Tulane at Cincinnati Week 13 College Football Matchup Tulane at Cincinnati Matchup - Week 13
Fri, Nov 25 2022 · Week 13 · 🏟 Nippert Stadium Cincinnati, OH · Turf · 40,000 cap
Tulane✈ 709 mi+1 hr TZ
Away
27 24
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
Tulane
23
CIN +1
Cincinnati
26
P&R Line Cincinnati -3
P&R Total O/U 48.5
Confidence 86 High
Vegas Tulane -1 · O/U 44.0
Matchup Prediction
Cincinnati has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor Cincinnati entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Cincinnati wins
Lean
Game Control
58.6%
Cincinnati wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Tulane -1
O/U 44.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Tulane · 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Tulane 2022 Schedule
Tulane's 2022 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/3Tulane vs Massachusetts-28.5W42–1059.0W42–10UY
Sat 9/10Tulane vs Alcorn State-35.5W52–059.5W52–0UY
Sat 9/17Tulane at Kansas State+13.5W17–1049.0W17–10UY
Sat 9/24Tulane vs Southern Miss-12.0L24–2748.5L24–27ON
Fri 9/30Tulane at Houston+5.0W27–2452.0W27–24UY
Sat 10/8Tulane vs East Carolina-2.5W24–956.0W24–9UY
Sat 10/15Tulane at South Florida-12.0W45–3155.0W45–31OY
Sat 10/22Tulane vs Memphis-7.0W38–2855.5W38–28OY
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/5Tulane at Tulsa-6.5W27–1356.0W27–13UY
Sat 11/12Tulane vs UCF-1.0L31–3854.5L31–38ON
Thu 11/17Tulane vs SMU-3.5W59–2465.0W59–24OY
Fri 11/25Tulane at Cincinnati-1.0W27–2444.0W27–24OY
Sat 12/3Tulane vs UCF-3.5W45–2857.5W45–28OY
Mon 1/2Tulane vs USC+1.5W46–4567.0W46–45OY
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
Tulane 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
→ Tulane
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Tulane
+0.391
Cincinnati
+0.346
Tulane Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Tulane
+0.475
Cincinnati
+0.518
Cincinnati Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Tulane
0.131
Cincinnati
0.198
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Cincinnati Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Tulane
+8.024
Cincinnati
+7.922
Tulane Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Tulane
+0.807
Cincinnati
+0.806
Tulane Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Tulane
69.5
Cincinnati
70.8
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Tulane 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
Tulane Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Tulane
-0.1
Cincinnati
-1.3
Offense Rating
Tulane
14.5
Cincinnati
13.7
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Tulane
14.6
Cincinnati
15.0
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Cincinnati Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Tulane #59
0.90
Cincinnati #39
1.36
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Tulane #71
0.70
Cincinnati #9
0.36
Cincinnati +0.46
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? Cincinnati Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Tulane #1
66.9
Cincinnati #1
72.6
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Tulane #22
20.2
Cincinnati #32
19.8
Cincinnati +5.7
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.6% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Cincinnati
1 — 0 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Tulane
15.5 — 52.9 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Tulane won by 3
✗ Model missed it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season

Both metrics agree on Cincinnati. Teams with this edge profile have covered 50.3% historically — essentially a coin flip against the spread.

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

Coaching Matchup
Tulane
Willie Fritz #1
31–43 (42%) · Yr 7 at school
OC Jim Svoboda Yr 1 #1
DC Chris Hampton 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