Matchup Prediction
Texas
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Texas entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Texas wins
Lean
Game Control
58.3%
Texas wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Texas -12.5
O/U 45.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Texas
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Texas 2025 Schedule
Texas's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Texas at Ohio State | +1.5L7–14 | 46.5 | L7–14 | U | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Texas vs San José State | -37.0W38–7 | 52.5 | W38–7 | U | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Texas vs UTEP | -39.5W27–10 | 52.5 | W27–10 | U | N |
| Sat 9/20 | Texas vs Sam Houston | -39.5W55–0 | 51.5 | W55–0 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/4 | Texas at Florida | -4.5L21–29 | 42.5 | L21–29 | O | N |
| Sat 10/11 | Texas vs Oklahoma | -2.5W23–6 | 44.5 | W23–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Texas at Kentucky | -12.5W16–13 | 45.5 | W16–13 | U | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Texas at Mississippi State | -8.5W45–38 | 48.5 | W45–38 | O | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Texas vs Vanderbilt | -3.5W34–31 | 48.5 | W34–31 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/15 | Texas at Georgia | +3.5L10–35 | 50.5 | L10–35 | U | N |
| Sat 11/22 | Texas vs Arkansas | -10.5W52–37 | 57.5 | W52–37 | O | Y |
| Fri 11/28 | Texas vs Texas A&M | +2.5W27–17 | 54.5 | W27–17 | U | Y |
| Wed 12/31 | Texas vs Michigan | -7.0W41–27 | 50.0 | W41–27 | O | Y |
Kentucky 2025 Schedule
Kentucky's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Kentucky vs Toledo | -10.0W24–16 | 48.5 | W24–16 | U | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Kentucky vs Ole Miss | +8.0L23–30 | 51.5 | L23–30 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Kentucky vs Eastern Michigan | -26.5W48–23 | 49.5 | W48–23 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Kentucky at South Carolina | +5.5L13–35 | 46.5 | L13–35 | O | N |
| Sat 10/4 | Kentucky at Georgia | +19.5L14–35 | 48.5 | L14–35 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/18 | Kentucky vs Texas | +12.5L13–16 | 45.5 | L13–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Kentucky vs Tennessee | +7.5L34–56 | 55.5 | L34–56 | O | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Kentucky at Auburn | +11.5W10–3 | 44.5 | W10–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/8 | Kentucky vs Florida | +4.5W38–7 | 44.5 | W38–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/15 | Kentucky vs Tennessee Tech | -22.5W42–10 | 52.5 | W42–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/22 | Kentucky at Vanderbilt | +7.0L17–45 | 53.5 | L17–45 | O | N |
| Sat 11/29 | Kentucky at Louisville | +1.0L0–41 | 45.5 | L0–41 | 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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Texas
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?
Texas Edge
Texas +0.63
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?
Texas Edge
Texas +10.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.3% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Texas. Teams with this edge profile have covered 50.3% historically — essentially a coin flip against the spread.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Texas
Steve Sarkisian #1
36–16 (69%)
· Yr 5 at school
OC
Kyle Flood
Yr 3
#1
DC
Pete Kwiatkowski
Yr 2
#1
Kentucky
Mark Stoops #1
77–73 (51%)
· Yr 13 at school
OC
Bush Hamdan
Yr 2
#1
DC
Brad White
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: 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 ✓