Sat, Nov 15 2025
·
Week 12
·
🏟 Houchens Industries-L. T. Smith Stadium
Bowling Green, KY
·
Turf
·
22,113 cap
Middle Tennessee✈ 78 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Western Kentucky
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Western Kentucky entering this game.
Momentum Control
71.6%
Western Kentucky wins
Solid
Game Control
76%
Western Kentucky wins
Strong
Vegas Spread
Western Kentucky -13.5
O/U 51.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Western Kentucky
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Middle Tennessee 2025 Schedule
Middle Tennessee's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Middle Tennessee vs Austin Peay | -14.5L14–34 | 53.5 | L14–34 | U | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Middle Tennessee at Wisconsin | +28.5L10–42 | 45.5 | L10–42 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Middle Tennessee at Nevada | +9.0W14–13 | 50.0 | W14–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/20 | Middle Tennessee vs Marshall | +2.5L28–42 | 46.5 | L28–42 | O | N |
| Sat 9/27 | Middle Tennessee at Kennesaw State | +7.0L16–24 | 54.5 | L16–24 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Wed 10/8 | Middle Tennessee vs Missouri State | +2.5L20–22 | 52.5 | L20–22 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Wed 10/22 | Middle Tennessee at Delaware | +9.5L28–31 | 55.5 | L28–31 | O | Y |
| Wed 10/29 | Middle Tennessee vs Jacksonville State | +4.5L21–24 | 54.0 | L21–24 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/8 | Middle Tennessee vs Florida International | -1.5L30–56 | 50.5 | L30–56 | O | N |
| Sat 11/15 | Middle Tennessee at Western Kentucky | +13.5L26–42 | 51.5 | L26–42 | O | N |
| Sat 11/22 | Middle Tennessee vs Sam Houston | -6.5W31–17 | 53.5 | W31–17 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | Middle Tennessee at New Mexico State | +3.5W31–24 | 52.0 | W31–24 | O | Y |
Western Kentucky 2025 Schedule
Western Kentucky's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/23 | Western Kentucky vs Sam Houston | -9.5W41–24 | 60.5 | W41–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 8/30 | Western Kentucky vs North Alabama | -27.5W55–6 | 60.5 | W55–6 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Western Kentucky at Toledo | +8.5L21–45 | 57.5 | L21–45 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/20 | Western Kentucky vs Nevada | -8.5W31–16 | 54.5 | W31–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/27 | Western Kentucky at Missouri State | -3.5W27–22 | 59.5 | W27–22 | U | Y |
| Fri 10/3 | Western Kentucky at Delaware | +2.5W27–24 | 62.5 | W27–24 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Tue 10/14 | Western Kentucky vs Florida International | -9.5L6–25 | 55.5 | L6–25 | U | N |
| Tue 10/21 | Western Kentucky at Louisiana Tech | +5.5W28–27 | 49.5 | W28–27 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Western Kentucky vs New Mexico State | -7.5W35–16 | 53.5 | W35–16 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/15 | Western Kentucky vs Middle Tennessee | -13.5W42–26 | 51.5 | W42–26 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/22 | Western Kentucky at LSU | +24.5L10–13 | 52.0 | L10–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | Western Kentucky at Jacksonville State | -1.5L34–37 | 56.5 | L34–37 | O | N |
| Tue 12/23 | Western Kentucky vs Southern Miss | +3.0W27–16 | 59.0 | W27–16 | U | Y |
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
→ Western Kentucky
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Western Kentucky
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Western Kentucky
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?
Western Kentucky Edge
Western Kentucky +1.13
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 71.6% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Western Kentucky Edge
Western Kentucky +24.5
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 76% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Tie
1 — 1 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Western Kentucky
85.3 — 9.0 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Western Kentucky won by 16
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Western Kentucky with a large edge. Historically, dominant teams like this are fully priced into the spread — the agreed-upon team covers just 50.2% of the time. The metrics predict game control better than they beat the number.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Middle Tennessee
Derek Mason #1
3–9 (25%)
· Yr 2 at school
OC
Bodie Reeder
Yr 2
#1
DC
Brian Stewart
Yr 2
#1
Western Kentucky
Tyson Helton #1
48–31 (61%)
· Yr 7 at school
OC
Will Friend
Yr 2
#1
DC
Tyson Summers
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: 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 ✓