Vanderbilt at Kentucky Week 8 College Football Matchup Vanderbilt at Kentucky Matchup - Week 8
Sat, Oct 24 2026 · Week 8 · 🏟 Commonwealth Stadium Lexington, KY · Turf · 61,000 cap
Vanderbilt✈ 181 mi+1 hr TZ
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
Vanderbilt
30
Kentucky
26
P&R Line Vanderbilt -3.5
P&R Total O/U 55.5
Confidence 69 Good
Matchup Prediction
Vanderbilt has the edge in this matchup
Both Momentum Control (CSS) and Game Control metrics favor Vanderbilt entering this game.
Momentum Control
73.7%
Vanderbilt wins
Solid
Game Control
64.9%
Vanderbilt wins
Lean
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → Vanderbilt · 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
Vanderbilt 2026 Schedule
Vanderbilt's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5Vanderbilt vs Austin Peay-29
Sat 9/12Vanderbilt vs Delaware-16.5
Sat 9/19Vanderbilt vs NC State-4
Sat 9/26Vanderbilt at Auburn+4
Sat 10/3Vanderbilt at Georgia+22
Sat 10/10Vanderbilt vs Ole Miss+8
Sat 10/17Vanderbilt vs Arkansas-8
Sat 10/24Vanderbilt at Kentucky-3.5
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/7Vanderbilt at Mississippi State-3.5
Sat 11/14Vanderbilt vs Alabama+6.5
Sat 11/21Vanderbilt at Florida+2.5
Sat 11/28Vanderbilt vs Tennessee+5.5
Kentucky 2026 Schedule
Kentucky's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5Kentucky vs Youngstown State-24.5
Sat 9/12Kentucky vs Alabama+12.5
Sat 9/19Kentucky at Texas A&M+19
Sat 9/26Kentucky vs South Alabama-16
Sat 10/3Kentucky at South Carolina+7
Sat 10/10Kentucky vs LSU+12.5
Sat 10/17Kentucky at Oklahoma+20
Sat 10/24Kentucky vs Vanderbilt+3.5
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/7Kentucky at Tennessee+16.5
Sat 11/14Kentucky vs Florida+3.5
Sat 11/21Kentucky at Missouri+15
Sat 11/28Kentucky vs Louisville+8
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2025 season (prior year)
Vanderbilt PPA Edge
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ Vanderbilt
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ Vanderbilt
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ Vanderbilt
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Vanderbilt #1
+0.624
Kentucky #115
+0.280
Vanderbilt Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Vanderbilt #1
+0.854
Kentucky #101
+0.544
Vanderbilt Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Vanderbilt #39
0.171
Kentucky #93
0.147
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Vanderbilt Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Vanderbilt #3
+8.985
Kentucky #57
+7.743
Vanderbilt Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Vanderbilt #1
+0.956
Kentucky #81
+0.833
Vanderbilt Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Vanderbilt #54
70.5
Kentucky #53
70.4
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Kentucky 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
Vanderbilt Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Vanderbilt #51
3.7
Kentucky #71
0.2
Offense Rating
Vanderbilt #81
14.6
Kentucky #61
16.3
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Vanderbilt #29
10.9
Kentucky #77
16.1
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Vanderbilt Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Vanderbilt #12
2.08
Kentucky #80
0.91
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Vanderbilt #51
0.75
Kentucky #83
1.36
Vanderbilt +1.17
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 73.7% of games historically
Based on 2025 full season · preseason estimate
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? Vanderbilt Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Vanderbilt #32
51.8
Kentucky #68
40.1
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Vanderbilt #43
31.6
Kentucky #95
47.0
Vanderbilt +11.6
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 64.9% of games historically
Based on 2025 full season · preseason estimate
Coaching Matchup
Vanderbilt
Clark Lea #36
26–36 (42%) · Yr 6 at school
OC Tim Beck Yr 3 #22
DC Steve Gregory Yr 2 #99
Staff Rating
3.12 #39
Kentucky
Will Stein #77
0–0 (0%) · Yr 1 at school
OC Joe Sloan Yr 1 #115
DC Jay Bateman Yr 1 #38
Staff Rating
2.60 #77
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