Sat, Oct 1 2022
·
Week 5
·
🏟 Rynearson Stadium
Ypsilanti, MI
·
Turf
·
30,200 cap
Massachusetts✈ 567 miSame 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
58.4%
Eastern Michigan wins
Lean
Game Control
76%
Eastern Michigan wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
Eastern Michigan -20
O/U 53.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Eastern Michigan
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Massachusetts 2022 Schedule
Massachusetts's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Massachusetts at Tulane | +28.5L10–42 | 59.0 | L10–42 | U | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Massachusetts at Toledo | +28.0L10–55 | 49.0 | L10–55 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Massachusetts vs Stony Brook | -1.0W20–3 | 44.5 | W20–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Massachusetts at Temple | +10.0L0–28 | 44.0 | L0–28 | U | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Massachusetts at Eastern Michigan | +20.0L13–20 | 53.0 | L13–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Massachusetts vs Liberty | +22.5L24–42 | 45.5 | L24–42 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | Massachusetts vs Buffalo | +17.0L7–34 | 47.5 | L7–34 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/29 | Massachusetts vs New Mexico State | +1.0L13–23 | 39.0 | L13–23 | U | N |
| Fri 11/4 | Massachusetts at UConn | +15.0L10–27 | 39.5 | L10–27 | U | N |
| Sat 11/12 | Massachusetts at Arkansas State | +17.0L33–35 | 49.0 | L33–35 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Massachusetts at Texas A&M | +32.0L3–20 | 46.0 | L3–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/26 | Massachusetts vs Army | +20.0L7–44 | 45.5 | L7–44 | O | N |
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 |
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 +0.75
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Eastern Michigan Edge
Eastern Michigan +23.3
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Eastern Michigan
1 — 0 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Massachusetts
34.7 — 46.0 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Eastern Michigan won by 7
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Eastern Michigan 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
Massachusetts
Don Brown #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Steve Casula
Yr 1
#1
DC
Keith Dudzinski
Yr 1
#1
Eastern Michigan
Chris Creighton #1
37–57 (39%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Chris Creighton
Yr 2
#1
DC
Neal Neathery
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 ✓