Matchup Prediction
USC
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
USC entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
USC wins
Lean
Game Control
49.4%
USC wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
USC -4
O/U 44.0
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → USC
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
USC 2024 Schedule
USC's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun 9/1 | USC vs LSU | +4.0W27–20 | 66.5 | W27–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/7 | USC vs Utah State | -30.5W48–0 | 62.5 | W48–0 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/21 | USC at Michigan | -4.0L24–27 | 44.0 | L24–27 | O | N |
| Sat 9/28 | USC vs Wisconsin | -14.0W38–21 | 50.5 | W38–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/5 | USC at Minnesota | -8.5L17–24 | 45.5 | L17–24 | U | N |
| Sat 10/12 | USC vs Penn State | +3.5L30–33 | 51.5 | L30–33 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/19 | USC at Maryland | -6.5L28–29 | 56.5 | L28–29 | O | N |
| Fri 10/25 | USC vs Rutgers | -14.0W42–20 | 57.0 | W42–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/2 | USC at Washington | -2.0L21–26 | 55.0 | L21–26 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/16 | USC vs Nebraska | -6.5W28–20 | 51.0 | W28–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/23 | USC at UCLA | -5.0W19–13 | 53.0 | W19–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/30 | USC vs Notre Dame | +6.5L35–49 | 52.5 | L35–49 | O | N |
| Fri 12/27 | USC vs Texas A&M | +3.5W35–31 | 56.5 | W35–31 | O | Y |
Michigan 2024 Schedule
Michigan's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/31 | Michigan vs Fresno State | -21.0W30–10 | 48.0 | W30–10 | U | N |
| Sat 9/7 | Michigan vs Texas | +7.0L12–31 | 42.0 | L12–31 | O | N |
| Sat 9/14 | Michigan vs Arkansas State | -22.0W28–18 | 47.5 | W28–18 | U | N |
| Sat 9/21 | Michigan vs USC | +4.0W27–24 | 44.0 | W27–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/28 | Michigan vs Minnesota | -10.5W27–24 | 34.5 | W27–24 | O | N |
| Sat 10/5 | Michigan at Washington | +1.5L17–27 | 39.5 | L17–27 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/19 | Michigan at Illinois | -6.0L7–21 | 44.0 | L7–21 | U | N |
| Sat 10/26 | Michigan vs Michigan State | -3.5W24–17 | 39.0 | W24–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/2 | Michigan vs Oregon | +14.5L17–38 | 45.5 | L17–38 | O | N |
| Sat 11/9 | Michigan at Indiana | +14.5L15–20 | 47.5 | L15–20 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/23 | Michigan vs Northwestern | -10.5W50–6 | 35.5 | W50–6 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/30 | Michigan at Ohio State | +20.5W13–10 | 41.5 | W13–10 | U | Y |
| Tue 12/31 | Michigan vs Alabama | +16.5W19–13 | 45.5 | W19–13 | U | Y |
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) ·
2024 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
→ USC
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 · 2024 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?
USC Edge
USC +0.83
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
USC Edge
USC +0.5
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 49.4% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on USC, but the GC edge is small. When metrics agree but GC is near-neutral, the agreed-upon team has covered only 46.7% of the time historically (n=224) — potentially a fade signal.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
USC
Lincoln Riley #1
19–8 (70%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Josh Henson
Yr 3
#1
DC
D'Anton Lynn
Yr 1
#1
Michigan
Sherrone Moore #1
1–0 (100%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Kirk Campbell
Yr 1
#1
DC
Don Martindale
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 ✓