Sat, Oct 4 2025
·
Week 6
·
🏟 Acrisure Stadium
Pittsburgh, PA
·
Turf
·
68,400 cap
Boston College✈ 476 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Pittsburgh
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Pittsburgh entering this game.
Momentum Control
71.6%
Pittsburgh wins
Solid
Game Control
67.1%
Pittsburgh wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Pittsburgh -6.5
O/U 54.5
ESPN Bet
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Pittsburgh
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Boston College 2025 Schedule
Boston College's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Boston College vs Fordham | -35.0W66–10 | 53.5 | W66–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Boston College at Michigan State | +3.5L40–42 | 45.5 | L40–42 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Boston College at Stanford | -14.0L20–30 | 44.5 | L20–30 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Boston College vs California | -6.0L24–28 | 54.5 | L24–28 | U | N |
| Sat 10/4 | Boston College at Pittsburgh | +6.5L7–48 | 54.5 | L7–48 | O | N |
| Sat 10/11 | Boston College vs Clemson | +14.0L10–41 | 54.5 | L10–41 | U | N |
| Sat 10/18 | Boston College vs UConn | +2.5L23–38 | 58.5 | L23–38 | O | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Boston College at Louisville | +25.5L24–38 | 54.5 | L24–38 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Boston College vs Notre Dame | +31.5L10–25 | 55.5 | L10–25 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/8 | Boston College vs SMU | +10.5L13–45 | 54.5 | L13–45 | O | N |
| Sat 11/15 | Boston College vs Georgia Tech | +16.5L34–36 | 61.5 | L34–36 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/29 | Boston College at Syracuse | -2.5W34–12 | 54.5 | W34–12 | U | Y |
Pittsburgh 2025 Schedule
Pittsburgh's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Pittsburgh vs Duquesne | -39.5W61–9 | 58.5 | W61–9 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Pittsburgh vs Central Michigan | -21.5W45–17 | 48.5 | W45–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Pittsburgh at West Virginia | -6.5L24–31 | 54.5 | L24–31 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Pittsburgh vs Louisville | +3.0L27–34 | 53.5 | L27–34 | O | N |
| Sat 10/4 | Pittsburgh vs Boston College | -6.5W48–7 | 54.5 | W48–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Pittsburgh at Florida State | +10.5W34–31 | 56.5 | W34–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Pittsburgh at Syracuse | -9.5W30–13 | 54.5 | W30–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Pittsburgh vs NC State | -5.5W53–34 | 52.5 | W53–34 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Pittsburgh at Stanford | -13.5W35–20 | 51.5 | W35–20 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/15 | Pittsburgh vs Notre Dame | +12.5L15–37 | 55.5 | L15–37 | U | N |
| Sat 11/22 | Pittsburgh at Georgia Tech | +2.5W42–28 | 61.5 | W42–28 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | Pittsburgh vs Miami | +6.5L7–38 | 49.5 | L7–38 | U | N |
| Sat 12/27 | Pittsburgh vs East Carolina | -13.5L17–23 | 51.5 | L17–23 | 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
→ Pittsburgh
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Pittsburgh
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Pittsburgh
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?
Pittsburgh Edge
Pittsburgh +1.33
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 71.6% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Pittsburgh Edge
Pittsburgh +19.7
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 67.1% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Pittsburgh
5 — 0 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Pittsburgh
91.4 — 4.0 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Pittsburgh won by 41
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Pittsburgh with a moderate edge in both. This is the strongest ATS signal in our backtest: teams in this situation have covered 55.8% of the time (n=113).
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Boston College
Bill O'Brien #1
7–5 (58%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Will Lawing
Yr 2
#1
DC
Tim Lewis
Yr 2
#1
Pittsburgh
Pat Narduzzi #1
72–55 (57%)
· Yr 11 at school
OC
Kade Bell
Yr 2
#1
DC
Randy Bates
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 ✓