Kicker, Notre Dame (from South Carolina), 2020–24
Mitch Jeter
- Number
- No. 98
- Height
- 5′11″
- Weight
- 195 lb
- Class (2024)
- Senior
- Hometown
- Salisbury, NC
Mitch Jeter played kicker at South Carolina (2020–23) and Notre Dame (2024).
Career highs
4field goals, career highat Missouri, 2023Kicking
| Season | Team | FGM | FGA | Pct | Long | XP | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | South Carolina | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 2022 | South Carolina | 11 | 11 | 100.0 | 53 | 42 | 75 |
| 2023 | South Carolina | 12 | 14 | 85.7 | 51 | 33 | 69 |
| 2024 | Notre Dame | 13 | 21 | 61.9 | 49 | 54 | 93 |
| Career | 36 | 46 | 78.3 | 53 | 131 | 239 | |
Defense
| Season | Team | Tkl | Solo | TFL | Sacks | PD | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | South Carolina | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | South Carolina | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | South Carolina | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2024 | Notre Dame | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Career | 8 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Season lines from CollegeFootballData, regular season and bowls. A dash: the source has no number for that season (often an FCS season), and career totals count only the numbers on file.
On the roster
| Season | Team | No. | Pos | Class | Ht | Wt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | South Carolina | 98 | PK | RS | ||
| 2021 | South Carolina | 98 | PK | Fr. | ||
| 2022 | South Carolina | 98 | PK | So. | ||
| 2023 | South Carolina | 98 | PK | Jr. | ||
| 2024 | Notre Dame | 98 | PK | Sr. | 5′11″ | 195 |
As each season’s roster listed the player (CollegeFootballData). Classes before the latest listing are counted back from it; “Yr 1” is the year on file where that count can’t place a season he played (a redshirt, transfer or 2020 year); height and weight as last listed.
Per play
| Season | Team | Plays | EPA/play | Pctile | Median | Total | Usage | PAAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | South Carolina | – | – | – | – | – | – | 8.0 (11 att.) |
| 2023 | South Carolina | – | – | – | – | – | – | 5.4 (13 att.) |
| 2024 | Notre Dame | – | – | – | – | – | – | 1.7 (18 att.) |
Expected points added: how much the player’s plays moved the team’s expected score, per play and in total. Plays: total EPA divided by EPA per play, the plays the source credits to him (for a receiver roughly his catches and runs, not every target; for a passer, not every attempt), so it can differ from attempts plus carries. Percentile: against the position’s regulars that season across all divisions on file (quarterbacks with 150+ plays, backs 60+, receivers and tight ends 30+), with how many there were (n) and their median; a dash means too few plays to rank. A season in progress uses the full-season bar scaled by games played, never below 75 plays for quarterbacks, 30 for backs and 20 for receivers. The cohort grows or shrinks with the source’s coverage each season (2025 lists far more players), so compare percentiles rather than raw EPA across years. FCS seasons are marked. Usage: the share of the team’s plays the player was part of (shown from 20 plays). PAAR: points a kicker added above a replacement-level kicker, with his field-goal attempts. From CollegeFootballData, 2013 on.
Game by game
2024 Notre Dame 14 games, 13 of 21 field goals
| Date | Opponent | Result | FGM | FGA | Long | XP | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31 | at | W 23–13 | 3 | 3 | 46 | 2 | 11 |
| Sep 7 | vs. | L 14–16 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Sep 14 | at | W 66–7 | 1 | 1 | 42 | 7 | 10 |
| Sep 21 | vs. | W 28–3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Sep 28 | vs. | W 31–24 | 1 | 1 | 48 | 4 | 7 |
| Oct 12 | vs. | W 49–7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Nov 9 | vs. | W 52–3 | 1 | 2 | 28 | 7 | 10 |
| Nov 16 | vs. | W 35–14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Nov 23 | vs. | W 49–14 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| Nov 30 | at | W 49–35 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| Dec 20 ✦ | vs. | W 27–17 | 2 | 3 | 49 | 3 | 9 |
| Jan 2 ✦ | vs. | W 23–10 | 3 | 3 | 48 | 2 | 11 |
| Jan 9 ✦ | vs. | W 27–24 | 2 | 2 | 41 | 3 | 9 |
| Jan 20 ✦ | vs. | L 23–34 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
2023 South Carolina 12 games, 12 of 14 field goals
| Date | Opponent | Result | FGM | FGA | Long | XP | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2 | vs. | L 17–31 | 1 | 1 | 26 | 2 | 5 |
| Sep 9 | vs. | W 47–21 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Sep 16 | at | L 14–24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Sep 23 | vs. | W 37–30 | 1 | 1 | 35 | 4 | 7 |
| Sep 30 | at | L 20–41 | 2 | 2 | 47 | 2 | 8 |
| Oct 14 | vs. | L 39–41 | 1 | 1 | 27 | 4 | 7 |
| Oct 21 | at | L 12–34 | 4 | 5 | 51 | 0 | 12 |
| Oct 28 | at | L 17–30 | 1 | 1 | 49 | 2 | 5 |
| Nov 4 | vs. | W 38–28 | 1 | 1 | 26 | 5 | 8 |
| Nov 11 | vs. | W 47–6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Nov 18 | vs. | W 17–14 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 2 | 5 |
| Nov 25 | vs. | L 7–16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
2022 South Carolina 12 games, 11 of 11 field goals
| Date | Opponent | Result | FGM | FGA | Long | XP | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3 | vs. | W 35–14 | 2 | 2 | 53 | 1 | 7 |
| Sep 10 | at | L 30–44 | 1 | 1 | 28 | 1 | 4 |
| Sep 17 | vs. | L 7–48 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Sep 24 | vs. | W 56–20 | 2 | 2 | 27 | 4 | 10 |
| Sep 29 | vs. | W 50–10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Oct 8 | at | W 24–14 | 1 | 1 | 32 | 3 | 6 |
| Oct 22 | vs. | W 30–24 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 3 | 6 |
| Oct 29 | vs. | L 10–23 | 1 | 1 | 39 | 1 | 4 |
| Nov 5 | at | W 38–27 | 1 | 1 | 31 | 5 | 8 |
| Nov 19 | vs. | W 63–38 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 9 |
| Nov 26 | at | W 31–30 | 1 | 1 | 35 | 4 | 7 |
| Dec 30 ✦ | vs. | L 38–45 | 1 | 1 | 45 | 5 | 8 |
2021 South Carolina 3 games, 2 of 2 extra points
| Date | Opponent | Result | FGM | FGA | Long | XP | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 4 | vs. | W 46–0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Nov 6 | vs. | W 40–17 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Nov 27 | vs. | L 0–30 | – | – | – | – | – |
Box scores from CollegeFootballData, 2004 on. ✦ postseason; ★ a career high on file.
Is this you, or do you know of something wrong or missing here? Suggest a correction. We check each one against a source before changing the page.
