Week 3 report · Sat, Sep 19 · 2026 Week 3
AP #12USC
6–2 · Ours #12 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.
42–35FinalWe had USC 43 – RUTG 19
Rutgers
2–6 · Ours #129 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.USC 93%USC won
USC 93%USC 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 USC −24.5.USC −21oursOur 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. −24.1 · RUTG covered by 14
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 62.2.59final 77 · over by 18
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.RUTG +24.5Wbeat the close by 3.5
RUTG +24.5Wbeat the close by 3.5Quarterbacksthis game
Jayden Maiava20/32 · 277 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.
- +0.2969th pct
- Comp %
- 62.5
- TD
- 2
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
Dylan Lonergan18/35 · 252 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.
- +0.4682nd pct
- Comp %
- 51.4
- TD
- 3
- Turnovers
- 11 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| USCoffense | Played like USC +1.1Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseRutgers | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83rd | 52.4%▲1.0 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 52.4%▼3.7 | 17th |
| 81st | +0.29▲0.10 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.29▼0.09 | 19th |
| 72nd | +0.29▼0.16 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.29▼0.05 | 28th |
| 85th | +0.30▲0.35 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.30▼0.10 | 16th |
| 79th | 0▲1.1 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼0.6 | 21st |
| Rutgersoffense | defenseUSC | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83rd | 52.2%▲13.4 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 52.2%▼14.8 | 17th |
| 76th | +0.24▲0.30 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.24▼0.22 | 24th |
| 66th | +0.22▲0.30 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.22▼0.06 | 34th |
| 82nd | +0.27▲0.30 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.27▼0.38 | 19th |
| 15th | 2▲0.4 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 2▲1.6 | 85th |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| USCUSC | RutgersRUTG | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 3688th | Own 228th |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | +1.0 pts77th | 0.0 pts39th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 6363rd | 6978th |
| 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. | −4.536th | +4.565th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 251st | 486th |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | −0.1 pts40th | +1.3 pts97th |
| Return touchdownsReturn TDsDefensive and special-teams touchdowns. | 192nd | 043rd |
| 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. USC +11.6: turnovers +5.2, field position +4.7, kicking +0.7, 4th downs −1.7, penalty first downs −1.5, return touchdowns +4.2. | +11.693rd | −11.67th |
Season so far
USC6–2 · 55th-hardest schedule
W
vs San José State42–26missed −38.5
vs San José State42–26missed −38.5W
vs Fresno State39–0covered −21.5
vs Fresno State39–0covered −21.5W
vs Louisiana49–30missed −31
vs Louisiana49–30missed −31Wat Rutgers42–35missed −21
at Rutgers42–35missed −21L
vs Oregon27–41missed +3.5
vs Oregon27–41missed +3.5W
vs Washington25–21missed −7.5
vs Washington25–21missed −7.5W
at Penn State31–23covered −1
at Penn State31–23covered −1L
at Wisconsin7–24missed −2.5
at Wisconsin7–24missed −2.5Rutgers2–6 · 40th-hardest schedule
L
vs Massachusetts21–37missed −29
vs Massachusetts21–37missed −29L
at Boston College21–28missed +3
at Boston College21–28missed +3Lvs USC35–42covered +21
vs USC35–42covered +21Wvs Howard58–7covered −42
L
vs Indiana15–47missed +24.5QB change mid-game
vs Indiana15–47missed +24.5QB change mid-gameW
at Maryland37–30covered +6
at Maryland37–30covered +6L
at Northwestern14–42missed +14.5
at Northwestern14–42missed +14.5L
vs Michigan21–28covered +16.5
vs Michigan21–28covered +16.5Model cfb_best · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Sep 19, 3:05 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is