Sat, Aug 30 2025
·
Week 1
·
🏟 Warren McGuirk Alumni Stadium
Hadley, MA
·
Turf
·
17,000 cap
Temple✈ 219 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Toss-up — no clear edge
Neither metric shows a meaningful pre-game edge in this matchup.
Momentum Control
58.4%
—
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
—
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Temple -3
O/U 51.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Temple
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Temple 2025 Schedule
Temple's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Temple at Massachusetts | -3.0W42–10 | 51.5 | W42–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Temple vs Howard | -28.0W55–7 | 47.0 | W55–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Temple vs Oklahoma | +23.5L3–42 | 50.5 | L3–42 | U | N |
| Sat 9/20 | Temple at Georgia Tech | +24.5L24–45 | 52.5 | L24–45 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/4 | Temple vs UTSA | +6.5W27–21 | 58.5 | W27–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Temple vs Navy | +10.0L31–32 | 52.5 | L31–32 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Temple at Charlotte | -10.0W49–14 | 47.5 | W49–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Temple at Tulsa | -4.5W38–37 | 52.5 | W38–37 | O | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Temple vs East Carolina | +5.5L14–45 | 58.5 | L14–45 | O | N |
| Sat 11/8 | Temple at Army | +7.5L13–14 | 45.5 | L13–14 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/22 | Temple vs Tulane | +7.5L13–37 | 54.5 | L13–37 | U | N |
| Fri 11/28 | Temple at North Texas | +20.0L25–52 | 65.5 | L25–52 | O | N |
Massachusetts 2025 Schedule
Massachusetts's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Massachusetts vs Temple | +3.0L10–42 | 51.5 | L10–42 | O | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Massachusetts vs Bryant | -14.5L26–27 | 52.0 | L26–27 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Massachusetts at Iowa | +35.5L7–47 | 44.5 | L7–47 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Massachusetts at Missouri | +44.5L6–42 | 57.5 | L6–42 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/4 | Massachusetts vs Western Michigan | +12.5L3–21 | 46.5 | L3–21 | U | N |
| Sat 10/11 | Massachusetts at Kent State | +1.5L6–42 | 49.5 | L6–42 | U | N |
| Sat 10/18 | Massachusetts vs Buffalo | +16.5L21–28 | 47.5 | L21–28 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Massachusetts at Central Michigan | +16.5L13–38 | 46.5 | L13–38 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Tue 11/4 | Massachusetts at Akron | +12.5L10–44 | 51.5 | L10–44 | O | N |
| Wed 11/12 | Massachusetts vs Northern Illinois | +8.5L3–45 | 43.5 | L3–45 | O | N |
| Tue 11/18 | Massachusetts at Ohio | +34.5L14–42 | 53.5 | L14–42 | O | Y |
| Tue 11/25 | Massachusetts vs Bowling Green | +14.0L14–45 | 44.5 | L14–45 | 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
All 4 Agree
→ Temple
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Temple
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Temple
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?
Temple Edge
Temple +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Temple Edge
Temple +0.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 0 games this season
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Massachusetts, 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
Temple
K. C. Keeler #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Tyler Walker
Yr 1
#1
DC
Brian Smith
Yr 1
#1
Massachusetts
Joe Harasymiak #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Mike Bajakian
Yr 1
#1
DC
Jared Keyte
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 ✓