Week 1 report · Sat, Sep 5 · 2026 Week 1
Boston College
4–4 · Ours #90 enteringOur rank going into this game, from the rankings page. The board's line comes from the betting model, which sees more than this one number.
15–34FinalWe had BC 26 – CIN 33
Cincinnati
5–3 · Ours #59 enteringOur rank going into this game, from the rankings page. The board's line comes from the betting model, which sees more than this one number.
Win chanceOur odds before kickoff: how often each team won outright when we played the game out thousands of times from our line.CIN 67%CIN won
CIN 67%CIN wonSpreadOur last pregame odds pull, usually inside the hour before kickoff. A median of the books we track, not a sharp close. First seen at CIN −7.5.CIN −7oursOur computer's point spread for this game, built from team stats, not from the betting odds. Read it like a betting line: −7 means we have that team winning by 7. −7.3 · CIN covered by 12
TotalOur last pregame odds pull, usually inside the hour before kickoff. A median of the books we track, not a sharp close. Our total was 58.4.51.5final 49 · under by 2.5
Our callThe side our number took at the early-week line, graded at that line. Line value is how far the market moved toward it by the last capture before kickoff.BC +7.5Lbeat the close by 0.5
BC +7.5Lbeat the close by 0.5Quarterbacksthis game
Mason McKenzie18/35 · 223 yards
- EPA / dropbackExpected points added per dropback (passes and sacks) in this game. The percentile is among every 2026 FBS quarterback game with 10+ dropbacks.
- −0.2517th pct
- Comp %
- 51.4
- TD
- 1
- Turnovers
- 11 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 4
JC French IV10/14 · 77 yards
- EPA / dropbackExpected points added per dropback (passes and sacks) in this game. The percentile is among every 2026 FBS quarterback game with 10+ dropbacks.
- −0.1923rd pct
- Comp %
- 71.4
- TD
- 1
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Boston Collegeoffense | Played like CIN +1.7Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseCincinnati | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38th | 38.6%▼3.5 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 38.6%▲7.7 | 62nd |
| 39th | −0.02▼0.12 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | −0.02▲0.21 | 61st |
| 16th | −0.32▼0.30 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.32▲0.67 | 84th |
| 85th | +0.31▲0.13 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.31▼0.26 | 15th |
| 15th | 2▼1.0 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 2▲1.0 | 85th |
| Cincinnatioffense | defenseBoston College | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31st | 36.7%▼6.6 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 36.7%▲5.7 | 69th |
| 43rd | +0.01▼0.12 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.01▼0.04 | 58th |
| 46th | +0.02▼0.09 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.02▼0.03 | 54th |
| 44th | 0.00▼0.15 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | 0.00▼0.05 | 56th |
| 79th | 0▲0.7 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼1.6 | 21st |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Boston CollegeBC | CincinnatiCIN | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 2523rd | Own 3687th |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | −2.4 pts6th | +2.5 pts98th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 7081st | 6055th |
| Drive pointsThe part of the final margin the offense moved the ball for (efficiency, success rate, big plays, finishing drives), in points. A margin over the opponent. | +0.150th | −0.150th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 372nd | 127th |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | −0.9 pts10th | +0.6 pts82nd |
| Hidden pointsPoints from outside the offense's drives: turnovers, field position, kicking, fourth downs, penalty first downs, return touchdowns and safeties. A margin over the opponent. CIN +12.9: turnovers +5.2, field position +3.8, kicking +3.5, 4th downs +1.9, penalty first downs −1.5. | −12.95th | +12.995th |
Season so far
Boston College4–4 · 52nd-hardest schedule
Lat Cincinnati15–34missed +7
at Cincinnati15–34missed +7W
vs Rutgers28–21covered −3
vs Rutgers28–21covered −3Wvs Maine22–16missed −37.5
L
vs Virginia Tech14–21covered +14.5
vs Virginia Tech14–21covered +14.5L
at SMU16–25covered +21.5
at SMU16–25covered +21.5W
vs Pittsburgh27–21covered +6.5
vs Pittsburgh27–21covered +6.5W
at Georgia Tech49–27covered +6.5
at Georgia Tech49–27covered +6.5L
at Duke2–47missed +7
at Duke2–47missed +7Cincinnati5–3 · 33rd-hardest schedule
Wvs Boston College34–15covered −7
vs Boston College34–15covered −7Wvs Western Carolina62–10covered −36
W
vs Miami (OH)35–31missed −14.5
vs Miami (OH)35–31missed −14.5W
vs Kansas State31–26covered +6
vs Kansas State31–26covered +6L
at Arizona7–34missed +7
at Arizona7–34missed +7L
at West Virginia42–45missed +1.5
at West Virginia42–45missed +1.5W
vs Texas Tech37–24covered +11.5
vs Texas Tech37–24covered +11.5L
vs Utah25–49missed +7
vs Utah25–49missed +7Model cfb_best · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Sep 5, 3:05 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is