Sat, Sep 17 2022
·
Week 3
·
🏟 Dowdy-Ficklen Stadium
Greenville, NC
·
Turf
·
50,000 cap
Campbell✈ 78 miSame TZ
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
50.6%
—
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
East Carolina -32.5
O/U 58.0
consensus
Campbell 2022 Schedule
Campbell's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/17 | Campbell at East Carolina | +32.5L10–49 | 58.0 | L10–49 | O | N |
East Carolina 2022 Schedule
East Carolina's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | East Carolina vs NC State | +12.5L20–21 | 52.0 | L20–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | East Carolina vs Old Dominion | -13.0W39–21 | 49.5 | W39–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/17 | East Carolina vs Campbell | -32.5W49–10 | 58.0 | W49–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | East Carolina vs Navy | -16.5L20–23 | 48.5 | L20–23 | U | N |
| Sat 10/1 | East Carolina vs South Florida | -10.0W48–28 | 55.5 | W48–28 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | East Carolina at Tulane | +2.5L9–24 | 56.0 | L9–24 | U | N |
| Sat 10/15 | East Carolina vs Memphis | -5.5W47–45 | 62.5 | W47–45 | O | N |
| Sat 10/22 | East Carolina vs UCF | +5.5W34–13 | 63.0 | W34–13 | U | Y |
| Fri 10/28 | East Carolina at BYU | +3.0W27–24 | 64.0 | W27–24 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 11/11 | East Carolina at Cincinnati | +4.5L25–27 | 51.5 | L25–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | East Carolina vs Houston | -6.0L3–42 | 66.5 | L3–42 | U | N |
| Sat 11/26 | East Carolina at Temple | -9.5W49–46 | 52.0 | W49–46 | O | N |
| Tue 12/27 | East Carolina vs Coastal Carolina | -7.0W53–29 | 67.5 | W53–29 | O | Y |
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences
Who builds scoring momentum?
Campbell Edge
Campbell +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 2 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Campbell Edge
Campbell +0.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 2 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
East Carolina
3 — 0 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
East Carolina
89.8 — 3.3 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
East Carolina won by 39
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on East Carolina, 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.
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 ✓