Sat, Oct 19 2024
·
Week 8
·
🏟 Alamodome
San Antonio, TX
·
Turf
·
65,000 cap
Florida Atlantic✈ 1,140 mi-1 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Florida Atlantic
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Florida Atlantic entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Florida Atlantic wins
Lean
Game Control
49.4%
Florida Atlantic wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
UTSA -4
O/U 52.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → UTSA
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Florida Atlantic 2024 Schedule
Florida Atlantic's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 8/30 | Florida Atlantic at Michigan State | +12.0L10–16 | 45.0 | L10–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/7 | Florida Atlantic vs Army | -1.5L7–24 | 42.5 | L7–24 | U | N |
| Sat 9/14 | Florida Atlantic vs Florida International | -3.5W38–20 | 44.5 | W38–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/21 | Florida Atlantic at UConn | +1.0L14–48 | 46.0 | L14–48 | O | N |
| Sat 9/28 | Florida Atlantic vs Wagner | -34.5W41–10 | 52.5 | W41–10 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/12 | Florida Atlantic vs North Texas | +5.5L37–41 | 58.5 | L37–41 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/19 | Florida Atlantic at UTSA | +4.0L24–38 | 52.5 | L24–38 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 11/1 | Florida Atlantic vs South Florida | +1.5L21–44 | 48.0 | L21–44 | O | N |
| Thu 11/7 | Florida Atlantic at East Carolina | +5.5L14–49 | 58.5 | L14–49 | O | N |
| Sat 11/16 | Florida Atlantic at Temple | +2.0L15–18 | 50.0 | L15–18 | U | N |
| Sat 11/23 | Florida Atlantic vs Charlotte | +3.0L27–39 | 49.5 | L27–39 | O | N |
| Sat 11/30 | Florida Atlantic at Tulsa | -2.5W63–16 | 57.5 | W63–16 | O | Y |
UTSA 2024 Schedule
UTSA's 2024 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/31 | UTSA vs Kennesaw State | -24.0W28–16 | 49.5 | W28–16 | U | N |
| Sat 9/7 | UTSA at Texas State | +2.5L10–49 | 58.5 | L10–49 | O | N |
| Sat 9/14 | UTSA at Texas | +36.5L7–56 | 56.5 | L7–56 | O | N |
| Sat 9/21 | UTSA vs Houston Christian | -35.5W45–7 | 54.5 | W45–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/28 | UTSA at East Carolina | +2.0L20–30 | 53.5 | L20–30 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/12 | UTSA at Rice | -3.5L27–29 | 51.0 | L27–29 | O | N |
| Sat 10/19 | UTSA vs Florida Atlantic | -4.0W38–24 | 52.5 | W38–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/26 | UTSA at Tulsa | -9.5L45–46 | 52.5 | L45–46 | O | N |
| Sat 11/2 | UTSA vs Memphis | +7.0W44–36 | 62.0 | W44–36 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 11/15 | UTSA vs North Texas | -1.0W48–27 | 73.0 | W48–27 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/22 | UTSA vs Temple | -16.5W51–27 | 56.0 | W51–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/30 | UTSA at Army | +6.5L24–29 | 53.5 | L24–29 | U | Y |
| Mon 12/23 | UTSA vs Coastal Carolina | -12.5W44–15 | 56.5 | W44–15 | 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
→ UTSA
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ UTSA
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ UTSA
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?
Florida Atlantic Edge
Florida Atlantic +0.40
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Florida Atlantic Edge
Florida Atlantic +0.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 49.4% of games historically
Based on 6 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
UTSA
3 — 1 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
UTSA
44.3 — 27.1 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
UTSA won by 14
✗ Model missed it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Florida Atlantic, 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
Florida Atlantic
Tom Herman #1
4–8 (33%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Charlie Frye
Yr 2
#1
DC
Roc Bellantoni
Yr 2
#1
UTSA
Jeff Traylor #1
39–14 (74%)
· Yr 5 at school
OC
Justin Burke
Yr 2
#1
DC
Jess Loepp
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 ✓