Sat, Nov 12 2022
·
Week 11
·
🏟 Protective Stadium
Birmingham, AL
·
Turf
·
47,100 cap
North Texas✈ 597 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors North Texas,
while Game Control favors UAB.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
North Texas wins
Lean
Game Control
58.6%
UAB wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
UAB -6.5
O/U 58.0
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → UAB
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
North Texas 2022 Schedule
North Texas's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/27 | North Texas at UTEP | -1.5W31–13 | 52.5 | W31–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/3 | North Texas vs SMU | +9.5L10–48 | 67.5 | L10–48 | U | N |
| Sat 9/10 | North Texas vs Texas Southern | -38.5W59–27 | 64.5 | W59–27 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | North Texas at UNLV | +2.5L27–58 | 62.5 | L27–58 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | North Texas at Memphis | +13.0L34–44 | 68.5 | L34–44 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | North Texas vs Florida Atlantic | +3.0W45–28 | 67.5 | W45–28 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/15 | North Texas vs Louisiana Tech | -6.5W47–27 | 68.0 | W47–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/22 | North Texas at UTSA | +10.0L27–31 | 73.0 | L27–31 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/29 | North Texas at Western Kentucky | +10.0W40–13 | 70.0 | W40–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/5 | North Texas vs Florida International | -21.0W52–14 | 63.5 | W52–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | North Texas at UAB | +6.5L21–41 | 58.0 | L21–41 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/26 | North Texas vs Rice | -14.5W21–17 | 57.0 | W21–17 | U | N |
| Fri 12/2 | North Texas at UTSA | +8.5L27–48 | 70.0 | L27–48 | O | N |
| Sat 12/17 | North Texas vs Boise State | +12.0L32–35 | 63.0 | L32–35 | O | Y |
UAB 2022 Schedule
UAB's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 9/1 | UAB vs Alabama A&M | -40.5W59–0 | 60.5 | W59–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | UAB at Liberty | -6.0L14–21 | 50.0 | L14–21 | U | N |
| Sat 9/17 | UAB vs Georgia Southern | -11.5W35–21 | 59.0 | W35–21 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/1 | UAB at Rice | -10.5L24–28 | 51.0 | L24–28 | O | N |
| Sat 10/8 | UAB vs Middle Tennessee | -10.0W41–14 | 53.0 | W41–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | UAB vs Charlotte | -21.5W34–20 | 65.0 | W34–20 | U | N |
| Fri 10/21 | UAB at Western Kentucky | +1.5L17–20 | 60.5 | L17–20 | U | N |
| Sat 10/29 | UAB at Florida Atlantic | -5.0L17–24 | 45.0 | L17–24 | U | N |
| Sat 11/5 | UAB vs UTSA | +2.5L38–44 | 53.5 | L38–44 | O | N |
| Sat 11/12 | UAB vs North Texas | -6.5W41–21 | 58.0 | W41–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/19 | UAB at LSU | +15.5L10–41 | 50.5 | L10–41 | O | N |
| Sat 11/26 | UAB at Louisiana Tech | -18.0W37–27 | 55.5 | W37–27 | O | N |
| Fri 12/16 | UAB vs Miami (OH) | -11.0W24–20 | 44.5 | W24–20 | U | N |
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) ·
2022 season
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ UAB
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ UAB
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ UAB
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
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
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences
Who builds scoring momentum?
North Texas Edge
North Texas +0.42
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?
UAB Edge
UAB +5.9
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.6% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
UAB
4 — 2 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
UAB
61.2 — 23.0 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
UAB won by 20
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
North Texas
Seth Littrell #1
37–38 (49%)
· Yr 7 at school
OC
Mike Bloesch
Yr 2
#1
DC
Phil Bennett
Yr 2
#1
UAB
Bill Clark #1
49–26 (65%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Bryant Vincent
Yr 2
#1
DC
David Reeves
Yr 2
#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 ✓
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 ✓