Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Navy,
while Game Control favors Memphis.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
71.6%
Navy wins
Solid
Game Control
58.3%
Memphis wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Memphis -9.5
O/U 47.0
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
Advanced factors are split · No strong agreement signal
↓ See full breakdown
Memphis 2024 Schedule
Memphis's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/31 | Memphis vs North Alabama | -38.5W40–0 | 62.5 | W40–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/7 | Memphis vs Troy | -18.5W38–17 | 57.5 | W38–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/14 | Memphis at Florida State | +7.0W20–12 | 52.0 | W20–12 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/21 | Memphis at Navy | -9.5L44–56 | 47.0 | L44–56 | O | N |
| Sat 9/28 | Memphis vs Middle Tennessee | -27.0W24–7 | 62.0 | W24–7 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/12 | Memphis vs South Florida | -10.0W21–3 | 61.0 | W21–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/19 | Memphis vs North Texas | -10.5W52–44 | 67.5 | W52–44 | O | N |
| Sat 10/26 | Memphis vs Charlotte | -17.0W33–28 | 56.5 | W33–28 | O | N |
| Sat 11/2 | Memphis at UTSA | -7.0L36–44 | 62.0 | L36–44 | O | N |
| Fri 11/8 | Memphis vs Rice | -7.5W27–20 | 50.5 | W27–20 | U | N |
| Sat 11/16 | Memphis vs UAB | -16.0W53–18 | 62.0 | W53–18 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Thu 11/28 | Memphis at Tulane | +12.5W34–24 | 54.5 | W34–24 | O | Y |
| Tue 12/17 | Memphis vs West Virginia | -5.0W42–37 | 60.0 | W42–37 | O | N |
Navy 2024 Schedule
Navy's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/31 | Navy vs Bucknell | -31.5W49–21 | 48.5 | W49–21 | O | N |
| Sat 9/7 | Navy vs Temple | -11.5W38–11 | 43.5 | W38–11 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/21 | Navy vs Memphis | +9.5W56–44 | 47.0 | W56–44 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/28 | Navy at UAB | -4.5W41–18 | 56.5 | W41–18 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/5 | Navy at Air Force | -10.0W34–7 | 37.0 | W34–7 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/19 | Navy vs Charlotte | -16.5W51–17 | 57.5 | W51–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/26 | Navy vs Notre Dame | +14.0L14–51 | 50.5 | L14–51 | O | N |
| Sat 11/2 | Navy at Rice | -12.5L10–24 | 49.0 | L10–24 | U | N |
| Sat 11/9 | Navy at South Florida | -4.5W28–7 | 59.5 | W28–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/16 | Navy vs Tulane | +7.5L0–35 | 49.0 | L0–35 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 11/29 | Navy at East Carolina | +2.5W34–20 | 54.0 | W34–20 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 12/14 | Navy vs Army | +6.0 | 39.5 | — | — | — |
| Fri 12/27 | Navy vs Oklahoma | -1.0W21–20 | 44.0 | W21–20 | U | N |
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
Split
Metrics disagree
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?
Navy Edge
Navy +1.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 71.6% of games historically
Based on 1 game this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Memphis Edge
Memphis +4.8
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.3% of games historically
Based on 2 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Navy
3 — 2 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Navy
62.0 — 18.6 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Navy won by 12
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
Memphis
Ryan Silverfield #1
31–19 (62%)
· Yr 5 at school
OC
Tim Cramsey
Yr 3
#1
DC
Jordon Hankins
Yr 1
#1
Navy
Brian Newberry #1
5–7 (42%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Drew Cronic
Yr 1
#1
DC
P.J. Volker
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: 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 ✓