Sat, Sep 27 2025
·
Week 5
·
🏟 Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium Frank Broyles Field
Fayetteville, AR
·
Turf
·
72,000 cap
Notre Dame✈ 577 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
67.1%
Arkansas wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Notre Dame -5.5
O/U 64.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Notre Dame
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Notre Dame 2025 Schedule
Notre Dame's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun 8/31 | Notre Dame at Miami | -2.5L24–27 | 53.5 | L24–27 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/13 | Notre Dame vs Texas A&M | -7.5L40–41 | 48.5 | L40–41 | O | N |
| Sat 9/20 | Notre Dame vs Purdue | -24.5W56–30 | 51.5 | W56–30 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/27 | Notre Dame at Arkansas | -5.5W56–13 | 64.5 | W56–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/4 | Notre Dame vs Boise State | -21.5W28–7 | 63.5 | W28–7 | U | N |
| Sat 10/11 | Notre Dame vs NC State | -23.5W36–7 | 59.5 | W36–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Notre Dame vs USC | -10.5W34–24 | 60.5 | W34–24 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/1 | Notre Dame at Boston College | -31.5W25–10 | 55.5 | W25–10 | U | N |
| Sat 11/8 | Notre Dame vs Navy | -30.5W49–10 | 54.5 | W49–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/15 | Notre Dame at Pittsburgh | -12.5W37–15 | 55.5 | W37–15 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/22 | Notre Dame vs Syracuse | -36.5W70–7 | 51.5 | W70–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | Notre Dame at Stanford | -32.5W49–20 | 50.5 | W49–20 | O | N |
Arkansas 2025 Schedule
Arkansas's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Arkansas vs Alabama A&M | -45.5W52–7 | 62.5 | W52–7 | U | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Arkansas vs Arkansas State | -23.5W56–14 | 62.0 | W56–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Arkansas at Ole Miss | +3.5L35–41 | 60.5 | L35–41 | O | N |
| Sat 9/20 | Arkansas at Memphis | -7.0L31–32 | 59.5 | L31–32 | O | N |
| Sat 9/27 | Arkansas vs Notre Dame | +5.5L13–56 | 64.5 | L13–56 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/11 | Arkansas at Tennessee | +10.0L31–34 | 68.5 | L31–34 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Arkansas vs Texas A&M | +7.5L42–45 | 57.5 | L42–45 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Arkansas vs Auburn | -2.5L24–33 | 55.5 | L24–33 | O | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Arkansas vs Mississippi State | -5.5L35–38 | 66.5 | L35–38 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/15 | Arkansas at LSU | +4.0L22–23 | 58.5 | L22–23 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/22 | Arkansas at Texas | +10.5L37–52 | 57.5 | L37–52 | O | N |
| Sat 11/29 | Arkansas vs Missouri | +4.5L17–31 | 54.5 | L17–31 | U | N |
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) ·
2025 season
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ Notre Dame
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Notre Dame
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Notre Dame
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 · 2025 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?
Notre Dame +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Arkansas Edge
Arkansas +13.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 67.1% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Arkansas 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
Notre Dame
Marcus Freeman #1
33–10 (77%)
· Yr 4 at school
OC
Mike Denbrock
Yr 2
#1
DC
Chris Ash
Yr 1
#1
Arkansas
Sam Pittman #1
29–31 (48%)
· Yr 6 at school
OC
Bobby Petrino
Yr 2
#1
DC
Travis Williams
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 ✓