Sat, Sep 28 2024
·
Week 5
·
🏟 SHI Stadium
Piscataway, NJ
·
Turf
·
52,454 cap
Washington✈ 6,257 mi+3 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Rutgers
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Rutgers entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Rutgers wins
Lean
Game Control
67.1%
Rutgers wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Rutgers -1.5
O/U 44.5
ESPN Bet
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Washington
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Washington 2024 Schedule
Washington's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/31 | Washington vs Weber State | -29.0W35–3 | 51.5 | W35–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/7 | Washington vs Eastern Michigan | -25.0W30–9 | 48.5 | W30–9 | U | N |
| Sat 9/14 | Washington vs Washington State | -4.0L19–24 | 56.0 | L19–24 | U | N |
| Sat 9/21 | Washington vs Northwestern | -11.5W24–5 | 42.5 | W24–5 | U | Y |
| Fri 9/27 | Washington at Rutgers | +1.5L18–21 | 44.5 | L18–21 | U | N |
| Sat 10/5 | Washington vs Michigan | -1.5W27–17 | 39.5 | W27–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/12 | Washington at Iowa | +2.5L16–40 | 41.5 | L16–40 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/26 | Washington at Indiana | +5.5L17–31 | 54.0 | L17–31 | U | N |
| Sat 11/2 | Washington vs USC | +2.0W26–21 | 55.0 | W26–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/9 | Washington at Penn State | +13.5L6–35 | 48.0 | L6–35 | U | N |
| Fri 11/15 | Washington vs UCLA | -4.5W31–19 | 47.0 | W31–19 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/30 | Washington at Oregon | +17.5L21–49 | 50.5 | L21–49 | O | N |
| Tue 12/31 | Washington vs Louisville | -1.0L34–35 | 50.5 | L34–35 | O | N |
Rutgers 2024 Schedule
Rutgers's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/29 | Rutgers vs Howard | -38.5W44–7 | 51.5 | W44–7 | U | N |
| Sat 9/7 | Rutgers vs Akron | -24.5W49–17 | 41.5 | W49–17 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/21 | Rutgers at Virginia Tech | +3.0W26–23 | 45.0 | W26–23 | O | Y |
| Fri 9/27 | Rutgers vs Washington | -1.5W21–18 | 44.5 | W21–18 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/5 | Rutgers at Nebraska | +7.0L7–14 | 39.5 | L7–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/12 | Rutgers vs Wisconsin | -1.0L7–42 | 43.5 | L7–42 | O | N |
| Sat 10/19 | Rutgers vs UCLA | -4.0L32–35 | 42.5 | L32–35 | O | N |
| Fri 10/25 | Rutgers at USC | +14.0L20–42 | 57.0 | L20–42 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/9 | Rutgers vs Minnesota | +6.5W26–19 | 44.5 | W26–19 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/16 | Rutgers at Maryland | +4.5W31–17 | 54.5 | W31–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/23 | Rutgers vs Illinois | -2.0L31–38 | 48.0 | L31–38 | O | N |
| Sat 11/30 | Rutgers at Michigan State | +1.5W41–14 | 46.5 | W41–14 | O | Y |
| Thu 12/26 | Rutgers vs Kansas State | +7.5L41–44 | 51.5 | L41–44 | O | 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
→ Washington
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?
Rutgers Edge
Rutgers +0.83
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 2 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Rutgers Edge
Rutgers +19.6
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 67.1% 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 Rutgers 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
Washington
Jedd Fisch #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Brennan Carroll
Yr 1
#1
DC
Stephen Belichick
Yr 1
#1
Rutgers
Greg Schiano #1
19–28 (40%)
· Yr 5 at school
OC
Kirk Ciarrocca
Yr 2
#1
DC
Joe Harasymiak
Yr 3
#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 ✓