Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Arkansas,
while Game Control favors Auburn.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
58.4%
Arkansas wins
Lean
Game Control
64.9%
Auburn wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Arkansas -2.5
O/U 55.5
ESPN Bet
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Auburn
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Auburn 2025 Schedule
Auburn's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 8/29 | Auburn at Baylor | -1.5W38–24 | 57.5 | W38–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Auburn vs Ball State | -43.0W42–3 | 52.5 | W42–3 | U | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Auburn vs South Alabama | -26.5W31–15 | 56.5 | W31–15 | U | N |
| Sat 9/20 | Auburn at Oklahoma | +6.5L17–24 | 47.5 | L17–24 | U | N |
| Sat 9/27 | Auburn at Texas A&M | +6.5L10–16 | 51.5 | L10–16 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/11 | Auburn vs Georgia | +4.5L10–20 | 45.5 | L10–20 | U | N |
| Sat 10/18 | Auburn vs Missouri | +1.5L17–23 | 43.5 | L17–23 | U | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Auburn at Arkansas | +2.5W33–24 | 55.5 | W33–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Auburn vs Kentucky | -11.5L3–10 | 44.5 | L3–10 | U | N |
| Sat 11/8 | Auburn at Vanderbilt | +6.0L38–45 | 46.5 | L38–45 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/22 | Auburn vs Mercer | -26.5W62–17 | 51.5 | W62–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | Auburn vs Alabama | +6.5L20–27 | 48.5 | L20–27 | U | 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
→ Auburn
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Auburn
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Auburn
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?
Arkansas Edge
Arkansas +0.14
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 6 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Auburn Edge
Auburn +11.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Auburn
1 — 3 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Arkansas
45.4 — 38.7 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Auburn won by 9
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
Auburn
Hugh Freeze #1
11–14 (44%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Derrick Nix
Yr 2
#1
DC
D. J. Durkin
Yr 2
#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 ✓