Probetrics — Sports Analytics
College Football slate
Charlotte 49ers
0-1 · #238 Elo
at
Sat, Nov 7, 12:00 AM ET
Protective Stadium
UAB Blazers
0-1 · #180 Elo
Spread Total Moneyline

The read

On rating alone UAB Blazers are 14.5 points better (#180 vs #238 of 240), and UAB add 0.0 for home field. The clearest mismatch is the rushing game: UAB rushing ranks #42, CLT defends it at #128; the other way CLT #135 into UAB's #126.

Who has the edge

Rating
Clear edge
UAB
UAB rated 14.5 points better on Elo (#180 vs #238).
Home & rest
Even
UAB gets 0.0 points for home field.
Passing game
Slight edge
UAB
UAB passing ranks #59, CLT defends it at #111; the other way CLT #117 into UAB's #135.
context · not in the margin
Rushing game
Clear edge
UAB
UAB rushing ranks #42, CLT defends it at #128; the other way CLT #135 into UAB's #126.
context · not in the margin
Third down & red zone
Slight edge
UAB
UAB third-down conversion ranks #20, CLT defends it at #115; the other way CLT #111 into UAB's #133.
context · not in the margin
Form (last 5)
Clear edge
CLT
UAB −19.0 per game over the last five, CLT −2.0.
context · not in the margin
Market
not priced
No line yet.
context · not in the margin

The margin, factor by factor

Charlotte 49ersUAB Blazers
1123 Elo · #238
RatingThe Elo gap in points — the model's core read on who is better, before the situational pieces below.
UAB +14.5 pts
1384 Elo · #180
road
Home field
not priced
home
Rest
even
−1.1 pts vs UAB 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.
UAB +4.5 pts
+3.4 pts vs CLT D
L · −2.0
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.
CLT +8.5 pts
L · −19.0
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

  • CLT pass explosiveness (#10) against a UAB defense ranked #134 at stopping it
  • UAB completion % (#34) against a CLT defense ranked #130 at stopping it
  • UAB third-down conversion (#20) against a CLT defense ranked #115 at stopping it
  • UAB defense (#41 rush explosiveness allowed) against a CLT offense ranked #135
  • UAB line yards / rush (#36) against a CLT defense ranked #129 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.

Charlotte 49ers offense vs UAB Blazers defense

ranks of 135
CLT offUAB defEdge
Identity
Pass rate / Pass rate faced54%38%·
Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains).65%73%·
Plays / game5257·
Possession / game28:0728:41·
Passing
Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD).+0.13#117+0.52#135·
Pass success rate35%#12248%#124·
Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are.1.75#101.94#134CLT
Yards / pass attempt6.5#1079.7#135CLT
Completion %59%#9566%#117·
Interception rate / Interceptions forced1.8%#415.6%#1UAB
Rushing
Rushing PPA / play−0.15#135+0.22#126·
Rush success rate34%#13350%#130·
Rush explosiveness0.66#1350.91#41UAB
Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed.2.13#1343.35#130·
Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line.24%#12614%#129·
Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2.61%#12483%#129·
Yards / rush2.7#1334.7#98UAB
Situational
Standard-down PPA−0.09#134+0.31#135·
Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+).+0.12#128+0.41#115·
Third-down conversion35%#11148%#133·
Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40.2.73#1304.71#134·
Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play.18.5%#12012.0%#130·
Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game1.92#1280.75#127·

UAB Blazers offense vs Charlotte 49ers defense

ranks of 135
UAB offCLT defEdge
Identity
Pass rate / Pass rate faced53%47%·
Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains).69%76%·
Plays / game6164·
Possession / game31:1931:53·
Passing
Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD).+0.27#59+0.34#111UAB
Pass success rate42%#6153%#134UAB
Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are.1.54#721.34#4CLT
Yards / pass attempt7.3#648.1#117UAB
Completion %66%#3468%#130UAB
Interception rate / Interceptions forced0.9%#63.2%#33UAB
Rushing
Rushing PPA / play+0.17#42+0.22#128UAB
Rush success rate44%#6155%#135UAB
Rush explosiveness1.09#240.86#19·
Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed.3.12#363.33#129UAB
Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line.18%#5314%#131UAB
Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2.71%#7981%#123UAB
Yards / rush4.2#845.0#119UAB
Situational
Standard-down PPA+0.12#62+0.21#124UAB
Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+).+0.36#48+0.42#119UAB
Third-down conversion46%#2044%#115UAB
Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40.3.63#754.16#114UAB
Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play.15.3%#6610.6%#133UAB
Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game1.75#1201.25#68CLT

Season

CLTUAB
0-1Record0-1
41.0Points for / game23.0
43.0Points against / game42.0
0-1 / 0-0Home / road0-0 / 0-1
0-1Against the spread1-0
1-0Over / underOvers–unders in this team's games. A tendency, not a lean.1-0
LLast 5L

Power ratings

CLTUAB
1123Elo1384
#238 of 240Rank#180 of 240
−5.0Offense ratingPoints per game above league average scored, opponent-adjusted.−0.8
−4.2Defense ratingPoints per game below league average allowed, opponent-adjusted. Positive is good.−3.9
1468Strength of scheduleMean Elo of opponents faced this season.1679

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

Advanced

CLTUAB
−24.1SP+ (this season)Bill Connelly's SP+ rating, points above average.
-0.014Offense PPA / playPredicted points added per play, garbage time excluded (CFBD).0.191
0.264Defense PPA / playPPA allowed per play — lower is better.0.336
34% / 54%Success rate (off / def)42% / 49%
1.28 / 1.09Explosiveness (off / def)1.33 / 1.29
577Talent composite247Sports team talent composite for the current roster.
41%Returning production

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

Head to head

2024UAB 27 at CLT 29CLT · CLT covered

How the margin was built

Rating gap
UAB +14.5 pts
Home field
UAB +— 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.