North Carolina Composite Control — 2025 | Punt & Rally
2025 Composite Control — Game Control + Momentum Control
Composite Score
41.9
Composite Rank: #104  •  3–8 (FBS games)
GC Score
25.4
#116 in FBS
GC Net
-37.6
Raw GC Net
GC Off
18.1
SOS-Adj Offense
GC Allowed
55.7
Avg Allowed ↓
MC Score
58.5
#81 in FBS
MC Net
-0.93
Raw MC Net
MC Off
0.26
Adj. Sequences
MC Win%
100%
When winning MC
MC > GC by 33 points. North Carolina generated strong consecutive scoring sequences (Momentum Control score: 58.5) but spent more time in contested win probability territory than their sequence count suggests (Game Control score: 25.4). This profile suggests a team that delivers explosive scoring runs but also plays in close, contested games.
Game Control Game-by-Game Win Probability Log
Wk Opponent Result GC Scores Avg WP% Ctrl% Never Trailed
GC Off GC Allowed GC Net
1 TCU H L 14–48 18.2 63.5 -45.2 27.5% 13.7%
2 Charlotte A W 20–3 90.6 6.6 +84 83.6% 92.6%
3 Richmond H 91.3 4.2 +87.1 89.6% 91.5%
4 UCF A L 9–34 4.6 91.4 -86.7 11.6% 0%
6 Clemson H L 10–38 3 94.7 -91.7 7.6% 0%
8 California A L 18–21 7.6 88.4 -80.8 19% 0%
9 Virginia H L 16–17 21.7 31.6 -9.8 50.8% 4%
10 Syracuse A W 27–10 45.7 40.7 +5 55% 40.7%
11 Stanford H W 20–15 65 12.7 +52.3 72.5% 57.2%
12 Wake Forest A L 12–28 7.1 91.4 -84.3 17.9% 0%
13 Duke H L 25–32 25.7 50.9 -25.2 40.8% 13.4%
14 NC State A L 19–42 4.4 92.6 -88.2 10.9% 0%
3W / 11G
Momentum Control Game-by-Game Scoring Sequences Log
Wk Opponent Result Opponent-Adjusted Raw Edge Opp Wt
MC Off MC Def ↓ MC Net Off Def ↓
1 TCU H L 14–48 0 4.33 -4.33 0 2 ✗ 0
1
2 Charlotte A W 20–3 0.02 0 +0.02 1 0 ✓ +1
0.02
4 UCF A L 9–34 0 1.42 -1.42 0 2 ✗ 0
0.71
6 Clemson H L 10–38 0 4.42 -4.42 0 2 ✗ 0
1
8 California A L 18–21 0 0 +0 0 0 Tied
1
9 Virginia H L 16–17 0 0 +0 0 0 Tied
1
10 Syracuse A W 27–10 1 0 +1 3 0 ✓ +3
0.33
11 Stanford H W 20–15 1.05 1.05 +0 1 1 Tied
1
12 Wake Forest A L 12–28 0 0 +0 0 0 Tied
1
13 Duke H L 25–32 1.71 3.41 -1.7 1 2 ✗ 1
1
14 NC State A L 19–42 0 2.68 -2.68 0 2 ✗ 0
1
3W / 11G 6 11