Massachusetts at Army Week 9 College Football Matchup Massachusetts at Army Matchup - Week 9
Sat, Oct 28 2023 · Week 9 · 🏟 Blaik Field at Michie Stadium West Point, NY · Turf · 38,000 cap
Massachusetts✈ 100 miSame TZ
21 14
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
Massachusetts
21
Army
29
P&R Line Army -8
P&R Total O/U 50
Confidence 86 High
Vegas Army -10 · O/U 49.5
Matchup Prediction
Army has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor Army entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Army wins
Lean
Game Control
76%
Army wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
Army -10
O/U 49.5
William Hill (New Jersey)
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Army · 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
🛋 Massachusetts Coming off BYE
Massachusetts 2023 Schedule
Massachusetts's 2023 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 8/26Massachusetts at New Mexico State+7.0W41–3045.5W41–30OY
Sat 9/2Massachusetts at Auburn+35.0L14–5952.0L14–59ON
Sat 9/9Massachusetts vs Miami (OH)+7.0L28–4145.0L28–41ON
Sat 9/16Massachusetts at Eastern Michigan+7.0L17–1950.0L17–19UY
Sat 9/23Massachusetts vs New Mexico-3.5L31–3448.5L31–34ON
Sat 9/30Massachusetts vs Arkansas State-2.5L28–5255.5L28–52ON
Sat 10/7Massachusetts vs Toledo+19.0L24–4155.5L24–41OY
Sat 10/14Massachusetts at Penn State+42.0L0–6355.0L0–63ON
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/28Massachusetts at Army+10.0W21–1449.5W21–14UY
Sat 11/4Massachusetts vs Merrimack-16.5W31–2157.5W31–21UN
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/18Massachusetts at Liberty+26.5L25–4964.5L25–49OY
Sat 11/25Massachusetts vs UConn-2.5L18–3151.0L18–31UN
Army 2023 Schedule
Army's 2023 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/2Army at UL Monroe-8.5L13–1747.0L13–17UN
Sat 9/9Army vs Delaware State-39.5W57–044.0W57–0OY
Fri 9/15Army at UTSA+7.0W37–2942.0W37–29OY
Sat 9/23Army at Syracuse+13.0L16–2950.5L16–29UY
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/7Army vs Boston College-2.5L24–2747.0L24–27ON
Sat 10/14Army vs Troy+6.5L0–1941.5L0–19UN
Sat 10/21Army at LSU+33.0L0–6260.0L0–62ON
Sat 10/28Army vs Massachusetts-10.0L14–2149.5L14–21UN
Sat 11/4Army vs Air Force+18.5W23–332.0W23–3UY
Sat 11/11Army vs Holy Cross-11.5W17–1455.5W17–14UN
Sat 11/18Army vs Coastal Carolina+1.5W28–2140.5W28–21OY
— Bye Week —
Sat 12/9Army vs Navy-2.0W17–1128.0W17–11UY
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2023 season
Army PPA Edge
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
Both Agree
→ Army
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Massachusetts #72
+0.410
Army #99
+0.440
Army Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Massachusetts #99
+0.452
Army #51
+0.638
Army Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Massachusetts #97
0.150
Army #127
0.120
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Massachusetts Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Massachusetts #82
+6.305
Army #122
+7.371
Army Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Massachusetts #68
+0.876
Army #99
+0.881
Army Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Massachusetts #123
73.5
Army #10
67.3
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Army 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
Army Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Massachusetts
-27.8
Army
-1.1
Offense Rating
Massachusetts
1.1
Army
14.9
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Massachusetts
29.1
Army
16.0
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Army Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Massachusetts #115
0.38
Army #57
0.50
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Massachusetts #130
2.13
Army #125
2.33
Army +0.13
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 6 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? Army Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Massachusetts #1
15.9
Army #1
44.0
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Massachusetts #132
69.6
Army #73
41.8
Army +28.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season

Both metrics agree on Army 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
Massachusetts
Don Brown #1
2–14 (13%) · Yr 2 at school
OC Steve Casula Yr 2 #1
DC Keith Dudzinski Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
Army
Jeff Monken #1
66–50 (57%) · Yr 10 at school
OC Matt Drinkall Yr 1 #1
DC Nate Woody Yr 3 #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: 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