Middle Tennessee at UTEP Week 9 College Football Matchup Middle Tennessee at UTEP Matchup - Week 9
Sun, Oct 30 2022 · Week 9 · 🏟 Sun Bowl Stadium El Paso, TX · Turf · 51,500 cap
Middle Tennessee✈ 1,187 mi-1 hr TZ
24 13
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
Middle Tennessee
27
UTEP
25
P&R Line Middle Tennessee -1.5
P&R Total O/U 51.5
Confidence 90 High
Vegas UTEP -2.5 · O/U 52.0
Matchup Prediction
Middle Tennessee has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor Middle Tennessee entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Middle Tennessee wins
Lean
Game Control
58.3%
Middle Tennessee wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
UTEP -2.5
O/U 52.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Middle Tennessee · 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
🏠 UTEP 2nd straight Home Game 🛋 Middle Tennessee Coming off BYE
Middle Tennessee 2022 Schedule
Middle Tennessee's 2022 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/3Middle Tennessee at James Madison+4.5L7–4460.5L7–44UN
Sat 9/10Middle Tennessee at Colorado State+13.5W34–1958.0W34–19UY
Sat 9/17Middle Tennessee vs Tennessee State-19.5W49–652.5W49–6OY
Sat 9/24Middle Tennessee at Miami+25.5W45–3153.5W45–31OY
Fri 9/30Middle Tennessee vs UTSA+4.5L30–4564.0L30–45ON
Sat 10/8Middle Tennessee at UAB+10.0L14–4153.0L14–41ON
Sat 10/15Middle Tennessee vs Western Kentucky+7.5L17–3567.5L17–35UN
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/29Middle Tennessee at UTEP+2.5W24–1352.0W24–13UY
Sat 11/5Middle Tennessee at Louisiana Tech-2.5L24–4064.0L24–40UN
Sat 11/12Middle Tennessee vs Charlotte-10.0W24–1467.0W24–14UN
Sat 11/19Middle Tennessee vs Florida Atlantic+5.5W49–2151.0W49–21OY
Sat 11/26Middle Tennessee at Florida International-19.5W33–2854.5W33–28ON
Sat 12/24Middle Tennessee vs San Diego State+7.0W25–2347.0W25–23OY
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
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2022 season
Middle Tennessee PPA Edge
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ Middle Tennessee
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Middle Tennessee
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Middle Tennessee
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Middle Tennessee
+0.363
UTEP
+0.253
Middle Tennessee Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Middle Tennessee
+0.629
UTEP
+0.428
Middle Tennessee Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Middle Tennessee
0.196
UTEP
0.186
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Middle Tennessee Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Middle Tennessee
+7.476
UTEP
+6.534
Middle Tennessee Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Middle Tennessee
+0.831
UTEP
+0.823
Middle Tennessee Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Middle Tennessee
68.2
UTEP
72.9
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Middle Tennessee 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
Middle Tennessee
-17.5
UTEP
-16.2
Offense Rating
Middle Tennessee
5.5
UTEP
4.4
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Middle Tennessee
22.9
UTEP
20.6
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Middle Tennessee Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Middle Tennessee #124
0.86
UTEP #38
0.75
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Middle Tennessee #74
1.29
UTEP #94
1.00
Middle Tennessee +0.11
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? Middle Tennessee Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Middle Tennessee #1
40.0
UTEP #1
31.0
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Middle Tennessee #77
53.9
UTEP #91
52.5
Middle Tennessee +8.9
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.3% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season

Both metrics agree on Middle Tennessee. 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
Middle Tennessee
Rick Stockstill #1
101–98 (51%) · Yr 17 at school
OC Mitch Stewart Yr 1 #1
DC Scott Shafer Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
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
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