Oregon and JMU wrap up the first round of the college football playoff Saturday night in Eugene. It is the second of two Power Four vs. Group of Five matchups (Ole Miss vs. Tulane being the other). The game boils down to Oregon’s explosive offense against JMU’s stout defense. Ultimately, Oregon’s superior talent, size advantage along the lines, overall depth, and playing at Autzen Stadium should combine to lead the Ducks to a comfortable win. That said, no question the Dukes come out fired up and the longer they can hang around, the more the pressure will build on the Ducks.
Lets dive into the schools on both sides of the ball, highlight a few players, and give our best bets for this first-round playoff game.
Game Details and How to Watch James Madison at Oregon
- Date: Saturday, December 20, 2025
- Time: 7:30 PM Eastern
- Site: Autzen Stadium
- City: Eugene, OR
- TV/Streaming: TNT/HBO Max/TruTV
Game Odds for James Madison at Oregon
The latest odds as of Friday courtesy of DraftKings:
- Moneyline: James Madison Dukes (+1000), Oregon Ducks (-1800)
- Spread: Oregon -20.5 (-108)
- Total: 46.5 points
Be sure to check out DraftKings for all the latest game odds & player props for every matchup this week on the college football schedule!
Oregon Ducks
Head Coach: Dan Lanning
2025 Record: 11-1 (8-1)
Offense Ranking: 13
Defense Ranking: 5
Strength of Schedule: 22
Oregon delivered an elite, CFP-caliber season under Dan Lanning, finishing 11-1 (8-1 Pac-12) with 10.6 second order wins and a Top 4 SP+ résumé that consistently matched its on-field dominance. The Ducks were ruthless offensively, ranking 5th in success rate, 7th in EPA per play, and 1st nationally in explosive-play rate (10.4% of snaps gaining 20+ yards), while pairing that with a Top 10 scoring efficiency at 3.27 points per drive. Defensively, Oregon was equally suffocating, sitting 8th in EPA allowed per play, 6th in yards per play allowed, and 1st in limiting explosive plays, while holding opponents to just 1.36 points per drive. The lone blemish came in a loss to an unbeaten Indiana team, but Oregon responded by closing the season with decisive wins over Iowa, USC, and Washington, finishing Top 5 nationally in average adjusted scoring margin (+25.2). Taken together, the Ducks’ combination of an efficient run game (1st in rushing success rate), and a disciplined, havoc-driven defense explains why they remained a Top 4 SP+ team wire-to-wire and a legitimate national title threat.
The Oregon Ducks Offense
Oregon’s offense was one of the most prolific units in the country, ranking 5th in overall success rate, 7th in EPA per play, and 8th nationally at 3.27 points per drive. The Ducks were devastating on the ground, finishing 1st in rushing success rate (52.7%), 2nd in EPA per rush, and 7th in yards per carry (6.2), consistently staying ahead of schedule and controlling games. Through the air, Oregon paired efficiency with downfield potency, ranking 3rd in completion rate, 10th in ANY/A, and 10th in 20+ yard completion rate, while also sitting 4th in avoiding negative dropbacks. Explosiveness was the calling card, as Oregon led the nation with 10.4% of plays gaining 20+ yards and ranked 1st in explosive-play rate overall, forcing defenses to defend every blade of grass. When drives crossed midfield the Ducks finished the job, placing 8th in points per scoring opportunity and Top 40 in both red-zone and goal-to-go touchdown rate, giving the offense true week-to-week blowout equity.
Oregon Player to Watch on Offense: QB Dante Moore
Dante Moore put together a precision-based, big-play driven season as Oregon’s full-time starter, completing 72.5% of his passes for 2,733 yards with a 24–6 TD-to-INT ratio across 12 starts. He paired accuracy with explosiveness, averaging 12.0 yards per completion and posting a strong 9.4 ANY/A, while his 8.1 yards per dropback and 49.7% passing success rate underscore consistent down-to-down effectiveness. Moore was notably poised under pressure, limiting sacks to a 3.7% rate and converting pressure into production with just a 14.5% sack-per-pressure figure. As a runner, he added a meaningful secondary dimension, rushing for 273 yards at 6.07 yards per carry with a 40.0% first-down rate, even if his value came more from situational movement than tackle-breaking. The advanced grading supports the box score, as Moore earned elite season marks (91.2 overall, 90.9 passing) that reflect a quarterback firmly in command of Oregon’s offense and comfortable operating at a playoff-caliber level.
The Oregon Ducks Defense
Oregon’s defense suppresses explosiveness while consistently generating stops, finishing 5th in Defensive SP+, 8th in EPA per play allowed (-0.12), and 13th in overall success rate allowed (36.4%). The Ducks were superb at limiting chunk gains, ranking 1st nationally in explosive plays allowed (3.3%) and 1st in yards per successful play allowed (10.1), forcing opponents to earn everything snap by snap. Against the pass, Oregon was especially stingy, placing 9th in passing success rate allowed, 5th in yards per dropback, and 4th in completion percentage allowed, while also ranking 2nd in adjusted completion rate allowed. The front consistently created pressure without sacrificing structure, finishing 12th in pressure rate, 40th in sacks per dropback, and Top 10 in preventing negative rushing plays from turning into explosives. When drives did reach scoring range, the defense tightened, helping Oregon allow just 1.36 points per drive (10th) and play a central role in the Ducks’ Top 5 adjusted scoring margin throughout the season.
Oregon Player to Watch on Defense: Edge Teitum Tuioti
Teitum Tuioti emerged as one of the defense’s most disruptive edge players, piling up 61 tackles with an exceptional 98.4% tackle rate while seeing 82.0% of his stops come against the run. His havoc production has been outstanding, totaling 18 havoc plays that included 13 tackles for loss, seven sacks, two forced fumbles, and 14 credited run stops over 12 games. As a pass rusher, Tuioti converted pressure into impact, recording seven sacks on 29 pressures across 238 rushes for a solid 12.2% pressure rate and eight sacks created. He consistently stressed protections early in downs, posting 26 first pressures with an average time-to-first-pressure of 3.05 seconds and adding value on third down with a 14.7% pressure share. The combination of high-efficiency tackling, backfield penetration, and steady pass-rush productivity made Tuioti a tone-setter on the edge and a true two-phase defender.
James Madison Dukes
Head Coach: Bob Chesney
2025 Record: 12-1 (8-0)
Offense Ranking: 22
Defense Ranking: 27
Strength of Schedule: 118
James Madison authored a dominant 12–1 campaign under Bob Chesney, sweeping the Sun Belt East at 8–0 while posting an SP+ rank of 24 and 11.5 second-order wins that largely validated the record. The Dukes paired a Top 25 offense (SP+ No. 22) with an elite, tone-setting defense (SP+ No. 27) that ranked No. 1 nationally in defensive success rate and plays gaining ≤0 yards, fueling a +21.5 actual scoring margin (No. 7). Efficiency has defined their playoff run: JMU finished Top 25 in EPA/play on offense, converted red-zone trips at a strong clip and repeatedly created separation with explosive outings (eight wins by 20+ points) including emphatic road and neutral-site performances. The lone blemish came at Louisville, but JMU answered by climbing from a preseason SP+ of 56 into the mid-20s by December, finishing with an average adjusted scoring margin of 22.1 PPG (No. 7). With near-certain bowl placement, a conference title favorite profile, and a defense capable of dictating games, the Dukes cemented themselves as one of the nation’s most complete Group of Five teams.
The James Madison Dukes Offense
James Madison’s offense powered the Dukes to a 12–1 season, finishing 30th nationally in success rate and 26th in EPA per play. The run game was the engine, ranking 12th in yards per rush and 13th in rushing EPA, while consistently winning at the point of attack with Top 15 marks in yards before contact. When throwing, JMU was selective but effective, posting a Top 30 ANY/A and generating explosive gains on nearly 20% of completed passes while protecting the quarterback with a Top 30 pressure rate allowed. Finishing drives was a quiet strength, as the Dukes converted over 71% of red-zone trips into touchdowns and averaged 2.83 points per drive. While not overly fast or pass-heavy, James Madison’s offense was disciplined, physical, and efficient enough to control games as a complement to one of the nation’s best defenses.
JMU Player to Watch on Offense: QB Alonza Barnett III
QB Alonza Barnett III piloted James Madison’s offense for all 13 starts, throwing for 2,533 yards with a 21–8 TD-INT line on 59.9% completions while averaging 13.1 yards per completion and posting a 46.0% passing success rate. His efficiency profile was solid rather than spectacular, reflected in a 7.0 yards per dropback mark, 8.8 ANY/A, and a Total QBR of 61.2, with pressure occasionally disrupting him (5.3% sack rate, 17.8% sacks per pressure). Where Barnett separated himself was as a runner, piling up 677 yards and 14 touchdowns on 97 carries at 6.98 yards per rush with a 54.6% success rate and an elite 43.3% first-down rate per carry. He consistently turned designed runs and scrambles into explosives, with 17.4% of his rushes gaining 10+ yards despite a modest 1.58 yards before contact. Overall, Barnett’s dual-threat profile made him the engine of JMU’s offense, combining vertical passing production with high-leverage rushing.
The James Madison Dukes Defense
James Madison’s defense was the backbone of its 12–1 season, ranking first nationally in defensive success rate and fifth in defensive EPA per play, consistently putting opponents behind schedule. The Dukes were elite against both the run and the pass, finishing second in rushing success rate allowed, second in passing success rate allowed, and Top 10 in yards per play allowed at 4.05 (4th). Havoc defined the unit, as JMU posted a 20.0% overall Havoc Rate (10th) with a relentless pass rush that ranked third in pressure rate and 13th in sacks per dropback. On money downs, the defense slammed the door, holding opponents to just 28.7% conversions on third down (5th) while forcing long-yardage situations at an elite rate. Even with occasional red-zone softness, James Madison’s defense combined efficiency, disruption, and consistency to profile as one of the most complete Group of Five units in the country.
JMU Player to Watch on Defense: Edge Sahir West
DE Sahir West was the primary havoc creator on the Dukes’ defense, starting all 13 games and piling up 52 total tackles with a strong 94.5% tackle rate and 76.9% of his stops coming against the run. He led the defense with 20 havoc plays, including 15 tackles for loss and 7 sacks, consistently blowing up plays at the line of scrimmage while also logging 11 run stops. As a pass rusher, West generated pressure on 8.8% of his 250 rushes, producing 22 total pressures and directly creating four sacks, plus a forced fumble. His timing off the snap stood out, with an average time to first pressure of 2.79 seconds and steady involvement on passing downs. Overall, West combined edge-setting physicality with backfield disruption, giving the defense a reliable every-down backfield penetrator.
Oregon and James Madison team stats, betting trends
- Oregon is 8-4 ATS this season
- JMU is 8-5 ATS this season
- The OVER has cashed in 6 of the Ducks’ 12 games (6-6)
- The OVER has cashed in 5 of the Dukes’ 13 games (5-8)
Rotoworld Best Bets
Please bet responsibly. If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, call the National Gambling Helpline at 1-800-522-4700.
Eric Froton (@CFFroton): Alonza Barnett UNDER 144.5 Passing Yards
Oregon’s pass defense has been absolutely dominant from a yardage perspective, allowing over 140+ pass yards only twice against FBS opponents. The two offenses to clear that mark were certifiably elite, as only USC (303 yards) and Indiana’s Heisman front-runner Fernando Mendoza (215) managed to move the ball with any regularity through the air against the Ducks. Alonza Barnett has managed to leverage low volume passing (only 2 games with more than 25 pass attempts) into explosive plays against the lower-level G5 teams. He will have an extremely difficult time popping the top off of Oregon’s devastating secondary, so I’m taking Barnett to go Under his 144.5 Passing Yards line.
****
Our model calculates projections around each moneyline, spread and over/under bet for every game on the college football calendar based on data points like past performance, player matchups, stadium information and weather forecasts.
Once the model is finished running, we put its projection next to the latest betting lines for the game to arrive at a relative confidence level for each wager.
Best bets our model is projecting for this week’s game between Oregon and JMU
- Moneyline: Rotoworld Bet is staying away from a play on the Moneyline.
- Spread: Rotoworld Bet is leaning towards a play ATS on the Oregon Ducks -21.5.
- Total: Rotoworld Bet is recommending a play on the UNDER on the Game Total of 49.5.
Rotoworld has you covered with all the latest college football betting news and analysis.
Follow our experts on socials to keep up with all the latest content from the staff:
- Jay Croucher (@croucherJD)
- Drew Dinsick (@whale_capper)
- Vaughn Dalzell (@VmoneySports)
- Trysta Krick (@Trysta_Krick)
- Eric Froton (@CFFroton)
