Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Purdue,
while Game Control favors Indiana.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
58.4%
Purdue wins
Lean
Game Control
49.4%
Indiana wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Purdue -2.5
O/U 55.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Purdue
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Indiana 2023 Schedule
Indiana's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Indiana vs Ohio State | +30.0L3–23 | 59.0 | L3–23 | U | Y |
| Fri 9/8 | Indiana vs Indiana State | -31.0W41–7 | 44.0 | W41–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/16 | Indiana vs Louisville | +10.0L14–21 | 51.0 | L14–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/23 | Indiana vs Akron | -16.5W29–27 | 45.5 | W29–27 | O | N |
| Sat 9/30 | Indiana at Maryland | +14.5L17–44 | 50.0 | L17–44 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/14 | Indiana at Michigan | +33.5L7–52 | 45.5 | L7–52 | O | N |
| Sat 10/21 | Indiana vs Rutgers | +6.0L14–31 | 39.5 | L14–31 | O | N |
| Sat 10/28 | Indiana at Penn State | +31.0L24–33 | 45.0 | L24–33 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/4 | Indiana vs Wisconsin | +9.5W20–14 | 45.0 | W20–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/11 | Indiana at Illinois | +4.5L45–48 | 43.5 | L45–48 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | Indiana vs Michigan State | -3.5L21–24 | 47.5 | L21–24 | U | N |
| Sat 11/25 | Indiana at Purdue | +2.5L31–35 | 55.5 | L31–35 | O | N |
Purdue 2023 Schedule
Purdue's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Purdue vs Fresno State | -4.0L35–39 | 47.0 | L35–39 | O | N |
| Sat 9/9 | Purdue at Virginia Tech | +1.5W24–17 | 49.0 | W24–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/16 | Purdue vs Syracuse | +1.0L20–35 | 56.5 | L20–35 | U | N |
| Fri 9/22 | Purdue vs Wisconsin | +5.5L17–38 | 54.0 | L17–38 | O | N |
| Sat 9/30 | Purdue vs Illinois | -1.0W44–19 | 54.0 | W44–19 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/7 | Purdue at Iowa | +2.5L14–20 | 38.5 | L14–20 | U | N |
| Sat 10/14 | Purdue vs Ohio State | +17.5L7–41 | 53.0 | L7–41 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/28 | Purdue at Nebraska | -1.0L14–31 | 39.5 | L14–31 | O | N |
| Sat 11/4 | Purdue at Michigan | +32.5L13–41 | 52.5 | L13–41 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/11 | Purdue vs Minnesota | +1.5W49–30 | 48.5 | W49–30 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | Purdue at Northwestern | +2.5L15–23 | 47.5 | L15–23 | U | N |
| Sat 11/25 | Purdue vs Indiana | -2.5W35–31 | 55.5 | W35–31 | O | 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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Purdue
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?
Purdue Edge
Purdue +0.46
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Indiana Edge
Indiana +2.4
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 49.4% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Purdue
2 — 0 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Indiana
16.2 — 55.7 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Purdue won by 4
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
CSS and GC disagree on this matchup. When the metrics split, historical cover rates are essentially random — treat this as a coin flip against the spread.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Indiana
Tom Allen #1
31–42 (43%)
· Yr 7 at school
OC
Walt Bell
Yr 2
#1
DC
Matt Guerrieri
Yr 1
#1
Purdue
Ryan Walters #1
1–2 (33%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Graham Harrell
Yr 1
#1
DC
Kevin Kane
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: 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 ✓