Tulsa at Navy Week 6 College Football Matchup Tulsa at Navy Matchup - Week 6
Sat, Oct 10 2026 · Week 6 · 🏟 Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium Annapolis, MD · Turf · 34,000 cap
Tulsa✈ 1,080 mi+1 hr TZ
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
Tulsa
23
Navy
32
P&R Line Navy -9.5
P&R Total O/U 55
Confidence 63 Moderate
Matchup Prediction
Metrics disagree on this matchup
Momentum Control favors Tulsa, while Game Control favors Navy. Split signals historically show weaker predictive confidence — treat as a toss-up.
⚡ Split Signal — Metrics Disagree
Momentum Control
61.3%
Tulsa wins
Lean
Game Control
67.1%
Navy wins
Solid
Advanced Stats
PPA + Success Rate agree → Navy · 73.9% ATS historically
↓ See full breakdown
Tulsa 2026 Schedule
Tulsa's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5Tulsa vs Oklahoma State+7
Sat 9/12Tulsa at Sam Houston-16.5
Sat 9/19Tulsa vs East Texas A&M-19
Sat 9/26Tulsa at Arkansas+8.5
Thu 10/1Tulsa vs North Texas+8.5
Sat 10/10Tulsa at Navy+9.5
Sat 10/17Tulsa at Rice-9
Fri 10/23Tulsa vs Army+2
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/7Tulsa at Tulane+10.5
Sat 11/14Tulsa vs Florida Atlantic-5.5
Sat 11/21Tulsa vs Charlotte-20
Sat 11/28Tulsa at UTSA+9.5
Navy 2026 Schedule
Navy's 2026 Schedule
DateMatchupSpreadTotalResultO/UCover
Sat 9/5Navy vs Towson-25.5
Sat 9/12Navy at Florida Atlantic-7.5
— Bye Week —
Fri 9/25Navy at UAB-15.5
Sat 10/3Navy at Air Force-5.5
Sat 10/10Navy vs Tulsa-9.5
Sat 10/17Navy at UTSA+2.5
Sat 10/24Navy vs North Texas+1.5
Sat 10/31Navy at Notre Dame+26.5
Sat 11/7Navy vs Temple-9
— Bye Week —
Sat 11/21Navy vs Memphis+0.5
Sat 11/28Navy at Charlotte-22
Advanced Stats
Advanced Analytics Matchup
Matchup-adjusted (offense vs opponent defense) · 2025 season (prior year)
Navy 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
Both Agree
→ Navy
Individual Factors — Ranked by Predictive Strength
PPA Overall
Points added per play · Elite predictor
Tulsa #105
+0.323
Navy #16
+0.446
Navy Edge
PPA Passing
Pass efficiency edge · Strong predictor
Tulsa #114
+0.525
Navy #9
+0.742
Navy Edge
Havoc Total
Def. disruption rate · Strong predictor
Tulsa #121
0.127
Navy #124
0.125
TFLs, sacks, PBUs, forced fumbles — higher is better
Tulsa Edge
Points Per Opp
Drive-finishing edge · Strong predictor
Tulsa #106
+7.542
Navy #28
+8.004
Navy Edge
Success Rate
Play consistency edge · Solid predictor
Tulsa #97
+0.811
Navy #9
+0.915
Navy Edge
Field Position
Avg start (lower=better) · Solid predictor
Tulsa #115
72.6
Navy #17
68.3
Avg yards from own endzone to average start — lower is better · longer bar = better field position
Navy 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
Tulsa Rated Higher
Overall Power Rating
Tulsa #65
0.7
Navy #81
-1.9
Offense Rating
Tulsa #54
16.9
Navy #71
15.5
Defense Rating (lower = better defense)
Tulsa #79
16.1
Navy #96
17.3
Power ratings updated throughout the season as results accumulate
Momentum Control (CSS)
Consecutive Scoring Sequences Who builds scoring momentum? Tulsa Edge
Avg sequences created per game
Tulsa #57
0.91
Navy #76
0.83
Avg sequences allowed per game (lower is better)
Tulsa #42
0.82
Navy #87
0.83
Tulsa +0.08
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? Navy Edge
Avg GC score per game (offense)
Tulsa #79
35.0
Navy #41
53.1
Avg GC score allowed per game (lower is better)
Tulsa #103
49.9
Navy #44
31.9
Navy +18.1
GC Edge (season-to-date)
Teams with this edge win 67.1% of games historically
Based on 2025 full season · preseason estimate
Coaching Matchup
Tulsa
Tre Lamb #113
4–8 (33%) · Yr 2 at school
OC Ty Darlington Yr 2 #127
DC Mike Gray Yr 2 #97
Staff Rating
2.10 #120
Navy
Brian Newberry #39
26–12 (68%) · Yr 4 at school
OC Drew Cronic Yr 3 #26
DC Vacant Yr 1 #59
Staff Rating
3.16 #36
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