Thu, Nov 6 2025
·
Week 11
·
🏟 Raymond James Stadium
Tampa, FL
·
Turf
·
65,857 cap
UTSA✈ 972 mi+1 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
South Florida
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
South Florida entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
South Florida wins
Lean
Game Control
58.6%
South Florida wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
South Florida -14
O/U 66.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → South Florida
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
UTSA 2025 Schedule
UTSA's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | UTSA at Texas A&M | +21.5L24–42 | 56.5 | L24–42 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | UTSA vs Texas State | -4.5L36–43 | 64.5 | L36–43 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | UTSA vs Incarnate Word | -21.0W48–20 | 62.5 | W48–20 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/20 | UTSA at Colorado State | -4.5W17–16 | 58.5 | W17–16 | U | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/4 | UTSA at Temple | -6.5L21–27 | 58.5 | L21–27 | U | N |
| Sat 10/11 | UTSA vs Rice | -8.5W61–13 | 48.5 | W61–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | UTSA at North Texas | +4.0L17–55 | 64.5 | L17–55 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Thu 10/30 | UTSA vs Tulane | +5.5W48–26 | 54.5 | W48–26 | O | Y |
| Thu 11/6 | UTSA at South Florida | +14.0L23–55 | 66.5 | L23–55 | O | N |
| Sat 11/15 | UTSA at Charlotte | -16.5W28–7 | 57.5 | W28–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/22 | UTSA vs East Carolina | +2.0W58–24 | 62.5 | W58–24 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | UTSA vs Army | -8.5L24–27 | 50.5 | L24–27 | O | N |
| Fri 12/26 | UTSA vs Florida International | -7.0W57–20 | 62.5 | W57–20 | O | Y |
South Florida 2025 Schedule
South Florida's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/28 | South Florida vs Boise State | +8.5W34–7 | 63.5 | W34–7 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | South Florida at Florida | +18.5W18–16 | 58.0 | W18–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | South Florida at Miami | +17.5L12–49 | 56.5 | L12–49 | O | N |
| Sat 9/20 | South Florida vs South Carolina State | -36.0W63–14 | 56.5 | W63–14 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Fri 10/3 | South Florida vs Charlotte | -28.5W54–26 | 54.5 | W54–26 | O | N |
| Fri 10/10 | South Florida at North Texas | +2.5W63–36 | 68.5 | W63–36 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | South Florida vs Florida Atlantic | -20.5W48–13 | 72.5 | W48–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | South Florida at Memphis | -3.5L31–34 | 58.5 | L31–34 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Thu 11/6 | South Florida vs UTSA | -14.0W55–23 | 66.5 | W55–23 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/15 | South Florida at Navy | -8.5L38–41 | 62.5 | L38–41 | O | N |
| Sat 11/22 | South Florida at UAB | -21.5W48–18 | 68.5 | W48–18 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | South Florida vs Rice | -28.5W52–3 | 57.5 | W52–3 | U | Y |
| Wed 12/17 | South Florida vs Old Dominion | -4.0L10–24 | 52.5 | L10–24 | 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
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
Split
Metrics disagree
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ South Florida
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?
South Florida Edge
South Florida +0.71
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
South Florida Edge
South Florida +6.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.6% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
South Florida
3 — 1 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
South Florida
97.3 — 2.7 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
South Florida won by 32
✓ Model called it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on South Florida. Teams with this edge profile have covered 50.3% historically — essentially a coin flip against the spread.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
UTSA
Jeff Traylor #1
45–20 (69%)
· Yr 6 at school
OC
Justin Burke
Yr 3
#1
DC
Jess Loepp
Yr 3
#1
South Florida
Alex Golesh #1
13–12 (52%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Joel Gordon
Yr 3
#1
DC
Todd Orlando
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 ✓