Matchup Prediction
Iowa
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Iowa entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Iowa wins
Lean
Game Control
64.9%
Iowa wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Iowa -7.5
O/U 34.5
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Iowa
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Iowa 2022 Schedule
Iowa's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Iowa vs South Dakota State | -11.0W7–3 | 42.5 | W7–3 | U | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Iowa vs Iowa State | -3.5L7–10 | 39.0 | L7–10 | U | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Iowa vs Nevada | -24.0W27–0 | 39.0 | W27–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Iowa at Rutgers | -7.5W27–10 | 34.5 | W27–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | Iowa vs Michigan | +10.5L14–27 | 42.0 | L14–27 | U | N |
| Sat 10/8 | Iowa at Illinois | +3.5L6–9 | 36.5 | L6–9 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/22 | Iowa at Ohio State | +29.5L10–54 | 50.0 | L10–54 | O | N |
| Sat 10/29 | Iowa vs Northwestern | -11.5W33–13 | 37.0 | W33–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/5 | Iowa at Purdue | +3.5W24–3 | 39.5 | W24–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | Iowa vs Wisconsin | -1.0W24–10 | 35.5 | W24–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Iowa at Minnesota | +2.0W13–10 | 31.5 | W13–10 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/25 | Iowa vs Nebraska | -10.5L17–24 | 38.0 | L17–24 | O | N |
| Sat 12/31 | Iowa vs Kentucky | -3.0W21–0 | 31.5 | W21–0 | U | Y |
Rutgers 2022 Schedule
Rutgers's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Rutgers at Boston College | +8.5W22–21 | 47.0 | W22–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Rutgers vs Wagner | -48.5W66–7 | 55.5 | W66–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/17 | Rutgers at Temple | -18.0W16–14 | 42.5 | W16–14 | U | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Rutgers vs Iowa | +7.5L10–27 | 34.5 | L10–27 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Rutgers at Ohio State | +39.0L10–49 | 58.0 | L10–49 | O | Y |
| Fri 10/7 | Rutgers vs Nebraska | +3.0L13–14 | 50.5 | L13–14 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/22 | Rutgers vs Indiana | -3.0W24–17 | 48.0 | W24–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/29 | Rutgers at Minnesota | +14.0L0–31 | 40.5 | L0–31 | U | N |
| Sat 11/5 | Rutgers vs Michigan | +26.0L17–52 | 45.0 | L17–52 | O | N |
| Sat 11/12 | Rutgers at Michigan State | +10.0L21–27 | 41.0 | L21–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Rutgers vs Penn State | +18.5L10–55 | 45.0 | L10–55 | O | N |
| Sat 11/26 | Rutgers at Maryland | +14.5L0–37 | 48.5 | L0–37 | U | 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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Iowa
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?
Iowa Edge
Iowa +0.50
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 2 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Iowa Edge
Iowa +16.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Tie
1 — 1 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Iowa
6.6 — 83.4 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Iowa won by 17
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Iowa with a solid GC edge. Teams with this profile have covered 53.0% of the time historically (n=330) — a mild lean.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Iowa
Kirk Ferentz #1
177–110 (62%)
· Yr 24 at school
OC
Brian Ferentz
Yr 2
#1
DC
Phil Parker
Yr 2
#1
Rutgers
Greg Schiano #1
8–14 (36%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Sean Gleeson
Yr 2
#1
DC
Joe Harasymiak
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 ✓