Matchup Prediction
Alabama
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Alabama entering this game.
Momentum Control
78.1%
Alabama wins
Strong
Game Control
50.6%
Alabama wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Alabama -7
O/U 53.0
William Hill (New Jersey)
Advanced Stats
Advanced factors are split · No strong agreement signal
↓ See full breakdown
Texas 2023 Schedule
Texas's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Texas vs Rice | -35.5W37–10 | 59.0 | W37–10 | U | N |
| Sat 9/9 | Texas at Alabama | +7.0W34–24 | 53.0 | W34–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/16 | Texas vs Wyoming | -31.0W31–10 | 48.5 | W31–10 | U | N |
| Sat 9/23 | Texas at Baylor | -17.5W38–6 | 49.5 | W38–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/30 | Texas vs Kansas | -15.5W40–14 | 61.0 | W40–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/7 | Texas vs Oklahoma | -4.0L30–34 | 62.0 | L30–34 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/21 | Texas at Houston | -24.0W31–24 | 60.5 | W31–24 | U | N |
| Sat 10/28 | Texas vs BYU | -20.5W35–6 | 48.5 | W35–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/4 | Texas vs Kansas State | -4.0W33–30 | 49.5 | W33–30 | O | N |
| Sat 11/11 | Texas at TCU | -13.0W29–26 | 56.0 | W29–26 | U | N |
| Sat 11/18 | Texas at Iowa State | -7.5W26–16 | 43.5 | W26–16 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/24 | Texas vs Texas Tech | -16.5W57–7 | 53.5 | W57–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/2 | Texas vs Oklahoma State | -14.0W49–21 | 55.0 | W49–21 | O | Y |
| Mon 1/1 | Texas vs Washington | -3.0L31–37 | 61.5 | L31–37 | O | N |
Alabama 2023 Schedule
Alabama's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Alabama vs Middle Tennessee | -39.5W56–7 | 52.0 | W56–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/9 | Alabama vs Texas | -7.0L24–34 | 53.0 | L24–34 | O | N |
| Sat 9/16 | Alabama at South Florida | -34.0W17–3 | 61.0 | W17–3 | U | N |
| Sat 9/23 | Alabama vs Ole Miss | -7.0W24–10 | 56.0 | W24–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/30 | Alabama at Mississippi State | -16.5W40–17 | 45.0 | W40–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/7 | Alabama at Texas A&M | -2.5W26–20 | 45.0 | W26–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/14 | Alabama vs Arkansas | -19.0W24–21 | 45.0 | W24–21 | U | N |
| Sat 10/21 | Alabama vs Tennessee | -8.5W34–20 | 47.5 | W34–20 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/4 | Alabama vs LSU | -3.0W42–28 | 61.5 | W42–28 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/11 | Alabama at Kentucky | -10.0W49–21 | 45.5 | W49–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | Alabama vs Chattanooga | -44.5W66–10 | 54.5 | W66–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/25 | Alabama at Auburn | -14.0W27–24 | 48.0 | W27–24 | O | N |
| Sat 12/2 | Alabama vs Georgia | +5.0W27–24 | 56.0 | W27–24 | U | Y |
| Mon 1/1 | Alabama vs Michigan | +2.0L20–27 | 46.0 | L20–27 | O | N |
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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Split
Metrics disagree
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?
Alabama Edge
Alabama +3.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 78.1% of games historically
Based on 1 game this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Alabama Edge
Alabama +3.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 1 game this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Alabama, 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
Texas
Steve Sarkisian #1
16–12 (57%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Kyle Flood
Yr 3
#1
DC
Jeff Choate
Yr 1
#1
Alabama
Nick Saban #1
191–28 (87%)
· Yr 17 at school
OC
Tommy Rees
Yr 1
#1
DC
Kevin Steele
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 ✓