2025 USC

9–⁠4 (7–⁠2 Big Ten), coached by Lincoln Riley, finished No. 20 in the AP poll.

Schedule and results

USC in 2025, game by game: won vs. Missouri State 73–13; won vs. Georgia Southern 59–20; won at Purdue 33–17; won vs. Michigan State 45–31; lost at No. 23 Illinois 32–34; won vs. No. 15 Michigan 31–13; lost at No. 13 Notre Dame 24–34; won at Nebraska 21–17; won vs. Northwestern 38–17; won vs. Iowa 26–21; lost at No. 6 Oregon 27–42; won vs. UCLA 29–10; lost vs. TCU 27–30+60−15Won 73–13 vs. Missouri State+60Missouri StateWon 59–20 vs. Georgia Southern+39Georgia SouthernWon 33–17 at Purdue+16PurdueWon 45–31 vs. Michigan State+14Michigan StateLost 32–34 at No. 23 Illinois-2No. 23 IllinoisWon 31–13 vs. No. 15 Michigan+18No. 15 MichiganLost 24–34 at No. 13 Notre Dame-10No. 13 Notre DameWon 21–17 at Nebraska+4NebraskaWon 38–17 vs. Northwestern+21NorthwesternWon 26–21 vs. Iowa+5IowaLost 27–42 at No. 6 Oregon-15No. 6 OregonWon 29–10 vs. UCLA+19UCLALost 27–30 vs. TCU-3TCU
Each game’s margin, wins above the line and losses below.
DateOpponentResultElo
Aug 30vsMissouri StateW 73–⁠1381%
Sep 6vsGeorgia SouthernW 59–⁠2071%
Sep 13atPurdueW 33–⁠1766%
Sep 20vsMichigan StateW 45–⁠3174%
Sep 27at23IllinoisL 32–⁠3447%
Oct 11vs15MichiganW 31–⁠1353%
Oct 18at13Notre DameL 24–⁠3429%
Nov 1atNebraskaW 21–⁠1753%
Nov 7vsNorthwesternW 38–⁠1777%
Nov 15vsIowaW 26–⁠2160%
Nov 22at6OregonL 27–⁠4229%
Nov 29vsUCLAW 29–⁠1084%
Dec 30vsTCUAlamo BowlL 27–⁠3056%

Elo: a pregame chance from scores alone.

How it ended: Lost to TCU 30–⁠27 in the Alamo Bowl; No. 20 in the final AP poll; tied for 4th in the Big Ten.

In program history: The 51st-best season in program history by end-of-season Elo (of 112 on file).

AP poll, week by week

  1. Wk 4: 25
  2. Wk 5: 21
  3. Wk 8: 20
  4. Wk 10: 23
  5. Wk 11: 20
  6. Wk 12: 17
  7. Wk 13: 16
  8. Wk 14: 19
  9. Wk 15: 17
  10. Wk 16: 16
  11. Final: 20
Record
9–⁠4
Conference
7–⁠2 tied for 4th in Big Ten
AP final
No. 20 peak No. 16
Points
465–⁠299
Coach
Lincoln Riley
Elo
1662 +89 this season
SP+ rating
16.9 No. 16 of 136; offense No. 9, defense No. 36, special teams No. 97
SRS
15.5 No. 13 of 136 in FBS
Returning
37% of last season’s EPA, No. 65 of 134
Recruiting class
No. 14 roster talent No. 17 in FBS
Offensive coordinator
Luke Huard
Defensive coordinators
D’Anton Lynn and Eric Henderson
Offense
Power raid
Defense
4–⁠3

How good, play by play

  • Offense3rd of 136
  • Defense64th of 136
  • Offense, opponent-adjusted5th of 136
  • Defense, opponent-adjusted45th of 136
EPA per playSuccessExplosivenessFBS rank
Offense0.3049%1.373rd of 136
Defense0.0845%1.1664th of 136
Opponent-adjusted0.28 off
0.05 def
49% off
43% def
—5th off
45th def

Passing and running

Pass successDepth of targetDeep throwsLine yardsStuffed
Offense54%10.4 yds21%3.3014%
Defense45%5.7 yds10%3.4015%
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
Offense4.7own 2713% allowed
Defense3.5own 2716% caused

CORE rating 23.7, 8th of 136 (offense 17.9, defense -5.8).

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 yardsJayden Maiava QB3,711 yds
Passing touchdownsJayden Maiava QB24 TD
Rushing yardsKing Miller RB972 yds
Rushing touchdownsKing Miller RB8 TD
Receiving yardsMakai Lemon WR1,156 yds
Receiving touchdownsMakai Lemon WR11 TD
TacklesDesman Stephens II LB86 tkl
SacksKameryn Fountain DE5.5 sacks
InterceptionsBishop Fitzgerald S5 INT

Top recruits in the 2025 class

Husan Longstreet QB★★★★★No. 25
Jahkeem Stewart DL★★★★No. 34
Matai Tagoa’i LB★★★★No. 102
R.J. Sermons CB★★★★No. 105
Aaron Dunn OT★★★★No. 166
Alex Payne OT★★★★No. 182
Trestin Castro CB★★★★No. 237
Kendarius Reddick S★★★★No. 318

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

The 2025 class by position

SignedStarsRating
Quarterbacks15.00.987
Running backs23.50.888
Receivers34.00.898
Offensive line43.50.902
Defensive line53.20.894
Linebackers23.50.914
Defensive backs53.80.910
Athletes and specialists33.00.858
Whole class253.60.899

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 2026

The 2026 draft
Rd 1Makai Lemon WRPhiladelphia Eagles
Rd 3Ja’Kobi Lane WRBaltimore Ravens
Rd 5Kamari Ramsey SHouston Texans

Roster 114

The 2025 roster

114 players, with numbers, heights, hometowns and each player’s 2025 line; 74 have a stat line. See the roster

Transfers in 15

The 2025 portal

And 3 more, lower-rated or unrated.

Transfers out 28

And 16 more, lower-rated or unrated.

All-Big Ten

2 first team, 1 second team

First team

Second team

From Wikipedia’s 2025 all-conference team article, with the selectors that named each player (AP-1: the Associated Press’s first team).

2025 Big Ten standings

Conference page
TeamConf.OverallAP final
Indiana9–⁠016–⁠01
Ohio State9–⁠012–⁠25
Oregon8–⁠113–⁠24
Michigan7–⁠29–⁠421
USC7–⁠29–⁠420
Iowa6–⁠39–⁠417
Illinois5–⁠49–⁠4
Washington5–⁠49–⁠4
Minnesota5–⁠48–⁠5
Nebraska4–⁠57–⁠6
Northwestern4–⁠57–⁠6
Penn State3–⁠67–⁠6
UCLA3–⁠63–⁠9
Rutgers2–⁠75–⁠7
Wisconsin2–⁠74–⁠8
Michigan State1–⁠84–⁠8
Maryland1–⁠84–⁠8
Purdue0–⁠92–⁠10

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