Probetrics — Sports Analytics
College Football slate
SMU Mustangs
9-4 last yr · #22 Elo
at
Sat, Nov 28, 12:00 AM ET
Stanford Stadium
Stanford Cardinal
1-1 · #81 Elo
Spread Total Moneyline

The read

On rating alone SMU Mustangs are 12.3 points better (#22 vs #81 of 240), and STAN add 0.0 for home field. The clearest mismatch is the passing game: SMU passing ranks #23, STAN defends it at #109; the other way STAN #97 into SMU's #42.

Who has the edge

Rating
Clear edge
SMU
SMU rated 12.3 points better on Elo (#81 vs #22).
Home & rest
Even
STAN gets 0.0 points for home field.
Passing game
Clear edge
SMU
SMU passing ranks #23, STAN defends it at #109; the other way STAN #97 into SMU's #42.
context · not in the margin
Rushing game
Clear edge
SMU
SMU rushing ranks #70, STAN defends it at #11; the other way STAN #130 into SMU's #5.
context · not in the margin
Third down & red zone
Clear edge
SMU
SMU third-down conversion ranks #56, STAN defends it at #103; the other way STAN #90 into SMU's #44.
context · not in the margin
Form (last 5)
Clear edge
SMU
STAN −14.5 per game over the last five, SMU +14.4.
context · not in the margin
Market
not priced
No line yet.
context · not in the margin

The margin, factor by factor

SMU MustangsStanford Cardinal
1714 Elo · #22
RatingThe Elo gap in points — the model's core read on who is better, before the situational pieces below.
SMU +12.3 pts
1494 Elo · #81
road
Home field
not priced
home
Rest
even
+5.0 pts vs STAN 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 +13.3 pts
−8.3 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 +14.4 pts
L W · −14.5
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

  • SMU defense (#4 rush explosiveness allowed) against a STAN offense ranked #133
  • SMU defense (#5 rushing ppa / play allowed) against a STAN offense ranked #130
  • SMU defense (#14 yards / rush allowed) against a STAN offense ranked #134
  • SMU defense (#5 standard-down ppa allowed) against a STAN offense ranked #118
  • SMU defense (#12 points / scoring opportunity allowed) against a STAN offense ranked #121

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 Stanford Cardinal defense

ranks of 135
SMU offSTAN defEdge
Identity
Pass rate / Pass rate faced55%57%·
Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains).68%67%·
Plays / game6465·
Possession / game26:5330:11·
Passing
Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD).+0.40#23+0.34#109SMU
Pass success rate44%#3943%#84SMU
Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are.1.61#371.58#83SMU
Yards / pass attempt8.0#357.8#113SMU
Completion %66%#2666%#119SMU
Interception rate / Interceptions forced3.9%#1202.7%#51STAN
Rushing
Rushing PPA / play+0.11#70−0.02#11STAN
Rush success rate42%#9242%#70·
Rush explosiveness1.00#560.88#24STAN
Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed.2.90#742.88#67·
Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line.19%#8117%#89·
Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2.79%#1974%#88SMU
Yards / rush4.4#713.8#46·
Situational
Standard-down PPA+0.16#46+0.09#65·
Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+).+0.39#37+0.35#95SMU
Third-down conversion41%#5642%#103SMU
Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40.3.89#523.46#52·
Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play.16.8%#9914.6%#94·
Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game1.46#941.08#94·

Stanford Cardinal offense vs SMU Mustangs defense

ranks of 135
STAN offSMU defEdge
Identity
Pass rate / Pass rate faced51%55%·
Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains).67%68%·
Plays / game5970·
Possession / game29:4933:07·
Passing
Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD).+0.20#97+0.19#42SMU
Pass success rate37%#11643%#90·
Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are.1.55#651.46#33SMU
Yards / pass attempt6.8#887.1#62·
Completion %57%#11561%#58SMU
Interception rate / Interceptions forced0.8%#52.5%#60STAN
Rushing
Rushing PPA / play−0.03#130−0.08#5SMU
Rush success rate37%#12538%#18SMU
Rush explosiveness0.75#1330.78#4SMU
Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed.2.63#1202.76#46SMU
Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line.18%#6222%#23SMU
Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2.82%#759%#8·
Yards / rush2.6#1343.2#14SMU
Situational
Standard-down PPA+0.00#118−0.09#5SMU
Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+).+0.19#111+0.29#68SMU
Third-down conversion38%#9036%#44SMU
Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40.3.02#1212.79#12SMU
Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play.17.2%#10418.8%#16SMU
Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game1.42#902.15#5SMU

Season

SMUSTAN
9-4Record1-1
32.2Points for / game21.5
20.5Points against / game36.0
6-1 / 3-3Home / road1-1 / 0-0
6-7Against the spread1-1
4-9Over / underOvers–unders in this team's games. A tendency, not a lean.2-0
W L W W WLast 5L W

Season numbers are from 2025 until this season has games.

Power ratings

SMUSTAN
1714Elo1494
#22 of 240Rank#81 of 240
+7.2Offense ratingPoints per game above league average scored, opponent-adjusted.+0.8
+9.1Defense ratingPoints per game below league average allowed, opponent-adjusted. Positive is good.+2.1
Strength of scheduleMean Elo of opponents faced this season.1684

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

Advanced

SMUSTAN
+12.1SP+ (this season)Bill Connelly's SP+ rating, points above average.
0.231Offense PPA / playPredicted points added per play, garbage time excluded (CFBD).0.064
0.030Defense PPA / playPPA allowed per play — lower is better.0.173
43% / 40%Success rate (off / def)36% / 42%
1.36 / 1.18Explosiveness (off / def)1.20 / 1.29
765Talent composite247Sports team talent composite for the current roster.
57%Returning production

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

Head to head

2025STAN 10 at SMU 34SMU · SMU covered
2024SMU 40 at STAN 10SMU · SMU covered

How the margin was built

Rating gap
SMU +12.3 pts
Home field
STAN +— 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.