UTSA at Florida Atlantic Week 8 College Football Matchup UTSA at Florida Atlantic Matchup - Week 8
Sat, Oct 21 2023 · Week 8 · 🏟 FAU Stadium Boca Raton, FL · Turf · 30,000 cap
UTSA✈ 1,140 mi+1 hr TZ
Away
36 10
Final
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
UTSA
31
UTSA -2.5
Florida Atlantic
23
P&R Line UTSA -7.5
P&R Total O/U 54
Confidence 90 High
Vegas UT San Antonio -2.5 · O/U 58.5
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors UTSA, while Game Control favors Florida Atlantic. Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
UTSA wins
Lean
Game Control
67.1%
Florida Atlantic wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
UT San Antonio -2.5
O/U 58.5
William Hill (New Jersey)
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → UTSA · 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
UTSA 2023 Schedule
UTSA's 2023 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/2UTSA at Houston-2.5L14–1759.5L14–17UN
Sat 9/9UTSA vs Texas State-13.5W20–1366.5W20–13UN
Fri 9/15UTSA vs Army-7.0L29–3742.0L29–37ON
Sat 9/23UTSA at Tennessee+24.0L14–4559.0L14–45UN
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/7UTSA at Temple-14.0W49–3456.0W49–34OY
Sat 10/14UTSA vs UAB-9.0W41–2067.0W41–20UY
Sat 10/21UTSA at Florida Atlantic-2.5W36–1058.5W36–10UY
Sat 10/28UTSA vs East Carolina-17.5W41–2748.0W41–27ON
Sat 11/4UTSA at North Texas-7.5W37–2971.0W37–29UY
Sat 11/11UTSA vs Rice-13.5W34–1453.5W34–14UY
Fri 11/17UTSA vs South Florida-14.5W49–2165.5W49–21OY
Fri 11/24UTSA at Tulane+2.5L16–2951.5L16–29UN
Tue 12/19UTSA vs Marshall-7.0W35–1747.0W35–17OY
Florida Atlantic 2023 Schedule
Florida Atlantic's 2023 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/2Florida Atlantic vs Monmouth-26.5W42–2056.0W42–20ON
Sat 9/9Florida Atlantic vs Ohio-3.5L10–1761.5L10–17UN
Sat 9/16Florida Atlantic at Clemson+25.0L14–4851.5L14–48ON
Sat 9/23Florida Atlantic at Illinois+16.0L17–2345.5L17–23UY
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/7Florida Atlantic vs Tulsa-3.0W20–1754.5W20–17UN
Sat 10/14Florida Atlantic at South Florida+3.0W56–1461.0W56–14OY
Sat 10/21Florida Atlantic vs UTSA+2.5L10–3658.5L10–36UN
Fri 10/27Florida Atlantic at Charlotte-3.5W38–1645.5W38–16OY
Sat 11/4Florida Atlantic at UAB+1.0L42–4559.5L42–45ON
Sat 11/11Florida Atlantic vs East Carolina-7.5L7–2244.5L7–22UN
Sat 11/18Florida Atlantic vs Tulane+9.5L8–2446.5L8–24UN
Sat 11/25Florida Atlantic at Rice+5.0L21–2446.5L21–24UY
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2023 season
UTSA PPA Edge
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ UTSA
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ UTSA
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ UTSA
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
UTSA #45
+0.422
Florida Atlantic #108
+0.256
UTSA Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
UTSA #58
+0.676
Florida Atlantic #105
+0.390
UTSA Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
UTSA #10
0.203
Florida Atlantic #93
0.150
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
UTSA Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
UTSA #24
+7.895
Florida Atlantic #83
+7.495
UTSA Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
UTSA #66
+0.854
Florida Atlantic #107
+0.766
UTSA Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
UTSA #85
71.0
Florida Atlantic #13
68.3
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Florida Atlantic 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
UTSA Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
UTSA
-0.2
Florida Atlantic
-6.5
Offense Rating
UTSA
16.4
Florida Atlantic
11.5
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
UTSA
16.6
Florida Atlantic
18.0
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? UTSA Edge
Avg sequences created per game
UTSA #59
0.83
Florida Atlantic #111
0.80
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
UTSA #74
1.00
Florida Atlantic #48
0.60
UTSA +0.03
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? Florida Atlantic Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
UTSA #1
40.3
Florida Atlantic #1
53.5
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
UTSA #38
44.6
Florida Atlantic #89
34.2
Florida Atlantic +13.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 67.1% of games historically
Based on 6 games this season
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
UTSA
Jeff Traylor #1
31–12 (72%) · Yr 4 at school
OC Justin Burke Yr 1 #1
DC Jess Loepp Yr 2 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
Florida Atlantic
Tom Herman #1
1–2 (33%) · Yr 1 at school
OC Charlie Frye Yr 1 #1
DC Roc Bellantoni Yr 1 #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: 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