DSC Inside Read: 3-2-1 Look at Oregon vs. James Madison

 

Oregon’s reward for a rivalry win and a playoff berth is a date with one of the most complete Group of 5 teams in the country. James Madison isn’t just a cute underdog; the Dukes are built on a real statistical backbone: 37.3 points per game, nearly 450 yards of offense, a punishing ground game, and a defense that strangles opponents to just 247.6 yards and 15.9 points per game while living in the backfield.

Here’s your 3-2-1 look at the matchup.

---

3 – Three Dukes to Know

1. RB Wayne Knight – The engine of everything

If you want to understand why JMU has turned into a 12-1 problem, start with No. 3.

• Rushing: 190 carries, 1,295 yards, 6.6 yards per carry, 9 TDs

• Receiving: 37 catches, 379 yards, 10.2 yards per catch, 1 TD

• Top-tier grade profile: strong overall offensive and rushing grades, plus receiving impact

Knight is the volume back and the efficiency back. He’s not just piling up touches; he’s turning them into explosives. The Dukes average 245.8 rushing yards per game at 5.6 yards per carry, and Knight is the heartbeat of that. He’s also their third-leading receiver, which means you can’t treat him like a traditional between-the-tackles runner — he’s a matchup piece.

For Oregon’s front seven, the key isn’t just tackling Knight; it’s preventing the “easy” yards he consistently manufactures on early downs. If he’s living in the 5–7 yard range on first down, JMU can lean into its entire playbook.

---

2. QB Alonza Barnett III – The dual-threat conflict creator

Everything in this offense is married to Barnett’s dual-threat profile.

• Passing: 193-of-322 (59.9%), 2,533 yards, 21 TD, 8 INT, 142.6 passer rating

• Rushing: 115 carries, 691 gross yards, 544 net, 4.7 yards per carry, 14 TD

• Strong overall offensive grade, especially in designed run/option concepts

On paper, JMU is “run first,” but Barnett is the reason that run game is so brutal to fit. Oregon has to defend:

• Zone read and QB power with Knight as the eye candy

• RPOs built off that downhill run game

• Play-action shots to a deep and efficient receiver room (24 passing TDs on just 201 completions)

Barnett doesn’t need to throw for 300 to be effective. His threat to pull the ball and create in the QB run game is what turns 2nd-and-5 into 3rd-and-short all afternoon. The Dukes are converting 47.4% of their third downs (82-of-173); that’s the symptom of manageable sticks created by Barnett/Knight on early downs.

For Oregon, the linebackers and edges have to be disciplined in their “mesh” fits. Overplay Knight, and Barnett keeps. Sit on the QB, and Knight gets a crease.

---

3. LB Trent Hendrick – The nerve center of a nasty defense

Offense gets the headlines, but this JMU defense is absolutely good enough to flip a playoff game.

Team-wide:

• Total defense: 247.6 yards per game allowed, just 4.1 yards per play

• Run defense: 76.2 rush yards allowed per game, 2.5 yards per carry, only 7 rushing TDs all year

• Havoc: 36 sacks, 85.0 tackles for loss (-375 yards)

Right in the middle of it is LB Trent Hendrick (No. 5):

• 96 total tackles (63 solo), 6.0 sacks, 3.0 additional TFL

• Elite-level defensive grade, especially in run defense and tackling

Hendrick is the guy who cleans up everything the front creates. With EDGE Sahir West (14.0 TFL, 7.0 sacks) and Xavier Holmes (7.5 sacks) crashing off the edges, Hendrick’s vision and trigger let him close space quickly and prevent missed tackles from turning into explosives.

Against Oregon’s offense, he’s the conflict player:

• Can he trigger downhill fast enough to prevent Oregon from living in 2nd-and-short?

• Can he hold up in space when Oregon motions backs and tight ends into his zone?

• Can he survive a game where he’s forced to cover grass horizontally instead of just filling gaps?

If Hendrick is racking up “quiet” tackles 5–7 yards downfield, Oregon can stay ahead of the chains. If he’s living at or behind the line of scrimmage, it’s a different conversation.

---

2 – Two Questions for Oregon

1. How healthy is Oregon really – and can they look like their peak version up front?

The numbers tell you exactly what kind of fight this will be in the trenches:

• JMU offense: 575 rush attempts vs. 336 passes, 36 rushing TDs, and 34:05 average time of possession

• JMU defense: holds opponents to 76.2 rushing yards per game, 2.5 yards per carry, and just 7 rushing TDs

That’s a team that wants to:

1. Shorten the game with long, ground-heavy drives.

2. Force you into must-pass situations and unleash a front that has 36 sacks and 85 TFLs.

For Oregon, the health of the offensive line and skill group is the first and biggest variable. This isn’t a game where you can hide banged-up tackles or shuffle guys around and expect everything to hold:

• If Oregon’s tackles and interior aren’t close to full strength, JMU’s edge trio (West, Holmes, Ezeogu) can win 1-on-1 and force Oregon out of its normal progression and protection rules.

• If the receiver room isn’t healthy, Oregon’s passing game loses the vertical threat that keeps safeties from triggering downhill against the run.

The Ducks don’t need “September cupcake” health. They need a version of the offense that can credibly threaten JMU horizontally and vertically so that the Dukes can’t just load the box and play downhill.

---

2. Can Oregon force JMU’s offense to play left-handed?

James Madison wants to call the game on their terms:

• Run for ~246 yards per game at 5.6 per carry

• Grind out drives and own the ball for 34 minutes a game

• Stay on schedule and stay aggressive on 3rd and medium (47.4% conversion rate)

The question for Oregon: Can the Ducks knock JMU off script?

That means:

• Winning first down – if Knight and Barnett are consistently in 2nd-and-4, the entire playbook is open. Force 2nd-and-9 and 3rd-and-7, and now Barnett has to win from the pocket against a playoff-caliber secondary.

• Tackling cleanly – JMU’s backs are efficient, not just explosive. A missed tackle that turns 2nd-and-7 into 2nd-and-2 is a hidden win for the Dukes’ tempo and play calling.

• Getting off the field – JMU’s own defense is built to protect leads. If Oregon hands them short fields or long TOP advantages, the Dukes are exactly the kind of team that can turn a slow start into four quarters of stress.

If Oregon can make this game about Barnett in obvious passing situations instead of Knight/Barnett as a run-game tandem, the Ducks will feel a lot better about their matchups.

---

1 – One Prediction: How Oregon Handles the Dukes’ Ground Game

James Madison is going to run it. A lot. That’s who they are: 575 rushing attempts, more than 3,190 net rushing yards, 36 touchdowns on the ground, and an identity built on staying ahead of the sticks.

Prediction: Oregon doesn’t shut down the Dukes’ rushing attack, but they de-fang it.

• JMU finishes under its season average of 245.8 rushing yards, landing somewhere in the 140–170 range.

• The Ducks hold the Dukes under 4.5 yards per carry, forcing more 2nd-and-longs than JMU is used to.

• Wayne Knight still has moments — and probably finds the end zone once — but Oregon limits the explosive runs (20+ yards) that normally flip the field for the Dukes.

In other words: James Madison’s ground game will still show up on the stat sheet, but Oregon’s front and game plan will keep it from dictating the script. If that prediction holds, the matchup tilts heavily toward the Ducks’ overall talent and depth over four quarters.