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
67.1%
Air Force wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Air Force -2.5
O/U 37.5
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Air Force
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Army 2021 Schedule
Army's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Army at Georgia State | +2.5W43–10 | 50.0 | W43–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/11 | Army vs Western Kentucky | -6.0W38–35 | 52.0 | W38–35 | O | N |
| Sat 9/18 | Army vs UConn | -34.5W52–21 | 48.0 | W52–21 | O | N |
| Sat 9/25 | Army vs Miami (OH) | -7.5W23–10 | 49.0 | W23–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/2 | Army at Ball State | -10.5L16–28 | 46.5 | L16–28 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/16 | Army at Wisconsin | +14.0L14–20 | 37.5 | L14–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/23 | Army vs Wake Forest | +3.0L56–70 | 53.5 | L56–70 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/6 | Army vs Air Force | +2.5W21–14 | 37.5 | W21–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/13 | Army vs Bucknell | -51.5W63–10 | 58.5 | W63–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/20 | Army vs Massachusetts | -37.5W33–17 | 56.0 | W33–17 | U | N |
| Sat 11/27 | Army at Liberty | +3.0W31–16 | 51.5 | W31–16 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 12/11 | Army vs Navy | +7.0L13–17 | 35.5 | L13–17 | U | Y |
| Wed 12/22 | Army vs Missouri | -7.0W24–22 | 54.0 | W24–22 | U | N |
Air Force 2021 Schedule
Air Force's 2021 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/4 | Air Force vs Lafayette | -40.5W35–14 | 49.5 | W35–14 | U | N |
| Sat 9/11 | Air Force at Navy | -6.0W23–3 | 40.0 | W23–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/18 | Air Force vs Utah State | -9.0L45–49 | 54.0 | L45–49 | O | N |
| Sat 9/25 | Air Force vs Florida Atlantic | -3.5W31–7 | 54.0 | W31–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/2 | Air Force at New Mexico | -11.5W38–10 | 46.0 | W38–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/9 | Air Force vs Wyoming | -5.5W24–14 | 46.5 | W24–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/16 | Air Force at Boise State | +3.0W24–17 | 52.0 | W24–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/23 | Air Force vs San Diego State | -3.0L14–20 | 38.5 | L14–20 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/6 | Air Force vs Army | -2.5L14–21 | 37.5 | L14–21 | U | N |
| Sat 11/13 | Air Force at Colorado State | -3.0W35–21 | 45.0 | W35–21 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/19 | Air Force at Nevada | -1.5W41–39 | 53.5 | W41–39 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/26 | Air Force vs UNLV | -18.5W48–14 | 49.5 | W48–14 | O | Y |
| Tue 12/28 | Air Force vs Louisville | -1.0W31–28 | 55.0 | 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
→ Air Force
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?
Army +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Air Force Edge
Air Force +18.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 67.1% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Air Force with a solid GC edge. Teams with this profile have covered 53.0% of the time historically (n=330) — a mild lean.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Army
Jeff Monken #1
52–39 (57%)
· Yr 8 at school
OC
Brent Davis
Yr 1
#1
DC
Nate Woody
Yr 1
#1
Air Force
Troy Calhoun #1
104–73 (59%)
· Yr 15 at school
OC
Mike Thiessen
Yr 1
#1
DC
John Rudzinski
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 ✓