Matchup Prediction
USC
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
USC entering this game.
Momentum Control
71.6%
USC wins
Solid
Game Control
50.6%
USC wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
USC -3
O/U 58.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → USC
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Michigan 2025 Schedule
Michigan's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Michigan vs New Mexico | -36.5W34–17 | 52.5 | W34–17 | U | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Michigan at Oklahoma | +3.0L13–24 | 47.5 | L13–24 | U | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Michigan vs Central Michigan | -27.5W63–3 | 42.5 | W63–3 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/20 | Michigan at Nebraska | -1.5W30–27 | 47.5 | W30–27 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/4 | Michigan vs Wisconsin | -17.5W24–10 | 42.5 | W24–10 | U | N |
| Sat 10/11 | Michigan at USC | +3.0L13–31 | 58.5 | L13–31 | U | N |
| Sat 10/18 | Michigan vs Washington | -4.5W24–7 | 50.5 | W24–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Michigan at Michigan State | -13.5W31–20 | 47.5 | W31–20 | O | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Michigan vs Purdue | -21.0W21–16 | 48.5 | W21–16 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/15 | Michigan vs Northwestern | -10.0W24–22 | 41.5 | W24–22 | O | N |
| Sat 11/22 | Michigan at Maryland | -14.0W45–20 | 46.5 | W45–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | Michigan vs Ohio State | +9.5L9–27 | 43.5 | L9–27 | U | N |
| Wed 12/31 | Michigan vs Texas | +7.0L27–41 | 50.0 | L27–41 | O | N |
USC 2025 Schedule
USC's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | USC vs Missouri State | -34.5W73–13 | 59.5 | W73–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | USC vs Georgia Southern | -29.0W59–20 | 61.5 | W59–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | USC at Purdue | -20.5W33–17 | 59.5 | W33–17 | U | N |
| Sat 9/20 | USC vs Michigan State | -18.5W45–31 | 55.5 | W45–31 | O | N |
| Sat 9/27 | USC at Illinois | -6.5L32–34 | 62.5 | L32–34 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/11 | USC vs Michigan | -3.0W31–13 | 58.5 | W31–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | USC at Notre Dame | +10.5L24–34 | 60.5 | L24–34 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/1 | USC at Nebraska | -4.5W21–17 | 59.5 | W21–17 | U | N |
| Fri 11/7 | USC vs Northwestern | -14.5W38–17 | 54.5 | W38–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/15 | USC vs Iowa | -6.5W26–21 | 48.5 | W26–21 | U | N |
| Sat 11/22 | USC at Oregon | +10.5L27–42 | 59.5 | L27–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/29 | USC vs UCLA | -21.0W29–10 | 59.0 | W29–10 | U | N |
| Tue 12/30 | USC vs TCU | -4.5L27–30 | 56.5 | L27–30 | O | 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
→ USC
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?
USC Edge
USC +1.40
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 71.6% of games historically
Based on 5 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
USC Edge
USC +3.7
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% 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 USC, 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
Michigan
Sherrone Moore #1
8–5 (62%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Chip Lindsey
Yr 1
#1
DC
Don Martindale
Yr 2
#1
USC
Lincoln Riley #1
25–14 (64%)
· Yr 4 at school
OC
Luke Huard
Yr 1
#1
DC
D'Anton Lynn
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 ✓