Sat, Sep 2 2023
·
Week 1
·
🏟 Michigan Stadium
Ann Arbor, MI
·
Turf
·
107,601 cap
East Carolina✈ 574 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Toss-up — no clear edge
Neither metric shows a meaningful pre-game edge in this matchup.
Momentum Control
58.4%
—
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
—
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Michigan -36
O/U 53.5
William Hill (New Jersey)
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Michigan
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
East Carolina 2023 Schedule
East Carolina's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | East Carolina at Michigan | +36.0L3–30 | 53.5 | L3–30 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/9 | East Carolina vs Marshall | +3.0L13–31 | 43.5 | L13–31 | O | N |
| Sat 9/16 | East Carolina at App State | +7.5L28–43 | 48.5 | L28–43 | O | N |
| Sat 9/23 | East Carolina vs Gardner-Webb | -13.0W44–0 | 51.0 | W44–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/30 | East Carolina at Rice | +3.5L17–24 | 47.0 | L17–24 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Thu 10/12 | East Carolina vs SMU | +11.5L10–31 | 48.5 | L10–31 | U | N |
| Sat 10/21 | East Carolina vs Charlotte | -6.0L7–10 | 39.5 | L7–10 | U | N |
| Sat 10/28 | East Carolina at UTSA | +17.5L27–41 | 48.0 | L27–41 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/4 | East Carolina vs Tulane | +17.0L10–13 | 46.0 | L10–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/11 | East Carolina at Florida Atlantic | +7.5W22–7 | 44.5 | W22–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | East Carolina at Navy | +2.5L0–10 | 30.5 | L0–10 | U | N |
| Sat 11/25 | East Carolina vs Tulsa | -4.5L27–29 | 44.5 | L27–29 | O | N |
Michigan 2023 Schedule
Michigan's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Michigan vs East Carolina | -36.0W30–3 | 53.5 | W30–3 | U | N |
| Sat 9/9 | Michigan vs UNLV | -38.0W35–7 | 57.5 | W35–7 | U | N |
| Sat 9/16 | Michigan vs Bowling Green | -40.5W31–6 | 53.5 | W31–6 | U | N |
| Sat 9/23 | Michigan vs Rutgers | -24.0W31–7 | 44.5 | W31–7 | U | N |
| Sat 9/30 | Michigan at Nebraska | -17.0W45–7 | 39.5 | W45–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/7 | Michigan at Minnesota | -18.5W52–10 | 46.0 | W52–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/14 | Michigan vs Indiana | -33.5W52–7 | 45.5 | W52–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/21 | Michigan at Michigan State | -25.5W49–0 | 47.0 | W49–0 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/4 | Michigan vs Purdue | -32.5W41–13 | 52.5 | W41–13 | O | N |
| Sat 11/11 | Michigan at Penn State | -4.0W24–15 | 44.5 | W24–15 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | Michigan at Maryland | -17.5W31–24 | 50.5 | W31–24 | O | N |
| Sat 11/25 | Michigan vs Ohio State | -3.0W30–24 | 47.0 | W30–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/2 | Michigan vs Iowa | -23.5W26–0 | 35.0 | W26–0 | U | Y |
| Mon 1/1 | Michigan vs Alabama | -2.0W27–20 | 46.0 | W27–20 | O | Y |
| Mon 1/8 | Michigan vs Washington | -5.5W34–13 | 55.5 | W34–13 | U | Y |
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) ·
2023 season
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ Michigan
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Michigan
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Michigan
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 · 2023 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?
East Carolina Edge
East Carolina +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
East Carolina Edge
East Carolina +0.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Michigan
3 — 0 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Michigan
97.2 — 0.2 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Michigan won by 27
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Michigan, but the GC edge is small. When metrics agree but GC is near-neutral, the agreed-upon team has covered only 46.7% of the time historically (n=224) — potentially a fade signal.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
East Carolina
Mike Houston #1
22–27 (45%)
· Yr 5 at school
OC
Donnie Kirkpatrick
Yr 3
#1
DC
Blake Harrell
Yr 3
#1
Michigan
Jim Harbaugh #1
77–25 (76%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Sherrone Moore
Yr 2
#1
DC
Jesse Minter
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 ✓

