Week 1 report · Fri, Sep 4 · 2026 Week 1
AP #7Miami
7–0 · Ours #7 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.
45–6FinalWe had MIA 38 – STAN 14
Stanford
4–5 · Ours #82 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.MIA 92%MIA won
MIA 92%MIA 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 MIA −24.MIA −24.5oursOur 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. −23.8 · MIA covered by 14.5
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 51.8.46.5final 51 · over by 4.5
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.STAN +24.5Lmatched the close
STAN +24.5Lmatched the closeQuarterbacksthis game
Darian Mensah27/30 · 401 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.
- +0.6391st pct
- Comp %
- 90.0
- TD
- 5
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 0
Davis Warren21/41 · 214 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.
- −0.1724th pct
- Comp %
- 51.2
- TD
- 0
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Miamioffense | Played like MIA +21.5Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseStanford | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 94th | 60.5%▲10.6 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 60.5%▼10.4 | 6th |
| 84th | +0.33▲0.05 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.33▼0.04 | 16th |
| 93rd | +0.64▲0.27 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.64▼0.39 | 7th |
| 33rd | −0.07▼0.24 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | −0.07▲0.40 | 67th |
| 41st | 1▼0.8 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 1▲0.4 | 59th |
| Stanfordoffense | defenseMiami | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 37th | 38.2%▲3.6 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 38.2%▼1.6 | 64th |
| 31st | −0.07 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | −0.07▲0.05 | 69th |
| 33rd | −0.10▼0.05 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.10▲0.36 | 67th |
| 48th | +0.02▲0.11 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.02▼0.38 | 52nd |
| 79th | 0▲0.9 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼0.8 | 21st |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| MiamiMIA | StanfordSTAN | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 2737th | Own 202nd |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | +1.1 pts77th | +0.7 pts66th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 4321st | 3410th |
| 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. | +26.896th | −26.84th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 08th | 251st |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | 0.0 pts50th | −0.4 pts26th |
| 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. STAN +0.9: turnovers +2.6, field position −2.5, kicking −0.3, 4th downs −0.6, penalty first downs +1.5. | −0.946th | +0.954th |
Season so far
Miami7–0 · 62nd-hardest schedule
Wat Stanford45–6covered −24.5
at Stanford45–6covered −24.5Wvs Florida A&M77–7covered −59.5
W
at Wake Forest33–20missed −20
at Wake Forest33–20missed −20W
vs Central Michigan52–3covered −41
vs Central Michigan52–3covered −41W
at Clemson41–13covered −14
at Clemson41–13covered −14W
vs Florida State43–35missed −19.5
vs Florida State43–35missed −19.5W
vs Pittsburgh52–23covered −20.5
vs Pittsburgh52–23covered −20.5Stanford4–5 · 10th-hardest schedule
W
vs Hawai'i37–27covered −4.5
vs Hawai'i37–27covered −4.5Lvs Miami6–45missed +24.5
vs Miami6–45missed +24.5L
at Duke7–35missed +10
at Duke7–35missed +10W
vs Georgia Tech34–27covered +3
vs Georgia Tech34–27covered +3Lat Wake Forest3–57missed +14.5
at Wake Forest3–57missed +14.5L
at Notre Dame7–58missed +39.5
at Notre Dame7–58missed +39.5Wvs Elon34–7missed −34
W
vs NC State31–28covered +7.5
vs NC State31–28covered +7.5L
at Louisville24–52missed +22.5
at Louisville24–52missed +22.5Model cfb_best · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Sep 4, 7:05 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is