What does Utah football's returning production mean for Utes' 2026 outlook?

Utes don't rank highly in returning production going into 2026, though recent data shows that might just be OK for Morgan Scalley and company

Utah Utes head coach Morgan Scalley. | Rob Gray-Imagn Images

When the previous regime in charge of Utah football moved on to other opportunities this past winter, seemingly every fan and follower of the Utes looked to the players who didn't enter the transfer portal as a way of measuring how well Morgan Scalley and his new staff fared in the damage control department.

In college football, a program's ability to retain its key players is romanticized by most fans and analysts. The line of thinking is: the more returners a team has, the better its culture and continuity will be going into the new season. And in theory, that makes sense.

It just doesn't always work out that way.

Remember when everyone hyped up Clemson as a surefire national title contender going into 2025 because Dabo Swinney and company had the highest returning production rate in the country? Well, the Tigers went 7-6 and finished outside the top 30 in the ESPN SP+ rankings. The team with the second-highest returning production rate was Arizona State, which wound up going 8-5 (largely due to injuries).

So, when calculating a team's outlook — or in Utah's case, grading its transition process — remember that the number of returners doesn't always equate to success on the field. Of course, there have been examples where that ends being the case — like Texas Tech, for example, was No. 4 in returning production going into 2025 before capturing the Big 12 title and spot in the College Football Playoff.

In short, there's not enough conclusive data that shows where the balance between acquiring new talent via the portal and bringing back certain parts of the roster translates to guaranteed success. Transfer portal and high school recruiting certainly matter, as does retaining high-upside and important players from the year prior. Perhaps time will tell whether, somewhere in between those aspects of roster building, a perfect harmony exists.

For now, there's only room for speculation and more data-gathering. Based on the information assembled from the portal, it appears the Utes will go into the 2026 campaign with less returning production than they did entering 2025.

According to ESPN's Bill Connelly, Utah returns 55% of its roster output from last season, ranking No. 54 in the country overall and No. 9 among Big 12 teams in that category. The Utes bring back 55% of their offense (No. 64 nationally) and 55% of their defense (No. 53), with standouts like Devon Dampier, Byrd Ficklin, Wayshawn Parker, Jackson Bennee and Elijah "Scooby" Davis headlining the players from the 2025 squad who are back in Salt Lake City for Scalley's first full season as head coach.

Last season, Utah was No. 41 in returning production at 61% overall. The Utes went 11-2 and captured the Las Vegas Bowl in their season finale with a dominant win over Nebraska.

Utah might not be near the top of the country in returning production, though the expectation is that the Utes will compete for a Big 12 title nonetheless this upcoming season. FanDuel Sportsbook has Utah's win total set for 8.5, which is tied with BYU for the second-highest win total in the Big 12 behind Texas Tech (11.5).

The Utes kick off the 2026 campaign on Sept. 3 with a home game against Idaho.

Big 12 Returning Production Ranks

Team	Returning Production Overall (National Rank)	Returning Production on Offense (National Rank)	Returning Production on Defense (National Rank)
Texas Tech	65% (No. 12)	67% (No. 20)	64% (No. 17)
Houston	65% (No. 17)	71% (No. 7)	58% (No. 44)
BYU	64% (No. 18)	59% (No. 50)	69% (No. 6)
UCF	61% (No. 29)	61% (No. 41)	60% (No. 37)
Arizona	60% (No. 32)	66% (No. 24)	55% (No. 56)
Kansas State	58% (No. 38)	65% (No. 25)	51% (No. 73)
Kansas	58% (No. 39)	49% (No. 79)	67% (No. 10)
Oklahoma State	58% (No. 42)	62% (No. 35)	53% (No. 65)
Cincinnati	57% (No. 50)	57% (No. 57)	56% (No. 50)
Utah	55% (No. 54)	55% (No. 64)	55% (No. 53)
Colorado	55% (No. 55)	57% (No. 60)	53% (No. 66)
Baylor	53% (No. 61)	44% (No. 102)	62% (No. 22)
West Virginia	52% (No. 66)	57% (No. 55)	46% (No. 86)
TCU	51% (No. 69)	44% (No. 100)	58% (No. 42)
Arizona State	51% (No. 70)	53% (No. 70)	49% (No. 79)
Iowa State	45% (No. 102)	44% (No. 104)	46% (No. 85)