UL Monroe at UAB Week 2 College Football Matchup UL Monroe at UAB Matchup - Week 2
Sat, Sep 12 2026 · Week 2 · 🏟 Protective Stadium Birmingham, AL · Turf · 47,100 cap
UL Monroe✈ 312 miSame TZ
VS
UAB
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
UL Monroe
25
UAB
31
P&R Line UAB -6
P&R Total O/U 56.5
Confidence 69 Good
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors UAB, while Game Control favors UL Monroe. Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
58.4%
UAB wins
Lean
Game Control
49.4%
UL Monroe wins
Toss-up
Advanced Stats
All 4 factors agree → UL Monroe · 83.1% ATS historically when all four align
↓ See full breakdown
🚌 UL Monroe 2nd straight Road Game
UL Monroe 2026 Schedule
UL Monroe's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5UL Monroe at Mississippi State+23
Sat 9/12UL Monroe at UAB+6
— Bye Week —
Sat 9/26UL Monroe vs Florida Atlantic+9.5
UAB 2026 Schedule
UAB's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5UAB at Illinois+28.5
Sat 9/12UAB vs UL Monroe-6
Sat 9/19UAB at Louisiana+11.5
Fri 9/25UAB vs Navy+15.5
Sat 10/3UAB vs Samford-7.5
Sat 10/10UAB at Memphis+24
Thu 10/15UAB vs East Carolina+18
— Bye Week —
Sat 10/31UAB at South Florida+25
Sat 11/7UAB vs Charlotte-9
Sat 11/14UAB at Temple+14
Sat 11/21UAB vs UTSA+15.5
Sat 11/28UAB at North Texas+24.5
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2025 season (prior year)
UL Monroe PPA Edge
Agreement Signals — When All Metrics Agree
Elite · 83.1% ATS
PPA + PPO + SR + Havoc
All 4 Agree
→ UL Monroe
Elite · 82.4% ATS
PPA + PPO + Havoc
3 Agree
→ UL Monroe
Elite · 73.9% ATS
PPA + Success Rate
Both Agree
→ UL Monroe
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
UL Monroe #114
+0.422
UAB #52
+0.378
UL Monroe Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
UL Monroe #91
+0.730
UAB #59
+0.584
UL Monroe Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
UL Monroe #100
0.144
UAB #130
0.120
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
UL Monroe Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
UL Monroe #119
+7.895
UAB #76
+7.836
UL Monroe Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
UL Monroe #125
+0.854
UAB #65
+0.833
UL Monroe Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
UL Monroe #124
73.2
UAB #75
71.1
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
UAB 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
UAB Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
UL Monroe #129
-17.8
UAB #124
-16.1
Offense Rating
UL Monroe #121
8.3
UAB #127
7.3
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
UL Monroe #133
26.1
UAB #125
23.4
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? UAB Edge
Avg sequences created per game
UL Monroe #129
0.36
UAB #95
0.55
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
UL Monroe #136
2.64
UAB #123
1.82
UAB +0.18
CSS Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 58.4% of games historically
Based on 2025 full season · preseason estimate
Game Control (GC)
Win Probability Dominance Who controls games start to finish? UL Monroe Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
UL Monroe #132
28.5
UAB #114
25.6
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
UL Monroe #126
59.8
UAB #123
58.7
UL Monroe +2.8
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 49.4% of games historically
Based on 2025 full season · preseason estimate
Coaching Matchup
UL Monroe
Bryant Vincent #133
8–16 (33%) · Yr 3 at school
OC Bryant Vincent Yr 3 #120
DC Earnest Hill Yr 3 #128
Staff Rating
1.68 #134
UAB
Alex Mortensen #77
2–4 (33%) · Yr 2 at school
OC Alex Mortensen Yr 3 #67
DC Todd Grantham Yr 1 #132
Staff Rating
2.16 #116
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