Matchup Prediction
Tulane
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Tulane entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Tulane wins
Lean
Game Control
64.9%
Tulane wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Tulane -4.5
O/U 54.5
Bovada
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Memphis
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Tulane 2023 Schedule
Tulane's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Tulane vs South Alabama | -6.0W37–17 | 51.0 | W37–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/9 | Tulane vs Ole Miss | +8.0L20–37 | 64.0 | L20–37 | U | N |
| Sat 9/16 | Tulane at Southern Miss | -8.0W21–3 | 47.5 | W21–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/23 | Tulane vs Nicholls | -38.0W36–7 | 55.5 | W36–7 | U | N |
| Sat 9/30 | Tulane vs UAB | -22.5W35–23 | 59.5 | W35–23 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 10/13 | Tulane at Memphis | -4.5W31–21 | 54.5 | W31–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/21 | Tulane vs North Texas | -20.0W35–28 | 63.5 | W35–28 | U | N |
| Sat 10/28 | Tulane at Rice | -10.0W30–28 | 55.0 | W30–28 | O | N |
| Sat 11/4 | Tulane at East Carolina | -17.0W13–10 | 46.0 | W13–10 | U | N |
| Sat 11/11 | Tulane vs Tulsa | -24.5W24–22 | 52.5 | W24–22 | U | N |
| Sat 11/18 | Tulane at Florida Atlantic | -9.5W24–8 | 46.5 | W24–8 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/24 | Tulane vs UTSA | -2.5W29–16 | 51.5 | W29–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 12/2 | Tulane vs SMU | -4.0L14–26 | 50.5 | L14–26 | U | N |
| Wed 12/27 | Tulane vs Virginia Tech | +13.5L20–41 | 43.5 | L20–41 | O | N |
Memphis 2023 Schedule
Memphis's 2023 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 9/2 | Memphis vs Bethune-Cookman | -49.0W56–14 | 59.5 | W56–14 | O | N |
| Sat 9/9 | Memphis at Arkansas State | -21.0W37–3 | 57.0 | W37–3 | U | Y |
| Thu 9/14 | Memphis vs Navy | -12.5W28–24 | 47.0 | W28–24 | O | N |
| Sat 9/23 | Memphis vs Missouri | +6.5L27–34 | 52.0 | L27–34 | O | N |
| Sat 9/30 | Memphis vs Boise State | -3.0W35–32 | 58.0 | W35–32 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 10/13 | Memphis vs Tulane | +4.5L21–31 | 54.5 | L21–31 | U | N |
| Sat 10/21 | Memphis at UAB | -7.5W45–21 | 61.5 | W45–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/28 | Memphis at North Texas | -6.5W45–42 | 70.0 | W45–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/4 | Memphis vs South Florida | -13.5W59–50 | 68.5 | W59–50 | O | N |
| Sat 11/11 | Memphis at Charlotte | -9.5W44–38 | 51.5 | W44–38 | O | N |
| Sat 11/18 | Memphis vs SMU | +9.5L34–38 | 64.5 | L34–38 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/24 | Memphis at Temple | -13.5W45–21 | 63.5 | W45–21 | O | Y |
| Fri 12/29 | Memphis at Iowa State | +10.5W36–26 | 58.0 | W36–26 | 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
→ Memphis
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?
Tulane Edge
Tulane +0.25
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Tulane Edge
Tulane +17.4
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Tie
2 — 2 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Tulane
23.2 — 56.2 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Tulane won by 10
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Tulane with a solid GC edge. Teams with this profile have covered 53.0% of the time historically (n=330) — a mild lean.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Tulane
Willie Fritz #1
45–46 (50%)
· Yr 8 at school
OC
Slade Nagle
Yr 1
#1
DC
Shiel Wood
Yr 1
#1
Memphis
Ryan Silverfield #1
24–16 (60%)
· Yr 4 at school
OC
Tim Cramsey
Yr 2
#1
DC
Matt Barnes
Yr 2
#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 ✓