CollegeFootballDigestfrom CooperSearch

2023 Temple

3–⁠9 (1–⁠7 American Athletic Conference), coached by Stan Drayton.

Schedule and results

Temple in 2023, game by game: won vs. Akron 24–21; lost at Rutgers 7–36; won vs. Norfolk State 41–9; lost vs. No. 20 Miami 7–41; lost at Tulsa 26–48; lost vs. UTSA 34–49; lost at North Texas 14–45; lost vs. SMU 0–55; won vs. Navy 32–18; lost at South Florida 23–27; lost at UAB 24–34; lost vs. Memphis 21–45+32−55Won 24–21 vs. Akron+3AkronLost 7–36 at Rutgers-29RutgersWon 41–9 vs. Norfolk State+32Norfolk StateLost 7–41 vs. No. 20 Miami-34No. 20 MiamiLost 26–48 at Tulsa-22TulsaLost 34–49 vs. UTSA-15UTSALost 14–45 at North Texas-31North TexasLost 0–55 vs. SMU-55SMUWon 32–18 vs. Navy+14NavyLost 23–27 at South Florida-4South FloridaLost 24–34 at UAB-10UABLost 21–45 vs. Memphis-24Memphis
Each game’s margin, wins above the line and losses below.
DateOpponentResultElo
Sep 2vsAkronW 24–⁠2160%
Sep 9atRutgersL 7–⁠3636%
Sep 16vsNorfolk StateW 41–⁠979%
Sep 23vs20MiamiL 7–⁠4137%
Sep 28atTulsaL 26–⁠4828%
Oct 7vsUTSAL 34–⁠4930%
Oct 14atNorth TexasL 14–⁠4527%
Oct 20vsSMUL 0–⁠5523%
Nov 4vsNavyW 32–⁠1838%
Nov 11atSouth FloridaL 23–⁠2736%
Nov 18atUABL 24–⁠3428%
Nov 24vsMemphisL 21–⁠4522%

Elo: a pregame chance from scores alone.

How it ended: Lost to Memphis 45–⁠21; unranked in the final AP poll; tied for 13th in the American Athletic Conference.

In program history: The 76th-best season in program history by end-of-season Elo (of 92 on file).

Record
3–⁠9
Conference
1–⁠7 tied for 13th in American Athletic Conference
AP final
Unranked
Points
253–⁠428
Coach
Stan Drayton
Elo
1287 −92 this season
SP+ rating
-21.0 No. 127 of 133; offense No. 110, defense No. 130, special teams No. 122
SRS
−19.2 No. 130 of 133 in FBS
Returning
76% of last season’s EPA, No. 23 of 131
Recruiting class
No. 85 roster talent No. 80 in FBS
Offensive coordinator
Danny Langsdorf
Defensive coordinator
Everett Withers
Offense
Pro-style
Defense
Multiple

How good, play by play

  • Offense115th of 133
  • Defense129th of 133
  • Offense, opponent-adjusted126th of 133
  • Defense, opponent-adjusted133rd of 133
EPA per playSuccessExplosivenessFBS rank
Offense-0.0238%1.30115th of 133
Defense0.2847%1.26129th of 133
Opponent-adjusted-0.02 off
0.25 def		37% off
47% def		—126th off
133rd def
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.

Drives and havoc

Points per trip inside the 40Average startHavoc
Offense3.0own 2618% allowed
Defense4.8own 3013% caused

CORE rating -19.1, 126th of 133 (offense -9.6, defense 9.5).

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 yardsE.J. Warner QB3,076 yds
Passing touchdownsE.J. Warner QB23 TD
Rushing yardsDarvon Hubbard RB412 yds
Rushing touchdownsQuincy Patterson II QB4 TD
Receiving yardsAmad Anderson Jr. WR647 yds
Receiving touchdownsDante Wright WR4 TD
TacklesJordan Magee LB80 tkl
SacksDiwun Black DE3.5 sacks
InterceptionsTywan Francis S2 INT

Top recruits in the 2023 class

Peter Clarke TE★★★No. 1155
Gensley Auguste DL★★★No. 1173
Xavier Irvin ATH★★★No. 1218
Richard Dandridge WR★★★No. 1220
Joquez Smith RB★★★No. 1365

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

The 2023 class by position

SignedStarsRating
Quarterbacks13.00.843
Running backs13.00.851
Receivers33.00.844
Offensive line33.00.835
Defensive line23.00.831
Linebackers13.00.822
Defensive backs23.00.824
Athletes and specialists33.00.834
Whole class163.00.835

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.

Drafted in 2024

The 2024 draft
Rd 5Jordan Magee LBWashington Commanders

Roster 107

The 2023 roster

107 players, with numbers, heights, hometowns and each player’s 2023 line; 58 have a stat line. See the roster

Transfers in 11

The 2023 portal
Tywan Francis S★★★from Colorado State
Diwun Black LB★★★★from Florida
Kamar Wilcoxson S★★★★from Florida
Allan Haye DL★★★from Miami
Dante Wright WR★★★from Colorado State
E.J. Wilson Jr. RB★★★from Florida International
K.J. Miles DL★★★from Georgia Tech
Landon Morris TE★★★from Utah
Brylan Noonan LS★★from Wagner
Chris Van Eekeren K★★from Purdue
Davion Hood DE★★from East Tennessee State

Transfers out 28

Darian Varner DL★★★to Wisconsin
Kobe Wilson LB★★★to SMU
Iverson Clement CB★★no new school on file
Ali Barkley RB★★★no new school on file
Balansama Kamara DE★★★to Hutchinson C.C.
DaeSean Winston S★★★to UAlbany
De’Von Fox WR★★★to Notre Dame College
Dyshier Clary DL★★★to Stony Brook
Jacoby Sharpe DL★★★to Hampton
Jaden Coffen WR★★★to Morgan State
Jakari Norwood RB★★★no new school on file
Jalen Satchell DL★★★to Old Dominion

And 16 more, lower-rated or unrated.

2023 American Athletic Conference standings

Conference page
TeamConf.OverallAP final
SMU8–⁠011–⁠322
Tulane8–⁠011–⁠3
UTSA7–⁠19–⁠4
Memphis6–⁠210–⁠3
South Florida4–⁠47–⁠6
Rice4–⁠46–⁠7
Navy4–⁠45–⁠7
North Texas3–⁠55–⁠7
UAB3–⁠54–⁠8
Florida Atlantic3–⁠54–⁠8
Tulsa2–⁠64–⁠8
Charlotte2–⁠63–⁠9
Temple1–⁠73–⁠9
East Carolina1–⁠72–⁠10

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