Sat, Nov 26 2022
·
Week 13
·
🏟 Joe Aillet Stadium
Ruston, LA
·
Turf
·
28,019 cap
UAB✈ 345 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
UAB
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
UAB entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
UAB wins
Lean
Game Control
75.9%
UAB wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
UAB -18
O/U 55.5
teamrankings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → UAB
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
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 |
Louisiana Tech 2022 Schedule
Louisiana Tech's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 9/1 | Louisiana Tech at Missouri | +20.0L24–52 | 62.5 | L24–52 | O | N |
| Sat 9/10 | Louisiana Tech vs Stephen F. Austin | -6.5W52–17 | 64.5 | W52–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/17 | Louisiana Tech at Clemson | +33.5L20–48 | 53.5 | L20–48 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Louisiana Tech at South Alabama | +13.0L14–38 | 59.0 | L14–38 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/8 | Louisiana Tech vs UTEP | -2.0W41–31 | 52.0 | W41–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | Louisiana Tech at North Texas | +6.5L27–47 | 68.0 | L27–47 | O | N |
| Sat 10/22 | Louisiana Tech vs Rice | +3.0L41–42 | 57.0 | L41–42 | O | Y |
| Fri 10/28 | Louisiana Tech at Florida International | -6.5L34–42 | 57.0 | L34–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/5 | Louisiana Tech vs Middle Tennessee | +2.5W40–24 | 64.0 | W40–24 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/12 | Louisiana Tech at UTSA | +17.0L7–51 | 68.5 | L7–51 | U | N |
| Sat 11/19 | Louisiana Tech at Charlotte | -2.0L21–26 | 66.5 | L21–26 | U | N |
| Sat 11/26 | Louisiana Tech vs UAB | +18.0L27–37 | 55.5 | L27–37 | O | Y |
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?
UAB Edge
UAB +0.40
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
UAB Edge
UAB +19.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 75.9% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on UAB with a solid GC edge. Teams with this profile have covered 53.0% of the time historically (n=330) — a mild lean.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
UAB
Bill Clark #1
49–26 (65%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Bryant Vincent
Yr 2
#1
DC
David Reeves
Yr 2
#1
Louisiana Tech
Sonny Cumbie #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Jake Brown
Yr 1
#1
DC
Scott Power
Yr 1
#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 ✓