Matchup Prediction
Missouri
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Missouri entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Missouri wins
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
Missouri wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Texas A&M -11.5
O/U 59.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Texas A&M
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Texas A&M 2021 Schedule
Texas A&M's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Texas A&M vs Kent State | -29.5W41–10 | 67.0 | W41–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/11 | Texas A&M vs Colorado | -17.5W10–7 | 51.0 | W10–7 | U | N |
| Sat 9/18 | Texas A&M vs New Mexico | -30.5W34–0 | 49.5 | W34–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/25 | Texas A&M vs Arkansas | -4.5L10–20 | 47.0 | L10–20 | U | N |
| Sat 10/2 | Texas A&M vs Mississippi State | -7.0L22–26 | 45.5 | L22–26 | O | N |
| Sat 10/9 | Texas A&M vs Alabama | +18.5W41–38 | 50.5 | W41–38 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/16 | Texas A&M at Missouri | -11.5W35–14 | 59.0 | W35–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/23 | Texas A&M vs South Carolina | -19.0W44–14 | 46.0 | W44–14 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/6 | Texas A&M vs Auburn | -4.5W20–3 | 49.5 | W20–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/13 | Texas A&M at Ole Miss | -1.0L19–29 | 57.5 | L19–29 | U | N |
| Sat 11/20 | Texas A&M vs Prairie View A&M | -41.5W52–3 | 50.0 | W52–3 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/27 | Texas A&M at LSU | -6.0L24–27 | 47.0 | L24–27 | O | N |
Missouri 2021 Schedule
Missouri's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Missouri vs Central Michigan | -13.5W34–24 | 59.0 | W34–24 | U | N |
| Sat 9/11 | Missouri at Kentucky | +5.5L28–35 | 56.5 | L28–35 | O | N |
| Sat 9/18 | Missouri vs Southeast Missouri State | -34.5W59–28 | 59.0 | W59–28 | O | N |
| Sat 9/25 | Missouri at Boston College | +1.0L34–41 | 58.5 | L34–41 | O | N |
| Sat 10/2 | Missouri vs Tennessee | -2.5L24–62 | 66.5 | L24–62 | O | N |
| Sat 10/9 | Missouri vs North Texas | -18.5W48–35 | 69.0 | W48–35 | O | N |
| Sat 10/16 | Missouri vs Texas A&M | +11.5L14–35 | 59.0 | L14–35 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/30 | Missouri at Vanderbilt | -16.0W37–28 | 62.5 | W37–28 | O | N |
| Sat 11/6 | Missouri at Georgia | +40.0L6–43 | 59.0 | L6–43 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/13 | Missouri vs South Carolina | -1.0W31–28 | 56.5 | W31–28 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/20 | Missouri vs Florida | +9.5W24–23 | 69.0 | W24–23 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/26 | Missouri at Arkansas | +14.5L17–34 | 63.0 | L17–34 | U | N |
| Wed 12/22 | Missouri vs Army | +7.0L22–24 | 54.0 | L22–24 | 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
All 4 Agree
→ Texas A&M
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Texas A&M
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Texas A&M
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?
Missouri Edge
Missouri +0.67
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 6 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Missouri Edge
Missouri +0.4
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 6 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Missouri, 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
Texas A&M
Jimbo Fisher #1
29–10 (74%)
· Yr 4 at school
OC
Darrell Dickey
Yr 1
#1
DC
Mike Elko
Yr 1
#1
Missouri
Eliah Drinkwitz #1
7–6 (54%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Eliah Drinkwitz
Yr 1
#1
DC
Steve Wilks
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 ✓