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
TCU -13.5
O/U 59.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → TCU
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
TCU 2022 Schedule
TCU's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 9/2 | TCU at Colorado | -13.5W38–13 | 59.0 | W38–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | TCU vs Tarleton State | -40.0W59–17 | 66.5 | W59–17 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/24 | TCU at SMU | -2.5W42–34 | 72.0 | W42–34 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | TCU vs Oklahoma | +5.0W55–24 | 69.5 | W55–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | TCU at Kansas | -7.0W38–31 | 70.0 | W38–31 | U | N |
| Sat 10/15 | TCU vs Oklahoma State | -5.0W43–40 | 69.5 | W43–40 | O | N |
| Sat 10/22 | TCU vs Kansas State | -3.5W38–28 | 54.5 | W38–28 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/29 | TCU at West Virginia | -7.0W41–31 | 70.0 | W41–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/5 | TCU vs Texas Tech | -8.5W34–24 | 69.0 | W34–24 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | TCU at Texas | +7.5W17–10 | 65.0 | W17–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | TCU at Baylor | -2.0W29–28 | 58.0 | W29–28 | U | N |
| Sat 11/26 | TCU vs Iowa State | -9.5W62–14 | 46.0 | W62–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/3 | TCU vs Kansas State | -1.0L28–31 | 60.5 | L28–31 | U | N |
| Sat 12/31 | TCU vs Michigan | +8.0W51–45 | 56.0 | W51–45 | O | Y |
| Mon 1/9 | TCU vs Georgia | +13.5L7–65 | 62.0 | L7–65 | O | N |
Colorado 2022 Schedule
Colorado's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 9/2 | Colorado vs TCU | +13.5L13–38 | 59.0 | L13–38 | U | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Colorado at Air Force | +17.5L10–41 | 50.0 | L10–41 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Colorado at Minnesota | +28.0L7–49 | 47.5 | L7–49 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Colorado vs UCLA | +22.0L17–45 | 57.0 | L17–45 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Colorado at Arizona | +17.5L20–43 | 57.5 | L20–43 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/15 | Colorado vs California | +15.0W20–13 | 49.0 | W20–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/22 | Colorado at Oregon State | +23.0L9–42 | 47.5 | L9–42 | O | N |
| Sat 10/29 | Colorado vs Arizona State | +13.0L34–42 | 49.0 | L34–42 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/5 | Colorado vs Oregon | +31.0L10–49 | 62.5 | L10–49 | U | N |
| Fri 11/11 | Colorado at USC | +34.0L17–55 | 66.0 | L17–55 | O | N |
| Sat 11/19 | Colorado at Washington | +30.5L7–54 | 61.5 | L7–54 | U | N |
| Sat 11/26 | Colorado vs Utah | +30.0L21–63 | 52.0 | L21–63 | O | 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
→ TCU
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ TCU
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ TCU
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?
TCU Edge
TCU +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?
TCU Edge
TCU +0.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
TCU
1 — 4 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
TCU
7.8 — 83.6 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
TCU won by 25
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Colorado, 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
TCU
Sonny Dykes #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Garrett Riley
Yr 1
#1
DC
Joseph Gillespie
Yr 1
#1
Colorado
Karl Dorrell #1
8–10 (44%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Mike Sanford Jr.
Yr 1
#1
DC
Chris Wilson
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 ✓