Sun, Sep 18 2022
·
Week 3
·
🏟 Sun Devil Stadium
Tempe, AZ
·
Turf
·
56,232 cap
Eastern Michigan✈ 1,650 mi-3 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Eastern Michigan
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Eastern Michigan entering this game.
Momentum Control
73.7%
Eastern Michigan wins
Solid
Game Control
49.4%
Eastern Michigan wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Arizona State -20.5
O/U 56.5
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Eastern Michigan
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Eastern Michigan 2022 Schedule
Eastern Michigan's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 9/2 | Eastern Michigan vs Eastern Kentucky | -10.5W42–34 | 57.5 | W42–34 | O | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Eastern Michigan at Louisiana | +11.0L21–49 | 56.0 | L21–49 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Eastern Michigan at Arizona State | +20.5W30–21 | 56.5 | W30–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Eastern Michigan vs Buffalo | -6.5L31–50 | 57.5 | L31–50 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Eastern Michigan vs Massachusetts | -20.0W20–13 | 53.0 | W20–13 | U | N |
| Sat 10/8 | Eastern Michigan at Western Michigan | +4.5W45–23 | 55.5 | W45–23 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | Eastern Michigan vs Northern Illinois | -3.5L10–39 | 64.5 | L10–39 | U | N |
| Sat 10/22 | Eastern Michigan at Ball State | +2.5W20–16 | 57.5 | W20–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/29 | Eastern Michigan vs Toledo | +4.0L24–27 | 54.0 | L24–27 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Tue 11/8 | Eastern Michigan at Akron | -6.5W34–28 | 57.0 | W34–28 | O | N |
| Wed 11/16 | Eastern Michigan at Kent State | +7.5W31–24 | 60.0 | W31–24 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/25 | Eastern Michigan vs Central Michigan | -1.0W38–19 | 53.5 | W38–19 | O | Y |
| Tue 12/20 | Eastern Michigan vs San José State | +3.5W41–27 | 54.0 | W41–27 | O | Y |
Arizona State 2022 Schedule
Arizona State's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 9/1 | Arizona State vs Northern Arizona | -25.5W40–3 | 52.5 | W40–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Arizona State at Oklahoma State | +12.0L17–34 | 58.5 | L17–34 | U | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Arizona State vs Eastern Michigan | -20.5L21–30 | 56.5 | L21–30 | U | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Arizona State vs Utah | +16.5L13–34 | 54.0 | L13–34 | U | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Arizona State at USC | +24.5L25–42 | 61.0 | L25–42 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Arizona State vs Washington | +13.5W45–38 | 56.0 | W45–38 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/22 | Arizona State at Stanford | +3.0L14–15 | 52.0 | L14–15 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/29 | Arizona State at Colorado | -13.0W42–34 | 49.0 | W42–34 | O | N |
| Sat 11/5 | Arizona State vs UCLA | +11.0L36–50 | 66.5 | L36–50 | O | N |
| Sat 11/12 | Arizona State at Washington State | +9.5L18–28 | 59.5 | L18–28 | U | N |
| Sat 11/19 | Arizona State vs Oregon State | +7.5L7–31 | 53.5 | L7–31 | U | N |
| Fri 11/25 | Arizona State at Arizona | +4.0L35–38 | 66.5 | L35–38 | 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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Eastern Michigan
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?
Eastern Michigan Edge
Eastern Michigan +1.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 73.7% of games historically
Based on 1 game this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Eastern Michigan Edge
Eastern Michigan +2.8
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 49.4% of games historically
Based on 2 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Eastern Michigan, 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
Eastern Michigan
Chris Creighton #1
37–57 (39%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Chris Creighton
Yr 2
#1
DC
Neal Neathery
Yr 2
#1
Arizona State
Herm Edwards #1
25–18 (58%)
· Yr 5 at school
OC
Glenn Thomas
Yr 1
#1
DC
Donnie Henderson
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 ✓