Matchup Prediction
Army
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Army entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Army wins
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
Army wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Army -10.5
O/U 45.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Army
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
UConn 2022 Schedule
UConn's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/27 | UConn at Utah State | +24.0L20–31 | 59.0 | L20–31 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/3 | UConn vs Central Connecticut | -20.5W28–3 | 51.5 | W28–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | UConn vs Syracuse | +23.5L14–48 | 49.5 | L14–48 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | UConn at Michigan | +47.5L0–59 | 59.0 | L0–59 | U | N |
| Sat 9/24 | UConn at NC State | +38.5L10–41 | 48.0 | L10–41 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | UConn vs Fresno State | +23.5W19–14 | 51.0 | W19–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | UConn at Florida International | -5.5W33–12 | 46.5 | W33–12 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | UConn at Ball State | +9.5L21–25 | 47.5 | L21–25 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/29 | UConn vs Boston College | +8.0W13–3 | 44.0 | W13–3 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/4 | UConn vs Massachusetts | -15.0W27–10 | 39.5 | W27–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | UConn vs Liberty | +13.5W36–33 | 45.0 | W36–33 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | UConn at Army | +10.5L17–34 | 45.0 | L17–34 | O | N |
| Mon 12/19 | UConn vs Marshall | +11.5L14–28 | 42.0 | L14–28 | U | N |
Army 2022 Schedule
Army's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Army at Coastal Carolina | +1.5L28–38 | 54.0 | L28–38 | O | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Army vs UTSA | +2.0L38–41 | 54.0 | L38–41 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Army vs Villanova | -14.0W49–10 | 56.0 | W49–10 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/1 | Army vs Georgia State | -8.5L14–31 | 54.0 | L14–31 | U | N |
| Sat 10/8 | Army at Wake Forest | +16.0L10–45 | 65.5 | L10–45 | U | N |
| Sat 10/15 | Army vs Colgate | -31.0W42–17 | 51.0 | W42–17 | O | N |
| Sat 10/22 | Army vs UL Monroe | -6.5W48–24 | 55.5 | W48–24 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/5 | Army vs Air Force | +7.0L7–13 | 40.5 | L7–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | Army at Troy | +8.5L9–10 | 45.5 | L9–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Army vs UConn | -10.5W34–17 | 45.0 | W34–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/26 | Army at Massachusetts | -20.0W44–7 | 45.5 | W44–7 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 12/10 | Army vs Navy | +2.5W20–17 | 32.0 | W20–17 | 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
→ Army
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?
Army Edge
Army +0.26
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Army Edge
Army +4.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Army, 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
UConn
Jim L. Mora #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Nick Charlton
Yr 1
#1
DC
Lou Spanos
Yr 1
#1
Army
Jeff Monken #1
58–42 (58%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Brent Davis
Yr 2
#1
DC
Nate Woody
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 ✓