Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors UAB,
while Game Control favors Liberty.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
58.4%
UAB wins
Lean
Game Control
58.3%
Liberty wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
UAB -3
O/U 49.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → UAB
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Liberty 2021 Schedule
Liberty's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Liberty vs Campbell | -35.0W48–7 | 65.0 | W48–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/11 | Liberty at Troy | -3.0W21–13 | 62.5 | W21–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/18 | Liberty vs Old Dominion | -26.5W45–17 | 53.5 | W45–17 | O | Y |
| Fri 9/24 | Liberty at Syracuse | -6.5L21–24 | 54.0 | L21–24 | U | N |
| Sat 10/2 | Liberty at UAB | +3.0W36–12 | 49.0 | W36–12 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/9 | Liberty vs Middle Tennessee | -20.0W41–13 | 59.0 | W41–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/16 | Liberty at UL Monroe | -32.5L28–31 | 57.0 | L28–31 | O | N |
| Sat 10/23 | Liberty at North Texas | -21.0W35–26 | 61.0 | W35–26 | U | N |
| Sat 10/30 | Liberty vs Massachusetts | -35.5W62–17 | 56.0 | W62–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/6 | Liberty at Ole Miss | +7.5L14–27 | 66.5 | L14–27 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/20 | Liberty vs Louisiana | -4.0L14–42 | 53.5 | L14–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/27 | Liberty vs Army | -3.0L16–31 | 51.5 | L16–31 | U | N |
| Sat 12/18 | Liberty vs Eastern Michigan | -9.5W56–20 | 58.5 | W56–20 | O | Y |
UAB 2021 Schedule
UAB's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wed 9/1 | UAB vs Jacksonville State | -16.5W31–0 | 52.0 | W31–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/11 | UAB at Georgia | +22.5L7–56 | 44.0 | L7–56 | O | N |
| Sat 9/18 | UAB at North Texas | -12.5W40–6 | 58.5 | W40–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/25 | UAB at Tulane | +2.5W28–21 | 55.0 | W28–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/2 | UAB vs Liberty | -3.0L12–36 | 49.0 | L12–36 | U | N |
| Sat 10/9 | UAB vs Florida Atlantic | -3.5W31–14 | 48.5 | W31–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/16 | UAB at Southern Miss | -17.0W34–0 | 43.0 | W34–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/23 | UAB vs Rice | -23.5L24–30 | 44.5 | L24–30 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/6 | UAB vs Louisiana Tech | -14.0W52–38 | 49.5 | W52–38 | O | N |
| Sat 11/13 | UAB at Marshall | +4.5W21–14 | 55.5 | W21–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/20 | UAB at UTSA | +3.5L31–34 | 54.0 | L31–34 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/26 | UAB vs UTEP | -13.5W42–25 | 49.5 | W42–25 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/18 | UAB vs BYU | +7.0W31–28 | 54.5 | W31–28 | O | 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
→ UAB
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?
UAB Edge
UAB +0.25
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Liberty Edge
Liberty +4.4
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.3% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
CSS and GC disagree on this matchup. When the metrics split, historical cover rates are essentially random — treat this as a coin flip against the spread.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Liberty
Hugh Freeze #1
21–6 (78%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Kent Austin
Yr 1
#1
DC
Scott Symons
Yr 1
#1
UAB
Bill Clark #1
42–23 (65%)
· Yr 8 at school
OC
Bryant Vincent
Yr 1
#1
DC
David Reeves
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: Momentum Control is a great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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: Game Control is another great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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: Momentum Control is a great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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: Game Control is another great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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 ✓