Sat, Nov 22 2025
·
Week 13
·
🏟 Nippert Stadium
Cincinnati, OH
·
Turf
·
40,000 cap
BYU✈ 1,439 mi+2 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors BYU,
while Game Control favors Cincinnati.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
BYU wins
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
Cincinnati wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
BYU -2.5
O/U 56.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → BYU
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
BYU 2025 Schedule
BYU's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | BYU vs Portland State | -43.5W69–0 | 61.5 | W69–0 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | BYU vs Stanford | -20.5W27–3 | 44.5 | W27–3 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/20 | BYU at East Carolina | -6.5W34–13 | 49.5 | W34–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/27 | BYU at Colorado | -6.5W24–21 | 48.5 | W24–21 | U | N |
| Fri 10/3 | BYU vs West Virginia | -19.5W38–24 | 46.5 | W38–24 | O | N |
| Sat 10/11 | BYU at Arizona | -2.5W33–27 | 46.5 | W33–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | BYU vs Utah | +4.0W24–21 | 49.5 | W24–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | BYU at Iowa State | +2.5W41–27 | 48.5 | W41–27 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/8 | BYU at Texas Tech | +13.5L7–29 | 50.5 | L7–29 | U | N |
| Sat 11/15 | BYU vs TCU | -3.0W44–13 | 51.5 | W44–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/22 | BYU at Cincinnati | -2.5W26–14 | 56.5 | W26–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | BYU vs UCF | -17.5W41–21 | 46.5 | W41–21 | O | Y |
| Sat 12/6 | BYU vs Texas Tech | +12.5L7–34 | 50.5 | L7–34 | U | N |
| Sat 12/27 | BYU vs Georgia Tech | -3.5W25–21 | 55.0 | W25–21 | U | Y |
Cincinnati 2025 Schedule
Cincinnati's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/28 | Cincinnati vs Nebraska | +6.5L17–20 | 52.5 | L17–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Cincinnati vs Bowling Green | -21.5W34–20 | 46.5 | W34–20 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Cincinnati vs Northwestern State | -48.5W70–0 | 55.5 | W70–0 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Cincinnati at Kansas | +5.5W37–34 | 55.5 | W37–34 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/4 | Cincinnati vs Iowa State | -1.5W38–30 | 55.5 | W38–30 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Cincinnati vs UCF | -10.0W20–11 | 55.5 | W20–11 | U | N |
| Sat 10/18 | Cincinnati at Oklahoma State | -23.5W49–17 | 57.5 | W49–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Cincinnati vs Baylor | -3.5W41–20 | 68.5 | W41–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Cincinnati at Utah | +11.5L14–45 | 57.5 | L14–45 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/15 | Cincinnati vs Arizona | -6.5L24–30 | 56.5 | L24–30 | U | N |
| Sat 11/22 | Cincinnati vs BYU | +2.5L14–26 | 56.5 | L14–26 | U | N |
| Sat 11/29 | Cincinnati at TCU | +3.0L23–45 | 58.5 | L23–45 | O | N |
| Fri 1/2 | Cincinnati vs Navy | +7.5L13–35 | 57.5 | L13–35 | 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
→ BYU
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ BYU
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ BYU
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?
BYU Edge
BYU +0.33
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Cincinnati Edge
Cincinnati +4.5
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 10 games this season
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
BYU
Kalani Sitake #1
71–43 (62%)
· Yr 10 at school
OC
Aaron Roderick
Yr 3
#1
DC
Jay Hill
Yr 3
#1
Cincinnati
Scott Satterfield #1
8–16 (33%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Brad Glenn
Yr 3
#1
DC
Tyson Veidt
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: Momentum Control is a great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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: Game Control is another great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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: Momentum Control is a great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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: Game Control is another great measure for predicting game outcome but NOT an 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 ✓