South Alabama at Bowling Green Week 2 College Football Matchup South Alabama at Bowling Green Matchup - Week 2
Sat, Sep 11 2021 · Week 2 · 🏟 Doyt Perry Stadium Bowling Green, OH · Turf · 24,000 cap
South Alabama✈ 778 mi+1 hr TZ
22 19
Final
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
South Alabama
26
BGSU +14.5
Bowling Green
24
P&R Line South Alabama -2.5
P&R Total O/U 50
Confidence 90 High
Vegas South Alabama -14.5 · O/U 48.0
Matchup Prediction
Toss-up — no clear edge
Neither metric shows a meaningful pre-game edge in this matchup.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Lean
Game Control
75.9%
South Alabama wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
South Alabama -14.5
O/U 48.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → South Alabama · 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
South Alabama 2021 Schedule
South Alabama's 2021 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/4South Alabama vs Southern Miss-2.0W31–756.5W31–7UY
Sat 9/11South Alabama at Bowling Green-14.5W22–1948.0W22–19UN
Sat 9/18South Alabama vs Alcorn State-21.5W28–2144.5W28–21ON
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/2South Alabama vs Louisiana+12.0L18–2052.5L18–20UY
Sat 10/9South Alabama at Texas State-4.0L31–3352.5L31–33ON
Thu 10/14South Alabama vs Georgia Southern-2.5W41–1449.0W41–14OY
Sat 10/23South Alabama at UL Monroe-13.5L31–4151.5L31–41ON
Sat 10/30South Alabama vs Arkansas State-9.5W31–1367.0W31–13UY
Sat 11/6South Alabama at Troy+3.5L24–3147.5L24–31ON
Sat 11/13South Alabama at App State+21.5L7–3151.5L7–31UN
Sat 11/20South Alabama at Tennessee+28.5L14–6061.5L14–60ON
Fri 11/26South Alabama vs Coastal Carolina+14.5L21–2755.5L21–27UY
Bowling Green 2021 Schedule
Bowling Green's 2021 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Thu 9/2Bowling Green at Tennessee+37.0L6–3860.5L6–38UY
Sat 9/11Bowling Green vs South Alabama+14.5L19–2248.0L19–22UY
Sat 9/18Bowling Green vs Murray State+2.5W27–1044.0W27–10UY
Sat 9/25Bowling Green at Minnesota+30.5W14–1052.5W14–10UY
Sat 10/2Bowling Green at Kent State+16.5L20–2756.0L20–27UY
Sat 10/9Bowling Green vs Akron-14.0L20–3546.0L20–35ON
Sat 10/16Bowling Green at Northern Illinois+9.0L26–3444.5L26–34OY
Sat 10/23Bowling Green vs Eastern Michigan+4.5L24–5549.5L24–55ON
Sat 10/30Bowling Green at Buffalo+13.5W56–4451.5W56–44OY
— Bye Week —
Wed 11/10Bowling Green vs Toledo+10.5L17–4950.0L17–49ON
Tue 11/16Bowling Green at Miami (OH)+17.0L7–3452.0L7–34UN
Fri 11/26Bowling Green vs Ohio+6.0W21–1048.0W21–10UY
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2021 season
South Alabama PPA Edge
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ South Alabama
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ South Alabama
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ South Alabama
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
South Alabama
+0.348
Bowling Green
+0.233
South Alabama Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
South Alabama
+0.424
Bowling Green
+0.415
South Alabama Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
South Alabama
0.197
Bowling Green
0.167
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
South Alabama Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
South Alabama
+7.559
Bowling Green
+6.617
South Alabama Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
South Alabama
+0.844
Bowling Green
+0.751
South Alabama Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
South Alabama
71.5
Bowling Green
69.6
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Bowling Green 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
Bowling Green Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
South Alabama
-11.8
Bowling Green
-9.7
Offense Rating
South Alabama
8.6
Bowling Green
10.9
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
South Alabama
20.4
Bowling Green
20.7
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum?
Avg sequences created per game
South Alabama #96
1.00
Bowling Green #86
1.00
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
South Alabama #103
1.00
Bowling Green #86
2.00
South Alabama +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 1 game this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? South Alabama Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
South Alabama #1
65.0
Bowling Green #1
0.2
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
South Alabama #77
32.1
Bowling Green #105
97.8
South Alabama +64.7
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 75.9% of games historically
Based on 1 game 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
South Alabama
Kane Wommack #1
3–0 (100%) · Yr 1 at school
OC Major Applewhite Yr 1 #1
DC Corey Batoon Yr 1 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
Bowling Green
Scot Loeffler #1
4–16 (20%) · Yr 3 at school
OC Terry Malone Yr 1 #1
DC Eric Lewis 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