Data degraded verified 2026-10-17 23:05 UTC
CFBD inputsfresh 23 endpoints · oldest live input 46d ago
DraftKings lines30/59 matched fresh · 54 credits remain
Model lineage2026.09-independent-venue-fcs full efficiency regime
2026 shadow record349 games forecast MAE 13.49 · independent 13.99
DraftKings has not posted or matched 29 game(s)
CHASE ANALYTICS MODEL LAB

College Football Model

A point-in-time CFB forecasting system that publishes its own spread and total against verified DraftKings quotes, with opponent-adjusted team strength, early-season reliability weighting, and a timestamped shadow record.

validated regime 59 games 138 FBS teams rated generated 2026-10-17 23:05 UTC
RESEARCH_ONLY may_bet = false 7 of 10 gates unmet

reports/BASELINE_2019_2025.md - walk-forward on 3,256 out-of-sample FBS games, opponent-adjusted: model MAE 12.5251 vs closing market 12.1596 (0.3655 worse); ATS on disagreements 51.11%, 95% CI [49.39%, 52.84%] - straddles the 52.38% breakeven, so unproven rather than confidently losing

✓ historical seasons at least 6✓ out of sample games at least 1500✓ out of sample bets at least 300○ timestamped quote coverage at least 0.98○ model mae below closing market○ ats lower confidence bound above breakeven○ roi lower confidence bound above zero after cost○ probability space clv above zero○ calibration ece at most 0.025○ shadow days at least 90
12.5423Independent model MAE1,548 games · weeks 1–6 · 2021–2025
11.8741Market MAEsame games · market remains better
52.42%ATS disagreements95% CI [49.91, 54.92] · still unproven
62.5%Underdog-side share69.2% before transition calibration
00 · Picks

Week 7 Best Bets

The board’s strongest disagreements with DraftKings, each with the angle behind it. Each pick is graded at the line it was first published at. Hit estimates give the model only the weight it earned against the market in held-out seasons, so they sit close to 50%. Every pick is logged before kickoff and graded. Season record: Spreads 10-8-0 (+1.1u, mean CLV +0.56) · Totals 4-5-0 (-1.4u, mean CLV +1.22). Evidence bar: 27 of 200 graded picks, win rate 51.9% (95% lower bound 34.0% vs 52.4% breakeven) - not met; these stay research picks. Research picks, not advice: authority is RESEARCH_ONLY until the record earns otherwise.

Spreads

Missouri +27.5 -110
Missouri @ Ole Miss · model 8.9 vs book 27.5 · edge 18.6 pts · est. 59% to hitinjury-report

The angle: The model makes it Ole Miss by 8.9; DraftKings has Missouri +27.5, a 18.6-point disagreement toward Missouri. Driven by: Missouri's defense ranks 6th in FBS in success rate allowed to Ole Miss's 81st (worth 6.9 pts); Missouri's offense ranks 42nd in FBS in explosiveness to Ole Miss's 115th (worth 1.2 pts). Injury report: Ole Miss lists 9 players out or doubtful (LB Ant Davis Jr., OL Emanuel Faulkner, OL Enoch Wangoy, ...). Risk: Missouri lists 6 players out or doubtful (OL Josh Atkins, OL Khalief Canty Jr., RB Ahmad Hardy, ...).

Eastern Michigan +19.5 -110
Toledo @ Eastern Michigan · model 3.2 vs book 19.5 · edge 16.3 pts · est. 58% to hitinjury-report

The angle: The model makes it Toledo by 3.2; DraftKings has Eastern Michigan +19.5, a 16.3-point disagreement toward Eastern Michigan. Driven by: Eastern Michigan's defense ranks 32nd in FBS in explosiveness allowed to Toledo's 115th (worth 2.0 pts); Eastern Michigan's offense ranks 70th in FBS in success rate to Toledo's 91st (worth 1.2 pts). Injury report: Toledo lists 12 players out or doubtful (DE Langston Long, DE Zackery Samuel, DT Cam Gwinn, ...). Risk: Eastern Michigan QB Noah Kim is listed questionable; Eastern Michigan lists 21 players out or doubtful (DB Antonio Solares-Vitti, DB Jabari Monds, DB Jaivian Norman, ...).

Northern Illinois +18.5 -110
Northern Illinois @ Wyoming · model 7.8 vs book 18.5 · edge 10.7 pts · est. 55% to hit

The angle: The model makes it Wyoming by 7.8; DraftKings has Northern Illinois +18.5, a 10.7-point disagreement toward Northern Illinois. Driven by: Northern Illinois's defense ranks 75th in FBS in run-stuff rate to Wyoming's 132nd (worth 1.1 pts); Northern Illinois's offense ranks 90th in FBS in explosiveness to Wyoming's 123rd (worth 0.7 pts). Home field is worth 7.9 pts at this venue (more than the FBS-average 4.5: altitude, travel and time zones).

New Mexico -14.5 -110
New Mexico @ Hawai'i · model -23.9 vs book -14.5 · edge 9.4 pts · est. 55% to hit

The angle: The model makes it New Mexico by 23.9; DraftKings has New Mexico -14.5, a 9.4-point disagreement toward New Mexico. Driven by: New Mexico's defense ranks 48th in FBS in success rate allowed to Hawai'i's 137th (worth 6.9 pts); New Mexico's offense ranks 6th in FBS in explosiveness to Hawai'i's 122nd (worth 2.4 pts). Home field is worth 2.4 pts at this venue (less than the FBS-average 4.5: altitude, travel and time zones).

Troy +15.5 -110
Troy @ Louisiana · model 7 vs book 15.5 · edge 8.5 pts · est. 54% to hit

The angle: The model makes it Louisiana by 7.0; DraftKings has Troy +15.5, a 8.5-point disagreement toward Troy. Driven by: Troy's offense ranks 54th in FBS in success rate to Louisiana's 110th (worth 3.8 pts).

Totals

Over 34.5 -110
Missouri @ Ole Miss · model 52.9 vs book 34.5 · edge 18.4 pts · est. 59% to hit

The angle: The model projects 52.9 combined points against a DraftKings total of 34.5 (18.4 over). Efficiency: Missouri offense 52nd / defense 20th in EPA per play; Ole Miss offense 4th / defense 67th in EPA per play. Pace: the two teams average 61 plays a game.

Under 56.5 -110
Washington State @ Oregon State · model 42.5 vs book 56.5 · edge 14.0 pts · est. 57% to hit

The angle: The model projects 42.5 combined points against a DraftKings total of 56.5 (14.0 under). Efficiency: Washington State offense 128th / defense 60th in EPA per play; Oregon State offense 23rd / defense 31st in EPA per play. Pace: the two teams average 57 plays a game.

Under 64.5 -110
Northern Illinois @ Wyoming · model 51.4 vs book 64.5 · edge 13.1 pts · est. 56% to hit

The angle: The model projects 51.4 combined points against a DraftKings total of 64.5 (13.1 under). Efficiency: Northern Illinois offense 130th / defense 127th in EPA per play; Wyoming offense 103rd / defense 130th in EPA per play. Pace: the two teams average 61 plays a game.

00b · Market

Week 7 Sharp Money & Line Moves

DraftKings’ public splits: where the share of money runs well ahead of the share of bets (fewer, larger wagers), ranked with how far the line has moved toward that side since it was first logged. Season record of these spots: Spreads 19-33-2 (-15.6u, mean CLV -0.08) · Totals 29-22-0 (+4.7u, mean CLV +0.39). Market observations, not model picks.

San Diego State +7 concentration 50
Fresno State @ San Diego State · 80% of money / 36% of bets · line +7.5 → +7reverse line movemodel agrees

80% of the money on San Diego State from 36% of the bets. Line +7.5 -> +7: toward the money side. Reverse line movement: the number moved with the money, against the tickets. The model agrees.

Syracuse +14.5 concentration 31
Louisville @ Syracuse · 72% of money / 41% of bets · line +14.5 → +14.5model agrees

72% of the money on Syracuse from 41% of the bets. The model agrees.

UTEP +6.5 concentration 28
San José State @ UTEP · 63% of money / 43% of bets · line +7.5 → +6.5reverse line movemodel agrees

63% of the money on UTEP from 43% of the bets. Line +7.5 -> +6.5: toward the money side. Reverse line movement: the number moved with the money, against the tickets. The model agrees.

Oklahoma -6.5 concentration 27
Kentucky @ Oklahoma · 56% of money / 29% of bets · line -7 → -6.5model disagrees

56% of the money on Oklahoma from 29% of the bets. Line -7 -> -6.5: away from the money side. The model is on the other side.

Colorado +15.5 concentration 25
Utah @ Colorado · 40% of money / 15% of bets · line +15.5 → +15.5model agrees

40% of the money on Colorado from 15% of the bets. The model agrees.

UTSA -5.5 concentration 19
Navy @ UTSA · 92% of money / 73% of bets · line -6.5 → -5.5model agrees

92% of the money on UTSA from 73% of the bets. Line -6.5 -> -5.5: away from the money side. The model agrees.

Under 46.5 concentration 81
Ohio @ Sacramento State · 88% of money / 18% of bets · line 48.5 → 46.5reverse line movemodel agrees

88% of the money on the under from 18% of the bets. Total 48.5 -> 46.5: toward the money side. Reverse line movement against the ticket majority. The model agrees.

Under 49.5 concentration 56
Utah @ Colorado · 69% of money / 13% of bets · line 49.5 → 49.5model agrees

69% of the money on the under from 13% of the bets. The model agrees.

Over 45.5 concentration 30
San José State @ UTEP · 55% of money / 25% of bets · line 46.5 → 45.5model disagrees

55% of the money on the over from 25% of the bets. Total 46.5 -> 45.5: away from the money side. The model is on the other side.

Over 46.5 concentration 18
Notre Dame @ BYU · 91% of money / 73% of bets · line 49.5 → 46.5model disagrees

91% of the money on the over from 73% of the bets. Total 49.5 -> 46.5: away from the money side. The model is on the other side.

Under 56.5 concentration 16
Louisville @ Syracuse · 26% of money / 10% of bets · line 55.5 → 56.5model disagrees

26% of the money on the under from 10% of the bets. Total 55.5 -> 56.5: away from the money side. The model is on the other side.

Over 62.5 concentration 14
Oklahoma State @ Houston · 98% of money / 84% of bets · line 62.5 → 62.5model disagrees

98% of the money on the over from 84% of the bets. The model is on the other side.

01 · Slate

Week 7 Board

Forecast margin is the home side and comes from the independent model. DraftKings is the live benchmark it is trying to beat, not the published number. Expand any game for the full breakdown. Authority remains RESEARCH_ONLY: historical ATS on disagreements has not cleared 52.38% breakeven.

Delaware
Conference USA
25
AT
Tue Oct 13 · 7:00 PM ET
24
Middle Tennessee
Conference USA
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -0.7
Forecast -0.7 independent model
Total 49.0 consensus 49.5
Edge +0.5
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorDEL MTSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3940.383-0.50
Offense · explosiveness1.291.17-0.69
Offense · PPA per play0.0990.014-0.47
Offense · stuffed rate0.2300.249-0.23
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4380.458-1.01
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.281.11+1.12
Defense · PPA allowed0.1840.147+0.24
Defense · stuff rate0.2110.152-0.73
Efficiency edge-2.27
Power rating & context
Rating-10.11-12.67
Home field4.65
Rating + home field, x0.45+0.94
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-0.74
Independent model total49.0
Market total (consensus)49.5
Model total (model)49.0
Model score2524

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Middle Tennessee. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Florida International
Conference USA
23
AT
Wed Oct 14 · time TBA
26
Jacksonville State
Conference USA
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +3.3
Forecast +3.3 independent model
Total 48.8 consensus 44.2
Edge +0.3
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorFIU JXSTPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3930.459+3.11
Offense · explosiveness1.181.30+0.69
Offense · PPA per play0.0210.211+1.05
Offense · stuffed rate0.2010.195+0.08
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3520.415-3.15
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.341.18+1.09
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0110.135-0.91
Defense · stuff rate0.2230.116-1.33
Efficiency edge+0.62
Power rating & context
Rating-3.82-3.87
Home field4.83
Rating + home field, x0.45+2.14
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+3.34
Independent model total48.8
Market total (consensus)44.2
Model total (model)48.8
Model score2326

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Jacksonville State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Kennesaw State
Conference USA
24
AT
Wed Oct 14 · 7:30 PM ET
25
Missouri State
Conference USA
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +1.1
Forecast +1.1 independent model
Total 49.1 consensus 52.5
Edge +3.6
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorKENN MOSTPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4060.429+1.09
Offense · explosiveness1.211.26+0.27
Offense · PPA per play0.1120.116+0.02
Offense · stuffed rate0.2630.153+1.33
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4170.450-1.61
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.090.973+0.81
Defense · PPA allowed0.0970.102-0.03
Defense · stuff rate0.2430.144-1.23
Efficiency edge+0.65
Power rating & context
Rating-8.11-13.01
Home field4.52
Rating + home field, x0.45-0.17
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+1.07
Independent model total49.1
Market total (consensus)52.5
Model total (model)49.1
Model score2425

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Missouri State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Western Kentucky
Conference USA
22
AT
Thu Oct 15 · time TBA
22
Sam Houston
Conference USA
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -0.0
Forecast -0.0 independent model
Total 44.6 consensus 53.5
Edge +1.2
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorWKU SHSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3760.405+1.38
Offense · explosiveness1.531.22-1.65
Offense · PPA per play0.1340.049-0.47
Offense · stuffed rate0.2310.228+0.03
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3670.408-2.07
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.271.03+1.56
Defense · PPA allowed0.0740.017+0.35
Defense · stuff rate0.2060.205-0.02
Efficiency edge-0.88
Power rating & context
Rating-7.18-10.98
Home field4.37
Rating + home field, x0.45+0.25
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-0.04
Independent model total44.6
Market total (consensus)53.5
Model total (model)44.6
Model score2222

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Sam Houston. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
East Carolina
American Athletic
25
AT
Thu Oct 15 · 7:30 PM ET
23
UAB
American Athletic
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -2.7
Forecast -2.7 independent model
Total 47.8 consensus 49.2
Edge +2.5
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorECU UABPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4260.455+1.39
Offense · explosiveness1.341.13-1.11
Offense · PPA per play0.1640.077-0.48
Offense · stuffed rate0.1910.142+0.59
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3170.415-4.88
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.450.996+3.01
Defense · PPA allowed-0.012-0.024+0.08
Defense · stuff rate0.3580.139-2.71
Efficiency edge-4.11
Power rating & context
Rating-4.90-7.76
Home field4.63
Rating + home field, x0.45+0.79
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-2.73
Independent model total47.8
Market total (consensus)49.2
Model total (model)47.8
Model score2523

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours UAB. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Georgia Southern
Sun Belt
27
AT
Thu Oct 15 · 7:30 PM ET
19
Old Dominion
Sun Belt
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -9.0
Forecast -9.0 independent model
Total 45.6 consensus 44.5
Edge -6.0
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorGASO ODUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4740.323-7.13
Offense · explosiveness1.321.44+0.67
Offense · PPA per play0.278-0.097-2.07
Offense · stuffed rate0.1840.307-1.49
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3850.356+1.41
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.091.09-0.01
Defense · PPA allowed0.040-0.095+0.85
Defense · stuff rate0.2400.226-0.17
Efficiency edge-7.94
Power rating & context
Rating-1.21-9.37
Home field4.48
Rating + home field, x0.45-1.64
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-8.99
Independent model total45.6
Market total (consensus)44.5
Model total (model)45.6
Model score2719

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Old Dominion. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Colorado State
Pac-12
27
AT
Fri Oct 16 · time TBA
45
Texas State
Pac-12
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +17.8
Forecast +17.8 independent model
Total 72.1 consensus 69.8
Edge +2.6
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorCSU TXSTPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5060.541+1.66
Offense · explosiveness1.661.58-0.43
Offense · PPA per play0.4160.540+0.68
Offense · stuffed rate0.1680.127+0.49
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4960.388+5.42
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.231.19+0.25
Defense · PPA allowed0.199-0.022+1.38
Defense · stuff rate0.1600.286+1.56
Efficiency edge+11.02
Power rating & context
Rating-9.332.05
Home field2.47
Rating + home field, x0.45+6.20
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+17.81
Independent model total72.1
Market total (consensus)69.8
Model total (model)72.1
Model score2745

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Texas State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Memphis
American Athletic
28
AT
Fri Oct 16 · 7:30 PM ET
23
Tulane
American Athletic
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -6.2
Forecast -6.2 independent model
Total 50.7 consensus 55.8
Edge +0.3
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorMEM TULNPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5100.329-8.55
Offense · explosiveness1.261.56+1.66
Offense · PPA per play0.2520.062-1.05
Offense · stuffed rate0.1160.252-1.63
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3570.373-0.78
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.491.26+1.52
Defense · PPA allowed0.046-0.010+0.35
Defense · stuff rate0.1740.247+0.90
Efficiency edge-7.59
Power rating & context
Rating2.11-0.463
Home field4.24
Rating + home field, x0.45+0.74
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-6.25
Independent model total50.7
Market total (consensus)55.8
Model total (model)50.7
Model score2823

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Tulane. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
App State
Sun Belt
28
AT
Sat Oct 17 · time TBA
26
Coastal Carolina
Sun Belt
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -1.4
Forecast -1.4 independent model
Total 54.4 consensus 48.8
Edge -0.1
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorAPP CCUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4150.379-1.68
Offense · explosiveness1.251.45+1.06
Offense · PPA per play0.1100.090-0.11
Offense · stuffed rate0.1760.158+0.21
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4520.453-0.02
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.031.21-1.19
Defense · PPA allowed0.1070.126-0.12
Defense · stuff rate0.1920.174-0.22
Efficiency edge-2.07
Power rating & context
Rating-6.83-9.21
Home field2.61
Rating + home field, x0.45+0.10
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-1.38
Independent model total54.4
Market total (consensus)48.8
Model total (model)54.4
Model score2826

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Coastal Carolina. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Washington
Big Ten
28
AT
Sat Oct 17 · time TBA
31
Purdue
Big Ten
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +3.5
Forecast +3.5 independent model
Total 58.5 consensus 50.5
Edge +0.5
Washington · Game Day · QB Demond Williams Jr.: GTD · S CJ Christian (Out), DL Kai McClendon (Out), LB Xe'ree Alexander (Out), OL Jack Shaffer (Out) +6 more
Purdue · Game Day · DB Mister Clark (Out), DB Raderrion Daniels (Out), OL Joey Tanona (Out), TE Kylan Fox (Out)
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorWASH PURPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4740.536+2.95
Offense · explosiveness1.271.39+0.65
Offense · PPA per play0.2450.432+1.03
Offense · stuffed rate0.1890.099+1.09
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3650.406-2.02
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.221.39-1.09
Defense · PPA allowed-0.1190.096-1.35
Defense · stuff rate0.3310.199-1.64
Efficiency edge-0.37
Power rating & context
Rating0.8731.70
Home field6.58
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.32
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+3.54
Independent model total58.5
Market total (consensus)50.5
Model total (model)58.5
Model score2831

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Purdue. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Ball State
Mid-American
24
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
24
Bowling Green
Mid-American
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +0.1
Forecast +0.1 independent model
Total 48.5 consensus 46.5
Edge -6.2
Ball State · Game Day · DB Avery Stuart (Out), DB Derek "DJ" Fields (Out), DB Gabe Aramboles (Out), DB Sterling "Stu" Smith (Out) +12 more
Bowling Green · Game Day · CB JoJo Johnson (Out), CB Rico Garcia (Out), DB Julian Holt (Out), DE Quentin Lewis (Out) +14 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorBALL BGSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4220.448+1.25
Offense · explosiveness1.370.985-2.08
Offense · PPA per play0.2170.104-0.63
Offense · stuffed rate0.2090.185+0.29
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3910.445-2.68
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.471.22+1.72
Defense · PPA allowed0.1550.066+0.56
Defense · stuff rate0.2320.157-0.93
Efficiency edge-2.50
Power rating & context
Rating-13.64-13.40
Home field4.14
Rating + home field, x0.45+1.96
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+0.05
Independent model total48.5
Market total (consensus)46.5
Model total (model)48.5
Model score2424

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Bowling Green. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Cincinnati
Big 12
33
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
35
West Virginia
Big 12
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +2.4
Forecast +2.4 independent model
Total 67.6 consensus 64.0
Edge +0.9
Cincinnati · Game Day · OL Aiden Pastoriza (Out), TE DaMari Witherspoon (Out)
West Virginia · Game Day · DL Darius Wiley (Out), N/S Emory Snyder (Out), RB Andre Devine (Out), RB Chris Talley (Out) +3 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorCIN WVUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5100.520+0.47
Offense · explosiveness1.441.53+0.51
Offense · PPA per play0.4320.455+0.13
Offense · stuffed rate0.1380.115+0.27
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4110.411-0.02
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.121.32-1.37
Defense · PPA allowed0.0350.094-0.37
Defense · stuff rate0.2250.283+0.72
Efficiency edge+0.34
Power rating & context
Rating-0.106-1.45
Home field4.61
Rating + home field, x0.45+1.46
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+2.40
Independent model total67.6
Market total (consensus)64.0
Model total (model)67.6
Model score3335

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours West Virginia. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Florida
SEC
19
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
28
Texas
SEC
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +11.2
Forecast +11.2 independent model
Total 46.8 consensus 51.2
Edge -1.8
Florida · Game Day · QB Aaron Philo: GTD · RB Duke Clark (Out), QB Aaron Philo (GTD), WR Bailey Stockton (GTD), WR Vernell Brown III (GTD)
Texas · Game Day · OL Jaydon Chatman (Out), WR Kaliq Lockett (Out)
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorFLA TEXPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5450.518-1.26
Offense · explosiveness1.211.18-0.14
Offense · PPA per play0.3800.239-0.78
Offense · stuffed rate0.1640.138+0.31
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3590.234+6.24
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.251.08+1.16
Defense · PPA allowed-0.110-0.199+0.56
Defense · stuff rate0.2300.282+0.64
Efficiency edge+6.72
Power rating & context
Rating10.2714.29
Home field4.65
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.88
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+11.20
Independent model total46.8
Market total (consensus)51.2
Model total (model)46.8
Model score1928

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Texas. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Florida Atlantic
American Athletic
27
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
31
Army
American Athletic
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +3.8
Forecast +3.8 independent model
Total 58.0 consensus 55.5
Edge +1.5
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorFAU ARMYPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5090.532+1.11
Offense · explosiveness1.160.906-1.36
Offense · PPA per play0.3090.314+0.03
Offense · stuffed rate0.1050.081+0.29
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3900.438-2.35
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.671.47+1.34
Defense · PPA allowed0.2270.136+0.57
Defense · stuff rate0.2340.116-1.46
Efficiency edge-1.83
Power rating & context
Rating-4.661.33
Home field5.24
Rating + home field, x0.45+5.02
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+3.78
Independent model total58.0
Market total (consensus)55.5
Model total (model)58.0
Model score2731

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Army. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Georgia State
Sun Belt
27
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
30
James Madison
Sun Belt
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +4.5
Forecast +4.5 independent model
Total 56.9 consensus 57.5
Edge -3.3
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorGAST JMUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5000.469-1.48
Offense · explosiveness1.411.31-0.54
Offense · PPA per play0.3220.264-0.32
Offense · stuffed rate0.1700.134+0.43
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3920.388+0.20
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.231.25-0.14
Defense · PPA allowed0.068-0.011+0.49
Defense · stuff rate0.2340.165-0.86
Efficiency edge-2.23
Power rating & context
Rating-0.3858.48
Home field4.80
Rating + home field, x0.45+6.11
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+4.48
Independent model total56.9
Market total (consensus)57.5
Model total (model)56.9
Model score2730

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours James Madison. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Kansas
Big 12
25
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
27
Kansas State
Big 12
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +2.8
Forecast +2.8 independent model
Total 51.9 consensus 55.5
Edge -0.5
Kansas · Game Day · CB Syeed Gibbs (Out), WR Keaton Kubecka (Out), OL Connor Stroh (GTD), QB Cole Ballard (GTD)
Kansas State · Game Day · CB Kaleb Patterson (Out), QB Blake Barnett (Out), TE Garrett Oakley (Out), QB Dillon Duff (GTD)
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorKU KSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4810.524+2.05
Offense · explosiveness1.391.24-0.79
Offense · PPA per play0.2230.369+0.81
Offense · stuffed rate0.1630.082+0.98
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3050.331-1.30
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.301.35-0.34
Defense · PPA allowed-0.1500.010-1.00
Defense · stuff rate0.3110.189-1.52
Efficiency edge-1.10
Power rating & context
Rating0.9944.05
Home field4.27
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.28
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+2.77
Independent model total51.9
Market total (consensus)55.5
Model total (model)51.9
Model score2527

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Kansas State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Mississippi State
SEC
17
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
33
LSU
SEC
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +18.0
Forecast +18.0 independent model
Total 50.8 consensus 56.0
Gap +0.3not an edge
Mississippi State · Game Day · QB Kamario Taylor: Out · DL Diesel Moye (Out), DL Trevion Williams (Out), LB Jalen Smith (Out), LB Zakari Tillman (Out) +4 more
LSU · Game Day · LB Charles Ross II (Out), LB Tylen Singleton (Out), LB Whit Weeks (Out), S Dashawn Spears (Out) +2 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorMSST LSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5980.555-1.99
Offense · explosiveness1.101.16+0.35
Offense · PPA per play0.3930.386-0.04
Offense · stuffed rate0.1470.135+0.15
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4320.211+10.99
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.111.35-1.61
Defense · PPA allowed-0.007-0.305+1.87
Defense · stuff rate0.2210.335+1.40
Efficiency edge+11.11
Power rating & context
Rating8.0318.04
Home field4.09
Rating + home field, x0.45+6.31
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+18.01
Independent model total50.8
Market total (consensus)56.0
Model total (model)50.8
Model score1733

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours LSU. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

AVOID Mississippi State starting QB Kamario Taylor listed out on the availability report
Northwestern
Big Ten
29
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
25
Michigan State
Big Ten
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -4.2
Forecast -4.2 independent model
Total 54.6 consensus 50.2
Edge +3.0
Northwestern · Game Day · DB Josh Fussell (Out), DB Robert Fitzgerald (Out), DL Callen Campbell (Out), LB Amare Jordan (Out) +9 more
Michigan State · Game Day · CB Charles Brantley (Out), CB Keshawn Williams (Out), CB Tre Bell (Out), CB Tyran Chappell (Out) +11 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorNU MSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5980.547-2.43
Offense · explosiveness1.381.13-1.35
Offense · PPA per play0.5620.253-1.70
Offense · stuffed rate0.1340.122+0.15
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3740.326+2.42
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.161.17-0.08
Defense · PPA allowed-0.102-0.112+0.06
Defense · stuff rate0.2280.258+0.37
Efficiency edge-2.56
Power rating & context
Rating8.75-0.786
Home field4.48
Rating + home field, x0.45-2.26
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-4.23
Independent model total54.6
Market total (consensus)50.2
Model total (model)54.6
Model score2925

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Michigan State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Ohio State
Big Ten
24
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
23
Indiana
Big Ten
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -1.3
Forecast -1.3 independent model
Total 47.9 consensus 49.8
Edge +1.5
Ohio State · Game Day · OL Austin Siereveld (Out), OL Jaxon Powell (Out), RB Anthony “Turbo” Rogers (Out), RB Ja’Kobi Jackson (Out) +5 more
Indiana · Game Day · RB Khobie Martin (Out)
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorOSU IUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.6000.518-3.86
Offense · explosiveness1.371.44+0.38
Offense · PPA per play0.4420.486+0.24
Offense · stuffed rate0.0970.128-0.37
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2680.252+0.80
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.271.17+0.63
Defense · PPA allowed-0.257-0.319+0.39
Defense · stuff rate0.3040.269-0.42
Efficiency edge-2.21
Power rating & context
Rating19.1115.59
Home field4.24
Rating + home field, x0.45+0.32
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-1.30
Independent model total47.9
Market total (consensus)49.8
Model total (model)47.9
Model score2423

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Indiana. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Pittsburgh
ACC
25
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
19
Boston College
ACC
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -7.3
Forecast -7.3 independent model
Total 44.5 consensus 42.8
Edge -0.8
Pittsburgh · Game Day · DB Allen Bryant (Out), DB Isaac Patterson (Out), DB Josh Guerrier (Out), DB Rashan Murray (Out) +8 more
Boston College · Game Day · DB Cameron Martinez (Out), DB Isaiah Farris (Out), LB Justin Medlock (Out), OL Pape Abdoulaye Sy (Out) +3 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorPITT BCPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4570.436-0.97
Offense · explosiveness1.261.26+0.01
Offense · PPA per play0.2390.094-0.80
Offense · stuffed rate0.1450.199-0.65
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2940.361-3.32
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.371.05+2.13
Defense · PPA allowed-0.126-0.111-0.09
Defense · stuff rate0.3350.225-1.37
Efficiency edge-5.05
Power rating & context
Rating5.52-5.11
Home field4.37
Rating + home field, x0.45-2.80
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-7.26
Independent model total44.5
Market total (consensus)42.8
Model total (model)44.5
Model score2519

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Boston College. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Virginia
ACC
22
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:00 PM ET
27
SMU
ACC
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +5.6
Forecast +5.6 independent model
Total 49.5 consensus 51.8
Edge -4.4
Virginia · Game Day · ATH Jae’Oyn Williams (Out), CB Omillio Agard (Out), DB Alex Dunn (Out), DE Devon Baxter (Out) +20 more
SMU · Game Day · DE Ira Singleton IV (Out), K Nick Reed (Out), LB I'Zayah Young (Out), LB Kenneth Goodwin III (Out) +6 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorUVA SMUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4950.530+1.65
Offense · explosiveness1.061.51+2.46
Offense · PPA per play0.2820.358+0.42
Offense · stuffed rate0.0790.265-2.24
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3340.326+0.38
Defense · explosiveness allowed0.9231.29-2.46
Defense · PPA allowed-0.083-0.061-0.14
Defense · stuff rate0.1790.299+1.49
Efficiency edge+1.56
Power rating & context
Rating-0.0023.21
Home field4.49
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.45
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+5.60
Independent model total49.5
Market total (consensus)51.8
Model total (model)49.5
Model score2227

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours SMU. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Rutgers
Big Ten
26
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 12:30 PM ET
27
Maryland
Big Ten
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +1.4
Forecast +1.4 independent model
Total 53.6 consensus 55.5
Edge -4.3
Rutgers · Game Day · DB Kaj Sanders (Out), DB Kevin Levy (Out), DB Zahmir Dawud (Out), RB Ja'shon Benjamin (Out) +7 more
Maryland · Game Day · DB Lloyd Irvin III (Out), DL Delmar White (Out), LB Zahir Mathis (Out), OL Day'Jon Moore (Out) +7 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorRUTG MDPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5260.436-4.26
Offense · explosiveness1.411.28-0.69
Offense · PPA per play0.3350.155-1.00
Offense · stuffed rate0.1390.160-0.25
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4250.363+3.06
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.281.12+1.03
Defense · PPA allowed0.091-0.058+0.93
Defense · stuff rate0.2400.221-0.24
Efficiency edge-1.41
Power rating & context
Rating-3.70-2.93
Home field4.24
Rating + home field, x0.45+2.24
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+1.42
Independent model total53.6
Market total (consensus)55.5
Model total (model)53.6
Model score2627

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Maryland. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Charlotte
American Athletic
19
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 1:00 PM ET
28
Temple
American Athletic
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +10.1
Forecast +10.1 independent model
Total 47.8 consensus 46.8
Edge -8.4
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorCLT TEMPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3490.437+4.16
Offense · explosiveness1.151.29+0.74
Offense · PPA per play-0.0250.296+1.77
Offense · stuffed rate0.2400.153+1.04
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4280.444-0.79
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.281.27+0.08
Defense · PPA allowed0.0710.149-0.49
Defense · stuff rate0.2880.169-1.47
Efficiency edge+5.04
Power rating & context
Rating-14.81-9.16
Home field4.25
Rating + home field, x0.45+4.43
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+10.07
Independent model total47.8
Market total (consensus)46.8
Model total (model)47.8
Model score1928

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Temple. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Massachusetts
Mid-American
24
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 1:00 PM ET
21
Buffalo
Mid-American
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -3.5
Forecast -3.5 independent model
Total 45.7 consensus 43.0
Gap -10.2not an edge
Massachusetts · Game Day · QB Aedan McCarthy: Out · DL William DePaepe (Out), DL Zachary Betts (Out), OL Greg Klingensmith (Out), QB Aedan McCarthy (Out) +6 more
Buffalo · Game Day · CB Ramari Taylor (Out), DT Charlton Goodell (Out), EDG Jacari Bennett (Out), LB George Hill (Out) +17 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorMASS BUFPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4300.353-3.65
Offense · explosiveness1.231.33+0.55
Offense · PPA per play0.1520.105-0.26
Offense · stuffed rate0.2030.172+0.37
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4000.402-0.06
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.041.30-1.76
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0140.111-0.78
Defense · stuff rate0.1450.128-0.21
Efficiency edge-5.82
Power rating & context
Rating-9.70-10.25
Home field4.48
Rating + home field, x0.45+1.76
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-3.47
Independent model total45.7
Market total (consensus)43.0
Model total (model)45.7
Model score2421

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Buffalo. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

AVOID Massachusetts starting QB Aedan McCarthy listed out on the availability report
Western Michigan
Mid-American
26
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 1:30 PM ET
20
Central Michigan
Mid-American
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent -7.0
Forecast -7.0 independent model
Total 46.3 consensus 42.5
Edge +0.5
Western Michigan · Game Day · DE August Johanningsmeier (Out), DE Noah Bishop (Out), OL Jeremy Schleicher (Out), OL Ryan Westrich (Out) +1 more
Central Michigan · Game Day · DB Ed Conoran (Out), DB Josiah Booker (Out), DB Kameran Hayward (Out), DB Trey Liebhardt (Out) +12 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorWMU CMUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4970.395-4.83
Offense · explosiveness0.9781.32+1.87
Offense · PPA per play0.2750.101-0.96
Offense · stuffed rate0.1430.172-0.34
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4260.410+0.80
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.091.30-1.40
Defense · PPA allowed0.0280.115-0.55
Defense · stuff rate0.1800.196+0.19
Efficiency edge-5.22
Power rating & context
Rating0.095-9.53
Home field4.24
Rating + home field, x0.45-2.41
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-7.05
Independent model total46.3
Market total (consensus)42.5
Model total (model)46.3
Model score2620

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Central Michigan. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Akron
Mid-American
19
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
33
Miami (OH)
Mid-American
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +15.6
Forecast +15.6 independent model
Total 51.5 consensus 47.0
Edge +6.1
Akron · Game Day · DB Catrell White (Out), DB Iesa Jarmon (Out), DE Jahvon Frazier (Out), DE Omari Abor (Out) +14 more
Miami (OH) · Game Day · DB Adrian Walker Jr. (Out), DB Max Deckard (Out), DL Anthony Ludington (Out), LB Vito McConnell (Out) +8 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorAKR M-OHPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4110.420+0.42
Offense · explosiveness1.231.52+1.61
Offense · PPA per play0.1430.258+0.63
Offense · stuffed rate0.1470.165-0.22
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4640.369+4.74
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.221.31-0.61
Defense · PPA allowed0.156-0.049+1.28
Defense · stuff rate0.1910.277+1.06
Efficiency edge+8.93
Power rating & context
Rating-16.18-6.61
Home field4.08
Rating + home field, x0.45+6.11
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+15.63
Independent model total51.5
Market total (consensus)47.0
Model total (model)51.5
Model score1933

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Miami (OH). Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Alabama
SEC
30
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
19
Tennessee
SEC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
TENN spread-15.5
Game total41.5
Independent -12.8
Forecast -12.8 independent model
Total 47.9 100% model signal
Edge -28.3
Alabama · Game Day · DB Nick Sherman (Out), DL Jeremiah Beaman (Out), DL Terrance Green (Out), LB Cayden Jones (Out) +4 more
Tennessee · Game Day · DB Dylan Lewis (Out), DB Edrees Farooq (Out), LB Jaedon Harmon (Out), OL Wendell Moe Jr. (Out) +2 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorALA TENNPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5520.492-2.85
Offense · explosiveness1.421.29-0.68
Offense · PPA per play0.5120.257-1.41
Offense · stuffed rate0.1090.117-0.10
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2280.338-5.45
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.421.10+2.13
Defense · PPA allowed-0.316-0.163-0.96
Defense · stuff rate0.3240.233-1.14
Efficiency edge-10.46
Power rating & context
Rating21.8910.63
Home field4.80
Rating + home field, x0.45-2.89
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-12.76
Independent model total47.9
Market total (consensus)50.8
Live book spread · DraftKings+15.5
Live book total · DraftKings41.5
Model total (model)47.9
Model score3019

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Tennessee. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

REVIEW independent model vs the live book
Arizona State
Big 12
14
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
34
Texas Tech
Big 12
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
TTU spread-30.5
Game total80.5
Independent +22.7
Forecast +22.7 independent model
Total 48.6 100% model signal
Edge -7.8
Arizona State · Game Day · DB Jalen Williams (Out), DB Lyrik Rawls (Out), DL Kirt Vakalahi (Out), OL Luke Baklenko (Out) +3 more
Texas Tech · Game Day · CB S'Vioarean Martin (Out), OL Elias Gillen (Out), RB Cameron Dickey (Out), S Maddox Quiller (Out) +2 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorASU TTUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4640.540+3.59
Offense · explosiveness1.011.40+2.15
Offense · PPA per play0.0470.380+1.84
Offense · stuffed rate0.1540.166-0.14
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3520.296+2.78
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.431.44-0.08
Defense · PPA allowed0.031-0.202+1.46
Defense · stuff rate0.2090.274+0.80
Efficiency edge+12.41
Power rating & context
Rating-3.1312.64
Home field5.91
Rating + home field, x0.45+9.71
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+22.71
Independent model total48.6
Market total (consensus)49.5
Live book spread · DraftKings+30.5
Live book total · DraftKings80.5
Model total (model)48.6
Model score1434

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Texas Tech. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Auburn
SEC
19
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
32
Georgia
SEC
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +15.3
Forecast +15.3 independent model
Total 51.1 consensus 50.2
Edge -4.2
Auburn · Game Day · LB Xavier Atkins (Out), OL Tai Buster (Out), TE Hunter Herring (Out)
Georgia · Game Day · DB KJ Bolden (Out), OLB Amaris Williams (Out), RB Chauncey Bowens (Out), S Tyriq Green (Out) +2 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorAUB UGAPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4560.631+8.27
Offense · explosiveness1.351.22-0.70
Offense · PPA per play0.2690.581+1.72
Offense · stuffed rate0.1320.074+0.69
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3300.314+0.77
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.151.35-1.33
Defense · PPA allowed-0.141-0.110-0.19
Defense · stuff rate0.2290.195-0.42
Efficiency edge+8.82
Power rating & context
Rating8.2317.03
Home field4.28
Rating + home field, x0.45+5.86
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+15.27
Independent model total51.1
Market total (consensus)50.2
Model total (model)51.1
Model score1932

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Georgia. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Georgia Tech
ACC
28
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
35
Virginia Tech
ACC
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +7.0
Forecast +7.0 independent model
Total 63.2 consensus 55.8
Edge -1.5
Georgia Tech · Game Day · CB Daiquan White (Out), DE A.J. Hoffler (Out), DE Jordan Boyd (Out), DE Jordan Walker (Out) +11 more
Virginia Tech · Game Day · DL Emmett Laws (Out), LB George Ballance (Out), OL Justin Terry (Out), OL Lucas Austin (Out) +8 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorGT VTPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5010.495-0.27
Offense · explosiveness1.231.37+0.78
Offense · PPA per play0.2790.326+0.26
Offense · stuffed rate0.1310.215-1.01
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4080.384+1.20
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.351.47-0.76
Defense · PPA allowed0.1640.136+0.18
Defense · stuff rate0.2180.299+1.00
Efficiency edge+1.38
Power rating & context
Rating-2.983.23
Home field5.11
Rating + home field, x0.45+5.07
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+7.04
Independent model total63.2
Market total (consensus)55.8
Model total (model)63.2
Model score2835

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Virginia Tech. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Missouri
SEC
23
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
30
Ole Miss
SEC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T22:53:39Z
MISS spread-27.5
Game total34.5
Independent +8.9
Forecast +8.9 independent model
Total 52.9 100% model signal
Edge -18.6
Missouri · Game Day · OL Josh Atkins (Out), OL Khalief Canty Jr. (Out), RB Ahmad Hardy (Out), RB Malae Fonoti (Out) +4 more
Ole Miss · Game Day · LB Ant Davis Jr. (Out), OL Emanuel Faulkner (Out), OL Enoch Wangoy (Out), OL Jalan Chapman (Out) +7 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorMIZ MISSPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4270.630+9.58
Offense · explosiveness1.371.14-1.24
Offense · PPA per play0.2850.573+1.59
Offense · stuffed rate0.1660.121+0.55
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2410.379-6.89
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.481.29+1.23
Defense · PPA allowed-0.195-0.023-1.08
Defense · stuff rate0.2750.316+0.51
Efficiency edge+4.26
Power rating & context
Rating10.4715.07
Home field4.35
Rating + home field, x0.45+4.01
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+8.86
Independent model total52.9
Market total (consensus)58.0
Live book spread · DraftKings+27.5
Live book total · DraftKings34.5
Model total (model)52.9
Model score2330

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Ole Miss. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
North Carolina
ACC
29
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
23
Duke
ACC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
DUKE spread+3.5
Game total44.5
Independent -6.7
Forecast -6.7 independent model
Total 52.8 100% model signal
Edge -3.2
North Carolina · Game Day · DB Jakob Weatherspoon (Out), DB Kaleb Cost (Out), DB Tre Miller (Out), DL Jimmy-Phrisco Alo-Suliafu (Out) +9 more
Duke · Game Day · CB Evan Smith (Out), K Cosme Salas (Out), LB Elliott Schaper (Out), OL Kai Jacobowitz (Out) +8 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorUNC DUKEPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5810.472-5.13
Offense · explosiveness1.221.27+0.32
Offense · PPA per play0.4360.274-0.89
Offense · stuffed rate0.1010.172-0.86
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3700.382-0.56
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.001.36-2.37
Defense · PPA allowed-0.1560.072-1.43
Defense · stuff rate0.1370.293+1.93
Efficiency edge-9.00
Power rating & context
Rating5.635.38
Home field4.12
Rating + home field, x0.45+1.73
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-6.68
Independent model total52.8
Market total (consensus)46.8
Live book spread · DraftKings-3.5
Live book total · DraftKings44.5
Model total (model)52.8
Model score2923

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Duke. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Northern Illinois
Mountain West
22
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
29
Wyoming
Mountain West
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T22:57:22Z
WYO spread-18.5
Game total64.5
Independent +7.8
Forecast +7.8 independent model
Total 51.4 100% model signal
Edge -10.7
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorNIU WYOPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4170.439+1.02
Offense · explosiveness1.231.10-0.72
Offense · PPA per play0.0230.118+0.53
Offense · stuffed rate0.1550.132+0.27
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4470.447+0.02
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.291.16+0.83
Defense · PPA allowed0.1550.181-0.16
Defense · stuff rate0.2240.137-1.08
Efficiency edge+0.71
Power rating & context
Rating-18.72-12.09
Home field7.86
Rating + home field, x0.45+6.48
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+7.78
Independent model total51.4
Market total (consensus)42.2
Live book spread · DraftKings+18.5
Live book total · DraftKings64.5
Model total (model)51.4
Model score2229

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Wyoming. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Penn State
Big Ten
19
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
25
Michigan
Big Ten
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
MICH spread-3.5
Game total39.5
Independent +6.3
Forecast +6.3 independent model
Total 43.5 100% model signal
Edge +2.8
Penn State · Game Day · CB Christian Askew (Out), CB Joshua Johnson (Out), CB Tyler Armstead (Out), DE Dayshaun Burnett (Out) +13 more
Michigan · Game Day · DE Julius Holly (Out), OL Ace Hamilton (Out), OL Andrew Sprague (Out), OL Brady Norton (Out) +5 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorPSU MICHPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4360.496+2.79
Offense · explosiveness1.301.30-0.00
Offense · PPA per play0.2600.255-0.03
Offense · stuffed rate0.1820.091+1.10
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3250.301+1.22
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.171.29-0.79
Defense · PPA allowed-0.165-0.150-0.09
Defense · stuff rate0.2590.268+0.11
Efficiency edge+4.31
Power rating & context
Rating4.033.08
Home field4.06
Rating + home field, x0.45+1.39
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+6.29
Independent model total43.5
Market total (consensus)43.2
Live book spread · DraftKings+3.5
Live book total · DraftKings39.5
Model total (model)43.5
Model score1925

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Michigan. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Toledo
Mid-American
27
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
24
Eastern Michigan
Mid-American
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
EMU spread+19.5
Game total48.5
Independent -3.2
Forecast -3.2 independent model
Total 50.4 100% model signal
Edge +16.3
Toledo · Game Day · DE Langston Long (Out), DE Zackery Samuel (Out), DT Cam Gwinn (Out), LB Kari Jackson (Out) +9 more
Eastern Michigan · Game Day · QB Noah Kim: Questionable · DB Antonio Solares-Vitti (Out), DB Jabari Monds (Out), DB Jaivian Norman (Out), DL Brandon Simmons Jr. (Out) +22 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorTOL EMUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4390.465+1.22
Offense · explosiveness1.271.19-0.45
Offense · PPA per play0.2180.214-0.02
Offense · stuffed rate0.0990.210-1.34
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3490.423-3.69
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.411.12+1.98
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0590.086-0.91
Defense · stuff rate0.2430.218-0.31
Efficiency edge-3.52
Power rating & context
Rating-4.33-9.23
Home field4.29
Rating + home field, x0.45-0.27
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-3.20
Independent model total50.4
Market total (consensus)52.2
Live book spread · DraftKings-19.5
Live book total · DraftKings48.5
Model total (model)50.4
Model score2724

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Eastern Michigan. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
UNLV
Mountain West
23
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 3:30 PM ET
30
Air Force
Mountain West
Live sportsbook line unavailableThis game was not matched to the configured book.
Independent +8.3
Forecast +8.3 independent model
Total 53.1 consensus 49.0
Edge +8.1
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorUNLV AFPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4160.543+5.99
Offense · explosiveness1.271.03-1.32
Offense · PPA per play0.2090.301+0.51
Offense · stuffed rate0.1840.073+1.34
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3680.399-1.57
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.281.27+0.06
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0010.078-0.50
Defense · stuff rate0.1900.185-0.06
Efficiency edge+4.46
Power rating & context
Rating-1.75-1.76
Home field7.27
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.25
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+8.31
Independent model total53.1
Market total (consensus)49.0
Model total (model)53.1
Model score2330

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Air Force. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Tulsa
American Athletic
24
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 4:30 PM ET
23
Rice
American Athletic
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
RICE spread+9.5
Game total53.5
Independent -2.1
Forecast -2.1 independent model
Total 46.7 100% model signal
Edge +7.4
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorTLSA RICEPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3950.403+0.35
Offense · explosiveness1.331.31-0.12
Offense · PPA per play0.1830.045-0.76
Offense · stuffed rate0.0780.186-1.30
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4000.368+1.61
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.161.47-2.11
Defense · PPA allowed0.0350.019+0.10
Defense · stuff rate0.1940.198+0.04
Efficiency edge-2.18
Power rating & context
Rating-3.18-8.37
Home field4.07
Rating + home field, x0.45-0.50
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-2.09
Independent model total46.7
Market total (consensus)46.5
Live book spread · DraftKings-9.5
Live book total · DraftKings53.5
Model total (model)46.7
Model score2423

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Rice. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Troy
Sun Belt
23
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 5:00 PM ET
29
Louisiana
Sun Belt
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
UL spread-15.5
Game total42.5
Independent +7.0
Forecast +7.0 independent model
Total 51.9 100% model signal
Edge -8.5
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorTROY ULPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4940.414-3.78
Offense · explosiveness1.131.30+0.94
Offense · PPA per play0.2000.194-0.03
Offense · stuffed rate0.1710.175-0.05
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3940.361+1.64
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.410.997+2.74
Defense · PPA allowed0.090-0.116+1.29
Defense · stuff rate0.2410.265+0.30
Efficiency edge+3.04
Power rating & context
Rating-5.25-1.65
Home field4.00
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.40
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+7.04
Independent model total51.9
Market total (consensus)49.2
Live book spread · DraftKings+15.5
Live book total · DraftKings42.5
Model total (model)51.9
Model score2329

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Louisiana. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Washington State
Pac-12
12
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 6:00 PM ET
31
Oregon State
Pac-12
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
ORST spread-27.5
Game total56.5
Independent +23.5
Forecast +23.5 independent model
Total 42.5 100% model signal
Edge -4.0
Washington State · Game Day Report · nobody listed out
Oregon State · Game Day Report · DB Kai Wheaton (Out), DB Ryan Whitten (Out), DB Trey TJ Crandall (Out), ILb Kord Shaw (Out) +1 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorWSU ORSTPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3720.523+7.15
Offense · explosiveness1.171.45+1.54
Offense · PPA per play0.0290.434+2.24
Offense · stuffed rate0.2230.109+1.37
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3470.329+0.92
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.340.943+2.63
Defense · PPA allowed-0.055-0.143+0.55
Defense · stuff rate0.2240.160-0.79
Efficiency edge+15.62
Power rating & context
Rating-7.226.20
Home field2.97
Rating + home field, x0.45+7.33
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+23.54
Independent model total42.5
Market total (consensus)52.2
Live book spread · DraftKings+27.5
Live book total · DraftKings56.5
Model total (model)42.5
Model score1231

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Oregon State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Arkansas
SEC
21
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:00 PM ET
23
Vanderbilt
SEC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
VAN spread-5.5
Game total49.5
Independent +2.9
Forecast +2.9 independent model
Total 43.4 100% model signal
Edge -2.6
Arkansas · Game Day · DB Braydon Lee (Out), OL Josiah Clemons (Out), TE Gavin Garretson (Out), TE Maddox Lassiter (Out)
Vanderbilt · Game Day · CB Jaylin Lackey (Out), DL Aaron Bryant (Out), DL Nikhil Jefferson (Out), LB Jamison Curtis (Out) +5 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorARK VANPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4580.416-2.02
Offense · explosiveness1.161.47+1.68
Offense · PPA per play0.1370.152+0.08
Offense · stuffed rate0.1480.164-0.18
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3600.350+0.50
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.161.28-0.79
Defense · PPA allowed0.028-0.083+0.70
Defense · stuff rate0.2060.220+0.17
Efficiency edge+0.14
Power rating & context
Rating-2.55-1.92
Home field4.17
Rating + home field, x0.45+2.15
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+2.88
Independent model total43.4
Market total (consensus)48.8
Live book spread · DraftKings+5.5
Live book total · DraftKings49.5
Model total (model)43.4
Model score2123

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Vanderbilt. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Arkansas State
Sun Belt
30
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:00 PM ET
25
Southern Miss
Sun Belt
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
USM spread+6.5
Game total59.5
Independent -4.5
Forecast -4.5 independent model
Total 54.7 100% model signal
Edge +2.0
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorARST USMPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4950.420-3.52
Offense · explosiveness1.291.22-0.40
Offense · PPA per play0.2290.081-0.82
Offense · stuffed rate0.1730.107+0.79
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4560.472-0.79
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.191.19-0.03
Defense · PPA allowed0.0870.231-0.90
Defense · stuff rate0.1310.133+0.02
Efficiency edge-5.64
Power rating & context
Rating-6.99-10.18
Home field4.36
Rating + home field, x0.45+0.53
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-4.53
Independent model total54.7
Market total (consensus)61.8
Live book spread · DraftKings-6.5
Live book total · DraftKings59.5
Model total (model)54.7
Model score3025

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Southern Miss. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Florida State
ACC
21
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:00 PM ET
42
Miami
ACC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:52Z
MIA spread-20.5
Game total57.5
Independent +22.1
Forecast +22.1 independent model
Total 62.8 100% model signal
Edge +1.6
Florida State · Game Day · DB Jamari Howard (Out), DB Jordan Crutchfield (Out), DB Karson Hobbs (Out), LB Blake Nichelson (Out) +5 more
Miami · Game Day · DB Ja'Boree Antoine (Out), DB Romanas "OJ" Frederique Jr. (Out), OL Max Buchanan (Out), RB CharMar Brown (Out) +2 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorFSU MIAPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5460.667+5.71
Offense · explosiveness1.571.35-1.21
Offense · PPA per play0.4490.739+1.60
Offense · stuffed rate0.1380.026+1.35
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3450.313+1.58
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.271.06+1.42
Defense · PPA allowed0.067-0.166+1.46
Defense · stuff rate0.2610.310+0.61
Efficiency edge+12.52
Power rating & context
Rating3.6819.33
Home field4.50
Rating + home field, x0.45+9.02
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+22.13
Independent model total62.8
Market total (consensus)56.5
Live book spread · DraftKings+20.5
Live book total · DraftKings57.5
Model total (model)62.8
Model score2142

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Miami. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Kent State
Mid-American
18
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:00 PM ET
28
South Florida
American Athletic
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
USF spread-19.5
Game total44.5
Independent +11.0
Forecast +11.0 independent model
Total 45.5 100% model signal
Edge -8.5
Kent State · Game Day · LB Quan Rhodes-McKee (Out), LB Sayed Abuhamdeh (Out), OL Tyler Meadows (Out), RB Mason King (Out) +2 more
South Florida · no availability report
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorKENT USFPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3470.467+5.68
Offense · explosiveness1.441.18-1.40
Offense · PPA per play0.0330.220+1.04
Offense · stuffed rate0.2210.232-0.13
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3710.414-2.12
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.221.18+0.32
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0690.020-0.56
Defense · stuff rate0.2030.254+0.63
Efficiency edge+3.44
Power rating & context
Rating-12.29-0.870
Home field4.20
Rating + home field, x0.45+6.99
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+11.03
Independent model total45.5
Market total (consensus)46.0
Live book spread · DraftKings+19.5
Live book total · DraftKings44.5
Model total (model)45.5
Model score1828

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours South Florida. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Nevada
Mountain West
14
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:00 PM ET
28
North Dakota State
Mountain West
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
NDSU spread-16.5
Game total41.5
Independent +16.4
Forecast +16.4 independent model
Total 42.3 100% model signal
Edge -0.1
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorNEV NDSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3820.411+1.39
Offense · explosiveness1.251.38+0.74
Offense · PPA per play0.0260.125+0.55
Offense · stuffed rate0.2160.219-0.04
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3320.328+0.19
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.541.09+3.00
Defense · PPA allowed0.148-0.203+2.20
Defense · stuff rate0.1740.233+0.72
Efficiency edge+8.74
Power rating & context
Rating-8.403.87
Home field3.53
Rating + home field, x0.45+7.07
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+16.40
Independent model total42.3
Market total (consensus)42.8
Live book spread · DraftKings+16.5
Live book total · DraftKings41.5
Model total (model)42.3
Model score1428

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours North Dakota State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
TCU
Big 12
22
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:00 PM ET
24
Baylor
Big 12
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
BAY spread-3.5
Game total49.5
Independent +2.3
Forecast +2.3 independent model
Total 45.8 100% model signal
Edge -1.2
TCU · Game Day · CB Devondre McGee (Out), DT Floyd Guidry (Out), K Kyle Lemmermann (Out), OL Devan Robison (Out) +3 more
Baylor · Game Day · CB Jamarion Richardson (Out), DL Devonte Tezino (Out), OL Cayden Tone (Out), S Jacob Redding (Out) +1 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorTCU BAYPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4500.491+1.95
Offense · explosiveness1.391.34-0.24
Offense · PPA per play0.2490.372+0.68
Offense · stuffed rate0.2080.108+1.20
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2940.296-0.10
Defense · explosiveness allowed0.9421.54-3.98
Defense · PPA allowed-0.238-0.037-1.26
Defense · stuff rate0.2350.206-0.36
Efficiency edge-2.11
Power rating & context
Rating4.448.97
Home field4.09
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.86
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+2.35
Independent model total45.8
Market total (consensus)50.2
Live book spread · DraftKings+3.5
Live book total · DraftKings49.5
Model total (model)45.8
Model score2224

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Baylor. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Kentucky
SEC
18
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:30 PM ET
19
Oklahoma
SEC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
OU spread-6.5
Game total43.5
Independent +1.5
Forecast +1.5 independent model
Total 37.1 100% model signal
Edge -5.0
Kentucky · Game Day · DB Grant Grayton (Out), DB Jaden Smith (Out), DE Tyler Thomas (Out), ILB Antwan Smith (Out) +3 more
Oklahoma · Game Day · DB Eli Bowen (Out), DB Jacobe Johnson (Out), LB Taylor Heim (Out), OL Eddy Pierre-Louis (Out) +6 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorUK OUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5690.458-5.26
Offense · explosiveness1.020.971-0.25
Offense · PPA per play0.3430.081-1.45
Offense · stuffed rate0.0910.216-1.50
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3610.206+7.69
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.201.27-0.43
Defense · PPA allowed-0.199-0.339+0.87
Defense · stuff rate0.2700.254-0.20
Efficiency edge-0.52
Power rating & context
Rating9.478.26
Home field4.46
Rating + home field, x0.45+1.46
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+1.53
Independent model total37.1
Market total (consensus)43.5
Live book spread · DraftKings+6.5
Live book total · DraftKings43.5
Model total (model)37.1
Model score1819

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Oklahoma. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Louisville
ACC
34
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:30 PM ET
23
Syracuse
ACC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
SYR spread+14.5
Game total56.5
Independent -11.5
Forecast -11.5 independent model
Total 57.2 100% model signal
Edge +3.0
Louisville · Game Day · DB Antonio Watts (Out), DB DJ Waller Jr. (Out), DL Sam Dawson (Out), OL Anwar O'neal (Out) +6 more
Syracuse · Game Day · OL D'Joni Scatliffe (Out), OL Jackson Iak (Out), QB Amari Odom (Out), QB Steve Angeli (Out) +2 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorLOU SYRPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5590.454-4.97
Offense · explosiveness1.441.40-0.22
Offense · PPA per play0.4570.168-1.60
Offense · stuffed rate0.1070.180-0.88
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3110.390-3.96
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.121.25-0.87
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0760.001-0.48
Defense · stuff rate0.0930.277+2.28
Efficiency edge-10.71
Power rating & context
Rating8.190.213
Home field4.84
Rating + home field, x0.45-1.40
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-11.52
Independent model total57.2
Market total (consensus)56.2
Live book spread · DraftKings-14.5
Live book total · DraftKings56.5
Model total (model)57.2
Model score3423

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Syracuse. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Notre Dame
FBS Independents
26
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:30 PM ET
18
BYU
Big 12
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
BYU spread+10.5
Game total46.5
Independent -9.3
Forecast -9.3 independent model
Total 43.6 100% model signal
Edge +1.2
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorND BYUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.6190.550-3.29
Offense · explosiveness1.211.35+0.79
Offense · PPA per play0.5700.504-0.37
Offense · stuffed rate0.1170.161-0.53
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2040.289-4.26
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.181.10+0.56
Defense · PPA allowed-0.381-0.240-0.88
Defense · stuff rate0.2870.242-0.55
Efficiency edge-8.53
Power rating & context
Rating21.2211.51
Home field6.63
Rating + home field, x0.45-1.37
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-9.31
Independent model total43.6
Market total (consensus)46.8
Live book spread · DraftKings-10.5
Live book total · DraftKings46.5
Model total (model)43.6
Model score2618

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours BYU. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Oklahoma State
Big 12
25
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:30 PM ET
30
Houston
Big 12
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
HOU spread-4.0
Game total62.5
Independent +6.0
Forecast +6.0 independent model
Total 55.4 100% model signal
Edge +2.0
Oklahoma State · Game Day · DT Landon Dean (Out), S Mose Phillips III (Out), WR Dayvon Standard (Out)
Houston · Game Day · DB Alvin Williamson Jr. (Out), DB Jalen Mayo (Out), DL De'Marion Thomas (Out), LB Jaden Yates (Out)
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorOKST HOUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5780.608+1.41
Offense · explosiveness1.261.08-0.97
Offense · PPA per play0.4460.520+0.40
Offense · stuffed rate0.0980.086+0.15
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3200.331-0.53
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.161.12+0.26
Defense · PPA allowed-0.159-0.109-0.31
Defense · stuff rate0.2820.287+0.07
Efficiency edge+0.48
Power rating & context
Rating7.0813.97
Home field4.03
Rating + home field, x0.45+4.89
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+5.96
Independent model total55.4
Market total (consensus)62.2
Live book spread · DraftKings+4.0
Live book total · DraftKings62.5
Model total (model)55.4
Model score2530

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Houston. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Wisconsin
Big Ten
20
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 7:30 PM ET
23
UCLA
Big Ten
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
UCLA spread-1.5
Game total42.5
Independent +4.1
Forecast +4.1 independent model
Total 42.5 100% model signal
Gap +2.6not an edge
Wisconsin · Game Day · CB Cai Bates (Out), RB Nate Palmer (Out), OL Austin Kawecki (GTD)
UCLA · Game Day · QB Nico Iamaleava: Out · DB Rodrick Pleasant (Out), DB Tao Johnson (Out), OL Jordan Davis (Out), OL Sam Yoon (Out) +4 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorWIS UCLAPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4550.483+1.33
Offense · explosiveness1.751.31-2.37
Offense · PPA per play0.3880.282-0.59
Offense · stuffed rate0.1040.120-0.18
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2630.295-1.63
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.081.02+0.37
Defense · PPA allowed-0.293-0.335+0.26
Defense · stuff rate0.1770.323+1.81
Efficiency edge-0.99
Power rating & context
Rating8.6314.11
Home field4.61
Rating + home field, x0.45+4.52
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+4.12
Independent model total42.5
Market total (consensus)42.8
Live book spread · DraftKings+1.5
Live book total · DraftKings42.5
Model total (model)42.5
Model score2023

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours UCLA. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

AVOID UCLA starting QB Nico Iamaleava listed out on the availability report
Louisiana Tech
Sun Belt
30
AT
Sun Oct 18 · time TBA
18
UL Monroe
Sun Belt
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
ULM spread+13.5
Game total56.5
Independent -14.4
Forecast -14.4 independent model
Total 47.9 100% model signal
Edge -0.9
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorLT ULMPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4550.402-2.52
Offense · explosiveness1.121.19+0.41
Offense · PPA per play0.166-0.023-1.05
Offense · stuffed rate0.2520.246+0.07
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3210.448-6.33
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.591.20+2.60
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0730.130-1.27
Defense · stuff rate0.2780.221-0.71
Efficiency edge-8.81
Power rating & context
Rating-0.780-18.78
Home field4.10
Rating + home field, x0.45-6.22
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-14.44
Independent model total47.9
Market total (consensus)56.2
Live book spread · DraftKings-13.5
Live book total · DraftKings56.5
Model total (model)47.9
Model score3018

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours UL Monroe. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Navy
American Athletic
19
AT
Sun Oct 18 · time TBA
25
UTSA
American Athletic
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
UTSA spread-5.5
Game total54.5
Independent +7.0
Forecast +7.0 independent model
Total 44.7 100% model signal
Edge +1.5
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorNAVY UTSAPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4260.457+1.50
Offense · explosiveness1.271.14-0.72
Offense · PPA per play0.1130.257+0.79
Offense · stuffed rate0.1460.160-0.17
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3080.340-1.61
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.511.10+2.70
Defense · PPA allowed0.011-0.082+0.58
Defense · stuff rate0.2860.202-1.03
Efficiency edge+2.05
Power rating & context
Rating-3.800.884
Home field4.97
Rating + home field, x0.45+4.32
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+6.96
Independent model total44.7
Market total (consensus)54.5
Live book spread · DraftKings+5.5
Live book total · DraftKings54.5
Model total (model)44.7
Model score1925

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours UTSA. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
San José State
Mountain West
22
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 9:00 PM ET
20
UTEP
Mountain West
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
UTEP spread+6.5
Game total45.5
Independent -1.9
Forecast -1.9 independent model
Total 42.0 100% model signal
Edge +4.6
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorSJSU UTEPPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.3900.352-1.82
Offense · explosiveness1.091.35+1.43
Offense · PPA per play0.046-0.074-0.66
Offense · stuffed rate0.2340.256-0.26
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4130.462-2.44
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.201.14+0.41
Defense · PPA allowed0.0200.142-0.77
Defense · stuff rate0.1860.239+0.66
Efficiency edge-3.45
Power rating & context
Rating-11.00-16.02
Home field7.26
Rating + home field, x0.45+1.01
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-1.85
Independent model total42.0
Market total (consensus)45.5
Live book spread · DraftKings-6.5
Live book total · DraftKings45.5
Model total (model)42.0
Model score2220

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours UTEP. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Ohio
Mid-American
29
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 10:00 PM ET
17
Sacramento State
Mid-American
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
SAC spread+16.5
Game total46.5
Independent -14.5
Forecast -14.5 independent model
Total 45.6 100% model signal
Edge +2.0
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorOHIO SACPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5060.423-3.88
Offense · explosiveness1.011.10+0.46
Offense · PPA per play0.214-0.004-1.21
Offense · stuffed rate0.1170.330-2.57
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.4050.391+0.72
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.181.56-2.53
Defense · PPA allowed0.0200.137-0.73
Defense · stuff rate0.2220.152-0.87
Efficiency edge-10.61
Power rating & context
Rating-3.34-17.80
Home field4.38
Rating + home field, x0.45-4.52
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-14.54
Independent model total45.6
Market total (consensus)46.5
Live book spread · DraftKings-16.5
Live book total · DraftKings46.5
Model total (model)45.6
Model score2917

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Sacramento State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Utah
Big 12
30
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 10:15 PM ET
20
Colorado
Big 12
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
COLO spread+15.5
Game total49.5
Independent -11.1
Forecast -11.1 independent model
Total 49.3 100% model signal
Edge +4.4
Utah · Update 2 · CB JC Hart (Out), LB Preston Pitts (Out)
Colorado · Update 2 · CB Preston Ashley (Out), DB Braylon Edwards (Out), TE Zach Atkins (Out), WR Danny Scudero (Out) +2 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorUTAH COLOPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.6160.483-6.24
Offense · explosiveness1.411.09-1.75
Offense · PPA per play0.5940.171-2.34
Offense · stuffed rate0.1550.177-0.27
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2970.281+0.78
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.311.14+1.11
Defense · PPA allowed-0.109-0.247+0.86
Defense · stuff rate0.2310.328+1.21
Efficiency edge-6.64
Power rating & context
Rating13.51-2.69
Home field4.95
Rating + home field, x0.45-5.03
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-11.08
Independent model total49.3
Market total (consensus)49.2
Live book spread · DraftKings-15.5
Live book total · DraftKings49.5
Model total (model)49.3
Model score3020

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Colorado. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Fresno State
Pac-12
24
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 10:30 PM ET
19
San Diego State
Pac-12
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
SDSU spread+7.0
Game total45.5
Independent -6.0
Forecast -6.0 independent model
Total 43.1 100% model signal
Edge +1.0
Fresno State · Third Report · DB Ryan Wilson (Out), DL Noah Yeh (Out), OL Gino Quinones (Out), DB Ethan Tierney (Questionable) +7 more
San Diego State · Third Report · DB Dalesean Staley (Out), RB DJ Overstreet (Out), SP Luke Williams (Out), TE Jack Ellis (Out) +14 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorFRES SDSUPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4700.366-4.90
Offense · explosiveness1.161.34+0.95
Offense · PPA per play0.2920.037-1.41
Offense · stuffed rate0.2330.197+0.43
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3790.411-1.58
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.191.02+1.08
Defense · PPA allowed-0.067-0.047-0.13
Defense · stuff rate0.1690.197+0.35
Efficiency edge-5.20
Power rating & context
Rating0.798-6.61
Home field4.36
Rating + home field, x0.45-1.36
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-5.97
Independent model total43.1
Market total (consensus)45.5
Live book spread · DraftKings-7.0
Live book total · DraftKings45.5
Model total (model)43.1
Model score2419

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours San Diego State. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
New Mexico
Mountain West
38
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 10:30 PM ET
16
Hawai'i
Mountain West
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
HAW spread+14.5
Game total45.5
Independent -23.9
Forecast -23.9 independent model
Total 54.5 100% model signal
Edge -9.4
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorUNM HAWPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.4560.413-1.99
Offense · explosiveness1.551.11-2.38
Offense · PPA per play0.3120.039-1.51
Offense · stuffed rate0.1020.181-0.95
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.3360.476-6.94
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.521.27+1.68
Defense · PPA allowed-0.0660.307-2.34
Defense · stuff rate0.2600.187-0.91
Efficiency edge-15.34
Power rating & context
Rating8.34-14.53
Home field2.45
Rating + home field, x0.45-9.14
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-23.89
Independent model total54.5
Market total (consensus)45.5
Live book spread · DraftKings-14.5
Live book total · DraftKings45.5
Model total (model)54.5
Model score3816

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Hawai'i. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Wake Forest
ACC
32
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 10:30 PM ET
16
California
ACC
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
CAL spread+10.5
Game total53.5
Independent -18.8
Forecast -18.8 independent model
Total 47.8 100% model signal
Edge -8.3
Wake Forest · Update 2 · DB Devin Cook (Out), DL Tyler Walton (Out), LB Joel Lowenberg (Out), OL Dalton DeBoer (Out) +2 more
California · Update 2 · DB Marquis Groves-Killebrew (Out), DL Nate Burrell (Out), OL Kahlee Tafai (Out), RB Carter Vargas (Out) +3 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorWAKE CALPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5500.439-5.22
Offense · explosiveness1.231.20-0.20
Offense · PPA per play0.3710.119-1.39
Offense · stuffed rate0.1630.200-0.45
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2930.339-2.29
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.121.48-2.44
Defense · PPA allowed-0.1710.029-1.25
Defense · stuff rate0.3940.145-3.08
Efficiency edge-16.33
Power rating & context
Rating10.12-1.14
Home field4.50
Rating + home field, x0.45-3.03
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin-18.76
Independent model total47.8
Market total (consensus)53.5
Live book spread · DraftKings-10.5
Live book total · DraftKings53.5
Model total (model)47.8
Model score3216

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours California. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
Nebraska
Big Ten
23
AT
Sat Oct 17 · 11:00 PM ET
24
Oregon
Big Ten
DraftKingsupdated 2026-10-17T23:05:53Z
ORE spread-7.0
Game total51.5
Independent +1.6
Forecast +1.6 independent model
Total 46.8 100% model signal
Edge -5.4
Nebraska · Update 2 · DB Jamir Conn (Out), DB Kahmir Prescott (Out), DB Rex Guthrie (Out), DL Gabe Moore (Out) +4 more
Oregon · Update 2 · DB Aaron Flowers (Out), ILB Brayden Platt (Out), OL Trent Ferguson (Out), QB Dante Moore (Out) +3 more
Breakdown · how the model got there
FactorNEB OREPts
Offense
Offense · success rate0.5410.464-3.65
Offense · explosiveness1.451.35-0.50
Offense · PPA per play0.5080.288-1.22
Offense · stuffed rate0.1510.166-0.18
Defense
Defense · success rate allowed0.2590.273-0.68
Defense · explosiveness allowed1.511.04+3.19
Defense · PPA allowed-0.198-0.286+0.55
Defense · stuff rate0.2780.315+0.45
Efficiency edge-2.04
Power rating & context
Rating10.0612.88
Home field4.08
Rating + home field, x0.45+3.09
Intercept+0.59
Projection
Model margin+1.64
Independent model total46.8
Market total (consensus)51.5
Live book spread · DraftKings+7.0
Live book total · DraftKings51.5
Model total (model)46.8
Model score2324

Values are opponent-adjusted, so they are comparable across schedules. Pts is each factor’s effect on the home margin: positive favours Oregon. Allowed statistics are inverted, so a lower number is a better defence.

MONITOR independent model vs the live book
02 · Ratings

Power Ratings

Points relative to an average FBS team on a neutral field, so the projected neutral margin between two teams is the difference of their ratings.

#TeamConferenceRatingvs average
1
Alabama
SEC+21.89
2
Notre Dame
FBS Independents+21.22
3
Miami
ACC+19.33
4
Ohio State
Big Ten+19.11
5
LSU
SEC+18.04
6
Georgia
SEC+17.03
7
Indiana
Big Ten+15.59
8
Ole Miss
SEC+15.07
9
Texas
SEC+14.29
10
UCLA
Big Ten+14.11
11
Houston
Big 12+13.97
12
Utah
Big 12+13.51
13
Oregon
Big Ten+12.88
14
Texas Tech
Big 12+12.64
15
BYU
Big 12+11.51
16
Tennessee
SEC+10.63
17
Missouri
SEC+10.47
18
Florida
SEC+10.27
19
Wake Forest
ACC+10.12
20
Nebraska
Big Ten+10.06
21
South Carolina
SEC+9.75
22
Kentucky
SEC+9.47
23
Baylor
Big 12+8.97
24
Northwestern
Big Ten+8.75
25
Wisconsin
Big Ten+8.63
26
James Madison
Sun Belt+8.48
27
New Mexico
Mountain West+8.34
28
Oklahoma
SEC+8.26
29
Auburn
SEC+8.23
30
Louisville
ACC+8.19
31
USC
Big Ten+8.17
32
Mississippi State
SEC+8.03
33
Boise State
Pac-12+8.00
34
Arizona
Big 12+7.57
35
Oklahoma State
Big 12+7.08
36
Iowa
Big Ten+7.00
37
Texas A&M
SEC+6.76
38
Oregon State
Pac-12+6.20
39
UCF
Big 12+5.92
40
North Carolina
ACC+5.63
03 · Conferences

Conference Ratings

Depth is median minus mean: positive is a deep league, negative means the mean is carried by its top teams. x-conf counts the completed out-of-conference games informing the rating — cross-conference scheduling is sparse, so a league’s level is less firmly identified than the ordering inside it.

ConferenceTeamsMeanMedianTop 4Depthx-confBest
1SEC16+10.23+10.01+18.01-0.2230Alabama (+21.9)
2Big Ten18+5.94+5.52+15.42-0.4241Ohio State (+19.1)
3Big 1216+5.35+5.18+12.91-0.1731Houston (+14.0)
4ACC17+2.90+3.23+10.82+0.3330Miami (+19.3)
5Pac-128-1.75-2.90+4.26-1.1625Boise State (+8.0)
6American Athletic14-3.57-3.49+2.01+0.0738North Texas (+3.7)
7Sun Belt14-5.64-6.04+1.52-0.4040James Madison (+8.5)
8Mountain West10-7.21-9.70+2.18-2.5026New Mexico (+8.3)
9Conference USA10-7.63-8.60-3.08-0.9730Liberty (+2.5)
10Mid-American13-9.71-9.70-3.54+0.0134Western Michigan (+0.1)
SEC — 16 teams
  1. 1Alabama+21.89
  2. 2LSU+18.04
  3. 3Georgia+17.03
  4. 4Ole Miss+15.07
  5. 5Texas+14.29
  6. 6Tennessee+10.63
  7. 7Missouri+10.47
  8. 8Florida+10.27
  9. 9South Carolina+9.75
  10. 10Kentucky+9.47
  11. 11Oklahoma+8.26
  12. 12Auburn+8.23
  13. 13Mississippi State+8.03
  14. 14Texas A&M+6.76
  15. 15Vanderbilt-1.92
  16. 16Arkansas-2.55
Big Ten — 18 teams
  1. 1Ohio State+19.11
  2. 2Indiana+15.59
  3. 3UCLA+14.11
  4. 4Oregon+12.88
  5. 5Nebraska+10.06
  6. 6Northwestern+8.75
  7. 7Wisconsin+8.63
  8. 8USC+8.17
  9. 9Iowa+7.00
  10. 10Penn State+4.03
  11. 11Michigan+3.08
  12. 12Purdue+1.70
  13. 13Illinois+1.28
  14. 14Washington+0.87
  15. 15Michigan State-0.79
  16. 16Minnesota-0.96
  17. 17Maryland-2.93
  18. 18Rutgers-3.70
Big 12 — 16 teams
  1. 1Houston+13.97
  2. 2Utah+13.51
  3. 3Texas Tech+12.64
  4. 4BYU+11.51
  5. 5Baylor+8.97
  6. 6Arizona+7.57
  7. 7Oklahoma State+7.08
  8. 8UCF+5.92
  9. 9TCU+4.44
  10. 10Kansas State+4.05
  11. 11Iowa State+2.37
  12. 12Kansas+0.99
  13. 13Cincinnati-0.11
  14. 14West Virginia-1.45
  15. 15Colorado-2.69
  16. 16Arizona State-3.13
ACC — 17 teams
  1. 1Miami+19.33
  2. 2Wake Forest+10.12
  3. 3Louisville+8.19
  4. 4North Carolina+5.63
  5. 5Pittsburgh+5.52
  6. 6Duke+5.38
  7. 7Clemson+4.91
  8. 8Florida State+3.68
  9. 9Virginia Tech+3.23
  10. 10SMU+3.21
  11. 11Syracuse+0.21
  12. 12Virginia-0.00
  13. 13California-1.14
  14. 14NC State-1.97
  15. 15Georgia Tech-2.98
  16. 16Boston College-5.11
  17. 17Stanford-8.97
Pac-12 — 8 teams
  1. 1Boise State+8.00
  2. 2Oregon State+6.20
  3. 3Texas State+2.05
  4. 4Fresno State+0.80
  5. 5San Diego State-6.61
  6. 6Washington State-7.22
  7. 7Utah State-7.88
  8. 8Colorado State-9.33
American Athletic — 14 teams
  1. 1North Texas+3.72
  2. 2Memphis+2.11
  3. 3Army+1.33
  4. 4UTSA+0.88
  5. 5Tulane-0.46
  6. 6South Florida-0.87
  7. 7Tulsa-3.18
  8. 8Navy-3.80
  9. 9Florida Atlantic-4.66
  10. 10East Carolina-4.90
  11. 11UAB-7.76
  12. 12Rice-8.37
  13. 13Temple-9.16
  14. 14Charlotte-14.81
Sun Belt — 14 teams
  1. 1James Madison+8.48
  2. 2Georgia State-0.39
  3. 3Louisiana Tech-0.78
  4. 4Georgia Southern-1.21
  5. 5Louisiana-1.65
  6. 6South Alabama-3.13
  7. 7Troy-5.25
  8. 8App State-6.83
  9. 9Arkansas State-6.99
  10. 10Coastal Carolina-9.21
  11. 11Old Dominion-9.37
  12. 12Southern Miss-10.18
  13. 13Marshall-13.71
  14. 14UL Monroe-18.78
Mountain West — 10 teams
  1. 1New Mexico+8.34
  2. 2North Dakota State+3.87
  3. 3UNLV-1.75
  4. 4Air Force-1.76
  5. 5Nevada-8.40
  6. 6San José State-11.00
  7. 7Wyoming-12.09
  8. 8Hawai'i-14.53
  9. 9UTEP-16.02
  10. 10Northern Illinois-18.72
Conference USA — 10 teams
  1. 1Liberty+2.53
  2. 2Florida International-3.82
  3. 3Jacksonville State-3.87
  4. 4Western Kentucky-7.18
  5. 5Kennesaw State-8.11
  6. 6New Mexico State-9.09
  7. 7Delaware-10.11
  8. 8Sam Houston-10.98
  9. 9Middle Tennessee-12.67
  10. 10Missouri State-13.01
Mid-American — 13 teams
  1. 1Western Michigan+0.10
  2. 2Ohio-3.34
  3. 3Toledo-4.33
  4. 4Miami (OH)-6.61
  5. 5Eastern Michigan-9.23
  6. 6Central Michigan-9.53
  7. 7Massachusetts-9.70
  8. 8Buffalo-10.25
  9. 9Kent State-12.29
  10. 10Bowling Green-13.40
  11. 11Ball State-13.64
  12. 12Akron-16.18
  13. 13Sacramento State-17.80
04 · Method

Methodology

Every constant below was measured on 3,256 out-of-sample games rather than assumed. Full evidence lives in reports/BASELINE_2019_2025.md.

Power ratings

Opponent-adjusted scoring margin, solved iteratively. Home field is removed before rating, so a soft home schedule earns nothing. The 4.53-point average is then adjusted per game for elevation gain, travel, and eastward body-clock shift — centred so a typical game still gets 4.53. Frequent FCS opponents are rated as themselves instead of one pooled bucket.

Margins are compressed through cap · tanh(margin / cap) at cap 32. 36% of FBS games are decided by 28+ points — the NFL figure is nearer 8% — so an unadjusted mean lets garbage time drive the ratings. Capping is worth about half a point of MAE.

Home field (average)4.53 pts
Blowout cap32
Recency half-life12 wks
Margin SD24.2 pts
Offense weights

Standardised importance from a leave-one-season-out fit on opponent-adjusted features. Success rate dominates.

success rate0.5796
explosiveness0.1533
ppa per play0.1488
stuff rate inverse0.1183
Defense weights

Allowed statistics enter inverted, so giving up less rates better.

success rate allowed inverse0.5402
explosiveness allowed inverse0.1889
ppa allowed inverse0.1451
stuff rate0.1258
Why opponent adjustment

Raw season efficiency is confounded by schedule, and CFB schedules barely overlap. Adjusting is worth 0.30 points of MAE overall and 0.70 in weeks 5–7.

It also revived a signal: raw explosiveness fitted at 0.016 and looked worthless. Opponent-adjusted it fits at 0.153. The feature was never weak — the measurement was confounded.

Totals & projected scores

Margin asks who is better, so it uses feature differences. A total asks how much scoring the two teams generate together, so it uses sums plus pace — drives and plays per game. CFB tempo varies far more than the NFL’s.

League-mean total13.6544
Model total13.0446
Market total12.5055
Total residual SD16.36

The headline score is algebra on the independent margin and total, then the mean of 10,000 residual draws. The sportsbook line is shown next to it as the benchmark. On 3,256 games the independent MAE is still worse than the close (12.53 vs 12.16); this board publishes the disagreement anyway, because a market-anchored number cannot beat the market. Authority stays RESEARCH_ONLY.

Current-season form

Ratings and scoring priors start from last year, then fold in this year’s scored games as they arrive — 14% of the blend per completed week, the share measured on weeks 1–4. A final that CFBD has not yet flagged completed still counts if both scores are on the box. Week 1 is still last year only; by week 3 this year already carries 28% of the rating and of the scoring prior, on top of opponent-adjusted efficiency from the games already played.

Simulated scoreline

The published score is the mean of 10,000 independent draws from the residual margin (SD 24.2) and total (SD 16.36). That is the sample size where the standard error of the mean (~0.24 pts) sits an order of magnitude below the model’s MAE, so more draws do not change a displayed score. The stream is seeded from the matchup, so a rebuild with the same inputs reprints the same board. Mean scores are the projection; a single draw is not.

Independent challenger

A nested leave-one-season-out audit covered 3,702 games from 2021–2025. The market remains the better MAE forecast. Publishing it as the headline made every projection sit on the sportsbook line, which cannot produce an edge. The board now publishes the independent margin and total as the forecast, with DraftKings kept as the live benchmark. ATS on disagreements is still 51.11% with a CI that straddles 52.38% breakeven, so this is a challenger, not a cleared betting model.

Point-in-time

Every feature is queried strictly before the week being forecast. CFBD’s endWeek is a real filter, so a backtest cannot see its own answer.

Early-season reliability

Weeks 2–4 no longer treat one or two games of efficiency as a mature sample. The full efficiency estimate is blended at 30%, 50%, and 80% respectively, with the fitted preseason prior carrying the balance. On 778 games from 2021–2025, the blend lowered MAE from 13.65 to 13.22. Outcome-scale calibration in weeks 2–3 lowered the final transition MAE to 12.72; week 4 calibration was rejected because it made error worse.

Where this is not validated

Week 1 is preseason-only; weeks 2–4 are a separately measured transition, not the mature full matrix. Across weeks 1–6 the updated model MAE is 12.54 against the market’s 11.87. Treat the market as the better estimate early.