Sat, Nov 9 2024
·
Week 11
·
🏟 Apogee Stadium
Denton, TX
·
Turf
·
30,850 cap
Army✈ 1,389 mi-1 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Toss-up — no clear edge
Neither metric shows a meaningful pre-game edge in this matchup.
Momentum Control
58.4%
—
Lean
Game Control
75.9%
Army wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Army -6.5
O/U 68.0
Bovada
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Army
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Army 2024 Schedule
Army's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 8/30 | Army vs Lehigh | -28 | — | — | — | — |
| Sat 9/7 | Army at Florida Atlantic | +1.5W24–7 | 42.5 | W24–7 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/21 | Army vs Rice | -7.0W37–14 | 44.0 | W37–14 | O | Y |
| Thu 9/26 | Army at Temple | -11.0W42–14 | 46.5 | W42–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/5 | Army at Tulsa | -13.5W49–7 | 50.5 | W49–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/12 | Army vs UAB | -27.0W44–10 | 55.5 | W44–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/19 | Army vs East Carolina | -17.5W45–28 | 54.0 | W45–28 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/2 | Army vs Air Force | -18.0W20–3 | 38.5 | W20–3 | U | N |
| Sat 11/9 | Army at North Texas | -6.5W14–3 | 68.0 | W14–3 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/23 | Army vs Notre Dame | +14.5L14–49 | 44.5 | L14–49 | O | N |
| Sat 11/30 | Army vs UTSA | -6.5W29–24 | 53.5 | W29–24 | U | N |
| Fri 12/6 | Army vs Tulane | +4.5W35–14 | 46.5 | W35–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/14 | Army vs Navy | -6.0 | 39.5 | — | — | — |
| Sat 12/28 | Army vs Louisiana Tech | -15.0W27–6 | 44.5 | W27–6 | U | Y |
North Texas 2024 Schedule
North Texas's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/31 | North Texas at South Alabama | +6.0W52–38 | 61.5 | W52–38 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/7 | North Texas vs Stephen F. Austin | -21.5W35–20 | 72.5 | W35–20 | U | N |
| Sat 9/14 | North Texas at Texas Tech | +10.5L21–66 | 70.5 | L21–66 | O | N |
| Sat 9/21 | North Texas vs Wyoming | -7.0W44–17 | 55.0 | W44–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/28 | North Texas vs Tulsa | -7.0W52–20 | 65.5 | W52–20 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/12 | North Texas at Florida Atlantic | -5.5W41–37 | 58.5 | W41–37 | O | N |
| Sat 10/19 | North Texas at Memphis | +10.5L44–52 | 67.5 | L44–52 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/26 | North Texas vs Tulane | +7.5L37–45 | 70.5 | L37–45 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/9 | North Texas vs Army | +6.5L3–14 | 68.0 | L3–14 | U | N |
| Fri 11/15 | North Texas at UTSA | +1.0L27–48 | 73.0 | L27–48 | O | N |
| Sat 11/23 | North Texas vs East Carolina | -2.5L28–40 | 73.5 | L28–40 | U | N |
| Sat 11/30 | North Texas at Temple | -10.5W24–17 | 63.5 | W24–17 | U | N |
| Fri 1/3 | North Texas vs Texas State | +15.5L28–30 | 67.5 | L28–30 | 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
All 4 Agree
→ Army
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Army
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Army
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?
Army +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Army Edge
Army +43.4
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 75.9% of games historically
Based on 8 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
Army
Jeff Monken #1
70–55 (56%)
· Yr 11 at school
OC
Cody Worley
Yr 1
#1
DC
Nate Woody
Yr 3
#1
North Texas
Eric Morris #1
5–7 (42%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Jordan Davis
Yr 2
#1
DC
Matt Caponi
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: 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 ✓
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 ✓