← College Football slate
SMU Mustangs
9-4 last yr · #22 Elo
at
Sat, Sep 19, 3:30 PM ET
L&N Federal Credit Union Stadium
Louisville Cardinals
9-4 last yr · #25 Elo
Spread LOU -1.5Total 56.5Moneyline SMU -105 · LOU -115
The read
On rating alone SMU Mustangs are 1.3 points better (#22 vs #25 of 240), and LOU add 0.0 for home field. The clearest mismatch is the passing game: SMU passing ranks #23, LOU defends it at #6; the other way LOU #118 into SMU's #42.
Who has the edge
Rating
Slight edge
SMU
SMU rated 1.3 points better on Elo (#25 vs #22).
Home & rest
Even
—
LOU gets 0.0 points for home field.
Passing game
Slight edge
SMU
SMU passing ranks #23, LOU defends it at #6; the other way LOU #118 into SMU's #42.
context · not in the margin
Rushing game
Even
—
LOU rushing ranks #21, SMU defends it at #5; the other way SMU #70 into LOU's #51.
context · not in the margin
Third down & red zone
Slight edge
SMU
SMU third-down conversion ranks #56, LOU defends it at #19; the other way LOU #105 into SMU's #44.
context · not in the margin
Form (last 5)
Clear edge
SMU
LOU +2.0 per game over the last five, SMU +14.4.
context · not in the margin
Market
Slight edge
LOU
Consensus has LOU by 1.5.
context · not in the margin
The margin, factor by factor
SMU MustangsLouisville Cardinals
1714 Elo · #22
RatingThe Elo gap in points — the model's core read on who is better, before the situational pieces below.
SMU +1.3 pts
1691 Elo · #25
road
Home field
not priced
home
—
Rest
even
—
−1.6 pts vs LOU D
Offense vs defenseEach offense's scoring rating against the other defense's — what drives the model total. Shown as an edge, though the winner call runs on Elo.
SMU +2.3 pts
−3.9 pts vs SMU D
W L W W W · +14.4
Form (last 5)Average margin over the last five games. Already inside the ratings — listed so you can see when recent form and the rating disagree.
SMU +6.2 pts
W W L L L · +2.0
+13.4
SP+ (last season)Bill Connelly's SP+ from last season, the prior the college model starts each season from.
SMU +1.0 pts
+12.4
SMU +1.5
MarketThe consensus spread, read as points. Compare with the model margin above it.
LOU +1.5 pts
LOU -1.5
Bars are in points toward the favored side. Blue factors are inside the model's margin; grey ones are context it does not add on top (form and offense/defense are already in the ratings; injuries beyond the quarterback are not priced).
Dissect the matchup
CollegeFootballData, garbage time excluded · 2025 season (last season until three games are in)Biggest mismatches
- ▸SMU defense (#8 power success allowed) against a LOU offense ranked #107
- ▸SMU defense (#23 stuff rate forced) against a LOU offense ranked #121
- ▸SMU defense (#33 pass explosiveness allowed) against a LOU offense ranked #130
- ▸SMU power success (#19) against a LOU defense ranked #99 at stopping it
- ▸LOU defense (#15 rush success rate allowed) against a SMU offense ranked #92
A mismatch is a rank gap of at least a fifth of the league between an offense and the defense it faces on the same measure. Descriptive rows (pass rate, pace, direction) are shown for reading the game, not ranked. ▲▼ mark where the last three games sit clearly above or below the season number, in the direction that helps that side.
SMU Mustangs offense vs Louisville Cardinals defense
ranks of 135| SMU off | LOU def | Edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identity | |||
| Pass rate / Pass rate faced | 55% | 53% | · |
| Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains). | 68% | 66% | · |
| Plays / game | 64 | 61 | · |
| Possession / game | 26:53 | 29:48 | · |
| Passing | |||
| Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD). | +0.40#23 | +0.06#6 | · |
| Pass success rate | 44%#39 | 37%#19 | · |
| Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are. | 1.61#37 | 1.36#7 | LOU |
| Yards / pass attempt | 8.0#35 | 6.0#10 | · |
| Completion % | 66%#26 | 59%#33 | · |
| Interception rate / Interceptions forced | 3.9%#120 | 2.2%#84 | LOU |
| Rushing | |||
| Rushing PPA / play | +0.11#70 | +0.07#51 | · |
| Rush success rate | 42%#92 | 38%#15 | LOU |
| Rush explosiveness | 1.00#56 | 0.95#62 | · |
| Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed. | 2.90#74 | 2.74#41 | LOU |
| Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line. | 19%#81 | 20%#52 | LOU |
| Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2. | 79%#19 | 75%#99 | SMU |
| Yards / rush | 4.4#71 | 3.5#21 | LOU |
| Situational | |||
| Standard-down PPA | +0.16#46 | +0.02#27 | · |
| Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+). | +0.39#37 | +0.11#9 | LOU |
| Third-down conversion | 41%#56 | 33%#19 | LOU |
| Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40. | 3.89#52 | 3.38#43 | · |
| Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play. | 16.8%#99 | 17.3%#35 | LOU |
| Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game | 1.46#94 | 1.54#38 | LOU |
Louisville Cardinals offense vs SMU Mustangs defense
ranks of 135| LOU off | SMU def | Edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identity | |||
| Pass rate / Pass rate faced | 53% | 55% | · |
| Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains). | 72% | 68% | · |
| Plays / game | 60 | 70 | · |
| Possession / game | 30:12 | 33:07 | · |
| Passing | |||
| Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD). | +0.13#118 | +0.19#42 | SMU |
| Pass success rate | 41%#73 | 43%#90 | · |
| Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are. | 1.36#130 | 1.46#33 | SMU |
| Yards / pass attempt | 6.9#85 | 7.1#62 | · |
| Completion % | 64%#45 | 61%#58 | · |
| Interception rate / Interceptions forced | 3.3%#98 | 2.5%#60 | SMU |
| Rushing | |||
| Rushing PPA / play | +0.21#21 | −0.08#5 | · |
| Rush success rate | 50%#9 | 38%#18 | · |
| Rush explosiveness | 1.08#28 | 0.78#4 | · |
| Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed. | 2.75#104 | 2.76#46 | SMU |
| Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line. | 23%#121 | 22%#23 | SMU |
| Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2. | 65%#107 | 59%#8 | SMU |
| Yards / rush | 5.1#26 | 3.2#14 | · |
| Situational | |||
| Standard-down PPA | +0.15#49 | −0.09#5 | SMU |
| Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+). | +0.14#123 | +0.29#68 | SMU |
| Third-down conversion | 35%#105 | 36%#44 | SMU |
| Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40. | 3.62#76 | 2.79#12 | SMU |
| Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play. | 16.6%#93 | 18.8%#16 | SMU |
| Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game | 1.31#78 | 2.15#5 | SMU |
Season
| SMU | LOU | |
|---|---|---|
| 9-4 | Record | 9-4 |
| 32.2 | Points for / game | 29.9 |
| 20.5 | Points against / game | 21.2 |
| 6-1 / 3-3 | Home / road | 6-3 / 3-1 |
| 6-7 | Against the spread | 4-9 |
| 4-9 | Over / underOvers–unders in this team's games. A tendency, not a lean. | 6-7 |
| W L W W W | Last 5 | W W L L L |
Season numbers are from 2025 until this season has games.
Power ratings
| SMU | LOU | |
|---|---|---|
| 1714 | Elo | 1691 |
| #22 of 240 | Rank | #25 of 240 |
| +7.2 | Offense ratingPoints per game above league average scored, opponent-adjusted. | +5.2 |
| +9.1 | Defense ratingPoints per game below league average allowed, opponent-adjusted. Positive is good. | +8.8 |
| — | Strength of scheduleMean Elo of opponents faced this season. | — |
Elo drives the winner call. Offense/defense ratings drive the total.
Advanced
| SMU | LOU | |
|---|---|---|
| +12.1 | SP+ (this season)Bill Connelly's SP+ rating, points above average. | +11.1 |
| 0.231 | Offense PPA / playPredicted points added per play, garbage time excluded (CFBD). | 0.150 |
| 0.030 | Defense PPA / playPPA allowed per play — lower is better. | 0.053 |
| 43% / 40% | Success rate (off / def) | 45% / 37% |
| 1.36 / 1.18 | Explosiveness (off / def) | 1.22 / 1.18 |
| 765 | Talent composite247Sports team talent composite for the current roster. | 740 |
| 57% | Returning production | 35% |
Advanced stats are from 2025 until this season has about three games. Source: CollegeFootballData.
Head to head
| 2025 | LOU 6 at SMU 38 | SMU · SMU covered |
| 2024 | SMU 34 at LOU 27 | SMU · SMU covered |
How the margin was built
- Rating gap
- SMU +1.3 pts
- Home field
- LOU +— pts
- Rest
- Even
- Weather / roof
- — pts on the total
- Model margin
- —
- Model total
- —
Market
- Spread
- LOU -1.5
- Total
- 56.5
- Moneyline
- SMU -105 · LOU -115
Per-book prices appear once the multi-book feed has this game (about a week out).
Informational only. Winner probabilities are backtested and calibrated; spread and total calls are tracked leans. 21+, 1-800-GAMBLER.