UTSA at Texas Week 3 College Football Matchup UTSA at Texas Matchup - Week 3
Sat, Sep 19 2026 · Week 3 · 🏟 Darrell K Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium Austin, TX · Turf · 100,119 cap
Away
VS
Home
Preseason projection — This game has not yet been played and 2026 in-season data is not yet available. Edges are based on 2025 full-season performance. Confidence will increase once in-season games are logged.
📊 Punt & Rally Projection
UTSA
15
Texas
43
P&R Line Texas -28.5
P&R Total O/U 57.5
Confidence 55 Early Season
Matchup Prediction
UTSA has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor UTSA entering this game.
Momentum Control
61.3%
UTSA wins
Lean
Game Control
58.3%
UTSA wins
Lean
Advanced Stats
Advanced factors are split · No strong agreement signal
↓ See full breakdown
🏠 Texas 3rd straight Home Game 🚌 UTSA 2nd straight Road Game
UTSA 2026 Schedule
UTSA's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5UTSA vs UT Rio Grande Valley-22.5
Sat 9/12UTSA at Texas State+1
Sat 9/19UTSA at Texas+28.5
Sat 9/26UTSA vs Colorado State-10.5
Sat 10/3UTSA at Rice-12.5
Thu 10/8UTSA vs South Florida-2
Sat 10/17UTSA vs Navy-2
Sat 10/24UTSA at Tulane+0.5
— Bye Week —
Thu 11/5UTSA at Florida Atlantic-3.5
Sat 11/14UTSA vs North Texas-9
Sat 11/21UTSA at UAB-14
Sat 11/28UTSA vs Tulsa-5
Texas 2026 Schedule
Texas's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5Texas vs Texas State-29
Sat 9/12Texas vs Ohio State+1.5
Sat 9/19Texas vs UTSA-28.5
Sat 9/26Texas at Tennessee-8
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/10Texas at Oklahoma-5
Sat 10/17Texas vs Florida-15
Sat 10/24Texas vs Ole Miss-12
Sat 10/31Texas vs Mississippi State-27
Sat 11/7Texas at Missouri-9.5
Sat 11/14Texas at LSU-4.5
Sat 11/21Texas vs Arkansas-26
Fri 11/27Texas at Texas A&M-5.5
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2025 season (prior year)
Texas 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
UTSA #31
+0.335
Texas #66
+0.360
Texas Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
UTSA #43
+0.531
Texas #50
+0.577
Texas Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
UTSA #18
0.185
Texas #24
0.179
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
UTSA Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
UTSA #27
+7.992
Texas #88
+7.718
UTSA Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
UTSA #35
+0.849
Texas #96
+0.800
UTSA Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
UTSA #15
68.2
Texas #20
68.7
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
UTSA Edge
Advanced stats sourced from CFBD · 2025 season (prior year — 2026 data not yet available) · Edges are matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense)
Power Ratings
Team Power Ratings
Overall · Offense · Defense ratings · Updated as season progresses
Texas Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
UTSA #72
-0.2
Texas #4
27.1
Offense Rating
UTSA #59
16.4
Texas #2
29.5
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
UTSA #82
16.6
Texas #6
2.4
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? UTSA Edge
Avg sequences created per game
UTSA #20
1.58
Texas #35
1.54
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
UTSA #84
1.17
Texas #29
0.62
UTSA +0.05
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 61.3% of games historically
Based on 2025 full season · preseason estimate
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? UTSA Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
UTSA #80
55.7
Texas #25
51.7
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
UTSA #47
33.2
Texas #41
31.3
UTSA +4.0
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.3% of games historically
Based on 2025 full season · preseason estimate
Coaching Matchup
UTSA
Jeff Traylor #55
53–26 (67%) · Yr 7 at school
OC Rick Bowie Yr 1 #67
DC Jess Loepp Yr 3 #122
Staff Rating
2.48 #93
Texas
Steve Sarkisian #7
46–20 (69%) · Yr 6 at school
OC Kyle Flood Yr 3 #5
DC Will Muschamp Yr 1 #45
Staff Rating
3.95 #6
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