Sat, Sep 24 2022
·
Week 4
·
🏟 Davis Wade Stadium
Starkville, MS
·
Turf
·
61,337 cap
Bowling Green✈ 616 mi-1 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Mississippi State
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Mississippi State entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Mississippi State wins
Lean
Game Control
76%
Mississippi State wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
Mississippi State -31
O/U 53.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Mississippi State
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Bowling Green 2022 Schedule
Bowling Green's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Bowling Green at UCLA | +24.0L17–45 | 56.5 | L17–45 | O | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Bowling Green vs Eastern Kentucky | -7.5L57–59 | 57.0 | L57–59 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Bowling Green vs Marshall | +17.0W34–31 | 50.0 | W34–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Bowling Green at Mississippi State | +31.0L14–45 | 53.0 | L14–45 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | Bowling Green at Akron | -9.0W31–28 | 49.5 | W31–28 | O | N |
| Sat 10/8 | Bowling Green vs Buffalo | +2.0L7–38 | 55.5 | L7–38 | U | N |
| Sat 10/15 | Bowling Green vs Miami (OH) | +7.0W17–13 | 45.0 | W17–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/22 | Bowling Green at Central Michigan | +5.5W34–18 | 51.0 | W34–18 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Wed 11/2 | Bowling Green vs Western Michigan | -5.0W13–9 | 48.0 | W13–9 | U | N |
| Wed 11/9 | Bowling Green vs Kent State | +2.5L6–40 | 55.5 | L6–40 | U | N |
| Tue 11/15 | Bowling Green at Toledo | +14.5W42–35 | 47.0 | W42–35 | O | Y |
| Tue 11/22 | Bowling Green at Ohio | +5.5L14–38 | 52.5 | L14–38 | U | N |
| Mon 12/26 | Bowling Green vs New Mexico State | -3.0L19–24 | 51.0 | L19–24 | U | N |
Mississippi State 2022 Schedule
Mississippi State's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Mississippi State vs Memphis | -17.0W49–23 | 58.0 | W49–23 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Mississippi State at Arizona | -11.5W39–17 | 57.5 | W39–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/17 | Mississippi State at LSU | -3.0L16–31 | 53.0 | L16–31 | U | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Mississippi State vs Bowling Green | -31.0W45–14 | 53.0 | W45–14 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Mississippi State vs Texas A&M | -4.0W42–24 | 45.0 | W42–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Mississippi State vs Arkansas | -8.0W40–17 | 55.5 | W40–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | Mississippi State at Kentucky | -3.5L17–27 | 50.5 | L17–27 | U | N |
| Sat 10/22 | Mississippi State at Alabama | +21.5L6–30 | 61.5 | L6–30 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/5 | Mississippi State vs Auburn | -12.5W39–33 | 50.5 | W39–33 | O | N |
| Sat 11/12 | Mississippi State vs Georgia | +16.5L19–45 | 53.0 | L19–45 | O | N |
| Sat 11/19 | Mississippi State vs East Tennessee State | -39.0W56–7 | 62.5 | W56–7 | O | Y |
| Thu 11/24 | Mississippi State at Ole Miss | +2.5W24–22 | 63.0 | W24–22 | U | Y |
| Mon 1/2 | Mississippi State vs Illinois | -3.5W19–10 | 46.5 | W19–10 | U | 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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Mississippi State
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?
Mississippi State Edge
Mississippi State +0.33
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Mississippi State Edge
Mississippi State +58.6
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Mississippi State
3 — 0 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Mississippi State
99.1 — 0.2 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Mississippi State won by 31
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Mississippi State 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
Bowling Green
Scot Loeffler #1
7–22 (24%)
· Yr 4 at school
OC
Terry Malone
Yr 2
#1
DC
Eric Lewis
Yr 2
#1
Mississippi State
Mike Leach #1
11–13 (46%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Mike Leach
Yr 2
#1
DC
Zach Arnett
Yr 2
#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 ✓