Southern Miss at UTSA Week 11 College Football Matchup Southern Miss at UTSA Matchup - Week 11
Sat, Nov 13 2021 · Week 11 · 🏟 Alamodome San Antonio, TX · Turf · 65,000 cap
Southern Miss✈ 560 miSame TZ
17 27
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
Southern Miss
15
USM +32.5
UTSA
38
P&R Line UTSA -23
P&R Total O/U 53.5
Confidence 86 High
Vegas UT San Antonio -32.5 · O/U 54.0
Matchup Prediction
UTSA has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor UTSA entering this game.
Momentum Control
71.6%
UTSA wins
Solid
Game Control
76%
UTSA wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
UT San Antonio -32.5
O/U 54.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → UTSA · 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Southern Miss 2021 Schedule
Southern Miss's 2021 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/4Southern Miss at South Alabama+2.0L7–3156.5L7–31UN
Sat 9/11Southern Miss vs Grambling-23.0W37–047.5W37–0UY
Sat 9/18Southern Miss vs Troy+11.0L9–2149.0L9–21UN
Sat 9/25Southern Miss at Alabama+45.0L14–6357.5L14–63ON
Sat 10/2Southern Miss at Rice+1.5L19–2445.0L19–24UN
Sat 10/9Southern Miss vs UTEP+1.0L13–2646.5L13–26UN
Sat 10/16Southern Miss vs UAB+17.0L0–3443.0L0–34UN
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/30Southern Miss at Middle Tennessee+12.5L10–3547.0L10–35UN
Sat 11/6Southern Miss vs North Texas+5.5L14–3849.0L14–38ON
Sat 11/13Southern Miss at UTSA+32.5L17–2754.0L17–27UY
Fri 11/19Southern Miss at Louisiana Tech+15.0W35–1947.5W35–19OY
Sat 11/27Southern Miss vs Florida International-14.5W37–1745.5W37–17OY
UTSA 2021 Schedule
UTSA's 2021 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/4UTSA at Illinois+4.5W37–3052.0W37–30OY
Sat 9/11UTSA vs Lamar-38.0W54–065.0W54–0UY
Sat 9/18UTSA vs Middle Tennessee-11.5W27–1360.0W27–13UY
Sat 9/25UTSA at Memphis+3.0W31–2866.5W31–28UY
Sat 10/2UTSA vs UNLV-21.5W24–1755.5W24–17UN
Sat 10/9UTSA at Western Kentucky+3.5W52–4671.0W52–46OY
Sat 10/16UTSA vs Rice-17.0W45–053.0W45–0UY
Sat 10/23UTSA at Louisiana Tech-5.5W45–1659.5W45–16OY
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/6UTSA at UTEP-12.0W44–2353.5W44–23OY
Sat 11/13UTSA vs Southern Miss-32.5W27–1754.0W27–17UN
Sat 11/20UTSA vs UAB-3.5W34–3154.0W34–31ON
Sat 11/27UTSA at North Texas-8.5L23–4560.0L23–45ON
Fri 12/3UTSA vs Western Kentucky+3.0W49–4174.5W49–41OY
Tue 12/21UTSA vs San Diego State+3.0L24–3848.0L24–38ON
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2021 season
UTSA PPA Edge
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
→ UTSA
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Southern Miss
+0.229
UTSA
+0.509
UTSA Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Southern Miss
+0.556
UTSA
+0.720
UTSA Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Southern Miss
0.189
UTSA
0.183
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Southern Miss Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Southern Miss
+6.432
UTSA
+7.482
UTSA Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Southern Miss
+0.783
UTSA
+0.869
UTSA Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Southern Miss
70.9
UTSA
69.5
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
UTSA Edge
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
UTSA Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Southern Miss
-12.9
UTSA
-0.2
Offense Rating
Southern Miss
8.0
UTSA
16.4
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Southern Miss
21.0
UTSA
16.6
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? UTSA Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Southern Miss #124
0.13
UTSA #32
1.89
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Southern Miss #117
1.25
UTSA #24
0.44
UTSA +1.76
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 71.6% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? UTSA Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Southern Miss #1
23.6
UTSA #1
74.5
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Southern Miss #104
66.4
UTSA #21
14.8
UTSA +51.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
UTSA
2 — 1 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
UTSA
70.4 — 13.4 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
UTSA won by 10
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season

Both metrics agree on UTSA 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
Southern Miss
Will Hall #1
1–2 (33%) · Yr 1 at school
OC Cayden Cochran Yr 1 #1
DC Austin Armstrong Yr 1 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
UTSA
Jeff Traylor #1
10–5 (67%) · Yr 2 at school
OC Barry Lunney Jr. Yr 1 #1
DC Jess Loepp / Rod Wright Yr 1 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #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