Matchup Prediction
Houston
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Houston entering this game.
Momentum Control
73.7%
Houston wins
Solid
Game Control
75.9%
Houston wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Houston -26
O/U 52.5
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Houston
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Houston 2021 Schedule
Houston's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Houston vs Texas Tech | -2.5L21–38 | 63.0 | L21–38 | U | N |
| Sat 9/11 | Houston at Rice | -7.5W44–7 | 50.0 | W44–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/18 | Houston vs Grambling | -41.0W45–0 | 51.5 | W45–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/25 | Houston vs Navy | -20.0W28–20 | 47.0 | W28–20 | O | N |
| Fri 10/1 | Houston at Tulsa | +3.0W45–10 | 54.0 | W45–10 | O | Y |
| Thu 10/7 | Houston at Tulane | -6.5W40–22 | 60.0 | W40–22 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/23 | Houston vs East Carolina | -13.5W31–24 | 56.0 | W31–24 | U | N |
| Sat 10/30 | Houston vs SMU | +1.0W44–37 | 61.5 | W44–37 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/6 | Houston at South Florida | -13.5W54–42 | 53.0 | W54–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/13 | Houston at Temple | -26.0W37–8 | 52.5 | W37–8 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/19 | Houston vs Memphis | -9.0W31–13 | 59.5 | W31–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/27 | Houston at UConn | -32.0W45–17 | 54.5 | W45–17 | O | N |
| Sat 12/4 | Houston at Cincinnati | +10.5L20–35 | 52.5 | L20–35 | O | N |
| Tue 12/28 | Houston vs Auburn | +2.0W17–13 | 51.5 | W17–13 | U | Y |
Temple 2021 Schedule
Temple's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Temple at Rutgers | +14.0L14–61 | 52.0 | L14–61 | O | N |
| Sat 9/11 | Temple at Akron | -6.5W45–24 | 51.5 | W45–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/18 | Temple vs Boston College | +15.0L3–28 | 55.5 | L3–28 | U | N |
| Sat 9/25 | Temple vs Wagner | -36.5W41–7 | 54.5 | W41–7 | U | N |
| Sat 10/2 | Temple vs Memphis | +11.0W34–31 | 58.5 | W34–31 | O | Y |
| Fri 10/8 | Temple at Cincinnati | +30.0L3–52 | 52.5 | L3–52 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/23 | Temple at South Florida | +1.5L14–34 | 54.5 | L14–34 | U | N |
| Sat 10/30 | Temple vs UCF | +12.0L7–49 | 52.0 | L7–49 | O | N |
| Sat 11/6 | Temple at East Carolina | +15.5L3–45 | 52.0 | L3–45 | U | N |
| Sat 11/13 | Temple vs Houston | +26.0L8–37 | 52.5 | L8–37 | U | N |
| Sat 11/20 | Temple at Tulsa | +22.0L10–44 | 50.5 | L10–44 | O | N |
| Sat 11/27 | Temple vs Navy | +13.5L14–38 | 42.0 | L14–38 | 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
→ Houston
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Houston
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Houston
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?
Houston Edge
Houston +1.38
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 73.7% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Houston Edge
Houston +52.7
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 Houston 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
Houston
Dana Holgorsen #1
9–14 (39%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Shannon Dawson
Yr 1
#1
DC
Doug Belk
Yr 1
#1
Temple
Rod Carey #1
10–13 (44%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Mike Uremovich
Yr 1
#1
DC
Jeff Knowles
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 ✓