PFN Impact · 2025 Season
College Cornerback Impact Rankings
Season
Week
| # | Details | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 97.0 | LSU | 35 | 13 | 37.1% | 147 | 11.3 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 31.4% | 4.0% | 26.7 | 11 | 15.52 | ||
| 2 | 96.4 | San Diego St. | 43 | 18 | 41.9% | 185 | 10.3 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 23.3% | 0.0% | 16.1 | 11 | 13.42 | ||
| 3 | 93.8 | Notre Dame | 48 | 26 | 54.2% | 201 | 7.7 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 20.8% | 4.0% | 45.9 | 10 | 13.31 | ||
| 4 | 93.1 | Arizona St. | 72 | 32 | 44.4% | 321 | 10.0 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 13.9% | 1.0% | 46.1 | 12 | 12.23 | ||
| 5 | 92.8 | Texas Tech | 64 | 32 | 50.0% | 311 | 9.7 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 12.5% | 2.0% | 31.4 | 13 | 9.60 | ||
| 6 | 92.3 | California | 60 | 28 | 46.7% | 370 | 13.2 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20.0% | 3.0% | 43.1 | 12 | 9.08 | ||
| 7 | 91.8 | South Carolina | 61 | 30 | 49.2% | 352 | 11.7 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 18.0% | 5.0% | 58.9 | 11 | 16.48 | ||
| 8 | 91.4 | Utah St. | 62 | 31 | 50.0% | 346 | 11.2 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 19.4% | 5.0% | 63.0 | 12 | 12.94 | ||
| 9 | 90.6 | Fresno St. | 63 | 36 | 57.1% | 244 | 6.8 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 9.5% | 3.0% | 38.1 | 12 | 14.10 | ||
| 10 | 90.6 | Arizona | 40 | 24 | 60.0% | 225 | 9.4 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 15.0% | 5.0% | 35.9 | 10 | 10.92 | ||
| 11 | 90.5 | Toledo | 48 | 20 | 41.7% | 237 | 11.9 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 25.0% | 3.0% | 55.6 | 12 | 15.52 | ||
| 12 | 90.0 | Toledo | 56 | 26 | 46.4% | 277 | 10.7 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 21.4% | 8.0% | 59.9 | 12 | 15.96 | ||
| 13 | 89.5 | BYU | 70 | 32 | 45.7% | 354 | 11.1 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 12.9% | 7.0% | 47.0 | 13 | 11.42 | ||
| 14 | 89.4 | California | 44 | 21 | 47.7% | 283 | 13.5 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 31.8% | 2.0% | 76.2 | 12 | 12.08 | ||
| 15 | 89.2 | North Carolina St. | 64 | 30 | 46.9% | 343 | 11.4 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 25.0% | 2.0% | 60.9 | 12 | 1.44 | ||
| 16 | 89.2 | UCF | 63 | 32 | 50.8% | 324 | 10.1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 20.6% | 0.0% | 64.5 | 12 | 13.81 | ||
| 17 | 89.1 | Bowling Green | 37 | 16 | 43.2% | 209 | 13.1 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 32.4% | 2.0% | 50.4 | 10 | 14.83 | ||
| 18 | 88.6 | Oklahoma St. | 13 | 2 | 15.4% | 23 | 11.5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 7.7% | 3.0% | 0.0 | 8 | 13.96 | ||
| 19 | 88.5 | Delaware | 46 | 24 | 52.2% | 257 | 10.7 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 19.6% | 1.0% | 58.0 | 12 | 14.10 | ||
| 20 | 88.4 | Iowa | 50 | 22 | 44.0% | 247 | 11.2 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 16.0% | 0.0% | 51.0 | 10 | 11.46 | ||
| 21 | 88.2 | Illinois | 55 | 28 | 50.9% | 248 | 8.9 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 18.2% | 4.0% | 75.4 | 8 | 15.10 | ||
| 22 | 88.1 | Ohio St. | 43 | 18 | 41.9% | 187 | 10.4 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 23.3% | 3.0% | 35.7 | 13 | 5.83 | ||
| 23 | 88.0 | Iowa | 60 | 35 | 58.3% | 304 | 8.7 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 13.3% | 8.0% | 56.5 | 12 | 12.23 | ||
| 24 | 87.8 | Indiana | 48 | 24 | 50.0% | 236 | 9.8 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 14.6% | 1.0% | 55.6 | 12 | 9.08 | ||
| 25 | 87.8 | Missouri St. | 53 | 26 | 49.1% | 275 | 10.6 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 17.0% | 5.0% | 61.4 | 12 | 11.38 | ||
| 26 | 87.7 | Notre Dame | 61 | 30 | 49.2% | 466 | 15.5 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 16.4% | 3.0% | 72.2 | 10 | 12.08 | ||
| 27 | 87.5 | Tennessee | 51 | 26 | 51.0% | 309 | 11.9 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 15.7% | 1.0% | 68.2 | 12 | 13.06 | ||
| 28 | 87.5 | Washington | 29 | 16 | 55.2% | 151 | 9.4 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 17.2% | 1.0% | 52.5 | 7 | 10.50 | ||
| 29 | 87.3 | Central Michigan | 56 | 27 | 48.2% | 263 | 9.7 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 17.9% | 4.0% | 60.3 | 12 | 11.94 | ||
| 30 | 87.2 | Mississippi St. | 38 | 11 | 28.9% | 212 | 19.3 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 28.9% | 3.0% | 54.7 | 12 | 11.63 | ||
| 31 | 87.1 | Georgia Tech | 32 | 14 | 43.8% | 148 | 10.6 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 21.9% | 0.0% | 57.8 | 9 | 14.35 | ||
| 32 | 87.1 | Iowa St. | 14 | 5 | 35.7% | 65 | 13.0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 21.4% | 0.0% | 45.2 | 4 | 11.44 | ||
| 33 | 86.9 | Oregon | 38 | 13 | 34.2% | 200 | 15.4 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 23.7% | 2.0% | 41.6 | 12 | 11.25 | ||
| 34 | 86.8 | Wake Forest | 45 | 20 | 44.4% | 220 | 11.0 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 20.0% | 2.0% | 65.0 | 12 | 11.38 | ||
| 35 | 86.6 | Duke | 64 | 44 | 68.8% | 480 | 10.9 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 14.1% | 6.0% | 82.8 | 13 | 11.77 | ||
| 36 | 86.6 | Hawaii | 65 | 42 | 64.6% | 428 | 10.2 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 12.3% | 10.0% | 75.7 | 12 | 14.90 | ||
| 37 | 86.5 | James Madison | 55 | 30 | 54.5% | 361 | 12.0 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 20.0% | 3.0% | 77.9 | 13 | 16.48 | ||
| 38 | 86.4 | Nevada | 40 | 23 | 57.5% | 219 | 9.5 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 22.5% | 3.0% | 81.1 | 11 | 13.06 | ||
| 39 | 86.3 | Louisville | 44 | 25 | 56.8% | 264 | 10.6 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 9.1% | 3.0% | 55.5 | 12 | 11.25 | ||
| 40 | 86.2 | LSU | 39 | 20 | 51.3% | 331 | 16.6 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 17.9% | 2.0% | 58.8 | 12 | 14.10 | ||
| 41 | 86.0 | Kennesaw St. | 61 | 35 | 57.4% | 446 | 12.7 | 2 | 0 | 9 | 18.0% | 7.0% | 91.3 | 11 | 13.40 | ||
| 42 | 85.9 | Virginia | 33 | 18 | 54.5% | 240 | 13.3 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 9.1% | 2.0% | 40.0 | 13 | 15.52 | ||
| 43 | 85.9 | Oklahoma | 29 | 15 | 51.7% | 155 | 10.3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 13.8% | 2.0% | 50.2 | 8 | 11.46 | ||
| 44 | 85.8 | Marshall | 51 | 32 | 62.7% | 459 | 14.3 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5.9% | 7.0% | 65.4 | 12 | 16.48 | ||
| 45 | 85.8 | Clemson | 55 | 31 | 56.4% | 316 | 10.2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 14.5% | 2.0% | 71.5 | 12 | 10.38 | ||
| 46 | 85.7 | Tulsa | 66 | 43 | 65.2% | 447 | 10.4 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 15.2% | 3.0% | 68.2 | 12 | 1.65 | ||
| 47 | 85.6 | Utah | 57 | 27 | 47.4% | 336 | 12.4 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 17.5% | 3.0% | 72.0 | 12 | 15.96 | ||
| 48 | 85.6 | Oregon | 33 | 15 | 45.5% | 89 | 5.9 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 15.2% | 2.0% | 37.3 | 12 | 8.90 | ||
| 49 | 85.6 | Missouri | 44 | 21 | 47.7% | 203 | 9.7 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 13.6% | 0.0% | 57.3 | 12 | 15.88 | ||
| 50 | 85.6 | Stanford | 38 | 22 | 57.9% | 234 | 10.6 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 18.4% | 4.0% | 62.8 | 12 | 12.92 |
1–50 of 521
Page 1 of 11
How Cornerback Impact is scored — College CB Impact (CB+) — coverage (catch rate, yards, rating allowed, forced incompletions) plus ball production (INTs, PBUs), into a single-number grade.
College Cornerback Impact (CB+) — a single-number season grade from PFN's college model. Toggle Compare to line up two CB seasons. Full methodology →