Matchup Prediction
Toss-up — no clear edge
Neither metric shows a meaningful pre-game edge in this matchup.
Momentum Control
58.4%
—
Lean
Game Control
76%
Navy wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
Memphis -4.5
O/U 47.5
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Memphis
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Memphis 2022 Schedule
Memphis's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Memphis at Mississippi State | +17.0L23–49 | 58.0 | L23–49 | O | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Memphis at Navy | -4.5W37–13 | 47.5 | W37–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/17 | Memphis vs Arkansas State | -14.5W44–32 | 64.0 | W44–32 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Memphis vs North Texas | -13.0W44–34 | 68.5 | W44–34 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Memphis vs Temple | -18.5W24–3 | 50.0 | W24–3 | U | Y |
| Fri 10/7 | Memphis vs Houston | -1.5L32–33 | 57.5 | L32–33 | O | N |
| Sat 10/15 | Memphis at East Carolina | +5.5L45–47 | 62.5 | L45–47 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/22 | Memphis at Tulane | +7.0L28–38 | 55.5 | L28–38 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/5 | Memphis vs UCF | +3.0L28–35 | 60.5 | L28–35 | O | N |
| Thu 11/10 | Memphis vs Tulsa | -7.0W26–10 | 62.0 | W26–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Memphis vs North Alabama | -36.0W59–0 | 67.5 | W59–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/26 | Memphis at SMU | +4.5L31–34 | 69.0 | L31–34 | U | Y |
| Tue 12/27 | Memphis vs Utah State | -8.0W38–10 | 57.0 | W38–10 | U | Y |
Navy 2022 Schedule
Navy's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Navy vs Delaware | -13.0L7–14 | 48.5 | L7–14 | U | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Navy vs Memphis | +4.5L13–37 | 47.5 | L13–37 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/24 | Navy at East Carolina | +16.5W23–20 | 48.5 | W23–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | Navy at Air Force | +14.0L10–13 | 38.0 | L10–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Navy vs Tulsa | +4.5W53–21 | 45.5 | W53–21 | O | Y |
| Fri 10/14 | Navy at SMU | +12.5L34–40 | 59.0 | L34–40 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/22 | Navy vs Houston | +3.0L20–38 | 51.0 | L20–38 | O | N |
| Sat 10/29 | Navy vs Temple | -14.5W27–20 | 41.5 | W27–20 | O | N |
| Sat 11/5 | Navy at Cincinnati | +18.5L10–20 | 43.5 | L10–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | Navy vs Notre Dame | +17.0L32–35 | 40.5 | L32–35 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | Navy at UCF | +14.5W17–14 | 53.0 | W17–14 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 12/10 | Navy vs Army | -2.5L17–20 | 32.0 | L17–20 | O | 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
→ Memphis
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?
Memphis Edge
Memphis +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Navy Edge
Navy +20.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 1 game this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Navy 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
Memphis
Ryan Silverfield #1
14–10 (58%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Tim Cramsey
Yr 1
#1
DC
Matt Barnes
Yr 1
#1
Navy
Ken Niumatalolo #1
104–74 (58%)
· Yr 16 at school
OC
Vacant
Yr 2
#1
DC
Brian Newberry
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 ✓