Sat, Oct 23 2021
·
Week 8
·
🏟 Kyle Field
College Station, TX
·
Turf
·
102,733 cap
South Carolina✈ 923 mi-1 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Texas A&M
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Texas A&M entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Texas A&M wins
Lean
Game Control
76%
Texas A&M wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
Texas A&M -19
O/U 46.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Texas A&M
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
South Carolina 2021 Schedule
South Carolina's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | South Carolina vs Eastern Illinois | -31.5W46–0 | 55.5 | W46–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/11 | South Carolina at East Carolina | -3.0W20–17 | 56.5 | W20–17 | U | N |
| Sat 9/18 | South Carolina at Georgia | +31.5L13–40 | 47.5 | L13–40 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/25 | South Carolina vs Kentucky | +4.5L10–16 | 49.0 | L10–16 | U | N |
| Sat 10/2 | South Carolina vs Troy | -6.5W23–14 | 43.0 | W23–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/9 | South Carolina at Tennessee | +10.5L20–45 | 57.0 | L20–45 | O | N |
| Sat 10/16 | South Carolina vs Vanderbilt | -19.0W21–20 | 50.0 | W21–20 | U | N |
| Sat 10/23 | South Carolina at Texas A&M | +19.0L14–44 | 46.0 | L14–44 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/6 | South Carolina vs Florida | +20.5W40–17 | 52.0 | W40–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/13 | South Carolina at Missouri | +1.0L28–31 | 56.5 | L28–31 | O | N |
| Sat 11/20 | South Carolina vs Auburn | +7.0W21–17 | 45.5 | W21–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/27 | South Carolina vs Clemson | +11.5L0–30 | 42.5 | L0–30 | U | N |
| Thu 12/30 | South Carolina vs North Carolina | +12.5W38–21 | 57.5 | W38–21 | O | Y |
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 |
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?
Texas A&M Edge
Texas A&M +0.57
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Texas A&M Edge
Texas A&M +21.7
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Texas A&M
4 — 0 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Texas A&M
98.7 — 0.7 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Texas A&M won by 30
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Texas A&M with a large edge. Historically, dominant teams like this are fully priced into the spread — the agreed-upon team covers just 50.2% of the time. The metrics predict game control better than they beat the number.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
South Carolina
Shane Beamer #1
2–1 (67%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Marcus Satterfield
Yr 1
#1
DC
Clayton White
Yr 1
#1
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
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 ✓