Sat, Oct 8 2022
·
Week 6
·
🏟 Alumni Stadium
Chestnut Hill, MA
·
Turf
·
44,500 cap
Clemson✈ 822 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Clemson
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Clemson entering this game.
Momentum Control
80.6%
Clemson wins
Strong
Game Control
75.9%
Clemson wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Clemson -21
O/U 49.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Clemson
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Clemson 2022 Schedule
Clemson's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 9/5 | Clemson vs Georgia Tech | -24.5W41–10 | 51.0 | W41–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Clemson vs Furman | -45.5W35–12 | 51.5 | W35–12 | U | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Clemson vs Louisiana Tech | -33.5W48–20 | 53.5 | W48–20 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Clemson at Wake Forest | -7.5W51–45 | 58.0 | W51–45 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Clemson vs NC State | -6.5W30–20 | 46.0 | W30–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Clemson at Boston College | -21.0W31–3 | 49.0 | W31–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | Clemson at Florida State | -4.5W34–28 | 51.0 | W34–28 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/22 | Clemson vs Syracuse | -14.0W27–21 | 50.0 | W27–21 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/5 | Clemson at Notre Dame | -3.5L14–35 | 43.5 | L14–35 | O | N |
| Sat 11/12 | Clemson vs Louisville | -7.0W31–16 | 52.0 | W31–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Clemson vs Miami | -19.0W40–10 | 47.5 | W40–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/26 | Clemson vs South Carolina | -14.0L30–31 | 53.0 | L30–31 | O | N |
| Sat 12/3 | Clemson vs North Carolina | -7.5W39–10 | 64.0 | W39–10 | U | Y |
| Fri 12/30 | Clemson vs Tennessee | -4.0L14–31 | 62.0 | L14–31 | U | N |
Boston College 2022 Schedule
Boston College's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Boston College vs Rutgers | -8.5L21–22 | 47.0 | L21–22 | U | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Boston College at Virginia Tech | +2.5L10–27 | 45.0 | L10–27 | U | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Boston College vs Maine | -31.0W38–17 | 48.0 | W38–17 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Boston College at Florida State | +18.5L14–44 | 48.5 | L14–44 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Boston College vs Louisville | +13.5W34–33 | 48.5 | W34–33 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Boston College vs Clemson | +21.0L3–31 | 49.0 | L3–31 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/22 | Boston College at Wake Forest | +20.0L15–43 | 60.0 | L15–43 | U | N |
| Sat 10/29 | Boston College at UConn | -8.0L3–13 | 44.0 | L3–13 | U | N |
| Fri 11/4 | Boston College vs Duke | +11.5L31–38 | 47.0 | L31–38 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | Boston College at NC State | +18.0W21–20 | 41.0 | W21–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Boston College at Notre Dame | +20.0L0–44 | 42.0 | L0–44 | O | N |
| Sat 11/26 | Boston College vs Syracuse | +10.5L23–32 | 47.0 | L23–32 | 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
All 4 Agree
→ Clemson
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Clemson
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Clemson
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?
Clemson Edge
Clemson +2.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 80.6% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Clemson Edge
Clemson +43.5
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 75.9% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Clemson 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
Clemson
Dabo Swinney #1
150–36 (81%)
· Yr 15 at school
OC
Brandon Streeter
Yr 1
#1
DC
Mickey Conn
Yr 1
#1
Boston College
Jeff Hafley #1
11–11 (50%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
John McNulty
Yr 1
#1
DC
Tem Lukabu
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: CSS is not a predictive 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: GS is not a predictive 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: CSS is not a predictive 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: GS is not a predictive 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 ✓