Indiana Hoosiers Football vs Oregon Ducks Football Match Player Stats
The indiana hoosiers football vs oregon ducks football match player stats tell the story of one of the most surprising and dominant performances in recent College Football Playoff history. On January 10, 2026, the undefeated Indiana Hoosiers defeated the Oregon Ducks 56 to 22 in the Chick fil A Peach Bowl semifinal, improving to a perfect 15 and 0 while ending Oregon’s season at 13 and 2.
Although the final score clearly favored Indiana, the individual numbers reveal how the Hoosiers controlled nearly every phase of the game. Efficient quarterback play, timely rushing touchdowns, disciplined defense, and mistake free execution created a performance that few expected against one of college football’s strongest programs.
This article provides a complete breakdown of the game’s player statistics, explains what the numbers actually mean, highlights the biggest performances from both teams, and examines how Indiana transformed statistical advantages into a decisive playoff victory.
Match Overview
| Category | Result |
| Game | Indiana Hoosiers vs Oregon Ducks |
| Date | January 10, 2026 |
| Tournament | College Football Playoff Semifinal |
| Venue | Chick fil A Peach Bowl |
| Winner | Indiana Hoosiers |
| Final Score | Indiana 56, Oregon 22 |
| Indiana Record | 15 and 0 |
| Oregon Record | 13 and 2 |
Quarter by Quarter Score
| Quarter | Oregon | Indiana |
| First | 7 | 14 |
| Second | 0 | 21 |
| Third | 8 | 7 |
| Fourth | 7 | 14 |
| Total | 22 | 56 |
The second quarter ultimately decided the contest. Indiana outscored Oregon 21 to 0 before halftime, turning a competitive opening into a commanding lead. From that point forward, Oregon struggled to recover while Indiana continued executing its offensive game plan with remarkable efficiency.
Indiana Hoosiers Football vs Oregon Ducks Football Match Player Stats
Looking beyond the scoreboard, the indiana hoosiers football vs oregon ducks football match player stats reveal several important trends.
Indiana excelled in the areas that often determine postseason success.
- Outstanding quarterback efficiency
- Balanced rushing attack
- Five touchdown passes
- Strong red zone execution
- Aggressive defensive pressure
- Positive turnover margin
Oregon generated respectable passing yardage but could not overcome costly turnovers, negative rushing plays, and defensive breakdowns.
Team Statistical Comparison
| Category | Oregon | Indiana |
| Passing Yards | 285 | 177 |
| Passing TD | 2 | 5 |
| Interceptions Thrown | 1 | 0 |
| Completion Rate | 24 of 40 | 17 of 20 |
| Rushing Yards | 93 | 185 |
| Rushing TD | 1 | 2 |
| Total Offensive TD | 3 | 7 |
| Team Fumbles | 3 | 2 |
| Fumbles Lost | 2 | 0 |
| Sacks Made | 1 | 3 |
| Tackles for Loss | 5 | 10 |
One interesting observation is that Oregon actually finished with more passing yards than Indiana. However, football games are rarely decided by passing yardage alone.
Indiana’s offense consistently produced touchdowns instead of empty possessions. The Hoosiers completed nearly every important drive with points, making their fewer passing yards far more valuable.
Quarterback Performance Analysis
Fernando Mendoza Delivers an Elite Performance
Indiana quarterback Fernando Mendoza produced one of the most efficient playoff performances of the season.
| Statistic | Value |
| Completions | 17 |
| Attempts | 20 |
| Passing Yards | 177 |
| Completion Percentage | 85 percent |
| Passing Touchdowns | 5 |
| Interceptions | 0 |
| QBR | 98.5 |
Five touchdown passes on only twenty attempts demonstrate exceptional efficiency. Mendoza consistently made accurate decisions, protected the football, and capitalized whenever Indiana reached scoring position.
Just as important, he avoided interceptions despite Oregon entering the game with one of the nation’s better defensive units.
Dante Moore Battles Through Pressure
Oregon quarterback Dante Moore had moments of success but also faced relentless pressure from Indiana’s defensive front.
| Statistic | Value |
| Completions | 24 |
| Attempts | 39 |
| Passing Yards | 285 |
| Passing Touchdowns | 2 |
| Interceptions | 1 |
| QBR | 67.9 |
While 285 passing yards appear impressive, context matters.
Moore attempted almost twice as many passes as Mendoza while completing a significantly lower percentage. Indiana’s defense frequently forced Oregon into obvious passing situations, making the Ducks increasingly predictable during the second half.
Moore also lost two fumbles, further swinging momentum toward Indiana.
Comparing the Two Quarterbacks
| Category | Fernando Mendoza | Dante Moore |
| Completion Rate | 85 percent | 61.5 percent |
| Passing Yards | 177 | 285 |
| Passing TD | 5 | 2 |
| Interceptions | 0 | 1 |
| QBR | 98.5 | 67.9 |
| Ball Security | Excellent | Struggled |
Although Moore accumulated more passing yards, Mendoza clearly delivered the more impactful performance.
His efficiency, touchdown production, and decision making gave Indiana an enormous advantage.
Running Game Breakdown
Indiana’s rushing attack complemented its passing game throughout the afternoon.
Kaelon Black Leads the Ground Attack
| Statistic | Value |
| Carries | 12 |
| Rushing Yards | 63 |
| Average | 5.3 |
| Touchdowns | 2 |
| Long Run | 23 |
Black consistently converted short yardage opportunities into first downs while scoring two important rushing touchdowns.
Roman Hemby Adds Valuable Production
| Statistic | Value |
| Carries | 17 |
| Yards | 53 |
| Average | 3.1 |
Although Hemby’s average was modest, he handled the tough inside carries that helped Indiana control possession and maintain offensive balance.
Khobie Martin Provides Explosive Runs
Martin carried only four times but averaged 10.5 yards per attempt, giving Indiana another explosive dimension whenever he entered the game.
Fernando Mendoza Contributes as a Runner
The Indiana quarterback also added 28 rushing yards on six carries, extending several drives with timely scrambles.
Oregon’s Running Game
Dierre Hill Jr. produced Oregon’s biggest rushing highlight.
| Statistic | Value |
| Carries | 5 |
| Yards | 86 |
| Average | 17.2 |
| Long | 71 |
His 71 yard run dramatically boosted his average, but Oregon struggled to sustain rushing success outside that explosive play.
Jay Harris managed only 35 yards on 16 carries, averaging just 2.2 yards per attempt.
Dante Moore also finished with negative rushing yardage after multiple sacks and defensive pressure disrupted Oregon’s offensive rhythm.
At the team level, Indiana rushed for 185 yards compared to Oregon’s 93, illustrating a significant advantage in physical play and clock control.
Why Indiana Controlled the Ground Game
Several factors contributed to Indiana’s rushing success.
- Effective offensive line play
- Consistent execution on early downs
- Balanced play calling
- Multiple productive ball carriers
- Quarterback mobility that kept defenders honest
These advantages allowed Indiana to dictate tempo instead of becoming one dimensional.
Tactical Breakdown: How Indiana Built a 34 Point Victory
The final score may suggest that Indiana dominated from the opening kickoff, but the game evolved through several key tactical advantages. A closer examination of the statistics shows that the Hoosiers consistently won the battles that matter most in championship football.
Outstanding Offensive Efficiency
Indiana scored 56 points despite recording only 177 passing yards. At first glance, that may seem unusual, but it reflects extraordinary efficiency rather than limited production.
Fernando Mendoza completed 17 of 20 passes and threw five touchdowns. Nearly every successful drive ended with points instead of stalling in the red zone.
This level of execution prevented Oregon’s defense from forcing momentum changing stops.
A Balanced Offensive Approach
Indiana never became predictable.
The Hoosiers combined:
- 177 passing yards
- 185 rushing yards
- Seven offensive touchdowns
- Multiple contributors in both phases
Because Oregon had to respect both the run and the pass, Indiana’s offense maintained balance throughout the game. Defensive coordinators often describe this as making an opponent “defend every blade of grass,” and Indiana accomplished exactly that.
Winning First Down
One overlooked aspect of the game was Indiana’s success on early downs.
Positive rushing gains created manageable second and third downs, allowing Mendoza to operate without constantly facing long passing situations.
Oregon, by comparison, frequently found itself behind the chains after negative rushing plays and tackles for loss.
That difference influenced play calling throughout the afternoon.
Oregon’s Biggest Challenges
Although Oregon entered the semifinal with an impressive 13 and 1 record before the game, several issues combined to create a difficult matchup.
Turnovers
Losing two fumbles and throwing an interception placed constant pressure on both the offense and defense.
Each turnover either ended a promising drive or provided Indiana with favorable field position.
Inconsistent Running Game
Outside Dierre Hill Jr.’s explosive 71 yard run, Oregon struggled to establish consistent production on the ground.
The Ducks finished with:
- 26 rushing attempts
- 93 rushing yards
- 3.6 yards per carry
Those numbers were not enough to keep Indiana’s defense honest.
Defensive Pressure
Indiana recorded:
- Three sacks
- Ten tackles for loss
That constant disruption prevented Oregon from maintaining offensive rhythm.
Key Players Who Changed the Outcome
Several individual performances stand above the rest.
Fernando Mendoza
The Indiana quarterback delivered one of the most efficient postseason performances in recent memory.
His numbers included:
- 17 completions
- 20 attempts
- Five passing touchdowns
- No interceptions
- 98.5 quarterback rating
Perhaps more impressive than the statistics was his decision making. He consistently identified favorable matchups and avoided unnecessary risks.
Elijah Sarratt
Sarratt’s seven receptions for 75 yards and two touchdowns gave Indiana a dependable receiving threat throughout the contest.
His ability to create separation in scoring situations proved especially valuable.
Kaelon Black
While Mendoza attracted much of the attention, Black quietly controlled the rushing attack.
His two rushing touchdowns ensured Indiana maintained offensive balance and prevented Oregon from focusing exclusively on defending the pass.
D’Angelo Ponds
Few defensive plays carry more impact than a touchdown.
Ponds intercepted Dante Moore and returned the ball 25 yards for a score, creating one of the defining moments of the semifinal.
That single play represented both outstanding anticipation and disciplined defensive positioning.
Bryce Boettcher
Despite the loss, Boettcher remained active throughout the afternoon.
His team leading 11 tackles reflected consistent effort, even as Indiana’s offense continued finding success.
Complete Team Statistics Comparison
| Category | Indiana | Oregon |
| Final Score | 56 | 22 |
| Passing Yards | 177 | 285 |
| Passing Touchdowns | 5 | 2 |
| Rushing Yards | 185 | 93 |
| Rushing Touchdowns | 2 | 1 |
| Total Offensive Touchdowns | 7 | 3 |
| Completion Percentage | 85% | 60% |
| Sacks | 3 | 1 |
| Tackles for Loss | 10 | 5 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 0 |
| Defensive Touchdowns | 1 | 0 |
| Fumbles Lost | 0 | 2 |
These numbers reinforce why Indiana controlled the game despite throwing for fewer yards.
What the Statistics Reveal Beyond the Box Score
The indiana hoosiers football vs oregon ducks football match player stats demonstrate several broader football lessons.
First, efficiency often matters more than volume.
Oregon produced more passing yards but converted fewer scoring opportunities.
Second, protecting the football remains one of the strongest predictors of success.
Indiana committed no turnovers while Oregon lost possession three times.
Third, balanced offenses are significantly harder to defend.
Indiana’s nearly equal production through the air and on the ground prevented Oregon from focusing on a single aspect of the offense.
Finally, defensive disruption changes games.
Ten tackles for loss and three sacks consistently forced Oregon into difficult situations.
Lessons Coaches Can Take From This Match
This semifinal offers valuable coaching lessons at every level of football.
Prioritize Ball Security
Every possession becomes more valuable during postseason play.
Indiana protected the football, while Oregon surrendered multiple turnovers.
Finish Drives
Touchdowns consistently outweigh field goal opportunities.
Indiana converted scoring chances into seven offensive touchdowns, maximizing nearly every opportunity.
Maintain Offensive Balance
Balanced offenses create uncertainty for opposing defenses.
Indiana’s commitment to both rushing and passing prevented Oregon from becoming comfortable defensively.
Pressure the Quarterback
Quarterback pressure affects more than sack totals.
It influences decision making, timing, accuracy, and overall offensive confidence.
Indiana’s front consistently disrupted Oregon’s offensive rhythm.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Indiana Hoosiers vs Oregon Ducks football game?
Indiana defeated Oregon 56 to 22 in the College Football Playoff semifinal played on January 10, 2026.
Who led Indiana in passing?
Fernando Mendoza completed 17 of 20 passes for 177 yards, five touchdowns, no interceptions, and posted a 98.5 quarterback rating.
Who had the most rushing yards in the game?
Dierre Hill Jr. led all rushers with 86 yards for Oregon, while Kaelon Black led Indiana with 63 rushing yards and two touchdowns.
Which receiver recorded the most receiving yards?
Jamari Johnson led all receivers with 83 receiving yards for Oregon. Elijah Sarratt led Indiana with seven receptions for 75 yards and two touchdowns.
What was the biggest statistical difference between the teams?
The turnover margin and scoring efficiency were decisive. Indiana committed no turnovers, while Oregon lost two fumbles and threw an interception that resulted in a defensive touchdown.
Why are the indiana hoosiers football vs oregon ducks football match player stats significant?
They highlight how efficiency, ball security, balanced offense, and defensive execution can outweigh total passing yardage, offering a clear example of why complete team performance is more important than individual statistical volume.
Conclusion
The indiana hoosiers football vs oregon ducks football match player stats illustrate far more than a lopsided final score. They explain how Indiana executed a complete game plan built on efficiency, discipline, and consistency against one of the nation’s strongest teams.
Fernando Mendoza’s exceptional quarterback play set the tone with five touchdown passes and no interceptions, while the rushing attack added balance with 185 team rushing yards and two touchdowns. Elijah Sarratt emerged as the leading receiving threat, and the defense delivered one of its best performances of the season by forcing turnovers, recording three sacks, and producing a pivotal interception return for a touchdown.
Oregon generated respectable passing production behind Dante Moore’s 285 yards and two touchdown passes, but turnovers, limited rushing success, and difficulties containing Indiana’s balanced offense proved too much to overcome. The statistical comparison demonstrates that efficiency, ball security, and red zone execution often determine playoff games more than total yardage alone.
For coaches, analysts, and college football fans, this matchup serves as an excellent example of how complementary football leads to postseason success. Indiana excelled in every critical phase, transforming strong individual performances into one of the most convincing victories of the College Football Playoff.
