Tulsa at Army Week 13 College Football Matchup Tulsa at Army Matchup - Week 13
Sat, Nov 22 2025 · Week 13 · 🏟 Blaik Field at Michie Stadium West Point, NY · Turf · 38,000 cap
Tulsa✈ 1,234 mi+1 hr TZ
Away
26 25
Final
Home
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
Tulsa
19
TLSA +10
Army
27
P&R Line Army -8
P&R Total O/U 46.5
Confidence 75 Good
Vegas Army -10 · O/U 43.5
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Tulsa, while Game Control favors Army. Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
Tulsa wins
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
Army wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Army -10
O/U 43.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
Advanced factors are split · No strong agreement signal
↓ See full breakdown
🛋 Army Coming off BYE
Tulsa 2025 Schedule
Tulsa's 2025 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 8/30Tulsa vs Abilene Christian-5.0W35–759.5W35–7UY
Sat 9/6Tulsa at New Mexico State-3.0L14–2152.5L14–21UN
Sat 9/13Tulsa vs Navy+14.0L23–4252.5L23–42ON
Fri 9/19Tulsa at Oklahoma State+10.5W19–1254.5W19–12UY
Sat 9/27Tulsa vs Tulane+14.5L14–3152.5L14–31UN
Sat 10/4Tulsa at Memphis+21.0L7–4554.5L7–45UN
— Bye Week —
Thu 10/16Tulsa at East Carolina+16.5L27–4154.5L27–41OY
Sat 10/25Tulsa vs Temple+4.5L37–3852.5L37–38OY
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/8Tulsa at Florida Atlantic+4.5L21–4060.5L21–40ON
Sat 11/15Tulsa vs Oregon State-1.5W31–1450.5W31–14UY
Sat 11/22Tulsa at Army+10.0W26–2543.5W26–25OY
Sat 11/29Tulsa vs UAB-9.0L24–3156.5L24–31UN
Army 2025 Schedule
Army's 2025 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Fri 8/29Army vs Tarleton State-14.5L27–3047.5L27–30ON
Sat 9/6Army at Kansas State+17.0W24–2148.5W24–21UY
— Bye Week —
Sat 9/20Army vs North Texas+2.5L38–4550.5L38–45ON
Thu 9/25Army at East Carolina+3.5L6–2852.5L6–28UN
Sat 10/4Army at UAB-6.5W31–1355.5W31–13UY
Sat 10/11Army vs Charlotte-17.5W24–745.5W24–7UN
Sat 10/18Army at Tulane+10.0L17–2444.5L17–24UY
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/1Army at Air Force-1.5W20–1748.5W20–17UY
Sat 11/8Army vs Temple-7.5W14–1345.5W14–13UN
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/22Army vs Tulsa-10.0L25–2643.5L25–26ON
Sat 11/29Army at UTSA+8.5W27–2450.5W27–24OY
— Bye Week —
Sat 12/13Army vs Navy+6.0L16–1738.0L16–17UY
Sat 12/27Army vs UConn-5.5W41–1641.5W41–16OY
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2025 season
Army PPA Edge
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
Split
Metrics disagree
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Tulsa #105
+0.289
Army #53
+0.339
Army Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Tulsa #114
+0.446
Army #7
+0.751
Army Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Tulsa #121
0.127
Army #121
0.127
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Even
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Tulsa #106
+7.107
Army #67
+7.479
Army Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Tulsa #97
+0.848
Army #70
+0.847
Tulsa Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Tulsa #115
72.6
Army #39
69.7
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Army Edge
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
Tulsa Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Tulsa
0.9
Army
-0.3
Offense Rating
Tulsa
16.9
Army
15.3
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Tulsa
16.0
Army
15.6
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Tulsa Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Tulsa #57
0.89
Army #66
0.38
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Tulsa #42
0.78
Army #48
0.75
Tulsa +0.51
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? Army Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Tulsa #1
36.6
Army #1
37.8
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Tulsa #103
51.1
Army #63
41.4
Army +1.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Tulsa
1 — 2 sequences
✓ Predicted correctly
GC Battle
Army
57.8 — 20.7 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Tulsa won by 1
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
Tulsa
Tre Lamb #1
0–0 (0%) · Yr 1 at school
OC Ty Darlington Yr 1 #1
DC Mike Gray Yr 1 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #1
Army
Jeff Monken #1
81–57 (59%) · Yr 12 at school
OC Cody Worley Yr 2 #1
DC Nate Woody Yr 3 #1
Staff Rating
0.00 #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