Navy at Cincinnati Week 10 College Football Matchup Navy at Cincinnati Matchup - Week 10
Sat, Nov 5 2022 · Week 10 · 🏟 Nippert Stadium Cincinnati, OH · Turf · 40,000 cap
Navy✈ 429 miSame TZ
Away
10 20
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
Navy
11
CIN -18.5
Cincinnati
34
P&R Line Cincinnati -23
P&R Total O/U 45.5
Confidence 86 High
Vegas Cincinnati -18.5 · O/U 43.5
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Navy, while Game Control favors Cincinnati. Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
Navy wins
Lean
Game Control
76%
Cincinnati wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
Cincinnati -18.5
O/U 43.5
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Cincinnati · 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Navy 2022 Schedule
Navy's 2022 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/3Navy vs Delaware-13.0L7–1448.5L7–14UN
Sat 9/10Navy vs Memphis+4.5L13–3747.5L13–37ON
— Bye Week —
Sat 9/24Navy at East Carolina+16.5W23–2048.5W23–20UY
Sat 10/1Navy at Air Force+14.0L10–1338.0L10–13UY
Sat 10/8Navy vs Tulsa+4.5W53–2145.5W53–21OY
Fri 10/14Navy at SMU+12.5L34–4059.0L34–40OY
Sat 10/22Navy vs Houston+3.0L20–3851.0L20–38ON
Sat 10/29Navy vs Temple-14.5W27–2041.5W27–20ON
Sat 11/5Navy at Cincinnati+18.5L10–2043.5L10–20UY
Sat 11/12Navy vs Notre Dame+17.0L32–3540.5L32–35OY
Sat 11/19Navy at UCF+14.5W17–1453.0W17–14UY
— Bye Week —
Sat 12/10Navy vs Army-2.5L17–2032.0L17–20ON
Cincinnati 2022 Schedule
Cincinnati's 2022 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/3Cincinnati at Arkansas+6.5L24–3154.5L24–31ON
Sat 9/10Cincinnati vs Kennesaw State-29
Sat 9/17Cincinnati vs Miami (OH)-24.0W38–1751.0W38–17ON
Sat 9/24Cincinnati vs Indiana-16.5W45–2457.0W45–24OY
Sat 10/1Cincinnati at Tulsa-10.0W31–2159.0W31–21UN
Sat 10/8Cincinnati vs South Florida-27.0W28–2458.5W28–24UN
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/22Cincinnati at SMU-3.5W29–2759.5W29–27UN
Sat 10/29Cincinnati at UCF+1.5L21–2555.5L21–25UN
Sat 11/5Cincinnati vs Navy-18.5W20–1043.5W20–10UN
Fri 11/11Cincinnati vs East Carolina-4.5W27–2551.5W27–25ON
Sat 11/19Cincinnati at Temple-17.0W23–348.5W23–3UY
Fri 11/25Cincinnati vs Tulane+1.0L24–2744.0L24–27ON
Sat 12/17Cincinnati vs Louisville+2.5L7–2438.5L7–24UN
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2022 season
Cincinnati PPA Edge
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
→ Cincinnati
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Navy
+0.243
Cincinnati
+0.427
Cincinnati Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Navy
+0.323
Cincinnati
+0.774
Cincinnati Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Navy
0.250
Cincinnati
0.198
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Navy Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Navy
+7.086
Cincinnati
+7.517
Cincinnati Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Navy
+0.740
Cincinnati
+0.781
Cincinnati Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Navy
71.7
Cincinnati
70.8
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Cincinnati Edge
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
Navy Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Navy
-1.0
Cincinnati
-1.4
Offense Rating
Navy
15.7
Cincinnati
13.7
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Navy
16.8
Cincinnati
15.0
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Navy Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Navy #99
1.14
Cincinnati #39
1.13
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Navy #96
1.29
Cincinnati #9
0.50
Navy +0.02
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? Cincinnati Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Navy #1
27.8
Cincinnati #1
67.8
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Navy #117
62.0
Cincinnati #32
24.7
Cincinnati +40.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Cincinnati
2 — 0 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Cincinnati
97.3 — 2.1 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Cincinnati won by 10
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season

CSS and GC disagree on this matchup. When the metrics split, historical cover rates are essentially random — treat this as a coin flip against the spread.

ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.

Coaching Matchup
Navy
Ken Niumatalolo #1
104–74 (58%) · Yr 16 at school
OC Vacant Yr 2 #1
DC Brian Newberry Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
Cincinnati
Luke Fickell #1
48–15 (76%) · Yr 6 at school
OC Gino Guidugli Yr 1 #1
DC Mike Tressel Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #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