Fri, Jan 2 2026
·
Postseason
·
Neutral Site
·
🏟 Liberty Bowl Memorial Stadium
Memphis, TN
·
Turf
·
62,380 cap
Navy✈ 788 mi-1 hr TZ
Cincinnati✈ 408 mi-1 hr TZ
Matchup Prediction
Cincinnati
has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor
Cincinnati entering this game.
Momentum Control
58.4%
Cincinnati wins
Lean
Game Control
50.6%
Cincinnati wins
Toss-up
Vegas Spread
Navy -7.5
O/U 57.5
Draft Kings
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Navy
· 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Navy 2025 Schedule
Navy's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 8/30 | Navy vs VMI | -42.5W52–7 | 54.5 | W52–7 | O | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Navy vs UAB | -20.5W38–24 | 59.0 | W38–24 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Navy at Tulsa | -14.0W42–23 | 52.5 | W42–23 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Navy vs Rice | -14.0W21–13 | 45.5 | W21–13 | U | N |
| Sat 10/4 | Navy vs Air Force | -13.5W34–31 | 50.5 | W34–31 | O | N |
| Sat 10/11 | Navy at Temple | -10.0W32–31 | 52.5 | W32–31 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 10/25 | Navy vs Florida Atlantic | -14.5W42–32 | 63.5 | W42–32 | O | N |
| Sat 11/1 | Navy at North Texas | +6.5L17–31 | 68.5 | L17–31 | U | N |
| Sat 11/8 | Navy at Notre Dame | +30.5L10–49 | 54.5 | L10–49 | O | N |
| Sat 11/15 | Navy vs South Florida | +8.5W41–38 | 62.5 | W41–38 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Thu 11/27 | Navy at Memphis | +3.5W28–17 | 57.5 | W28–17 | U | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 12/13 | Navy vs Army | -6.0W17–16 | 38.0 | W17–16 | U | N |
| Fri 1/2 | Navy vs Cincinnati | -7.5W35–13 | 57.5 | W35–13 | U | Y |
Cincinnati 2025 Schedule
Cincinnati's 2025 Schedule
| Date | Matchup | Spread | Total | Result | O/U | Cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 8/28 | Cincinnati vs Nebraska | +6.5L17–20 | 52.5 | L17–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 9/6 | Cincinnati vs Bowling Green | -21.5W34–20 | 46.5 | W34–20 | O | N |
| Sat 9/13 | Cincinnati vs Northwestern State | -48.5W70–0 | 55.5 | W70–0 | O | Y |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 9/27 | Cincinnati at Kansas | +5.5W37–34 | 55.5 | W37–34 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/4 | Cincinnati vs Iowa State | -1.5W38–30 | 55.5 | W38–30 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/11 | Cincinnati vs UCF | -10.0W20–11 | 55.5 | W20–11 | U | N |
| Sat 10/18 | Cincinnati at Oklahoma State | -23.5W49–17 | 57.5 | W49–17 | O | Y |
| Sat 10/25 | Cincinnati vs Baylor | -3.5W41–20 | 68.5 | W41–20 | U | Y |
| Sat 11/1 | Cincinnati at Utah | +11.5L14–45 | 57.5 | L14–45 | O | N |
| — Bye Week — | ||||||
| Sat 11/15 | Cincinnati vs Arizona | -6.5L24–30 | 56.5 | L24–30 | U | N |
| Sat 11/22 | Cincinnati vs BYU | +2.5L14–26 | 56.5 | L14–26 | U | N |
| Sat 11/29 | Cincinnati at TCU | +3.0L23–45 | 58.5 | L23–45 | O | N |
| Fri 1/2 | Cincinnati vs Navy | +7.5L13–35 | 57.5 | L13–35 | 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
→ Navy
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?
Cincinnati Edge
Cincinnati +0.09
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 11 games this season
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance
Who controls games start to finish?
Cincinnati Edge
Cincinnati +3.2
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 50.6% of games historically
Based on 12 games this season
Actual Result
CSS Battle
Tie
1 — 1 sequences
✗ Predicted incorrectly
GC Battle
Navy
11.0 — 67.6 GC score
✗ Predicted incorrectly
Game Result
Navy won by 22
✗ Model missed it
Spread Context
ATS Historical Context
Based on 2021–2025 backtest · FBS vs FBS · Regular season
Both metrics agree on Cincinnati, but the GC edge is small. When metrics agree but GC is near-neutral, the agreed-upon team has covered only 46.7% of the time historically (n=224) — potentially a fade signal.
ATS data is informational only. Past cover rates do not guarantee future results.
Coaching Matchup
Navy
Brian Newberry #1
14–10 (58%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Drew Cronic
Yr 2
#1
DC
P.J. Volker
Yr 3
#1
Cincinnati
Scott Satterfield #1
8–16 (33%)
· Yr 3 at school
OC
Brad Glenn
Yr 3
#1
DC
Tyson Veidt
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 ✓