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
50.6%
—
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Utah -2.5
O/U 52.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Utah
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Utah 2022 Schedule
Utah's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Utah at Florida | -2.5L26–29 | 52.0 | L26–29 | O | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Utah vs Southern Utah | -45.5W73–7 | 58.5 | W73–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/17 | Utah vs San Diego State | -21.5W35–7 | 48.0 | W35–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Utah at Arizona State | -16.5W34–13 | 54.0 | W34–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | Utah vs Oregon State | -10.5W42–16 | 54.0 | W42–16 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Utah at UCLA | -3.0L32–42 | 64.5 | L32–42 | O | N |
| Sat 10/15 | Utah vs USC | -3.5W43–42 | 65.0 | W43–42 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Thu 10/27 | Utah at Washington State | -7.5W21–17 | 56.5 | W21–17 | U | N |
| Sat 11/5 | Utah vs Arizona | -17.5W45–20 | 67.5 | W45–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | Utah vs Stanford | -23.5W42–7 | 54.0 | W42–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Utah at Oregon | -2.5L17–20 | 60.0 | L17–20 | U | N |
| Sat 11/26 | Utah at Colorado | -30.0W63–21 | 52.0 | W63–21 | O | Y |
| Fri 12/2 | Utah vs USC | +3.0W47–24 | 67.5 | W47–24 | O | Y |
| Mon 1/2 | Utah vs Penn State | +1.5L21–35 | 55.5 | L21–35 | O | N |
Florida 2022 Schedule
Florida's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Florida vs Utah | +2.5W29–26 | 52.0 | W29–26 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Florida vs Kentucky | -6.0L16–26 | 53.0 | L16–26 | U | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Florida vs South Florida | -23.5W31–28 | 58.0 | W31–28 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Florida at Tennessee | +11.0L33–38 | 62.0 | L33–38 | O | Y |
| Sun 10/2 | Florida vs Eastern Washington | -32.0W52–17 | 71.5 | W52–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Florida vs Missouri | -11.0W24–17 | 53.5 | W24–17 | U | N |
| Sat 10/15 | Florida vs LSU | -2.0L35–45 | 51.5 | L35–45 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/29 | Florida vs Georgia | +23.0L20–42 | 56.5 | L20–42 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/5 | Florida at Texas A&M | +1.5W41–24 | 53.5 | W41–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | Florida vs South Carolina | -8.0W38–6 | 58.0 | W38–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Florida at Vanderbilt | -14.0L24–31 | 58.0 | L24–31 | U | N |
| Fri 11/25 | Florida at Florida State | +10.0L38–45 | 58.5 | L38–45 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/17 | Florida vs Oregon State | +7.5L3–30 | 52.0 | L3–30 | U | N |
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) ·
2022 season
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ Utah
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Utah
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Utah
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 · 2022 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?
Utah Edge
Utah +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Utah Edge
Utah +0.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Florida, but the GC edge is small. When metrics agree but GC is near-neutral, the agreed-upon team has covered only 46.7% of the time historically (n=224) — potentially a fade signal.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Utah
Kyle Whittingham #1
144–70 (67%)
· Yr 18 at school
OC
Andy Ludwig
Yr 2
#1
DC
Morgan Scalley
Yr 2
#1
Florida
Billy Napier #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Rob Sale
Yr 1
#1
DC
Patrick Toney
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 ✓