San José State
Nevada
Stanford
Arizona State
Colorado
Arizona
Notre Dame
Utah
California
Washington
Oregon
UCLA
LouisvilleFour-year talent direction
Track class strength, position balance and roster needs across signing cycles.
STATTAKE DATABASEFIND ANY TEAM OR PLAYER
Big Ten • FBS TEAM DATABASE
USC
Complete schedules, team production, player statistics, news, analytics, recruiting and program history in one fan destination.
2023 SEASON DATABASE
USC football
Record: 8–5 (Schedule & Results)
Conference: Big Ten
Players: 67
Points For: 544
Points/Game: 41.8
Points Against: 447
Opp. Points/Game: 34.4
2023 SEASON
LIVE SCOREBOARD →Schedule & results
OFFICIAL SCHEDULE FEEDOpponent names and logos open team pages. Dates and results open StatTake box scores.
WEEKOPPONENTLOCATIONGAME
WEEK 3BYE——
POSTSEASONBOWL & PLAYOFF GAMES
TEAM PRODUCTION
Team stats
Season totals organized for quick comparison. Swipe horizontally for more.
2023 SEASON TOTALS
ALL GAMESOffense at a glance
| PASS CMP | PASS ATT | PASS YDS | PASS % | PASS AVG | PASS TD | PASS INT | PASS RTG | SACK | RUSH ATT | RUSH YDS | RUSH AVG | RUSH TD | REC | REC YDS | REC AVG | REC TD | PTS/G |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 314 | 457 | 4,329 | 68.7 | 9.5 | 37 | 6 | 172.4 | 0 | 349 | 1,768 | 5.1 | 33 | 314 | 4,329 | 13.8 | 37 | 41.8 |
TEAM ANALYTICS CENTER
OPEN NATIONAL ANALYTICS →USC analytics
LOADING 2023 EPA METRICS
The verified team snapshot is loading now.
2023 COMPLETE TEAM ROSTER
PLAYER PROFILES →Individual player statistics
SEASON PRODUCTION
SWIPE FOR MORE →Passing
| PLAYER | CMP | ATT | YDS | CMP% | AVG | TD | INT | RTG | SACK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C. WilliamsQB | 266 | 388 | 3633 | 68.6 | 9.4 | 30 | 5 | 170.1 | — |
| M. MossQB | 46 | 65 | 681 | 70.8 | 10.5 | 7 | 1 | 191.2 | — |
| M. WilliamsWR | 1 | 1 | 15 | 100.0 | 15.0 | 0 | 0 | 226.0 | — |
| M. NelsonQB | 1 | 3 | 0 | 33.3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 33.3 | — |
| TEAM TOTALS | 314 | 457 | 4,329 | 68.7 | 9.5 | 37 | 6 | 172.4 | 0 |
SEASON PRODUCTION
SWIPE FOR MORE →Rushing
| PLAYER | CAR | YDS | AVG | LNG | TD | FUM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M. LloydRB | 116 | 820 | 7.1 | 56 | 9 | — |
| A. JonesRB | 85 | 477 | 5.6 | 37 | 7 | — |
| Q. JoynerRB | 18 | 125 | 6.9 | 47 | 1 | — |
| C. WilliamsQB | 99 | 115 | 1.2 | 46 | 11 | — |
| D. BarlowRB | 8 | 81 | 10.1 | 43 | 1 | — |
| Z. BranchWR | 9 | 70 | 7.8 | 21 | 1 | — |
| M. MossQB | 4 | 32 | 8.0 | 15 | 2 | — |
| R. BrownRB | 3 | 16 | 5.3 | 14 | 1 | — |
| A. PetersonRB | 2 | 14 | 7.0 | 9 | 0 | — |
| T. WashingtonWR | 1 | 10 | 10.0 | 10 | 0 | — |
| M. ColomboRB | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 7 | 0 | — |
| J. JensenQB | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| M. WilliamsWR | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 4 | 0 | — |
| TEAM TOTALS | 349 | 1,768 | 5.1 | 56 | 33 | 0 |
SEASON PRODUCTION
SWIPE FOR MORE →Receiving
| PLAYER | REC | YDS | AVG | LNG | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T. WashingtonWR | 59 | 1062 | 18.0 | 76 | 8 |
| B. RiceWR | 45 | 791 | 17.6 | 75 | 12 |
| D. RobinsonWR | 16 | 351 | 21.9 | 71 | 2 |
| Z. BranchWR | 31 | 320 | 10.3 | 36 | 2 |
| M. WilliamsWR | 29 | 305 | 10.5 | 29 | 2 |
| D. SingerWR | 24 | 289 | 12.0 | 44 | 3 |
| L. McReeTE | 26 | 262 | 10.1 | 31 | 1 |
| M. LloydRB | 13 | 232 | 17.8 | 54 | 0 |
| K. HudsonWR | 17 | 189 | 11.1 | 33 | 2 |
| M. Jackson IIIWR | 17 | 146 | 8.6 | 16 | 1 |
| A. JonesRB | 13 | 103 | 7.9 | 24 | 1 |
| J. LaneWR | 7 | 93 | 13.3 | 31 | 2 |
| M. LemonWR | 6 | 88 | 14.7 | 40 | 0 |
| C. TabaracciTE | 1 | 32 | 32.0 | 32 | 0 |
| R. BrownRB | 3 | 18 | 6.0 | 14 | 0 |
| C. WilliamsQB | 1 | 15 | 15.0 | 15 | 0 |
| J. ZamoraWR | 2 | 11 | 5.5 | 6 | 0 |
| D. BarlowRB | 1 | 10 | 10.0 | 10 | 0 |
| Q. JoynerRB | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 7 | 0 |
| J. WolfeTE | 2 | 5 | 2.5 | 3 | 1 |
| TEAM TOTALS | 314 | 4,329 | 13.8 | 76 | 37 |
SEASON PRODUCTION
SWIPE FOR MORE →Defense
| PLAYER | TOT | SOLO | AST | TFL | SACK | INT | PD | FF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M. CobbLB | 85 | 50 | — | 7.0 | 0 | — | 1 | — |
| J. SmithCB | 69 | 52 | — | 4.5 | 1 | — | 1 | — |
| C. BullockS | 58 | 39 | — | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | — |
| B. ShawS | 52 | 36 | — | 2.5 | 0.5 | — | 0 | — |
| J. MuhammadDE | 46 | 28 | — | 9.5 | 5.5 | — | 1 | — |
| B. AlexanderDL | 45 | 25 | — | 6.5 | 1.5 | — | 1 | — |
| S. ByrdDE | 44 | 26 | — | 7.5 | 4.5 | — | 1 | — |
| E. GentryLB | 43 | 25 | — | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | — |
| T. CurtisLB | 37 | 23 | — | 4 | 2 | — | 0 | — |
| C. Roland-WallaceCB | 34 | 24 | — | 2.5 | 0 | 2 | 9 | — |
| D. JacksonDB | 31 | 24 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 3 | — |
| S. LeeLB | 26 | 9 | — | 2.0 | 1 | — | 0 | — |
| M. WilliamsS | 24 | 17 | — | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | — |
| Z. BranchS | 19 | 12 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| K. BarrsDL | 18 | 7 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| R. HeightLB | 18 | 9 | — | 5.0 | 4 | — | 0 | — |
| B. ShelbyDE | 17 | 15 | — | 4 | 2 | — | 0 | — |
| R. DavisLB | 17 | 9 | — | 0.5 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| A. BeaversLB | 15 | 11 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| J. CovingtonCB | 12 | 8 | — | 1.0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | — |
| D. BentonDL | 11 | 9 | — | 5.5 | 2 | — | 0 | — |
| T. TaleniDL | 11 | 5 | — | 0.5 | 0.5 | — | 0 | — |
| C. WrightDB | 10 | 7 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 2 | — |
| A. LucasDE | 9 | 6 | — | 2.5 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| C. Thompson Jr.LB | 9 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| P. BrownCB | 9 | 6 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — |
| T. FegansCB | 9 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| J. SullivanDL | 8 | 7 | — | 2 | 1 | — | 0 | — |
| S. Ta'ufo'ouDL | 7 | 5 | — | 0.5 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| C. PierceS | 6 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| E. HughesDL | 5 | 3 | — | 1.5 | 0.5 | — | 0 | — |
| C. TabaracciTE | 3 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| K. PepeDT | 3 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| D. LynchPK | 2 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| D. PalmerLB | 2 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| T. WashingtonWR | 2 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| Z. BranchWR | 2 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| A. MilekOL | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| A. JonesRB | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| J. CasasanteLS | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| J. KingstonOL | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| K. ForemanDL | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| K. HudsonWR | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| M. LemonWR | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| S. GreeneLB | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| TEAM TOTALS | 826 | 526 | 0 | 75 | 28 | 7 | 30 | 0 |
SEASON PRODUCTION
SWIPE FOR MORE →Kicking & Scoring
TEAM NEWS + STATTAKE ARTICLES
ALL CFB NEWS →Latest USC coverage
NATIONAL UPDATE
Will Ole Miss Extend Streak?
Will Ole Miss Extend Streak? Can USC Top Oregon? Joel Klatt's Week 4 CFB Picks. Week 4 is filled with multiple top-25 games and conference showdowns, take a look at Joel Klatt's picks.
READ UPDATE →NATIONAL UPDATEOregon news: Star tight end Jamari Johnson headlines injury report vs.
Oregon news: Star tight end Jamari Johnson headlines injury report vs. USC. Oregon football already suffered a shocking loss in 2026, d ropping a Week 2 road game against Oklahoma State as a heavy favorite. Of course, that doesn’t knock the Ducks out of College Football Playoff contention just yet, but with a tough Big Ten schedule ahead, it certainly puts Dan Lanning and company behind the 8-ball.
READ UPDATE →NATIONAL UPDATEUSC Cornerback Jontez Williams Clarifies Injury Status.
USC Cornerback Jontez Williams Clarifies Injury Status. Cornerback Jontez Williams believes that No. 12 USC Trojans' defense will get back on track in their top-25 matchup versus the No. 20 Oregon Ducks in Week 4 (Sept.
READ UPDATE →NATIONAL UPDATEBig Ten Football Power Poll: Week Three.
Big Ten Football Power Poll: Week Three. A week as expected in Week 3 leads to one that should answer many questions in Week 4 Week three pretty much went as expected. The Big Ten was favorited big in a majority of the non-conference games, and they won those games. Key points from the original article: 1. Indiana Hoosiers 3-0 (1) 2. Ohio State Buckeyes 2-1 (3) 3. USC Trojans 4-0 (2) 4. Penn State Nittany Lions 3-0 (4) 5. Michigan Wolverines (3-0) (5) 6. Oregon Ducks 2-1 (8) 7. Iowa Hawkeyes 3-0 (7) 8. Washington Huskies 3-0 (6) 9. Nebraska Cornhuskers 3-0 (9) 10. UCLA Bruins 3-0 (10) 11. Minnesota Golden Gophers 2-1 (11) 12. Northwestern Wildcats 2-0 (13) 13. Illinois Fighting Illini 2-1 (12) 14. Wisconsin Badgers 2-1 (14) 15. Michigan State Spartans 2-1 (15) 16. Maryland Terrapins 2-1 (16) 17. Purdue Boilermakers 1-2 (17) 18. Rutgers Scarlet Knights 0-3 (18)
READ UPDATE →STATTAKEIs USC No. 12 Because Voters Watched the Record, Not Rutgers?
The Trojans are 4–0. They also beat an 0–3 Rutgers team by seven while losing the second half by 80 yards. Both facts have to matter.
READ UPDATE →NATIONAL UPDATEBig Ten football power rankings after Week 3 - USC craters at Rutgers.
Big Ten football power rankings after Week 3 - USC craters at Rutgers. USC fell several spots in the Big Ten rankings after a brutally ugly and undisciplined win over Rutgers The top teams in the Big Ten held serve in Week 3, while USC football fell a few spots in the rankings. The Trojans did not prove they are a different team this season, allowing Rutgers to hang with them. Key points from the original article: 1. Indiana Hoosiers (3-0) 2. Ohio State Buckeyes (2-1) 3. Oregon Ducks (2-1) 4. Penn State Nittany Lions (3-0) 5. USC Trojans (4-0) 6. UCLA Bruins (3-0) 7. Michigan Wolverines (3-0) 8. Iowa Hawkeyes (3-0) 9. Washington Huskies (3-0) 10. Wisconsin Badgers (2-1) 11. Illinois Fighting Illini (2-1) 12. Minnesota Golden Gophers (2-1) 13. Nebraska Cornhuskers (3-0) 14. Northwestern Wildcats (2-0) 15. Maryland Terrapins (2-1) 16. Michigan State Spartans (2-1) 17. Purdue Boilermakers (1-2) 18. Rutgers Scarlet Knights (0-3)
READ UPDATE →NATIONAL UPDATEUSC's Kayden Dixon-Wyatt reduced the negative effects of the Trent Mosley injury W…
USC's Kayden Dixon-Wyatt reduced the negative effects of the Trent Mosley injury With games having more meaning as Big Ten play starts, the USC Trojans ' freshmen are not playing as much. Still, the big focal points of this football team this year are freshmen. Kayden Dixon-Wyatt is no longer looked at as a freshman. This guy is a bona fide playmaker at receiver. He has taken the mantle of the great Trojans receivers last season. He has shown that if Jayden Maiava throws it in his direction, he is going to catch it. Instead of Terrell Anderson and Tanook Hines rising to become the top target for the Trojans, it is Dixon-Wyatt who picked up the slack the most.
READ UPDATE →WEEKEND ROUNDUPWeek Zero’s Five Power Four Tests: Virginia Was Cleanest, UNC Mattered Most
North Carolina supplied the upset, Virginia delivered the most complete performance, USC showed the highest ceiling, and two other Power Four winners left revealing evidence behind the score.
READ UPDATE →ROSTER BUILDING
RECRUITING HUB →Recruiting & development
Recruiting to production
See how efficiently signed talent develops into starts, impact and wins.
What transfers added
Separate returning development from incoming and outgoing portal value.
PROGRAM CONTEXT
TEAM TRENDS →History & trends
Wins, efficiency and schedule strength in one timeline.
Home, road, favorite and underdog performance.
Recent form versus the long-term series story.
Drafted players by position and development path.
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Maryland
Michigan
Michigan State