Sat, Nov 4 2023
·
Week 10
·
🏟 Nippert Stadium
Cincinnati, OH
·
Turf
·
40,000 cap
UCF✈ 751 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
UCF
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
UCF entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
UCF wins
Lean
Game Control
58.3%
UCF wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
UCF -3.5
O/U 59.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
Advanced factors are split · No strong agreement signal
↓ See full breakdown
UCF 2023 Schedule
UCF's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/31 | UCF vs Kent State | -35.0W56–6 | 54.0 | W56–6 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/9 | UCF at Boise State | -3.0W18–16 | 58.5 | W18–16 | U | N |
| Sat 9/16 | UCF vs Villanova | -26.5W48–14 | 54.0 | W48–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/23 | UCF at Kansas State | +6.0L31–44 | 53.5 | L31–44 | O | N |
| Sat 9/30 | UCF vs Baylor | -8.0L35–36 | 56.5 | L35–36 | O | N |
| Sat 10/7 | UCF at Kansas | -2.0L22–51 | 65.0 | L22–51 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/21 | UCF at Oklahoma | +17.0L29–31 | 67.5 | L29–31 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/28 | UCF vs West Virginia | -6.5L28–41 | 59.5 | L28–41 | O | N |
| Sat 11/4 | UCF at Cincinnati | -3.5W28–26 | 59.5 | W28–26 | U | N |
| Sat 11/11 | UCF vs Oklahoma State | +2.5W45–3 | 63.5 | W45–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | UCF at Texas Tech | +2.0L23–24 | 59.0 | L23–24 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/25 | UCF vs Houston | -15.5W27–13 | 61.5 | W27–13 | U | N |
| Fri 12/22 | UCF vs Georgia Tech | -6.0L17–30 | 66.5 | L17–30 | U | N |
Cincinnati 2023 Schedule
Cincinnati's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Cincinnati vs Eastern Kentucky | -21.5W66–13 | 57.5 | W66–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/9 | Cincinnati at Pittsburgh | +6.5W27–21 | 44.5 | W27–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/16 | Cincinnati vs Miami (OH) | -14.5L24–31 | 44.5 | L24–31 | O | N |
| Sat 9/23 | Cincinnati vs Oklahoma | +13.0L6–20 | 58.0 | L6–20 | U | N |
| Fri 9/29 | Cincinnati at BYU | +1.0L27–35 | 47.5 | L27–35 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/14 | Cincinnati vs Iowa State | -4.0L10–30 | 42.5 | L10–30 | U | N |
| Sat 10/21 | Cincinnati vs Baylor | -2.5L29–32 | 51.5 | L29–32 | O | N |
| Sat 10/28 | Cincinnati at Oklahoma State | +7.0L13–45 | 53.0 | L13–45 | O | N |
| Sat 11/4 | Cincinnati vs UCF | +3.5L26–28 | 59.5 | L26–28 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/11 | Cincinnati at Houston | +3.5W24–14 | 53.5 | W24–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/18 | Cincinnati at West Virginia | +4.5L21–42 | 52.5 | L21–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/25 | Cincinnati vs Kansas | +7.5L16–49 | 59.5 | L16–49 | 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?
UCF Edge
UCF +0.71
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
UCF Edge
UCF +10.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.3% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on UCF. Teams with this edge profile have covered 50.3% historically — essentially a coin flip against the spread.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
UCF
Gus Malzahn #1
21–9 (70%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Darin Hinshaw
Yr 1
#1
DC
David Gibbs
Yr 2
#1
Cincinnati
Scott Satterfield #1
2–1 (67%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Brad Glenn
Yr 1
#1
DC
Bryan Brown
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 ✓