Probetrics — Sports Analytics
College Football slate
Vanderbilt Commodores
1-0 · #11 Elo
at
Sat, Sep 26, 12:00 AM ET
Jordan-Hare Stadium
Auburn Tigers
1-0 · #59 Elo
Spread Total Moneyline

The read

On rating alone Vanderbilt Commodores are 13.4 points better (#11 vs #59 of 240), and AUB add 0.0 for home field. The clearest mismatch is the passing game: VAN passing ranks #1, AUB defends it at #80; the other way AUB #119 into VAN's #114.

Who has the edge

Rating
Clear edge
VAN
VAN rated 13.4 points better on Elo (#59 vs #11).
Home & rest
Even
AUB gets 0.0 points for home field.
Passing game
Clear edge
VAN
VAN passing ranks #1, AUB defends it at #80; the other way AUB #119 into VAN's #114.
context · not in the margin
Rushing game
Even
AUB rushing ranks #13, VAN defends it at #32; the other way VAN #1 into AUB's #2.
context · not in the margin
Third down & red zone
Even
AUB third-down conversion ranks #76, VAN defends it at #111; the other way VAN #6 into AUB's #34.
context · not in the margin
Form (last 5)
Clear edge
VAN
AUB +1.0 per game over the last five, VAN +19.0.
context · not in the margin
Market
not priced
No line yet.
context · not in the margin

The margin, factor by factor

Vanderbilt CommodoresAuburn Tigers
1807 Elo · #11
RatingThe Elo gap in points — the model's core read on who is better, before the situational pieces below.
VAN +13.4 pts
1566 Elo · #59
road
Home field
not priced
home
Rest
even
+0.6 pts vs AUB 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.
VAN +6.9 pts
−6.3 pts vs VAN D
W · +19.0
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.
VAN +9.0 pts
W · +1.0
MarketThe consensus spread, read as points. Compare with the model margin above it.
not priced

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

  • VAN pass success rate (#3) against a AUB defense ranked #99 at stopping it
  • AUB turnovers / game (#4) against a VAN defense ranked #89 at stopping it
  • VAN interception rate (#48) against a AUB defense ranked #132 at stopping it
  • VAN passing ppa / play (#1) against a AUB defense ranked #80 at stopping it
  • VAN completion % (#7) against a AUB defense ranked #77 at stopping it

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.

Vanderbilt Commodores offense vs Auburn Tigers defense

ranks of 135
VAN offAUB defEdge
Identity
Pass rate / Pass rate faced52%51%·
Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains).74%68%·
Plays / game5764·
Possession / game31:1830:34·
Passing
Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD).+0.55#1+0.27#80VAN
Pass success rate54%#344%#99VAN
Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are.1.54#741.57#80·
Yards / pass attempt9.3#47.2#73VAN
Completion %70%#762%#77VAN
Interception rate / Interceptions forced2.0%#481.0%#132VAN
Rushing
Rushing PPA / play+0.35#1−0.11#2·
Rush success rate50%#833%#5·
Rush explosiveness1.21#20.89#28·
Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed.3.37#92.25#4·
Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line.16%#2526%#5·
Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2.76%#3870%#58·
Yards / rush5.7#72.9#6·
Situational
Standard-down PPA+0.32#2−0.04#10·
Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+).+0.78#1+0.30#70VAN
Third-down conversion51%#635%#34VAN
Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40.5.00#33.37#42VAN
Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play.12.9%#2816.6%#51·
Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game0.92#191.42#48VAN

Auburn Tigers offense vs Vanderbilt Commodores defense

ranks of 135
AUB offVAN defEdge
Identity
Pass rate / Pass rate faced48%54%·
Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains).69%66%·
Plays / game6656·
Possession / game29:2628:42·
Passing
Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD).+0.13#119+0.35#114·
Pass success rate40%#8843%#91·
Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are.1.30#1331.56#75VAN
Yards / pass attempt6.5#1027.1#66VAN
Completion %61%#8167%#123AUB
Interception rate / Interceptions forced3.0%#841.7%#105·
Rushing
Rushing PPA / play+0.24#13+0.04#32·
Rush success rate47%#3040%#47·
Rush explosiveness1.00#540.93#53·
Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed.3.19#232.66#24·
Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line.15%#2022%#31·
Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2.80%#1872%#74AUB
Yards / rush4.7#433.7#30·
Situational
Standard-down PPA+0.15#47+0.11#78AUB
Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+).+0.21#104+0.38#108·
Third-down conversion39%#7643%#111AUB
Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40.3.90#503.90#90AUB
Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play.16.8%#10017.1%#39VAN
Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game0.67#41.15#89AUB

Season

VANAUB
1-0Record1-0
28.0Points for / game17.0
9.0Points against / game16.0
1-0 / 0-0Home / road1-0 / 0-0
0-1Against the spread0-1
0-1Over / underOvers–unders in this team's games. A tendency, not a lean.0-1
WLast 5W

Power ratings

VANAUB
1807Elo1566
#11 of 240Rank#59 of 240
+11.3Offense ratingPoints per game above league average scored, opponent-adjusted.+2.5
+8.8Defense ratingPoints per game below league average allowed, opponent-adjusted. Positive is good.+10.7
1477Strength of scheduleMean Elo of opponents faced this season.1520

Elo drives the winner call. Offense/defense ratings drive the total.

Advanced

VANAUB
+9.8SP+ (this season)Bill Connelly's SP+ rating, points above average.
0.440Offense PPA / playPredicted points added per play, garbage time excluded (CFBD).0.170
0.203Defense PPA / playPPA allowed per play — lower is better.0.069
52% / 42%Success rate (off / def)43% / 38%
1.39 / 1.31Explosiveness (off / def)1.14 / 1.29
727Talent composite247Sports team talent composite for the current roster.
35%Returning production

Advanced stats are from 2025 until this season has about three games. Source: CollegeFootballData.

Head to head

2025AUB 38 at VAN 45VAN · VAN covered
2024VAN 17 at AUB 7VAN · VAN covered
2023AUB 31 at VAN 15AUB · AUB covered

How the margin was built

Rating gap
VAN +13.4 pts
Home field
AUB +— pts
Rest
Even
Weather / roof
— pts on the total
Model margin
Model total

Market

Spread
Total
Moneyline

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.