Matchup Prediction
Toss-up — no clear edge
Neither metric shows a meaningful pre-game edge in this matchup.
Momentum Control
58.4%
—
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
—
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Arkansas -19.5
O/U 50.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Arkansas
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Rice 2021 Schedule
Rice's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Rice at Arkansas | +19.5L17–38 | 50.0 | L17–38 | O | N |
| Sat 9/11 | Rice vs Houston | +7.5L7–44 | 50.0 | L7–44 | O | N |
| Sat 9/18 | Rice at Texas | +26.0L0–58 | 52.0 | L0–58 | O | N |
| Sat 9/25 | Rice vs Texas Southern | -37.0W48–34 | 53.5 | W48–34 | O | N |
| Sat 10/2 | Rice vs Southern Miss | -1.5W24–19 | 45.0 | W24–19 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/16 | Rice at UTSA | +17.0L0–45 | 53.0 | L0–45 | U | N |
| Sat 10/23 | Rice at UAB | +23.5W30–24 | 44.5 | W30–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/30 | Rice vs North Texas | -1.5L24–30 | 55.0 | L24–30 | U | N |
| Sat 11/6 | Rice at Charlotte | +6.5L24–31 | 51.5 | L24–31 | O | N |
| Sat 11/13 | Rice vs Western Kentucky | +19.0L21–42 | 61.0 | L21–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/20 | Rice at UTEP | +9.0L28–38 | 47.0 | L28–38 | O | N |
| Sat 11/27 | Rice vs Louisiana Tech | +3.5W35–31 | 52.5 | W35–31 | O | Y |
Arkansas 2021 Schedule
Arkansas's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Arkansas vs Rice | -19.5W38–17 | 50.0 | W38–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/11 | Arkansas vs Texas | +6.0W40–21 | 57.5 | W40–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/18 | Arkansas vs Georgia Southern | -23.0W45–10 | 53.5 | W45–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/25 | Arkansas vs Texas A&M | +4.5W20–10 | 47.0 | W20–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/2 | Arkansas at Georgia | +16.5L0–37 | 48.0 | L0–37 | U | N |
| Sat 10/9 | Arkansas at Ole Miss | +5.0L51–52 | 67.0 | L51–52 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/16 | Arkansas vs Auburn | -4.5L23–38 | 54.0 | L23–38 | O | N |
| Sat 10/23 | Arkansas vs Arkansas-Pine Bluff | -50.5W45–3 | 59.5 | W45–3 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/6 | Arkansas vs Mississippi State | -4.0W31–28 | 54.0 | W31–28 | O | N |
| Sat 11/13 | Arkansas at LSU | -3.0W16–13 | 59.5 | W16–13 | U | N |
| Sat 11/20 | Arkansas at Alabama | +20.5L35–42 | 58.5 | L35–42 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/26 | Arkansas vs Missouri | -14.5W34–17 | 63.0 | W34–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 1/1 | Arkansas vs Penn State | -3.5W24–10 | 51.0 | W24–10 | U | Y |
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) ·
2021 season
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Arkansas
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Advanced stats sourced from CFBD · 2021 season ·
Edges are matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense)
Power Ratings
Team Power Ratings
Overall · Offense · Defense ratings · Updated as season progresses
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences
Who builds scoring momentum?
Rice Edge
Rice +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Rice Edge
Rice +0.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Arkansas
3 — 0 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Arkansas
85.8 — 5.8 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Arkansas won by 21
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Arkansas, but the GC edge is small. When metrics agree but GC is near-neutral, the agreed-upon team has covered only 46.7% of the time historically (n=224) — potentially a fade signal.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Rice
Mike Bloomgren #1
7–26 (21%)
· Yr 4 at school
OC
Marques Tuiasosopo
Yr 1
#1
DC
Brian Smith
Yr 1
#1
Arkansas
Sam Pittman #1
6–7 (46%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Kendal Briles
Yr 1
#1
DC
Barry Odom
Yr 1
#1
About these metrics
Advanced Stats shows matchup-adjusted factor edges (offense vs opponent defense). Combination signals — when PPA, PPO, Success Rate, and Havoc all point the same direction — have historically predicted the SU winner in 95–97% of games and the ATS winner in 82–83% of games (2021–2025, FBS vs FBS, regular season).
Impact: Advanced Stats are the best performance based metric used to predict the outcome of games. ✓
Momentum Control (CSS) measures consecutive scoring sequences — when a team scores, holds the opponent scoreless, then scores again. Teams entering a game with a CSS edge of +1.0 or more have won 71–78% of games historically (2021–2025, FBS vs FBS).
Impact: CSS is not a predictive ATS advantage, data shows this is already considered when lines are set. ✗
Game Control (GC) measures win probability dominance — how thoroughly a team controlled the game from start to finish. Teams with a GC edge of +12 or more have won 67–76% of games historically. When both metrics agree, combined confidence is higher. When they split, treat as a lean at best.
Impact: GS is not a predictive ATS advantage, data shows this is already considered when lines are set. ✗
Power Ratings are a custom-built composite of a Teams Talent, Experience & Production, Coaching & Performance Metrics. These are updated constantly with roster changes, performance once the games start for the 2026 season, injuries the team is dealing with and scheduling situations.
Impact: There are a wide range of power ratings available, we think ours is the best, you can decide for yourself ✓
Advanced Stats shows matchup-adjusted factor edges (offense vs opponent defense). Combination signals — when PPA, PPO, Success Rate, and Havoc all point the same direction — have historically predicted the SU winner in 95–97% of games and the ATS winner in 82–83% of games (2021–2025, FBS vs FBS, regular season).
Impact: Advanced Stats are the best performance based metric used to predict the outcome of games. ✓
Momentum Control (CSS) measures consecutive scoring sequences — when a team scores, holds the opponent scoreless, then scores again. Teams entering a game with a CSS edge of +1.0 or more have won 71–78% of games historically (2021–2025, FBS vs FBS).
Impact: CSS is not a predictive ATS advantage, data shows this is already considered when lines are set. ✗
Game Control (GC) measures win probability dominance — how thoroughly a team controlled the game from start to finish. Teams with a GC edge of +12 or more have won 67–76% of games historically. When both metrics agree, combined confidence is higher. When they split, treat as a lean at best.
Impact: GS is not a predictive ATS advantage, data shows this is already considered when lines are set. ✗
Power Ratings are a custom-built composite of a Teams Talent, Experience & Production, Coaching & Performance Metrics. These are updated constantly with roster changes, performance once the games start for the 2026 season, injuries the team is dealing with and scheduling situations.
Impact: There are a wide range of power ratings available, we think ours is the best, you can decide for yourself ✓