Sat, Nov 1 2025
·
Week 10
·
🏟 Waldo Stadium
Kalamazoo, MI
·
Turf
·
30,200 cap
Central Michigan✈ 98 miSame TZ
Matchup Prediction
Central Michigan
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Central Michigan entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
Central Michigan wins
Lean
Game Control
64.9%
Central Michigan wins
Lean
Vegas Spread
Western Michigan -6
O/U 43.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
Advanced factors are split · No strong agreement signal
↓ See full breakdown
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 |
Western Michigan 2025 Schedule
Western Michigan's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 8/29 | Western Michigan at Michigan State | +18.5L6–23 | 49.5 | L6–23 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Western Michigan vs North Texas | +12.0L30–33 | 56.0 | L30–33 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Western Michigan at Illinois | +27.5L0–38 | 50.5 | L0–38 | U | N |
| Sat 9/20 | Western Michigan vs Toledo | +13.5W14–13 | 48.5 | W14–13 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/27 | Western Michigan vs Rhode Island | -7.5W47–14 | 45.5 | W47–14 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/4 | Western Michigan at Massachusetts | -12.5W21–3 | 46.5 | W21–3 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Western Michigan vs Ball State | -9.5W42–0 | 43.5 | W42–0 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/25 | Western Michigan at Miami (OH) | +2.5L17–26 | 40.5 | L17–26 | O | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Western Michigan vs Central Michigan | -6.0W24–21 | 43.5 | W24–21 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Tue 11/11 | Western Michigan vs Ohio | -1.5W17–13 | 46.5 | W17–13 | U | Y |
| Tue 11/18 | Western Michigan at Northern Illinois | -7.0W35–19 | 39.5 | W35–19 | O | Y |
| Tue 11/25 | Western Michigan at Eastern Michigan | -10.0W31–21 | 49.0 | W31–21 | O | N |
| Sat 12/6 | Western Michigan vs Miami (OH) | -2.5W23–13 | 44.5 | W23–13 | U | Y |
| Fri 12/19 | Western Michigan vs Kennesaw State | -3.0W41–6 | 47.0 | W41–6 | 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
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
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?
Central Michigan Edge
Central Michigan +0.71
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 7 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Central Michigan Edge
Central Michigan +11.5
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 8 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Western Michigan
1 — 0 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Central Michigan
20.4 — 49.8 GC score
✓ Predicted correctly
Game Result
Western Michigan won by 3
✗ Model missed it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Central Michigan. 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
Central Michigan
Matt Drinkall #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Jim Chapin
Yr 1
#1
DC
Sean Cronin
Yr 1
#1
Western Michigan
Lance Taylor #1
10–14 (42%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Walt Bell
Yr 2
#1
DC
Chris O'Leary
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 ✓