Thu, Oct 5 2023
·
Week 6
·
🏟 Johnny Red"" Floyd Stadium""
Murfreesboro, TN
·
Turf
·
31,000 cap
Jacksonville State✈ 144 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Jacksonville State
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Jacksonville State entering this game.
Momentum Control
73.7%
Jacksonville State wins
Solid
Game Control
75.9%
Jacksonville State wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Middle Tennessee -2.5
O/U 52.0
William Hill (New Jersey)
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Jacksonville State
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Jacksonville State 2023 Schedule
Jacksonville State's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/26 | Jacksonville State vs UTEP | +1.5W17–14 | 54.5 | W17–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/2 | Jacksonville State vs East Tennessee State | -20.0W49–3 | 55.0 | W49–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/9 | Jacksonville State at Coastal Carolina | +13.5L16–30 | 61.0 | L16–30 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/23 | Jacksonville State vs Eastern Michigan | -6.5W21–0 | 51.0 | W21–0 | U | Y |
| Thu 9/28 | Jacksonville State at Sam Houston | -6.5W35–28 | 36.5 | W35–28 | O | Y |
| Wed 10/4 | Jacksonville State at Middle Tennessee | +2.5W45–30 | 52.0 | W45–30 | O | Y |
| Tue 10/10 | Jacksonville State vs Liberty | +7.0L13–31 | 59.5 | L13–31 | U | N |
| Tue 10/17 | Jacksonville State vs Western Kentucky | +7.5W20–17 | 60.5 | W20–17 | U | Y |
| Wed 10/25 | Jacksonville State at Florida International | -9.0W41–16 | 48.0 | W41–16 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/4 | Jacksonville State at South Carolina | +15.5L28–38 | 55.0 | L28–38 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/18 | Jacksonville State vs Louisiana Tech | -8.5W56–17 | 53.5 | W56–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/25 | Jacksonville State at New Mexico State | +2.0L17–20 | 48.5 | L17–20 | U | N |
| Sat 12/16 | Jacksonville State vs Louisiana | -3.5W34–31 | 58.5 | W34–31 | O | N |
Middle Tennessee 2023 Schedule
Middle Tennessee's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Middle Tennessee at Alabama | +39.5L7–56 | 52.0 | L7–56 | O | N |
| Sat 9/9 | Middle Tennessee at Missouri | +21.0L19–23 | 47.5 | L19–23 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/16 | Middle Tennessee vs Murray State | -34.5W35–14 | 51.0 | W35–14 | U | N |
| Sat 9/23 | Middle Tennessee vs Colorado State | -3.5L23–31 | 50.0 | L23–31 | O | N |
| Thu 9/28 | Middle Tennessee at Western Kentucky | +6.5L10–31 | 61.0 | L10–31 | U | N |
| Wed 10/4 | Middle Tennessee vs Jacksonville State | -2.5L30–45 | 52.0 | L30–45 | O | N |
| Tue 10/10 | Middle Tennessee vs Louisiana Tech | -3.0W31–23 | 53.5 | W31–23 | O | Y |
| Tue 10/17 | Middle Tennessee at Liberty | +16.0L35–42 | 56.5 | L35–42 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/4 | Middle Tennessee at New Mexico State | +3.0L7–13 | 55.5 | L7–13 | U | N |
| Sat 11/11 | Middle Tennessee vs Florida International | -10.5W40–6 | 50.5 | W40–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | Middle Tennessee vs UTEP | -8.5W34–30 | 48.5 | W34–30 | O | N |
| Sat 11/25 | Middle Tennessee at Sam Houston | -3.5L20–23 | 49.5 | L20–23 | U | 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
All 4 Agree
→ Jacksonville State
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Jacksonville State
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Jacksonville State
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?
Jacksonville State Edge
Jacksonville State +1.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 73.7% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Jacksonville State Edge
Jacksonville State +22.5
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 75.9% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Jacksonville State
2 — 3 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Middle Tennessee
40.1 — 34.4 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Jacksonville State won by 15
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Jacksonville State with a large edge. Historically, dominant teams like this are fully priced into the spread — the agreed-upon team covers just 50.2% of the time. The metrics predict game control better than they beat the number.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Jacksonville State
Rich Rodriguez #1
11–3 (79%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Rod Smith
Yr 1
#1
DC
Zac Alley
Yr 1
#1
Middle Tennessee
Rick Stockstill #1
110–105 (51%)
· Yr 18 at school
OC
Mitch Stewart
Yr 2
#1
DC
Scott Shafer
Yr 3
#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 ✓