Matchup Prediction
Arkansas
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Arkansas entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Arkansas wins
Lean
Game Control
49.4%
Arkansas wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Texas A&M -1.5
O/U 51.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
3 factors agree (PPA + PPO + Havoc) → Texas A&M
· 82.4% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Arkansas 2022 Schedule
Arkansas's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Arkansas vs Cincinnati | -6.5W31–24 | 54.5 | W31–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Arkansas vs South Carolina | -9.0W44–30 | 56.0 | W44–30 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/17 | Arkansas vs Missouri State | -26.0W38–27 | 60.0 | W38–27 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Arkansas vs Texas A&M | +1.5L21–23 | 51.0 | L21–23 | U | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Arkansas vs Alabama | +17.0L26–49 | 61.0 | L26–49 | O | N |
| Sat 10/8 | Arkansas at Mississippi State | +8.0L17–40 | 55.5 | L17–40 | O | N |
| Sat 10/15 | Arkansas at BYU | +1.0W52–35 | 66.5 | W52–35 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/29 | Arkansas at Auburn | -4.0W41–27 | 60.0 | W41–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/5 | Arkansas vs Liberty | -14.5L19–21 | 61.5 | L19–21 | U | N |
| Sat 11/12 | Arkansas vs LSU | +5.0L10–13 | 59.0 | L10–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Arkansas vs Ole Miss | +0.0W42–27 | 67.5 | W42–27 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/25 | Arkansas at Missouri | -3.0L27–29 | 55.5 | L27–29 | O | N |
| Wed 12/28 | Arkansas vs Kansas | -1.5W55–53 | 70.5 | W55–53 | O | Y |
Texas A&M 2022 Schedule
Texas A&M's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Texas A&M vs Sam Houston | -36.5W31–0 | 54.0 | W31–0 | U | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Texas A&M vs App State | -18.0L14–17 | 54.0 | L14–17 | U | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Texas A&M vs Miami | -6.5W17–9 | 45.5 | W17–9 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Texas A&M vs Arkansas | -1.5W23–21 | 51.0 | W23–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | Texas A&M at Mississippi State | +4.0L24–42 | 45.0 | L24–42 | O | N |
| Sat 10/8 | Texas A&M at Alabama | +24.0L20–24 | 48.0 | L20–24 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/22 | Texas A&M at South Carolina | -3.0L24–30 | 44.5 | L24–30 | O | N |
| Sat 10/29 | Texas A&M vs Ole Miss | +3.0L28–31 | 55.5 | L28–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/5 | Texas A&M vs Florida | -1.5L24–41 | 53.5 | L24–41 | O | N |
| Sat 11/12 | Texas A&M at Auburn | +1.5L10–13 | 48.0 | L10–13 | U | N |
| Sat 11/19 | Texas A&M vs Massachusetts | -32.0W20–3 | 46.0 | W20–3 | U | N |
| Sat 11/26 | Texas A&M vs LSU | +10.0W38–23 | 47.5 | W38–23 | O | Y |
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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Texas A&M
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Split
Metrics disagree
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?
Arkansas Edge
Arkansas +0.67
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Arkansas Edge
Arkansas +3.9
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 49.4% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Tie
1 — 1 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Arkansas
40.8 — 41.2 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Texas A&M won by 2
✗ Model missed it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Arkansas, 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
Arkansas
Sam Pittman #1
12–11 (52%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Kendal Briles
Yr 2
#1
DC
Barry Odom
Yr 2
#1
Texas A&M
Jimbo Fisher #1
34–14 (71%)
· Yr 5 at school
OC
Darrell Dickey
Yr 2
#1
DC
D. J. Durkin
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 ✓