UTEP at Charlotte Week 5 College Football Matchup UTEP at Charlotte Matchup - Week 5
Sat, Oct 1 2022 · Week 5 · 🏟 Jerry Richardson Stadium Charlotte, NC · Turf · 15,314 cap
UTEP✈ 1,499 mi+2 hr TZ
Away
41 35
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
UTEP
30
CHAR +3.5
Charlotte
27
P&R Line UTEP -3
P&R Total O/U 57
Confidence 86 High
Vegas UTEP -3.5 · O/U 56.0
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Charlotte, while Game Control favors UTEP. Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
58.4%
Charlotte wins
Lean
Game Control
64.9%
UTEP wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
UTEP -3.5
O/U 56.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → UTEP · 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
UTEP 2022 Schedule
UTEP's 2022 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 8/27UTEP vs North Texas+1.5L13–3152.5L13–31UN
Sat 9/3UTEP at Oklahoma+31.0L13–4558.0L13–45UN
Sat 9/10UTEP vs New Mexico State-17.0W20–1346.5W20–13UN
Sat 9/17UTEP at New Mexico-2.0L10–2738.0L10–27UN
Fri 9/23UTEP vs Boise State+16.0W27–1044.5W27–10UY
Sat 10/1UTEP at Charlotte-3.5W41–3556.0W41–35OY
Sat 10/8UTEP at Louisiana Tech+2.0L31–4152.0L31–41ON
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/22UTEP vs Florida Atlantic+3.0W24–2150.5W24–21UY
Sat 10/29UTEP vs Middle Tennessee-2.5L13–2452.0L13–24UN
Thu 11/3UTEP at Rice+3.5L30–3747.0L30–37ON
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/19UTEP vs Florida International-14.0W40–650.0W40–6UY
Sat 11/26UTEP at UTSA+16.5L31–3456.5L31–34OY
Charlotte 2022 Schedule
Charlotte's 2022 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 8/27Charlotte at Florida Atlantic+7.0L13–4360.0L13–43UN
Fri 9/2Charlotte vs William & Mary-4.5L24–4152.0L24–41ON
Sat 9/10Charlotte vs Maryland+28.0L21–5665.0L21–56ON
Sat 9/17Charlotte at Georgia State+19.5W42–4164.0W42–41OY
Sat 9/24Charlotte at South Carolina+23.5L20–5666.5L20–56ON
Sat 10/1Charlotte vs UTEP+3.5L35–4156.0L35–41ON
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/15Charlotte at UAB+21.5L20–3465.0L20–34UY
Sat 10/22Charlotte vs Florida International-14.0L15–3463.5L15–34UN
Sat 10/29Charlotte at Rice+15.0W56–2361.0W56–23OY
Sat 11/5Charlotte vs Western Kentucky+14.5L7–5972.5L7–59UN
Sat 11/12Charlotte at Middle Tennessee+10.0L14–2467.0L14–24UY
Sat 11/19Charlotte vs Louisiana Tech+2.0W26–2166.5W26–21UY
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2022 season
UTEP 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
→ UTEP
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
UTEP
+0.504
Charlotte
+0.378
UTEP Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
UTEP
+0.731
Charlotte
+0.726
UTEP Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
UTEP
0.186
Charlotte
0.135
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
UTEP Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
UTEP
+7.005
Charlotte
+8.097
Charlotte Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
UTEP
+0.901
Charlotte
+0.898
UTEP Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
UTEP
72.9
Charlotte
69.3
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Charlotte 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
UTEP Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
UTEP
-16.2
Charlotte
-18.9
Offense Rating
UTEP
4.4
Charlotte
9.3
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
UTEP
20.6
Charlotte
28.2
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Charlotte Edge
Avg sequences created per game
UTEP #38
0.20
Charlotte #103
0.25
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
UTEP #94
1.00
Charlotte #134
2.50
Charlotte +0.05
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? UTEP Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
UTEP #1
29.3
Charlotte #1
11.2
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
UTEP #91
56.5
Charlotte #125
76.1
UTEP +18.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
UTEP
2 — 3 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
UTEP
11.3 — 68.2 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
UTEP won by 6
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
UTEP
Dana Dimel #1
12–33 (27%) · Yr 5 at school
OC Dave Warner Yr 2 #1
DC Bradley Dale Peveto Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
Charlotte
Will Healy #1
14–17 (45%) · Yr 4 at school
OC Mark Carney Yr 2 #1
DC Greg Brown Yr 1 #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