These MAC Football Teams Got Lucky in 2025 – Who Will Crash in 2026?

What metric determines which teams are the luckiest in college football? The Pythagorean win total is a formula that helps determine how many wins or losses a team should have at the conclusion of their season by using the formula below. That is, points scored over points scored plus points allowed. You can view the luckiest and unluckiest teams from the American Conference in 2025 here. In this article, we’ll be focusing on the luckiest and unluckiest teams in the MAC football conference.

What Metric Determines the Luckiest Teams in College Football?

Expected Win Percentage = Points For (2.37)
                    ————————
          Points For (2.37) + Points Against (2.37)

The coefficient changes depending on the sport, but 2.37 seems to be regarded as the correct coefficient to use with college and pro football. Other sports, such as soccer and baseball, use a standard squared coefficient.

Using this formula, it is easier to see how many more wins or losses a team should have compared to how many wins or losses the team actually amassed at the end of the season. This can sometimes be a helpful factor in seeing how teams may perform leading into the following season. Teams that got lucky and overperformed tend to regress the following season and drop more toward the mean. Meanwhile, teams that underperformed tend to experience positive regression that results in more success.

However, with today’s shifting landscape in the world of college football, especially with NIL, the transfer portal, and coaching/staff overhauls, these numbers aren’t always an accurate prediction of how teams will perform in the following season. Knowing this isn’t the end all, be all. Yet, it is interesting food for thought.

Here are a few teams in the Mid-Atlantic Conference (MAC) that had fortunate and underwhelming seasons, according to Pythagorean win total.  Some teams were excluded, as they generally only had a +/- of one half of an expected win or loss.

MAC Football Teams That Overperformed in 2025 (Good Luck)

Kent State Golden Flashes

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
255	403	25.2%	12	5	7	3.0	8.9	-1.96

Kent State had a nice bounce back in 2025, trying to distance themselves from a disastrous 0-12 season in 2024. They went 5-7 and fell just one game short of bowl eligibility. However, the Pythagorean win total still shows that they didn’t recover as much as the win-loss column suggests. In fact, the model states that Kent State should have likely only won around three games instead of five.  

Kent State played in six one-possession games last season, going 4-2. The wins included a four-point Week 1 win at home versus the FCS’s Merrimack, a three-point win at home against an eventual 4-8 Bowling Green team, a seven-point overtime win at Akron, and a four-point win at 3-9 Northern Illinois in the last game of the season. Their two one-possession losses came at Buffalo, who found themselves on the opposite side of “lucky” last season, and at 4-8 Ball State, who is listed directly below. 

Typically, finishing with a positive two-win above expectation points to regression in the following year. However, Kent State does return nine starters from last season’s team. There is reason to believe they may somewhat stabilize moving into the 2026 season. Looking at the 4-2 record in one-possession games against the bottom of the MAC, and getting outscored by 150 points in the other six games on their schedule, does give reasonable pause for concern.

Ball State Cardinals

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
190	358	18.2%	12	4	8	2.1	9.8	-1.81

Ball State didn’t quite experience the same turnaround in 2025 as Kent State. They only improved from 3-9 in 2024 to 4-8 in 2025. However, they did still find themselves on the positive side of luck. 

Ball State won around two more games than expected in 2025, playing in four one-possession games, where the team went 3-1. The wins included a five-point home victory against New Hampshire, a six-point win versus Ohio, and a four-point win against the aforementioned Kent St. Going 3-1 against two teams on this side of the list (Kent and Ohio) and struggling at home against an FCS team doesn’t instill a ton of confidence coming into the 2026 season. This is especially true considering out of the six starters returning in 2026, only one returns on a defense that allowed over 350 points last season. 

Of the eight losses last season, the Cardinals lost four of them by 30 points (one game was 29). Ball State may still find trouble qualifying for a bowl heading into this season. However, anything is possible.

Ohio Bobcats

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
361	285	63.6%	13	9	4	8.2	4.7	-.72

Ohio had a lot of momentum heading into last season, returning 10 starters, their dual-threat quarterback, four out of their top five receivers, and coming off of a 2024 MAC championship. The Bobcats ended with a respectable 9-4 record, punching up in a tough, three-point road loss at Rutgers and beating a newly rebuilt West Virginia team at home. However, despite the success, Ohio played in seven coin-flip contests last season (including their bowl win against UNLV). They went 5-3, winning by an average of only six points per game.

Ohio was only around one win better than their expected 8-5 season. However, sometimes the difference of one game is enough to quantify the season as a success or a failure. With their quarterback being denied another year of eligibility and returning just one offensive starter for this upcoming season, it seems like Ohio’s luck might have run its course heading into 2026.  

Western Michigan Broncos (Honorable Mention)

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
348	243	70%	14	10	4	9.8	4.1	-.18

Western Michigan doesn’t really need to be included on this list, as they were almost break even in the expected in the win column. However, it is important to point out that most of the time when teams have a great season, they have to know how to win close games. And, that is exactly what they did, going 10-4 in the 2025 season. 

Although WMU outscored their opponents by over 100 total points in their 10 wins, they did play in four one-possession games. They went 3-1 in those games, winning by a combined seven points. Their only loss was a three-point defeat in overtime at home to North Texas. WMU was pretty fortunate in their one-possession games. Yet in reality, the team ran a middle of the road tempo, with a heavy run game, and a pretty stingy defense for MAC football standards (excluding the 38-0 loss at Illinois). They wanted to control the clock and keep the other team off the field. As a result, they won some of the games they likely could have lost. 

Style of play sometimes contributes to the luck or misfortune of teams. The math of the Pythagorean win total can get lost in blowout wins, which is what may have happened here. The math suggests that WMU may take a slight step back this season after recording their best season in half a decade, winning a MAC championship and a bowl game. However, they do bring back 10 total starters from last season’s team, including their starting quarterback and 1000-yard running back.

Western Michigan is favored to win the MAC again next season. However, since 2020 the MAC has seen six different teams win the title in as many years. It will be interesting to see if negative regression hits the Broncos next season or if they can continue to win close games with their style of play and returning continuity.

MAC Football Teams That Underperformed (Bad Luck)

Toledo Rockets

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
401	173	87.9%	13	8	5	11.4	1.5	3.4

Toledo was the odds-on favorite to win the MAC last season, returning 13 starters from a team that went 8-5 in 2024. This is the true definition of underperforming, and is one of the wilder seasons on the expected win scale as well. The Pythagorean win total suggested they should have won 3.5 more games in their 8-5 2025 campaign. 

Toledo went 0-4 in one-possession games last season (including their bowl game) and lost most of them in devastating fashion. On the road at Kentucky in Week 1, Toledo gave up a one-play, 80-yard touchdown, trailing by only a possession in the fourth quarter. Their second loss was a one-point defeat on the road at WMU, followed by a blown 21-0 lead versus Bowling Green. Finally, they had a 21-point loss on the road at Washington State, where Toledo turned the ball over on every one of their five possessions in the second half. While the game at Wazzu wasn’t a one-possession contest, it highlights some of the bad luck Toledo ran into last season.

It is truly an impressive feat to have a middling 8-5 record while outscoring the opposition by the largest amount in the MAC conference last season, 228 points. The math suggests Toledo is owed some positive win variance this season. Yet, it really seems more likely that they wasted a season of opportunity last year. Toledo only returns one starter from last season and also lost their coaching staff, leaving it hard to believe that Toledo can improve their record heading into 2026.

Buffalo Bulls

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
288	282	51.2%	12	5	7	6.1	5.8	1.1

Buffalo was regarded by some last season to be a sleeper football program in the MAC, bringing back 16 total starters for their 2025 campaign. However, they fell well short of expectations, finishing 5-7 and on the wrong side of the Pythagorean win total. 

Buffalo played in seven one-possession games last season. They won by three at Kent State, lost by four in consecutive home games versus Troy and UConn, beat Eastern Michigan by one in overtime, won by seven on the road at UMass, lost by eight to Akron, and ended the season with a five point loss against Ohio, for a grand total of 3-4 in one-possession games. If Buffalo had the fortune of going 4-3 in those games, they go 6-6 and likely make a bowl. This demonstrates the point of how one extra win in close games can go on to define a team’s season.

The Bulls bring back only six starters coming into 2026. However, paired with their small, but positive point differential, it seems like they may flirt with bowl contention again if they can improve upon their 2-5 home record from last season. 

Bowling Green Falcons

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
246	291	40.1%	12	4	8	4.8	7.1	.82

Bowling Green played in four one-possession games last season, going 1-3. They fell pretty much exactly one whole win under expected. However, they had big-time quarterback issues last season, factoring in their 4-8 record.

Many weeks it was a coin flip whether their starting QB would return to play, before their second-stringer suffered an injury. After both QB1 and QB2 dealt with injuries, it was a competition between the third string QB and a true freshman to see who would start on a week-to-week. It was a complete mess, and the team struggled without having the presence of a mid-range starter on a consistent basis.

The Falcons were outscored by 45 points on the season, even with all of the quarterback shuffling and uncertainty. BG may get some better luck heading into 2026, even though they now have new coordinators and only return three total starters from the 2025 season. Coach Eddie George seems like he is up to the task, however. His team truly didn’t quit down the stretch last season, despite all of the obstacles and unfortunate results.  

UMass Minutemen (Honorable Mention)

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
133	463	4.9%	12	0	12	.59	11.4	.59

UMass made the list because the Pythagorean win total suggested they probably should have gone closer 1-11 instead of 0-12. They played in two one-possession games, losing both. However, UMass had a real chance to win both of those games last season. 

The first competitive game they dropped was a loss at home to Bryant by a single point. They failed to outgain and out-first down the FCS foe. Their second blown win was even worse than the first. After thinking they had won the game at Buffalo by intercepting the ball with two minutes to play, UMass attempted to run the clock out. Instead, they went three-and-out, losing 14 yards on the series before punting. Buffalo then went 50 yards in four plays to score the game-winning touchdown with 22 seconds left. 

There is some bad luck, and even humiliation here. However, it isn’t crazy to think UMass should be able to muster up at least a singular win in the 2026 season.

Sacramento State Hornets (Bonus)

Pts. For	Pts. All.	Win %	Games	W	L	Pyth. W	Pyth. L	+/-
351	246	69%	12	7	5	8.3	3.6	1.38

This Sacramento State Pythagorean win total needs to be taken with a grain of salt. With the team jumping up to the FBS level, it isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison to the other MAC football teams from last season. It is just interesting to note that they underperformed last season by just under 1.5 expected wins and likely should have been around 8-4, instead of 7-5. 

The Hornets played in five one-possession games last season, one of which was a game on the road at Nevada. They actually controlled most of the game until the fourth quarter, where they threw a pick-six with two minutes left to go down 20-17. They followed that up by missing 42-yard field goal to tie the game with eight seconds left. Once again, this isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison because making the leap from FCS to FBS does have its challenges. However, there were several teams in the MAC last season that were comparable to Nevada. 

Could Sacramento State be competitive within the basement of the MAC next season? They already have one data point from last season to show it. Unfortunately, that was a completely different team, as they only brought back three total starters from last year and now have a first-year head coach.  While not totally out of the realm of possibility, it seems unlikely.