Rutgers at Michigan Week 4 College Football Matchup Rutgers at Michigan Matchup - Week 4
Sat, Sep 23 2023 · Week 4 · 🏟 Michigan Stadium Ann Arbor, MI · Turf · 107,601 cap
Rutgers✈ 495 miSame TZ
Away
7 31
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
Rutgers
8
Michigan
37
P&R Line Michigan -29
P&R Total O/U 45
Confidence 90 High
Vegas Michigan -24 · O/U 44.5
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%
Michigan wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Michigan -24
O/U 44.5
Caesars Sportsbook (Colorado)
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Michigan · 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
🏠 Michigan 4th straight Home Game
Rutgers 2023 Schedule
Rutgers's 2023 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sun 9/3Rutgers vs Northwestern-5.0W24–739.0W24–7UY
Sat 9/9Rutgers vs Temple-7.5W36–743.5W36–7UY
Sat 9/16Rutgers vs Virginia Tech-6.5W35–1637.5W35–16OY
Sat 9/23Rutgers at Michigan+24.0L7–3144.5L7–31UY
Sat 9/30Rutgers vs Wagner-46.0W52–352.5W52–3OY
Sat 10/7Rutgers at Wisconsin+12.5L13–2444.0L13–24UY
Sat 10/14Rutgers vs Michigan State-4.0W27–2438.5W27–24ON
Sat 10/21Rutgers at Indiana-6.0W31–1439.5W31–14OY
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/4Rutgers vs Ohio State+19.0L16–3542.5L16–35OY
Sat 11/11Rutgers at Iowa-2.5L0–2227.5L0–22UN
Sat 11/18Rutgers at Penn State+19.5L6–2739.5L6–27UN
Sat 11/25Rutgers vs Maryland+2.0L24–4245.5L24–42ON
Thu 12/28Rutgers vs Miami-3.0W31–2441.0W31–24OY
Michigan 2023 Schedule
Michigan's 2023 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/2Michigan vs East Carolina-36.0W30–353.5W30–3UN
Sat 9/9Michigan vs UNLV-38.0W35–757.5W35–7UN
Sat 9/16Michigan vs Bowling Green-40.5W31–653.5W31–6UN
Sat 9/23Michigan vs Rutgers-24.0W31–744.5W31–7UN
Sat 9/30Michigan at Nebraska-17.0W45–739.5W45–7OY
Sat 10/7Michigan at Minnesota-18.5W52–1046.0W52–10OY
Sat 10/14Michigan vs Indiana-33.5W52–745.5W52–7OY
Sat 10/21Michigan at Michigan State-25.5W49–047.0W49–0OY
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/4Michigan vs Purdue-32.5W41–1352.5W41–13ON
Sat 11/11Michigan at Penn State-4.0W24–1544.5W24–15UY
Sat 11/18Michigan at Maryland-17.5W31–2450.5W31–24ON
Sat 11/25Michigan vs Ohio State-3.0W30–2447.0W30–24OY
Sat 12/2Michigan vs Iowa-23.5W26–035.0W26–0UY
Mon 1/1Michigan vs Alabama-2.0W27–2046.0W27–20OY
Mon 1/8Michigan vs Washington-5.5W34–1355.5W34–13UY
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2023 season
Michigan PPA Edge
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
Rutgers #107
+0.106
Michigan #11
+0.474
Michigan Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Rutgers #126
+0.160
Michigan #5
+0.768
Michigan Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Rutgers #107
0.145
Michigan #6
0.214
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Michigan Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Rutgers #62
+6.317
Michigan #10
+8.268
Michigan Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Rutgers #91
+0.724
Michigan #7
+0.949
Michigan Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Rutgers #50
70.0
Michigan #7
66.4
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Michigan Edge
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
Michigan Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Rutgers
-2.0
Michigan
18.3
Offense Rating
Rutgers
13.9
Michigan
24.2
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Rutgers
15.9
Michigan
5.9
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum?
Avg sequences created per game
Rutgers #87
2.00
Michigan #12
2.00
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Rutgers #67
0.33
Michigan #1
0.00
Rutgers +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? Michigan Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Rutgers #1
86.4
Michigan #1
88.6
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Rutgers #76
6.5
Michigan #2
4.5
Michigan +2.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Michigan
1 — 0 sequences
GC Battle
Michigan
56.5 — 20.3 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Michigan won by 24
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
Rutgers
Greg Schiano #1
15–22 (41%) · Yr 4 at school
OC Kirk Ciarrocca Yr 1 #1
DC Joe Harasymiak Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
Michigan
Jim Harbaugh #1
77–25 (76%) · Yr 9 at school
OC Sherrone Moore Yr 2 #1
DC Jesse Minter Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #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