Wed, Nov 19 2025
·
Week 13
·
🏟 Dix Stadium
Kent, OH
·
Turf
·
25,000 cap
Central Michigan✈ 244 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
75.9%
Central Michigan wins
Solid
Vegas Spread
Central Michigan -7.5
O/U 50.5
DraftKings
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Central Michigan
· 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ 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 |
Kent State 2025 Schedule
Kent State's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Kent State vs Merrimack | -5.5W21–17 | 50.5 | W21–17 | U | N |
| Sat 9/6 | Kent State at Texas Tech | +48.5L14–62 | 60.0 | L14–62 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/13 | Kent State vs Buffalo | +23.5L28–31 | 48.5 | L28–31 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/20 | Kent State at Florida State | +44.5L10–66 | 56.5 | L10–66 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/4 | Kent State at Oklahoma | +46.5L0–44 | 53.5 | L0–44 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Kent State vs Massachusetts | -1.5W42–6 | 49.5 | W42–6 | U | Y |
| Sat 10/18 | Kent State at Toledo | +25.5L10–45 | 48.5 | L10–45 | O | N |
| Sat 10/25 | Kent State vs Bowling Green | +7.5W24–21 | 47.5 | W24–21 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Wed 11/5 | Kent State at Ball State | +3.0L13–17 | 48.5 | L13–17 | U | N |
| Tue 11/11 | Kent State at Akron | +7.5W42–35 | 49.5 | W42–35 | O | Y |
| Wed 11/19 | Kent State vs Central Michigan | +7.5L16–28 | 50.5 | L16–28 | U | N |
| Fri 11/28 | Kent State at Northern Illinois | +5.0W35–31 | 45.0 | W35–31 | O | 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
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?
Central Michigan +0.00
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 9 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Central Michigan Edge
Central Michigan +20.6
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 75.9% of games historically
Based on 10 games this season
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
Central Michigan
Matt Drinkall #1
0–0 (0%)
· Yr 1 at school
OC
Jim Chapin
Yr 1
#1
DC
Sean Cronin
Yr 1
#1
Kent State
Kenni Burns #1
1–23 (4%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Mark Carney
Yr 2
#1
DC
Kody Morgan
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 ✓