Sat, Sep 27 2025
·
Week 5
·
🏟 Kelly/Shorts Stadium
Mount Pleasant, MI
·
Turf
·
32,885 cap
Eastern Michigan✈ 107 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Eastern Michigan,
while Game Control favors Central Michigan.
Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
Eastern Michigan wins
Lean
Game Control
67.1%
Central Michigan wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Central Michigan -3
O/U 55.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Central Michigan
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Eastern Michigan 2025 Schedule
Eastern Michigan's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Eastern Michigan at Texas State | +14.0L27–52 | 58.5 | L27–52 | O | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Eastern Michigan vs Long Island University | -22.5L23–28 | 54.5 | L23–28 | U | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Eastern Michigan at Kentucky | +26.5L23–48 | 49.5 | L23–48 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/20 | Eastern Michigan vs Louisiana | +2.5W34–31 | 51.5 | W34–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/27 | Eastern Michigan at Central Michigan | +3.0L13–24 | 55.5 | L13–24 | U | N |
| Sat 10/4 | Eastern Michigan at Buffalo | +9.5L30–31 | 53.5 | L30–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Eastern Michigan vs Northern Illinois | +1.5W16–10 | 48.5 | W16–10 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Eastern Michigan at Miami (OH) | +12.5L30–44 | 47.5 | L30–44 | O | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Eastern Michigan vs Ohio | +11.5L21–28 | 60.5 | L21–28 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/8 | Eastern Michigan vs Bowling Green | -3.0W27–21 | 49.5 | W27–21 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/15 | Eastern Michigan at Ball State | -2.5W24–9 | 48.5 | W24–9 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Tue 11/25 | Eastern Michigan vs Western Michigan | +10.0L21–31 | 49.0 | L21–31 | O | Y |
Central Michigan 2025 Schedule
Central Michigan's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 8/29 | Central Michigan at San José State | +11.5W16–14 | 50.5 | W16–14 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Central Michigan at Pittsburgh | +21.5L17–45 | 48.5 | L17–45 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Central Michigan at Michigan | +27.5L3–63 | 42.5 | L3–63 | O | N |
| Sat 9/20 | Central Michigan vs Wagner | -29.0W49–10 | 47.0 | W49–10 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/27 | Central Michigan vs Eastern Michigan | -3.0W24–13 | 55.5 | W24–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/4 | Central Michigan at Akron | -7.0L22–28 | 47.5 | L22–28 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/18 | Central Michigan at Bowling Green | +3.0W27–6 | 43.5 | W27–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Central Michigan vs Massachusetts | -16.5W38–13 | 46.5 | W38–13 | O | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Central Michigan at Western Michigan | +6.0L21–24 | 43.5 | L21–24 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Wed 11/12 | Central Michigan vs Buffalo | -2.5W38–19 | 44.5 | W38–19 | O | Y |
| Wed 11/19 | Central Michigan at Kent State | -7.5W28–16 | 50.5 | W28–16 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/29 | Central Michigan vs Toledo | +11.5L3–21 | 46.5 | L3–21 | U | N |
| Fri 12/26 | Central Michigan vs Northwestern | +13.5L7–34 | 43.5 | L7–34 | 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
→ Central Michigan
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Central Michigan
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Central Michigan
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?
Eastern Michigan Edge
Eastern Michigan +0.33
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 3 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Central Michigan Edge
Central Michigan +17.8
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 67.1% of games historically
Based on 4 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Central Michigan
1 — 0 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Central Michigan
90.3 — 6.2 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Central Michigan won by 11
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
Eastern Michigan
Chris Creighton #1
57–75 (43%)
· Yr 12 at school
OC
Mike Piatkowski
Yr 2
#1
DC
Ben Needham
Yr 2
#1
Central Michigan
Matt Drinkall #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Jim Chapin
Yr 1
#1
DC
Sean Cronin
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: 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 ✓