Matchup Prediction
Ohio
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Ohio entering this game.
Momentum Control
73.7%
Ohio wins
Solid
Game Control
64.9%
Ohio wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Ohio -3
O/U 43.0
Bovada
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Ohio
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Ohio 2022 Schedule
Ohio's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/3 | Ohio vs Florida Atlantic | +6.0W41–38 | 51.0 | W41–38 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Ohio at Penn State | +28.0L10–46 | 55.0 | L10–46 | O | N |
| Sat 9/17 | Ohio at Iowa State | +20.0L10–43 | 48.0 | L10–43 | O | N |
| Sat 9/24 | Ohio vs Fordham | -16.5W59–52 | 73.5 | W59–52 | O | N |
| Sat 10/1 | Ohio at Kent State | +13.0L24–31 | 65.5 | L24–31 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/8 | Ohio vs Akron | -10.0W55–34 | 58.5 | W55–34 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/15 | Ohio at Western Michigan | +2.0W33–14 | 61.5 | W33–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/22 | Ohio vs Northern Illinois | +2.5W24–17 | 65.5 | W24–17 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Tue 11/1 | Ohio vs Buffalo | +2.5W45–24 | 61.0 | W45–24 | O | Y |
| Tue 11/8 | Ohio at Miami (OH) | -2.5W37–21 | 52.0 | W37–21 | O | Y |
| Tue 11/15 | Ohio at Ball State | -3.5W32–18 | 57.5 | W32–18 | U | Y |
| Tue 11/22 | Ohio vs Bowling Green | -5.5W38–14 | 52.5 | W38–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 12/3 | Ohio vs Toledo | +3.5L7–17 | 54.5 | L7–17 | U | N |
| Fri 12/30 | Ohio vs Wyoming | -3.0W30–27 | 43.0 | W30–27 | O | N |
Wyoming 2022 Schedule
Wyoming's 2022 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/27 | Wyoming at Illinois | +14.0L6–38 | 42.5 | L6–38 | O | N |
| Sat 9/3 | Wyoming vs Tulsa | +6.5W40–37 | 47.0 | W40–37 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/10 | Wyoming vs Northern Colorado | -23.5W33–10 | 54.5 | W33–10 | U | N |
| Fri 9/16 | Wyoming vs Air Force | +16.5W17–14 | 47.0 | W17–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/24 | Wyoming at BYU | +21.5L24–38 | 50.0 | L24–38 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/1 | Wyoming vs San José State | +2.5L16–33 | 42.5 | L16–33 | O | N |
| Sat 10/8 | Wyoming at New Mexico | -3.0W27–14 | 37.0 | W27–14 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/22 | Wyoming vs Utah State | -5.0W28–14 | 44.5 | W28–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/29 | Wyoming at Hawai'i | -11.5W27–20 | 50.5 | W27–20 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/12 | Wyoming at Colorado State | -8.5W14–13 | 42.5 | W14–13 | U | N |
| Sat 11/19 | Wyoming vs Boise State | +14.5L17–20 | 44.5 | L17–20 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/25 | Wyoming at Fresno State | +15.0L0–30 | 50.5 | L0–30 | U | N |
| Fri 12/30 | Wyoming vs Ohio | +3.0L27–30 | 43.0 | L27–30 | 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
→ Ohio
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Ohio
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Ohio
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?
Ohio Edge
Ohio +1.06
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 73.7% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Ohio Edge
Ohio +16.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 12 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Ohio with a moderate edge in both. This is the strongest ATS signal in our backtest: teams in this situation have covered 55.8% of the time (n=113).
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Ohio
Tim Albin #1
3–9 (25%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Scott Isphording
Yr 1
#1
DC
Spence Nowinsky
Yr 1
#1
Wyoming
Craig Bohl #1
45–50 (47%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Tim Polasek
Yr 2
#1
DC
Jay Sawvel
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: 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 ✓
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 ✓