PFN Impact · 2026 Season
College Offensive Line Impact Rankings
Season
Week
| # | Details | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 92.1 | USC | LT | 54 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 89 | 100 | — | — | — | ||
| 2 | 90.1 | USC | LG | 57 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 87 | 98 | — | — | — | ||
| 3 | 90.1 | USC | RT | 57 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 89 | 95 | — | — | — | ||
| 4 | 89.8 | USC | RG | 57 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 86 | 100 | — | — | — | ||
| 5 | 87.4 | USC | LT | 54 | 1 | 0 | 5.3% | 79 | 100 | — | — | — | ||
| 6 | 87.1 | Stanford | C | 71 | 1 | 0 | 3.8% | 84 | 87 | — | — | — | ||
| 7 | 86.8 | Virginia | LG | 62 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 81 | 97 | — | — | — | ||
| 8 | 86.3 | Virginia | LT | 62 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 84 | 92 | — | — | — | ||
| 9 | 86.0 | Virginia | RT | 55 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 83 | 95 | — | — | — | ||
| 10 | 83.5 | Florida St. | RT | 66 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 86 | 76 | — | — | — | ||
| 11 | 83.3 | Virginia | RG | 62 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 81 | 86 | — | — | — | ||
| 12 | 83.0 | Florida St. | LT | 66 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 84 | 84 | — | — | — | ||
| 13 | 82.7 | North Dakota St. | RG | 65 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 81 | 87 | — | — | — | ||
| 14 | 82.5 | North Carolina | RT | 57 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 88 | 75 | — | — | — | ||
| 15 | 82.4 | TCU | RG | 70 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 86 | 77 | — | — | — | ||
| 16 | 81.4 | Eastern Michigan | LT | 68 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 85 | 76 | — | — | — | ||
| 17 | 81.3 | Florida St. | C | 66 | 2 | 0 | 0.0% | 78 | 85 | — | — | — | ||
| 18 | 81.3 | TCU | LG | 70 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 88 | 69 | — | — | — | ||
| 19 | 79.5 | North Carolina St. | LT | 49 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 85 | 79 | — | — | — | ||
| 20 | 79.4 | North Carolina St. | RG | 51 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 87 | 74 | — | — | — | ||
| 21 | 79.2 | Memphis | RG | 60 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 80 | 78 | — | — | — | ||
| 22 | 79.1 | Stanford | RG | 68 | 1 | 0 | 4.2% | 79 | 77 | — | — | — | ||
| 23 | 78.8 | Stanford | C | 51 | 1 | 0 | 5.3% | 78 | 74 | — | — | — | ||
| 24 | 78.7 | Virginia | RT | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 80 | 83 | — | — | — | ||
| 25 | 78.6 | Florida St. | LG | 66 | 1 | 0 | 5.0% | 78 | 77 | — | — | — | ||
| 26 | 78.5 | North Carolina St. | LG | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 87 | 73 | — | — | — | ||
| 27 | 78.5 | Memphis | RT | 60 | 1 | 0 | 7.7% | 77 | 86 | — | — | — | ||
| 28 | 78.5 | North Carolina | RT | 57 | 1 | 0 | 4.5% | 84 | 72 | — | — | — | ||
| 29 | 78.5 | UNLV | RG | 79 | 1 | 0 | 3.3% | 81 | 62 | — | — | — | ||
| 30 | 78.4 | Memphis | C | 60 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 82 | 72 | — | — | — | ||
| 31 | 78.4 | Eastern Michigan | LT | 44 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 84 | 77 | — | — | — | ||
| 32 | 78.3 | Stanford | RG | 71 | 2 | 0 | 3.8% | 76 | 69 | — | — | — | ||
| 33 | 78.2 | TCU | LT | 70 | 1 | 1 | 3.8% | 78 | 78 | — | — | — | ||
| 34 | 77.7 | North Carolina St. | RG | 32 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 86 | 75 | — | — | — | ||
| 35 | 77.6 | North Carolina St. | RT | 45 | 1 | 0 | 5.0% | 82 | 75 | — | — | — | ||
| 36 | 77.5 | North Carolina | LT | 57 | 1 | 0 | 4.5% | 83 | 73 | — | — | — | ||
| 37 | 77.4 | Stanford | LG | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 85 | 77 | — | — | — | ||
| 38 | 77.1 | New Mexico St. | LG | 54 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 85 | 67 | — | — | — | ||
| 39 | 76.9 | San Jose St. | RG | 56 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 81 | 64 | — | — | — | ||
| 40 | 76.9 | USC | C | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 82 | 79 | — | — | — | ||
| 41 | 76.7 | UNLV | RT | 68 | 1 | 0 | 4.3% | 76 | 72 | — | — | — | ||
| 42 | 76.4 | Stanford | RG | 71 | 3 | 0 | 11.5% | 70 | 81 | — | — | — | ||
| 43 | 76.0 | Hawaii | C | 74 | 1 | 0 | 2.0% | 83 | 65 | — | — | — | ||
| 44 | 76.0 | North Carolina | LG | 57 | 2 | 1 | 9.1% | 71 | 78 | — | — | — | ||
| 45 | 75.8 | New Mexico St. | LG | 54 | 1 | 0 | 3.0% | 79 | 65 | — | — | — | ||
| 46 | 75.7 | USC | RT | 19 | 1 | 0 | 16.7% | 74 | 83 | — | — | — | ||
| 47 | 75.7 | Memphis | LT | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 82 | 66 | — | — | — | ||
| 48 | 75.3 | San Jose St. | RT | 56 | 1 | 0 | 3.7% | 76 | 66 | — | — | — | ||
| 49 | 75.2 | Jacksonville St. | LT | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 82 | 70 | — | — | — | ||
| 50 | 74.7 | North Dakota St. | RT | 58 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 79 | 64 | — | — | — |
1–50 of 93
Page 1 of 2
How Offensive Line Impact is scored — College OL Impact (OL+) — snap-weighted pass protection (pressures and sacks allowed) and run blocking, by line position, into a single-number grade.
Snap minimum — 94 graded players are not ranked yet, for playing under 20% of the busiest player’s snaps per game (under 19). Every player is graded — the bar keeps a three-snap cameo off the top of the board. Tick Non-Qualifiers above to include them.
College Offensive Line Impact (OL+) — a single-number season grade from PFN's college model. 2026 updates as games are played, so it is shown on its own and left out of the pooled all-time ranking. Toggle Compare to line up two OL seasons. Full methodology →