Week 4 report · Sat, Sep 26 · 2026 Week 4
Georgia Tech
2–5 · Ours #67 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.
27–34FinalWe had GT 28 – STAN 23
Stanford
4–5 · Ours #108 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.GT 63%STAN won
GT 63%STAN 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 GT −5.GT −3oursOur 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. −5.5 · STAN covered by 10
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 50.7.48.5final 61 · over by 12.5
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.No call
Quarterbacksthis game
Alberto Mendoza26/39 · 290 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.
- +0.0140th pct
- Comp %
- 66.7
- TD
- 2
- Turnovers
- 11 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
Davis Warren22/35 · 396 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.
- +0.8397th pct
- Comp %
- 62.9
- TD
- 3
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 0
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Georgia Techoffense | Played like STAN +8.9Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseStanford | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55th | 42.9%▼0.9 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 42.9%▲9.7 | 45th |
| 58th | +0.11▲0.02 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.11▲0.21 | 42nd |
| 38th | −0.05▼0.19 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.05▲0.40 | 62nd |
| 87th | +0.32▲0.29 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.32▼0.05 | 13th |
| 4th | 3▼2.0 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 3▲2.7 | 96th |
| Stanfordoffense | defenseGeorgia Tech | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50th | 41.7%▲7.6 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 41.7%▲3.6 | 50th |
| 81st | +0.30▲0.42 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.30▼0.08 | 19th |
| 96th | +0.77▲0.94 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.77▼0.64 | 4th |
| 21st | −0.18▼0.11 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | −0.18▲0.42 | 79th |
| 79th | 0▲0.9 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0 | 21st |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Georgia TechGT | StanfordSTAN | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 3164th | Own 3687th |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | +0.7 pts67th | +0.6 pts65th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 7081st | 7285th |
| 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. | +1.254th | −1.246th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 372nd | 486th |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | +0.2 pts61st | +1.4 pts98th |
| 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 +11.9: turnovers +7.8, field position +1.7, kicking −0.1, 4th downs +1.6, penalty first downs +0.8. | −11.96th | +11.994th |
Season so far
Georgia Tech2–5 · 49th-hardest schedule
L
vs Colorado13–14missed −6.5
vs Colorado13–14missed −6.5L
vs Tennessee24–45missed +12
vs Tennessee24–45missed +12Wvs Mercer44–11missed −38.5
Lat Stanford27–34missed −3
at Stanford27–34missed −3W
vs Duke28–25covered +4.5
vs Duke28–25covered +4.5L
at Virginia Tech24–34missed +8.5
at Virginia Tech24–34missed +8.5L
vs Boston College27–49missed −6.5
vs Boston College27–49missed −6.5Stanford4–5 · 10th-hardest schedule
W
vs Hawai'i37–27covered −4.5
vs Hawai'i37–27covered −4.5L
vs Miami6–45missed +24.5
vs Miami6–45missed +24.5Lat Duke7–35missed +10
at Duke7–35missed +10Wvs Georgia Tech34–27covered +3
vs Georgia Tech34–27covered +3L
at 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 ±15.6 · run Sep 26, 6:05 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is