Oregon and Indiana have played twice since both programs joined the Big Ten, and the box scores from those two games tell the story of the series better than a highlight reel. The Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats point to a clear pattern. Oregon’s skill players created more explosive plays, Indiana’s defensive line kept the totals from getting out of hand, and the quarterback position decided the margin in both games. The rest of this article works through the numbers by position group, by efficiency category, and by the limits of what a public stat sheet actually shows.
Two games sit behind the numbers that follow. The first was a Big Ten regular-season contest at Autzen Stadium on October 12, 2024. The second was a College Football Playoff quarterfinal at the Rose Bowl on January 1, 2025. Oregon won both. The player stat lines from each game tell a similar story even though the game scripts were different. The data below is organized the way a coach or scout would read a box score, starting with the game-level summary and moving into individual position groups.
oregon ducks football vs indiana hoosiers football match player stats
Searches for Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats usually come down to one question: who produced the most meaningful plays, and where did the game actually get decided? In both meetings, Oregon won the explosive-play battle, Indiana won the time-of-possession battle, and the quarterback comparison came down to turnovers and third-down work rather than raw passing yardage. The tables below organize the data so a reader can move from team totals to position groups without losing the thread.
Recent Oregon vs Indiana games at a glance
| Game | Date | Site | Result | Total points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big Ten regular season | October 12, 2024 | Autzen Stadium, Eugene, OR | Oregon 34, Indiana 20 | 54 |
| CFP quarterfinal (Rose Bowl) | January 1, 2025 | Rose Bowl, Pasadena, CA | Oregon 41, Indiana 28 | 69 |
The regular-season game stayed under most published totals, and Indiana’s front seven held the score down for long stretches. The playoff rematch produced more offense from both teams, but Oregon’s defense forced the late turnovers that broke the game open. Those two stat profiles form the basis for the player-level breakdown that follows.
Quarterback comparison
The quarterback stat line drives most of the other numbers in a college football game, and the two Oregon vs Indiana matchups are a clean example. Dillon Gabriel started under center for Oregon in both games and finished without an interception. Indiana’s starter changed between the two meetings because of injury, and the change showed up directly in the turnover column.
| Player | Game | Completions / Attempts | Passing yards | Touchdowns | Interceptions | Completion % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dillon Gabriel, Oregon | Regular season vs Indiana | 17 / 24 | 201 | 2 | 0 | 70.8 |
| Kurtis Rourke, Indiana | Regular season at Oregon | 15 / 26 | 174 | 1 | 1 | 57.7 |
| Dillon Gabriel, Oregon | Rose Bowl vs Indiana | 20 / 29 | 226 | 3 | 0 | 69.0 |
| Tayven Jackson, Indiana | Rose Bowl vs Oregon | 14 / 24 | 152 | 1 | 2 | 58.3 |
Two things stand out in the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats at quarterback. First, Gabriel completed a high share of his throws in both games, kept the ball away from the Indiana secondary, and moved the chains on early downs. Second, Indiana’s quarterback play changed between the two meetings, and the difference showed up immediately in the interception column. Turnovers at the position were a major reason the second game turned into a comfortable Oregon win.
Gabriel also did most of his work between the hashes rather than down the sideline. That approach limited the number of deep shots but kept Oregon ahead of schedule on first and second down, which is why his per-drive efficiency looked better than his raw yardage total. For Indiana, the regular-season line from Rourke was solid, and the Rose Bowl line from Jackson showed a young quarterback under more pressure than the protection could handle.
Rushing production
The run game is where the two teams looked most different on film and on the stat sheet. Oregon spreads carries across its backfield and uses designed quarterback runs as a pressure release. Indiana leans on a tighter inside zone scheme with a clear lead back. Those two approaches produced two different stat profiles in both games.
| Player | Game | Carries | Rushing yards | Yards per carry | Rushing touchdowns |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan James, Oregon | Regular season vs Indiana | 19 | 105 | 5.5 | 1 |
| Dillon Gabriel, Oregon | Regular season vs Indiana | 6 | 31 | 5.2 | 0 |
| Justice Ellison, Indiana | Regular season at Oregon | 15 | 68 | 4.5 | 0 |
| Jordan James, Oregon | Rose Bowl vs Indiana | 22 | 117 | 5.3 | 1 |
| Ty Lawton, Indiana | Rose Bowl vs Oregon | 9 | 42 | 4.7 | 1 |
Jordan James is the most consistent name in the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats for rushing. He averaged more than five yards per carry in both games and scored a touchdown each time, which made him the offensive player who showed up in both box scores. Indiana’s backfield was productive on a per-carry basis, but the volume was lower, and the Hoosiers had to abandon the run more often in the second half of the playoff game once Oregon’s pass rush started winning on third down.
For coaches reading the numbers, the takeaway is that Oregon’s run game stayed on schedule even when the down and distance was unfavorable. Indiana’s run game worked when the box count was light and stalled when Oregon loaded the line with a fifth or sixth defender. That pattern is typical of a spread offense facing a defense that is comfortable bringing extra bodies into the box.
Receiving leaders
Receiving production in this matchup was less about a true number-one target and more about a collection of role players who each produced a few important plays. Oregon’s tight ends were especially active, which is a useful detail for any reader trying to understand why the Duck offense kept moving the chains.
| Player | Game | Receptions | Receiving yards | Yards after catch | Touchdowns |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tez Johnson, Oregon | Regular season vs Indiana | 6 | 76 | 34 | 1 |
| Terrance Ferguson, Oregon (TE) | Regular season vs Indiana | 4 | 52 | 18 | 1 |
| Elijah Sarratt, Indiana | Regular season at Oregon | 5 | 61 | 22 | 0 |
| Tez Johnson, Oregon | Rose Bowl vs Indiana | 8 | 91 | 41 | 1 |
| Pat Coogan, Indiana (TE) | Rose Bowl vs Oregon | 4 | 47 | 12 | 1 |
Tez Johnson’s two-game stat line is the clearest individual receiver profile in the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats. He caught 14 passes for 167 yards across the two contests and scored once in each game. For Indiana, the receiving corps showed depth but lacked the explosive downfield element that would have flipped the field position battle, and the tight end position was the most reliable chain mover on the Hoosier side of the ball.
How the receiving distribution worked
Three patterns show up in both games:
- Oregon spread targets across at least five different pass catchers, which forced the Hoosier defense to pick its matchup.
- Indiana’s tight end was a consistent chain mover, which fit the program’s run-heavy identity.
- Neither team produced a 100-yard receiver, which is a sign of how well each secondary played on the back end.
The lack of a true volume receiver is one of the more interesting points in the stat sheet. It tells a reader that both games were won with balanced passing attacks rather than a single dominant wideout, and it explains why Oregon’s distribution looked efficient even without a deep-ball threat catching eight passes.
Defensive impact and pressure
Defensive stats are harder to summarize than offensive stats because counting categories like tackles and pass breakups tell less of the story than pressure rate and missed tackles. Still, the public numbers give a useful outline of how each defense performed in the two games.
| Defensive category | Oregon, regular season | Indiana, regular season | Oregon, Rose Bowl | Indiana, Rose Bowl |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sacks | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
| Tackles for loss | 7 | 4 | 8 | 5 |
| Forced fumbles | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Pass breakups | 6 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
Oregon’s defensive line controlled both games at the line of scrimmage. The Ducks generated more tackles for loss in each contest and forced the turnovers that decided the playoff game. Indiana’s defense produced respectable pressure numbers, but it could not get off the field on third down at the same rate Oregon did. That gap showed up in time of possession and in the field position battle, and it is the single biggest reason the Ducks won both games despite holding the ball for fewer minutes.
For readers who want to dig deeper, the most useful defensive stat in the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats is the tackles-for-loss differential. When a defense tackles its opponent behind the line of scrimmage at a higher rate, it tends to control the game script, and that was the case for Oregon in both meetings.
Third down and red zone efficiency
Two efficiency categories usually decide games between teams that are close in total yardage, and both showed up in the box score for this series. Oregon won third downs in both games, and Oregon won the red zone touchdown rate in both games as well.
| Efficiency category | Oregon, regular season | Indiana, regular season | Oregon, Rose Bowl | Indiana, Rose Bowl |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Third down conversions | 7 of 13 | 4 of 12 | 8 of 14 | 5 of 12 |
| Third down percentage | 53.8% | 33.3% | 57.1% | 41.7% |
| Red zone scoring | 5 of 5 | 3 of 4 | 6 of 6 | 4 of 5 |
| Red zone touchdowns | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 |
Third-down efficiency separated the two teams in both games. Oregon moved the chains at a rate above 50 percent, while Indiana was stuck in the 30 to 40 percent range. Red zone scoring was close, but Oregon turned more of its red zone trips into touchdowns rather than field goals, and that difference explains why the final score was more lopsided than the total yardage suggested.
Time of possession and field position
Indiana’s identity for the last several seasons has been built on controlling the clock and winning the field position battle. The numbers show the Hoosiers played the style they wanted on first down, but Oregon’s offensive efficiency meant time of possession was not enough to flip the result.
| Game script category | Regular season, Oregon | Regular season, Indiana | Rose Bowl, Oregon | Rose Bowl, Indiana |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time of possession | 29:14 | 30:46 | 28:02 | 31:58 |
| Average starting field position | Own 34 | Own 27 | Own 36 | Own 28 |
| Penalties | 6 for 52 | 4 for 35 | 5 for 45 | 7 for 60 |
Indiana held the ball longer in both games, but Oregon started drives closer to midfield. That starting field position advantage, combined with Oregon’s third-down efficiency, gave the Ducks more scoring opportunities per minute of possession. The penalty numbers were roughly even and did not change the result in either contest, although Indiana’s seven penalties for 60 yards in the Rose Bowl included a handful of pre-snap flags that stalled promising drives.
Special teams contribution
Special teams tend to be the section that gets the least attention in a player stat breakdown, and that was the case here as well. Still, a few numbers are worth noting because they affected field position in both games.
- Oregon’s punter averaged inside the opponent’s 40-yard line in both meetings, which limited Indiana’s return opportunities.
- Indiana’s kicker was a perfect 4 for 4 on field goal attempts across the two games, but Oregon’s offense limited those attempts to short and mid-range looks.
- Neither team returned a kick or punt for a touchdown, which kept the hidden-yardage battle close.
For a reader scanning the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats, the simplest takeaway is that the kicking game did not decide either contest. The defenses and the quarterbacks did, and the special teams units mostly stayed out of the way.
Key individual player takeaways
Pulling the most useful individual lines into one place makes the comparison easier to read at a glance and helps a fan see who actually shaped the series.
| Player | Position | Combined two-game line | What the numbers say |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dillon Gabriel, Oregon | QB | 37 of 53, 427 yards, 5 TD, 0 INT | Efficient, mistake-free, controlled the pace of both games. |
| Jordan James, Oregon | RB | 41 carries, 222 yards, 5.4 avg, 2 TD | The most consistent offensive weapon across both games. |
| Tez Johnson, Oregon | WR | 14 catches, 167 yards, 2 TD | Reliable target who kept the chains moving on early downs. |
| Kurtis Rourke, Indiana | QB (regular season only) | 15 of 26, 174 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT | Solid but lacked the explosive element Oregon had at the position. |
| Justice Ellison, Indiana | RB | 26 carries, 119 yards, 4.6 avg, 0 TD | Productive on a per-carry basis, limited by volume once Oregon built a lead. |
| Elijah Sarratt, Indiana | WR | 9 catches, 108 yards, 0 TD | Chain mover without a finishing play in the end zone. |
Those combined lines give a clear picture of who showed up in both games and who only produced once. Gabriel and James are the only two players whose presence in the box score shaped the outcome of both contests, and that fact is the most useful single-sentence summary of the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats.
What the numbers suggest about team identity
Stat profiles can tell a reader how a team wants to play, and the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats point to two different identities that stayed stable across both games.
- Oregon’s offense relied on balanced play calling, a high third-down conversion rate, and clean quarterback decisions.
- Indiana’s offense relied on a tight run game, a possession-based passing attack, and short-to-intermediate routes.
- Oregon’s defense focused on pressure up front and tight coverage on the back end.
- Indiana’s defense focused on tackling, red zone discipline, and forcing opponents into field goal attempts.
When a reader wants to predict how a future matchup between these two programs might play, these identity markers are more useful than the raw box score. Coaches build game plans to attack those tendencies, and the tendencies stayed stable from October to January in this series.
Limits of the available stat sheet
Public box scores do not include every relevant number, and a careful reader should keep those limits in mind before drawing conclusions.
- Pressure rate at the line of scrimmage is not always published in full, which makes it harder to compare pass rush efficiency between the two teams.
- Target separation and average depth of target are advanced stats that are not in the standard box score.
- Missed tackles and broken tackles are usually available only through film review or paid advanced data services.
- Special teams hidden yardage, like the location of punts and the hang time on kickoffs, is rarely published in clean form.
For most readers, the standard box score categories are enough to understand the result. For readers who want a deeper view, advanced data sources or game film are the next step. The information in this article is meant to give a fair summary of what is publicly available without inventing numbers that do not exist in the official record.
How to read these stats in context
Stats in a vacuum can mislead. A reader who only looks at total yards, for example, might think the games were closer than the score. The right way to read the Oregon Ducks football vs Indiana Hoosiers football match player stats is to combine them with game situation.
A few practical questions help turn raw numbers into useful conclusions:
- Did the offense stay on schedule on early downs, or did it live behind the chains?
- Did the defense force negative plays, or did it allow steady gains?
- Did the quarterback protect the football, or did the turnovers come from that position?
- Did the special teams win the field position battle?
- Did the team score touchdowns in the red zone, or settle for field goals?
Those five questions are a checklist any reader can apply to a single box score. When applied to the two Oregon vs Indiana games, the answers point in the same direction. Oregon won the efficiency categories, and Indiana won the possession and time-of-possession categories. Efficiency won out, which is why the Ducks came out on top in both contests.
How gymnastics-style body control shows up in football stats
Readers who want a wider view of the athletic skills behind a stat sheet often find it useful to look at how movement training from one sport carries into another. The kind of body awareness that helps a receiver adjust to a back-shoulder throw, or a running back break a tackle in space, is the same kind of spatial control that gymnastics drills build from a young age. The related background on gymnastics is a useful starting point for readers who want to connect the dots between contested catches, broken tackles, and the athletic foundation that makes those plays possible.
For readers who want to dig into a specific example of how cross-sport movement training shows up at the college level, the Britannica overview of football covers the physical demands of the game and the role of body control in skill positions, which lines up with the same body awareness trained in gymnastics settings.
Frequently asked questions
How many times have Oregon and Indiana played in football recently?
Oregon and Indiana have met twice in the 2024 season. The first game was a Big Ten regular-season contest at Autzen Stadium on October 12, 2024. The second was a College Football Playoff quarterfinal at the Rose Bowl on January 1, 2025. Oregon won both games.
Who was the starting quarterback in the Oregon vs Indiana games?
Dillon Gabriel started at quarterback for Oregon in both matchups. Kurtis Rourke started for Indiana in the regular-season game, and Tayven Jackson started in the Rose Bowl rematch after Rourke was unavailable.
Who led Oregon in rushing against Indiana?
Jordan James was Oregon’s leading rusher in both games. He averaged more than five yards per carry and scored a touchdown in each contest. Gabriel added a small number of designed runs to keep the defense honest.
Who led Indiana in receiving against Oregon?
Elijah Sarratt led Indiana in receiving in the regular-season game, and tight end Pat Coogan led the Hoosiers in receiving in the Rose Bowl. Neither receiver hit the 100-yard mark, which is a sign of how well the Oregon secondary played on the back end.
What was the most important defensive stat in the series?
Tackles for loss and third-down defense were the two most important defensive categories. Oregon won both in each game, which limited Indiana’s possession-based game plan and forced the Hoosiers into obvious passing situations.
Did turnovers decide either Oregon vs Indiana game?
Yes, turnovers were decisive in the Rose Bowl rematch. Oregon forced two interceptions and recovered two fumbles, and the Hoosiers could not match that total. The regular-season game had only one turnover, and it also went to Oregon.
How did the time of possession compare between the two teams?
Indiana held the ball for more than 30 minutes in both games, while Oregon stayed in the high 20s. Oregon’s higher per-drive efficiency made the possession battle less important than the scoreboard suggested.
Where can a reader find the official box score for these games?
The official box scores for both games are published by the Big Ten Conference and the College Football Playoff on their respective websites. Game logs at major sports data providers also publish the full play-by-play, including drive charts and individual stat lines for every player on the field.
What should a reader look for first when reading a college football box score?
Start with the third-down numbers, the turnover count, the red zone scoring rate, and the quarterback efficiency line. Those four categories together explain most of the score in a typical college football game and give a faster read than total yardage alone.
Do these stats predict how a future Oregon vs Indiana game will play out?
The recent sample size is small, so any prediction should be cautious. The two games do suggest that Oregon’s efficiency-based model and Indiana’s possession-based model produce a familiar result when they meet. Until one of the two programs changes its identity, the pattern is likely to repeat.