2025 Army

7–⁠6 (4–⁠5 American Athletic Conference), coached by Jeff Monken.

Schedule and results

Army in 2025, game by game: lost vs. Tarleton State 27–30; won at Kansas State 24–21; lost vs. North Texas 38–45; lost at East Carolina 6–28; won at UAB 31–13; won vs. Charlotte 24–7; lost at Tulane 17–24; won at Air Force 20–17; won vs. Temple 14–13; lost vs. Tulsa 25–26; won at UTSA 27–24; lost vs. No. 22 Navy 16–17; won vs. UConn 41–16+25−22Lost 27–30 vs. Tarleton State-3Tarleton StateWon 24–21 at Kansas State+3Kansas StateLost 38–45 vs. North Texas-7North TexasLost 6–28 at East Carolina-22East CarolinaWon 31–13 at UAB+18UABWon 24–7 vs. Charlotte+17CharlotteLost 17–24 at Tulane-7TulaneWon 20–17 at Air Force+3Air ForceWon 14–13 vs. Temple+1TempleLost 25–26 vs. Tulsa-1TulsaWon 27–24 at UTSA+3UTSALost 16–17 vs. No. 22 Navy-1No. 22 NavyWon 41–16 vs. UConn+25UConn
Each game’s margin, wins above the line and losses below.
DateOpponentResultElo
Aug 29vsTarleton StateL 27–⁠3080%
Sep 6atKansas StateW 24–⁠2140%
Sep 20vsNorth TexasL 38–⁠4565%
Sep 25atEast CarolinaL 6–⁠2850%
Oct 4atUABW 31–⁠1358%
Oct 11vsCharlotteW 24–⁠782%
Oct 18atTulaneL 17–⁠2434%
Nov 1atAir ForceW 20–⁠1759%
Nov 8vsTempleW 14–⁠1375%
Nov 22vsTulsaL 25–⁠2683%
Nov 29atUTSAW 27–⁠2439%
Dec 13vs22NavyL 16–⁠1741%
Dec 27vsUConnFenway BowlW 41–⁠1645%

Elo: a pregame chance from scores alone.

How it ended: Beat UConn 41–⁠16 in the Fenway Bowl; unranked in the final AP poll; 8th in the American Athletic Conference.

In program history: The 39th-best season in program history by end-of-season Elo (of 135 on file).

Record
7–⁠6
Conference
4–⁠5 8th in American Athletic Conference
AP final
Unranked
Points
310–⁠281
Coach
Jeff Monken
Elo
1593 +2 this season
SP+ rating
0.8 No. 74 of 136; offense No. 85, defense No. 53, special teams No. 62
SRS
−0.8 No. 71 of 136 in FBS
Returning
25% of last season’s EPA, No. 82 of 134
Recruiting class
No. 130 roster talent No. 134 in FBS
Offensive coordinator
Cody Worley
Defensive coordinator
Nate Woody
Offense
Triple option
Defense
3–⁠4

How good, play by play

  • Offense54th of 136
  • Defense65th of 136
  • Offense, opponent-adjusted65th of 136
  • Defense, opponent-adjusted54th of 136
EPA per playSuccessExplosivenessFBS rank
Offense0.1242%1.1554th of 136
Defense0.0946%1.0965th of 136
Opponent-adjusted0.09 off
0.07 def
40% off
45% def
—65th off
54th def

Passing and running

Pass successDepth of targetDeep throwsLine yardsStuffed
Offense38%14.1 yds29%3.1011%
Defense48%8.0 yds10%3.3013%
How these are measured

Play-weighted averages over games against FBS opponents; raw numbers, not adjusted for the strength of the opponent. EPA (expected points added) measures how much each play changed the expected score; success rate counts plays that kept the offense on schedule; explosiveness is the average EPA on successful plays. Lower is better on defense. Ranked by EPA per play among teams that were FBS that season. The opponent-adjusted row (offense / defense) is CollegeFootballData.com’s WEPA, which accounts for who each team played. Passing and running: depth of target is how far downfield passes traveled in the air; deep throws are the share thrown deep, of the passes whose depth and direction the play-by-play describes (about half); line yards are the running yards per carry credited to the blockers; stuffed is the share of carries stopped at or behind the line. The defense’s line is what its opponents did. From CollegeFootballData.com, 2025 on.

Drives and havoc

Points per trip inside the 40Average startHavoc
Offense3.7own 308% allowed
Defense3.8own 3013% caused

CORE rating 0.0, 64th of 136 (offense -0.2, defense -0.2).

A trip inside the 40 is a drive that reaches the opponent’s 40-yard line; points per trip is how many it scored on average (allowed, on defense). Average start is where drives began (the defense’s line is where its opponents started). Havoc is the share of plays ending in a tackle for loss, a forced fumble, an interception or a pass broken up. CORE is CollegeFootballData.com’s context- and opponent-adjusted rating (points better than an average team; lower is better on defense). From CollegeFootballData.com.

Leaders

Passing yardsCale Hellums QB694 yds
Passing touchdownsCale Hellums QB4 TD
Rushing yardsCale Hellums QB1,215 yds
Rushing touchdownsCale Hellums QB18 TD
Receiving yardsNoah Short WR438 yds
Receiving touchdownsBradyn Anderson WR2 TD
TacklesAndon Thomas LB112 tkl
SacksEric Ford LB4.5 sacks
InterceptionsCasey Larkin S2 INT

Top recruits in the 2025 class

Sam Hayward DE★★★No. 872
Max Phenicie S★★★No. 2034
Matthew Perkins ATH★★★No. 2110
Jaden Pydyn ATH★★★No. 2110
Zachary Green DL★★★No. 2303

247Sports composite rankings via CollegeFootballData.com; national rank in the class.

The 2025 class by position

SignedStarsRating
Quarterbacks33.00.814
Running backs13.00.810
Receivers42.80.800
Offensive line62.30.791
Defensive line42.80.830
Linebackers22.50.780
Defensive backs52.60.803
Athletes and specialists62.70.815
Whole class312.60.806

High-school signees by position group, with their average stars and 247Sports composite rating (out of 1), via CollegeFootballData.com. Athletes are signees with no set position.

Roster 180

The 2025 roster

180 players, with numbers, heights, hometowns and each player’s 2025 line; 55 have a stat line. See the roster

2025 American Athletic Conference standings

Conference page
TeamConf.OverallAP final
Navy8–⁠111–⁠223
North Texas7–⁠112–⁠224
Tulane7–⁠111–⁠318
South Florida6–⁠29–⁠4
East Carolina6–⁠29–⁠4
Memphis4–⁠48–⁠5
UTSA4–⁠47–⁠6
Army4–⁠57–⁠6
Temple3–⁠55–⁠7
Florida Atlantic3–⁠54–⁠8
Rice2–⁠65–⁠8
UAB2–⁠64–⁠8
Tulsa1–⁠74–⁠8
Charlotte0–⁠81–⁠11

Ordered by conference winning percentage, then conference wins. Division splits and tiebreakers aren’t applied.