It’s time for the annual look at each Mountain West team’s recruiting level compared to the rest of the college football landscape. Here is last year’s post if you want a bit of a refresher. These posts
aim to identify how each team recruits by looking at the teams in the same range as each of the twelve Mountain West members. That helps us determine which MWC teams are recruiting above, at, or below their conference affiliation.
Keep in mind this isn’t necessarily describing the quality of players each team recruits, as many teams in the Mountain West play above or below their level of recruiting. Instead, this attempts to give a range of comparisons for how each team recruited this past year. Each range is determined by looking at teams within three composite points above or below their own.
Note: All rankings are taken from 247 Sports composite recruiting rankings (meaning transfers do not factor in) and are accurate as of 2/7/26.
Air Force
2026 Ranking: 138
Closest Comparisons: UC Davis
Bottom Line:
As has been discussed many times, the Falcons’ recruiting is much different from the rest of the conference, being an academy school. They are looking for specific types of players to fit their scheme, and the number of their commits can skew their rankings. That being said, Air Force has been at the bottom of the 247 rankings for a few cycles now, which is lower than what they were previously. UC Davis is not the company they want to be keeping, although they are in line with Army and Navy, so perhaps this is the fate of academy schools in the NIL era.
Boise State
2026 Ranking: 53
Closest Comparisons: Kentucky, Northwestern, Boston College, Kansas State, Purdue, Iowa State
Bottom Line:
The Broncos again find themselves ranked among and higher than many teams that reside in conferences that are deemed to be of the power variety. In fact, all of their closest comparisons are P4 schools, and while they aren’t rubbing shoulders with the recruiting blue-bloods, they are in good company. Boise State should be on one side or the other of a top-50 class each year, and doing so will allow them to remain near or at the top of G6 recruiting, as they accomplished once again this year.
Colorado State
2026 Ranking: 71
Closest Comparisons: Colorado, Oklahoma State, Duke, Tulane, Baylor, Wisconsin, Texas State, Fresno State, Troy, Memphis, Bowling Green, South Alabama
Bottom Line:
The Rams turned in a strong G6 class, which is especially impressive considering they fired their coach halfway through the season and still kept the bulk of it together. The comparison list is large and covers a wide spectrum of programs. It’s filled with some teams that lost their coach and thus their recruiting class, as well as teams that are leaning into the transfer portal more. Plus, two current or future conference peers. All of that puts Colorado State in good company, and being in the same recruiting conversation as in-state rival Colorado is a good thing for the program.
Fresno State
2026 Ranking: 74
Closest Comparisons: Baylor, Colorado State, Wisconsin, Texas State, Troy, Memphis, Bowling Green, South Alabama, San Diego State, James Madison
Bottom Line:
The Bulldogs put together a nice class overall, securing a top-75 class in the first full cycle of the Matt Entz era. Like the Rams above, this list sees some bigger names with P4 pedigree, even if they aren’t pedigree programs themselves. However, Fresno State fits neatly among three other future PAC-12 schools, which is a good thing, as well as two other prominent mid-major programs. However, those other mid-majors both lost their coach this cycle, so context is important. It will be worth seeing who they compare to next time around.
Hawaii
2026 Ranking: 120
Closest Comparisons: Kessesaw State, Kent State, Ball State
Bottom Line:
Hawaii’s successful 2025 season on the field didn’t lead to many gains in the 2026 recruiting rankings. They have a nice recruiting philosophy going and are executing it very well. The problem is they haven’t been able to make any big splashes to tie the class together. It isn’t easy to recruit to the Islands, as can be seen in the rankings and corresponding comparisons, but if Hawaii wants to sustain its success, finding ways to move closer to the 100-110 range and distinguishing itself from mid to low FBS programs would be a solid next step.
Nevada
2026 Ranking: 90
Closest Comparisons: East Carolina, UTEP, South Florida, New Mexico, Central Michigan, FIU, UTSA, Tulsa, Louisiana, Old Dominion, Charlotte, Utah State, Eastern Michigan, Nebraska, Virginia
Bottom Line:
The Wolf Pack have turned in back-to-back top-100 recruiting classes, which is no small feat considering the hard times on the field. They slot nicely between a whole host of G6 programs, as well as a top G6 team and two P4 schools that look out of place. Nevada doesn’t want to keep this company every year, but the coaching staff has shown an ability to recruit, and if they can find a way to be one of the better recruiting teams in the Mountain West, that could go a long way. Of course, they will need to get more wins on the field.
New Mexico
2026 Ranking: 89
Closest Comparisons: East Carolina, UTEP, South Florida, Nevada, Central Michigan, FIU, UTSA, Tulsa, Louisiana, Old Dominion, Charlotte, Utah State, Eastern Michigan, Nebraska, Virginia
Bottom Line:
Much of the same can be said for the Lobos, as they and the Wolf Pack have the exact same comparison list. After being one of the lowest-ranked teams in the entire 247 list, jumping all the way up to an average G6 school is an outstanding accomplishment. New Mexico was able to turn in a pretty good class, and the hope is that they haven’t plateaued yet. It’s not easy to recruit to Albuquerque, but capitalizing on their fun season is a good way to balance the scales in their favor.
San Diego State
2026 Ranking: 79
Closest Comparisons: Fresno State, Troy, Memphis, Bowling Green, South Alabama, James Madison, Arkansas State, Western Kentucky, UConn
Bottom Line:
The Aztecs turned in another good recrutiing year under Coach Lewis, but it does appear they are struggling to take that next step. The company they are keeping isn’t bad, but it’s definitely more “regular mid-major” than “top mid-major” program. Considering their location and history of quality play, it is a bit confusing. San Diego State will need to find a way to see a P4 team or two in their comparison group going forward.
San Jose State
2026 Ranking: 128
Closest Comparisons: Montana State, Washington State, Missouri State, Middle Tennessee, Sam Houston
Bottom Line:
San Jose State has fallen off over the past few cycles, dropping down to the bottom of the FBS for recruiting. Part of that likely stems from their philosophy, which has been transfer-heavy since the new regime took over, but that approach isn’t sustainable for building a successful program. The Spartans are in a fertile recruiting area, and the program found some success luring local talent to the team. Overall, it’s a concerning trend that they will need to find a way to reverse.
UNLV
2026 Ranking: 60
Closest Comparisons: Cincinnati, App State, Kansas, Penn State
Bottom Line:
The Rebels’ class and ranking are more impressive than the list of comparable schools, but it’s worth discussing either way. Having a class in the same sentence as Penn State is quite the feat, even if it comes with an asterisk. Pairing up with two other power schools and a name-brand G6 school puts the program in good company. UNLV turning in a top 60 class is still low-level P4, and it shows off their recruiting prowess. Look for this to be their expected landing spot for the foreseeable future.
Utah State
2026 Ranking: 98
Closest Comparisons: East Carolina, UTEP, South Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, Central Michigan, FIU, UTSA, Tulsa, Louisiana, Old Dominion, Charlotte, Eastern Michigan, Nebraska, Virginia, Buffalo
Bottom Line:
The Aggies are another team that is included in this huge bundle of schools on the favorable side of the top-100. In the 2026 class, they continued prioritizing local players, as well as others in the high school ranks. The strategy paid off a bit this year, as they rubbed shoulders with a few power programs, some strong mid-major recruiters in key states like Florida and Texas, and (former) conference peers. While Utah State will need to continue to improve its recruiting to find more success on the field, it’s refreshing to see the program prioritize recruiting again.
Wyoming
2026 Ranking: 109
Closest Comparisons: Buffalo, Georgia State, Liberty, Ohio, Oregon State, Georgia Southern, Louisiana Tech, Western Michigan, Miami (OH), Rice, Southern Miss
Bottom Line:
Considering their struggles on the field this season, the Cowboys were able to turn in a decent recruiting class, all things considered. Their list of comparisons makes sense at first glance, as they are mostly all average Group of 5 teams. That isn’t meant to be a slight, but rather a description of average teams turning in average recruiting classes. Of course, the hope is that Wyoming is capable of doing better going forward, but this isn’t the worst spot for them considering location, NIL funds, and recent play.
Summary:
Let’s summarize and reorder a bit by grouping the teams in different classifications. These categories are fairly arbitrary, but they serve to provide context for each team’s recruiting efforts. Keep in mind, there are 136 FBS teams.
Recruits at a lower Power 4 level (46-68): Boise State, UNLV
Recruits at a high Group of 6 level (69-85): Colorado State, Fresno State, San Diego State
Recruits at a middle Group of 6 level (86-100): New Mexico, Nevada, Utah State
Recruits at a lower Group of 6 level (101-120): Wyoming, Hawaii
Recruits near the bottom of the FBS (121-134): San Jose State
Recruits at an FCS level (135 or below): Air Force
In the 2026 cycle, the 12 Mountain West teams ranged in every category. Two-thirds of teams placing in the top 100 is a nice development and an acceptable outcome. Two teams leading the charge at a P4 level, three teams in the top mid-major grouping, and three more on track as middle-of-the-pack G5 recruiting teams. Even two teams in the lower G6 tier have distinct geographical uniquenesses to provide some context. It’s the bottom two teams that are the biggest causes for concern. Some of it can be explained by being an academy team and a program that skews towards transfer players, but each of them moving up a category would be more acceptable.
With all of that being said, every year, there are lots of players who outperform their recruiting rankings. And there are highly rated prospects who don’t pan out. There is no denying that. Some teams outperform their rankings annually, achieving winning records despite not landing high on the rankings lists.
On the other hand, players play to their rankings more often than not. And it is certainly better to get better players (by whatever metric coaches use to recruit). We will likely never know, but the important question to consider is where on the recruiting board are the players they are landing? Are teams getting players from their top few tiers or landing commits at lower points on the board?
For fans of teams who recruit to a specialized scheme or standard (Air Force) or the teams mentioned above who excel in player development, or who just don’t care about recruiting, this post may not carry much weight. At the end of the day, it is still interesting to know how teams measure up both in the conference and across the board. Recruiting is the lifeblood of a college program, and it bodes well for teams to recruit well. Then, of course, they have to develop the skills and the culture to produce winning. Consider this post an emphasis on step one of the process.
