: 5.87; +20% YoY
B10 Avg: 6.82
B10 CFP Teams: Indiana (8.90 - 2nd); Ohio St (8.01 - 4th); Oregon (7.49 - 6th)
Plays per Turnover
Conference Rank: 14th
2025 UW: 48
2024 UW: 58; -18% YoY
B10 Avg: 63
B10 CFP Teams: Indiana (92 - 3rd); Ohio St (107 - 2nd); Oregon (65 - 6th)
Comments
-
Quick Analysis (High-Level)
The big area of emphasis going into the year was how the impact of an improved OL (both in talent and depth) as well as having healthy TEs would help in sustaining the run game and in the red zone. Both metrics saw substantial YoY increases versus the 2024 team.
While the run game showed improvement in 2025, the conference ranking (12th) and the questionable ability to run against the top end defenses in the conference and also highlighted the continued need for depth improvements as the run game struggled when injuries hit. The other big area where the run game leaves a bad taste in the mouth for the season is the performance at Wisconsin in the elements as in a game where the weather (and injuries made the passing game a challenge), Washington was unable to establish a consistent run against a Top 6 rushing defense in the conference (in contrast, Wisconsin was dead last in the conference in completion % and the only games where it didn't get gashed were either weather games or Iowa).
The impact of Demond on the run game is something that I think is difficult to completely pinpoint for 2 key reasons:
- Impact of sacks: Demond didn't take a ton of sacks (21 in 9 conference games) but when you back out the yardage lost on those sacks (116 yards, 5.5 yards lost per sack), the rushing yards per carry bumps up to 4.8 yards per carry (a far more palpable number)
- Impact of short scrambles: Demond has a tendency to tuck the ball and run when either the pocket breaks down or he can't find anybody open instead of throwing the ball away. I haven't researched the numbers for the number of shortish runs made in those situations that suppress rushing averages (byproduct is that it also inflates completion % and passing rate stats).
Despite the struggles in the passing game that we all saw this year, I was a bit surprised to see that all rate stats were actually improved by 8-10% vs 2024. What makes this surprising to me is that if you think back to the 2024 UW team, there were 3 accomplished WR options (Boston, Giles, Hunter) as well as 2 TE options (Latu and DeGraaf). For 2025, you only had Boston and DeGraaf returning and really only Roebuck stepping up and filling the gap. The one metric that took a slight step back in the passing game was completion % dropping from 70.2% to 68.8% … I wouldn't consider that very material.
The passing game becomes a significant area of focus in this offseason and an area where there's room for significant growth in 2026. Against good teams there wasn't a significant threat of defenses being beat in the passing game and the overall youth at the WR position while showing great promise also had a hand in the inconsistencies in the passing game.
The other big area of improvement for UW in 2026 is in protecting the football better. Big picture, the conference average is that teams turn the ball over just over 1x per game in conference play. It's a relatively conservative conference where defense and field position are huge factors - average scoring is at 24 points per game. This isn't to say that Washington is terrible at protecting the football … but it needs to find ways to get better and obviously a lot of that is going to be on the shoulders of Demond. Turnovers was a big story in many of the losses this year.
This will also hold true for the defensive stats (which I'll post later) … but there is a clear tier level to the B10 and its rate stats. When UW joined the B10 I think everybody viewed the conference and those with a path to CFP success being Ohio St, Michigan, Penn St, Oregon, UW, and USC. Indiana with Cignetti has pushed themselves into that group and we'll see what happens with Penn St. There is generally a clear consensus with the same programs dominating the Top 6 or 7 spots in the conference rankings. The good news is UW is in that group this year. The bad news is that UW is at the bottom of that group. However, given the rebuild that was on the table after the 2023 season and the program made from 2024 to 2025 … the numbers are suggesting that UW is moving in the right direction and will be knocking at those CFP levels in the relative near future.