Matchup Prediction
Texas A&M
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Texas A&M entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Texas A&M wins
Lean
Game Control
64.9%
Texas A&M wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Texas A&M -7
O/U 48.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
Advanced factors are split · No strong agreement signal
↓ See full breakdown
Texas A&M 2025 Schedule
Texas A&M's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Texas A&M vs UTSA | -21.5W42–24 | 56.5 | W42–24 | O | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Texas A&M vs Utah State | -34.5W44–22 | 57.5 | W44–22 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Texas A&M at Notre Dame | +7.5W41–40 | 48.5 | W41–40 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Texas A&M vs Auburn | -6.5W16–10 | 51.5 | W16–10 | U | N |
| Sat 10/4 | Texas A&M vs Mississippi State | -17.5W31–9 | 57.5 | W31–9 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Texas A&M vs Florida | -7.0W34–17 | 47.5 | W34–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Texas A&M at Arkansas | -7.5W45–42 | 57.5 | W45–42 | O | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Texas A&M at LSU | -1.5W49–25 | 50.5 | W49–25 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/8 | Texas A&M at Missouri | -7.0W38–17 | 48.5 | W38–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/15 | Texas A&M vs South Carolina | -16.5W31–30 | 49.5 | W31–30 | O | N |
| Sat 11/22 | Texas A&M vs Samford | -54.5W48–0 | 59.5 | W48–0 | U | N |
| Fri 11/28 | Texas A&M at Texas | -2.5L17–27 | 54.5 | L17–27 | U | N |
| Sat 12/20 | Texas A&M vs Miami | -3.0L3–10 | 48.5 | L3–10 | U | N |
Missouri 2025 Schedule
Missouri's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/28 | Missouri vs Central Arkansas | -38.5W61–6 | 52.5 | W61–6 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Missouri vs Kansas | -5.5W42–31 | 51.0 | W42–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Missouri vs Louisiana | -27.5W52–10 | 47.5 | W52–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/20 | Missouri vs South Carolina | -10.0W29–20 | 48.5 | W29–20 | O | N |
| Sat 9/27 | Missouri vs Massachusetts | -44.5W42–6 | 57.5 | W42–6 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/11 | Missouri vs Alabama | +3.5L24–27 | 50.5 | L24–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Missouri at Auburn | -1.5W23–17 | 43.5 | W23–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Missouri at Vanderbilt | +3.0L10–17 | 52.5 | L10–17 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/8 | Missouri vs Texas A&M | +7.0L17–38 | 48.5 | L17–38 | O | N |
| Sat 11/15 | Missouri vs Mississippi State | -7.5W49–27 | 50.5 | W49–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/22 | Missouri at Oklahoma | +4.5L6–17 | 42.5 | L6–17 | U | N |
| Sat 11/29 | Missouri at Arkansas | -4.5W31–17 | 54.5 | W31–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 12/27 | Missouri vs Virginia | -4.0L7–13 | 43.5 | L7–13 | 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
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 · 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 A&M Edge
Texas A&M +0.21
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Texas A&M Edge
Texas A&M +17.7
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Texas A&M 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
Texas A&M
Mike Elko #1
8–4 (67%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Collin Klein
Yr 2
#1
DC
Jay Bateman
Yr 2
#1
Missouri
Eliah Drinkwitz #1
37–24 (61%)
· Yr 6 at school
OC
Kirby Moore
Yr 3
#1
DC
Corey Batoon
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 ✓