Matchup Prediction
Georgia
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Georgia entering this game.
Momentum Control
73.7%
Georgia wins
Solid
Game Control
75.9%
Georgia wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Georgia -19
O/U 56.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Georgia
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Georgia 2021 Schedule
Georgia's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Georgia vs Clemson | +3.0W10–3 | 51.5 | W10–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/11 | Georgia vs UAB | -22.5W56–7 | 44.0 | W56–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/18 | Georgia vs South Carolina | -31.5W40–13 | 47.5 | W40–13 | O | N |
| Sat 9/25 | Georgia at Vanderbilt | -36.0W62–0 | 54.5 | W62–0 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/2 | Georgia vs Arkansas | -16.5W37–0 | 48.0 | W37–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/9 | Georgia at Auburn | -14.5W34–10 | 45.5 | W34–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/16 | Georgia vs Kentucky | -21.5W30–13 | 44.5 | W30–13 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/30 | Georgia vs Florida | -14.0W34–7 | 50.0 | W34–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/6 | Georgia vs Missouri | -40.0W43–6 | 59.0 | W43–6 | U | N |
| Sat 11/13 | Georgia at Tennessee | -19.0W41–17 | 56.0 | W41–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/20 | Georgia vs Charleston Southern | -52.5W56–7 | 59.5 | W56–7 | O | N |
| Sat 11/27 | Georgia at Georgia Tech | -35.5W45–0 | 54.5 | W45–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 12/4 | Georgia vs Alabama | -6.0L24–41 | 48.5 | L24–41 | O | N |
| Fri 12/31 | Georgia vs Michigan | -7.5W34–11 | 47.0 | W34–11 | U | Y |
| Mon 1/10 | Georgia vs Alabama | -3.0W33–18 | 53.5 | W33–18 | U | Y |
Tennessee 2021 Schedule
Tennessee's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 9/2 | Tennessee vs Bowling Green | -37.0W38–6 | 60.5 | W38–6 | U | N |
| Sat 9/11 | Tennessee vs Pittsburgh | +3.5L34–41 | 56.0 | L34–41 | O | N |
| Sat 9/18 | Tennessee vs Tennessee Tech | -38.0W56–0 | 53.0 | W56–0 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/25 | Tennessee at Florida | +19.0L14–38 | 65.0 | L14–38 | U | N |
| Sat 10/2 | Tennessee at Missouri | +2.5W62–24 | 66.5 | W62–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/9 | Tennessee vs South Carolina | -10.5W45–20 | 57.0 | W45–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/16 | Tennessee vs Ole Miss | +1.0L26–31 | 82.0 | L26–31 | U | N |
| Sat 10/23 | Tennessee at Alabama | +24.5L24–52 | 68.0 | L24–52 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/6 | Tennessee at Kentucky | -1.0W45–42 | 57.5 | W45–42 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/13 | Tennessee vs Georgia | +19.0L17–41 | 56.0 | L17–41 | O | N |
| Sat 11/20 | Tennessee vs South Alabama | -28.5W60–14 | 61.5 | W60–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/27 | Tennessee vs Vanderbilt | -33.0W45–21 | 65.0 | W45–21 | O | N |
| Thu 12/30 | Tennessee vs Purdue | -8.0L45–48 | 67.0 | L45–48 | 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
→ Georgia
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Georgia
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Georgia
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?
Georgia Edge
Georgia +1.22
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 73.7% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Georgia Edge
Georgia +37.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 75.9% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Georgia 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
Georgia
Kirby Smart #1
55–13 (81%)
· Yr 6 at school
OC
Todd Monken
Yr 1
#1
DC
Dan Lanning
Yr 1
#1
Tennessee
Josh Heupel #1
2–1 (67%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Alex Golesh
Yr 1
#1
DC
Tim Banks
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 ✓