Matchup Prediction
Rutgers
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Rutgers entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Rutgers wins
Lean
Game Control
64.9%
Rutgers wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Purdue -2.5
O/U 60.5
ESPN Bet
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Rutgers
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Rutgers 2025 Schedule
Rutgers's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/28 | Rutgers vs Ohio | -11.5W34–31 | 46.5 | W34–31 | O | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Rutgers vs Miami (OH) | -15.5W45–17 | 45.5 | W45–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Rutgers vs Norfolk State | -44.5W60–10 | 56.5 | W60–10 | O | Y |
| Fri 9/19 | Rutgers vs Iowa | +2.5L28–38 | 46.5 | L28–38 | O | N |
| Sat 9/27 | Rutgers at Minnesota | +3.5L28–31 | 51.5 | L28–31 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 10/10 | Rutgers at Washington | +9.5L19–38 | 62.5 | L19–38 | U | N |
| Sat 10/18 | Rutgers vs Oregon | +17.5L10–56 | 62.5 | L10–56 | O | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Rutgers at Purdue | +2.5W27–24 | 60.5 | W27–24 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Rutgers at Illinois | +13.5L13–35 | 63.5 | L13–35 | U | N |
| Sat 11/8 | Rutgers vs Maryland | -1.5W35–20 | 56.5 | W35–20 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/22 | Rutgers at Ohio State | +29.0L9–42 | 54.0 | L9–42 | U | N |
| Sat 11/29 | Rutgers vs Penn State | +14.5L36–40 | 55.5 | L36–40 | O | Y |
Purdue 2025 Schedule
Purdue's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Purdue vs Ball State | -16.5W31–0 | 50.5 | W31–0 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Purdue vs Southern Illinois | -19.5W34–17 | 52.0 | W34–17 | U | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Purdue vs USC | +20.5L17–33 | 59.5 | L17–33 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/20 | Purdue at Notre Dame | +24.5L30–56 | 51.5 | L30–56 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/4 | Purdue vs Illinois | +7.5L27–43 | 55.5 | L27–43 | O | N |
| Sat 10/11 | Purdue at Minnesota | +7.5L20–27 | 49.5 | L20–27 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Purdue at Northwestern | +3.0L0–19 | 47.5 | L0–19 | U | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Purdue vs Rutgers | -2.5L24–27 | 60.5 | L24–27 | U | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Purdue at Michigan | +21.0L16–21 | 48.5 | L16–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/8 | Purdue vs Ohio State | +29.5L10–34 | 49.5 | L10–34 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/15 | Purdue at Washington | +14.5L13–49 | 51.5 | L13–49 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 11/28 | Purdue vs Indiana | +28.5L3–56 | 53.5 | L3–56 | 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
→ Rutgers
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?
Rutgers Edge
Rutgers +0.50
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 6 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Rutgers Edge
Rutgers +15.0
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
Rutgers
1 — 2 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Purdue
70.6 — 14.3 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Rutgers won by 3
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Rutgers 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
Rutgers
Greg Schiano #1
26–33 (44%)
· Yr 6 at school
OC
Kirk Ciarrocca
Yr 3
#1
DC
Robb Smith
Yr 1
#1
Purdue
Barry Odom #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Josh Henson
Yr 1
#1
DC
Michael Scherer
Yr 1
#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 ✓