Week 3 report · Sat, Sep 19 · 2026 Week 3
UTEP
1–7 · Ours #120 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.
17–52FinalWe had UTEP 9 – MICH 46
AP #19Michigan
5–3 · Ours #25 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.MICH 99%MICH won
MICH 99%MICH 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 MICH −36.5.MICH −34.5oursOur 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. −37.1 · MICH covered by 0.5
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 54.3.48.5final 69 · over by 20.5
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.UTEP +36.5Wbeat the close by 2.0
UTEP +36.5Wbeat the close by 2.0Quarterbacksthis game
EJ Colson Jr.7/8 · 86 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.
- +0.1050th pct
- Comp %
- 87.5
- TD
- 2
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 4
Relieved in Q4 by Raymond Moore III
Bryce Underwood19/26 · 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.
- +0.5789th pct
- Comp %
- 73.1
- TD
- 2
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| UTEPoffense | Played like MICH +33.2Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseMichigan | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12th | 29.0%▼4.6 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 29.0%▲5.7 | 89th |
| 12th | −0.23▼0.09 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | −0.23▲0.06 | 88th |
| 54th | +0.10▲0.44 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.10▼0.40 | 46th |
| 4th | −0.44▼0.48 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | −0.44▲0.33 | 96th |
| 41st | 1▲0.2 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 1▼0.3 | 59th |
| Michiganoffense | defenseUTEP | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 91st | 56.9%▲19.1 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 56.9%▼7.1 | 10th |
| 87th | +0.35▲0.39 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.35▼0.17 | 13th |
| 89th | +0.57▲0.67 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.57▼0.32 | 11th |
| 67th | +0.16▲0.15 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.16▼0.03 | 33rd |
| 41st | 1▲0.2 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 1▲0.3 | 59th |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| UTEPUTEP | MichiganMICH | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 3167th | Own 3995th |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | +0.8 pts70th | +1.2 pts81st |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 317th | 5848th |
| 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. | −25.34th | +25.396th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 127th | 251st |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | −0.1 pts40th | +0.8 pts90th |
| Return touchdownsReturn TDsDefensive and special-teams touchdowns. | 043rd | 192nd |
| 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. MICH +6.6: turnovers −2.6, field position +2.8, kicking +0.3, 4th downs +1.2, penalty first downs +0.8, return touchdowns +4.2. | −6.621st | +6.679th |
Season so far
UTEP1–7 · 46th-hardest schedule
L
at Oklahoma0–51missed +41
at Oklahoma0–51missed +41Wvs Texas Southern51–10covered −27
Lat Michigan17–52missed +34.5
at Michigan17–52missed +34.5L
vs Oregon State7–33missed +11
vs Oregon State7–33missed +11L
at New Mexico7–61missed +23.5
at New Mexico7–61missed +23.5L
vs Nevada13–30missed +10
vs Nevada13–30missed +10L
vs San José State11–24missed +7QB change mid-game
vs San José State11–24missed +7QB change mid-gameL
at North Dakota State7–31missed +23.5
at North Dakota State7–31missed +23.5Michigan5–3 · 45th-hardest schedule
W
vs Western Michigan13–12missed −27.5
vs Western Michigan13–12missed −27.5Wvs Oklahoma17–10covered +5
vs Oklahoma17–10covered +5Wvs UTEP52–17covered −34.5
vs UTEP52–17covered −34.5L
vs Iowa19–20missed −5.5
vs Iowa19–20missed −5.5L
at Minnesota14–20missed −6
at Minnesota14–20missed −6W
vs Penn State21–18missed −5.5
vs Penn State21–18missed −5.5L
vs Indiana6–13covered +7.5
vs Indiana6–13covered +7.5W
at Rutgers28–21missed −16.5
at Rutgers28–21missed −16.5Model cfb_best · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Sep 19, 3:05 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is