Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Ohio,
while Game Control favors Toledo.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
Ohio wins
Lean
Game Control
58.6%
Toledo wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Toledo -1.5
O/U 47.0
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Ohio
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Ohio 2024 Schedule
Ohio's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/31 | Ohio at Syracuse | +17.5L22–38 | 47.5 | L22–38 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/7 | Ohio vs South Alabama | +1.5W27–20 | 55.5 | W27–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/14 | Ohio vs Morgan State | -24.5W21–6 | 45.5 | W21–6 | U | N |
| Sat 9/21 | Ohio at Kentucky | +19.0L6–41 | 42.0 | L6–41 | O | N |
| Sat 9/28 | Ohio vs Akron | -8.5W30–10 | 46.0 | W30–10 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/12 | Ohio at Central Michigan | -3.0W27–25 | 50.5 | W27–25 | O | N |
| Sat 10/19 | Ohio at Miami (OH) | +3.5L20–30 | 43.5 | L20–30 | O | N |
| Sat 10/26 | Ohio vs Buffalo | -4.0W47–16 | 46.5 | W47–16 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Wed 11/6 | Ohio at Kent State | -20.5W41–0 | 53.5 | W41–0 | U | Y |
| Wed 11/13 | Ohio vs Eastern Michigan | -10.5W35–10 | 51.5 | W35–10 | U | Y |
| Wed 11/20 | Ohio at Toledo | +1.5W24–7 | 47.0 | W24–7 | U | Y |
| Fri 11/29 | Ohio vs Ball State | -17.5W42–21 | 51.5 | W42–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/7 | Ohio vs Miami (OH) | +2.5W38–3 | 43.5 | W38–3 | U | Y |
| Fri 12/20 | Ohio vs Jacksonville State | -6.5W30–27 | 57.5 | W30–27 | U | N |
Toledo 2024 Schedule
Toledo's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/29 | Toledo vs Duquesne | -27.5W49–10 | 53.5 | W49–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/7 | Toledo vs Massachusetts | -17.5W38–23 | 50.5 | W38–23 | O | N |
| Sat 9/14 | Toledo at Mississippi State | +10.5W41–17 | 56.5 | W41–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/21 | Toledo at Western Kentucky | -2.0L21–26 | 60.5 | L21–26 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/5 | Toledo vs Miami (OH) | -4.5W30–20 | 44.0 | W30–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/12 | Toledo at Buffalo | -10.5L15–30 | 44.5 | L15–30 | O | N |
| Sat 10/19 | Toledo at Northern Illinois | +3.0W13–6 | 42.5 | W13–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/26 | Toledo vs Bowling Green | -1.5L26–41 | 47.5 | L26–41 | O | N |
| Sat 11/2 | Toledo at Eastern Michigan | -10.0W29–28 | 54.5 | W29–28 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Tue 11/12 | Toledo vs Central Michigan | -15.0W37–10 | 52.5 | W37–10 | U | Y |
| Wed 11/20 | Toledo vs Ohio | -1.5L7–24 | 47.0 | L7–24 | U | N |
| Tue 11/26 | Toledo at Akron | -9.5L14–21 | 50.5 | L14–21 | U | N |
| Thu 12/26 | Toledo vs Pittsburgh | +6.5W48–46 | 48.5 | W48–46 | 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
All 4 Agree
→ Ohio
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Ohio
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Ohio
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?
Ohio Edge
Ohio +0.22
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Toledo Edge
Toledo +11.5
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.6% of games historically
Based on 10 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
Ohio
Tim Albin #1
23–16 (59%)
· Yr 4 at school
OC
Brian Smith
Yr 1
#1
DC
John Hauser
Yr 1
#1
Toledo
Jason Candle #1
65–35 (65%)
· Yr 9 at school
OC
Mike Hallett
Yr 3
#1
DC
Vince Kehres
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 ✓