Week 3 report · Sat, Sep 19 · 2026 Week 3
Western Michigan
6–3 · Ours #58 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.
28–21FinalWe had WMU 29 – RICE 18
Rice
1–7 · Ours #123 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.WMU 76%WMU won
WMU 76%WMU 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 WMU −11.WMU −8.5oursOur 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. −11.5 · RICE covered by 1.5
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 46.9.43.5final 49 · over by 5.5
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.RICE +10.5Wbeat the close by 2.0
RICE +10.5Wbeat the close by 2.0Quarterbacksthis game
Broc Lowry14/20 · 116 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.
- −0.0732nd pct
- Comp %
- 70.0
- TD
- 1
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 2
Jacurri Brown11/18 · 121 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.
- +0.2666th pct
- Comp %
- 61.1
- 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
| Western Michiganoffense | Played like WMU +1.0Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseRice | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 48th | 41.3%▼0.4 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 41.3%▲5.9 | 52nd |
| 64th | +0.15▲0.14 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.15▲0.02 | 36th |
| 36th | −0.07▲0.03 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.07▲0.35 | 64th |
| 82nd | +0.27▲0.20 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.27▼0.21 | 18th |
| 79th | 0▲0.7 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼0.2 | 21st |
| Riceoffense | defenseWestern Michigan | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 57th | 43.5%▲8.4 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 43.5%▲0.4 | 43rd |
| 56th | +0.09▲0.07 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.09 | 45th |
| 70th | +0.26▲0.64 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.26▼0.13 | 30th |
| 46th | +0.01▼0.14 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.01▲0.02 | 55th |
| 79th | 0▲0.7 | 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
| Western MichiganWMU | RiceRICE | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 2954th | Own 3057th |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | 0.0 pts39th | −2.0 pts11th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 6363rd | 6260th |
| 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. | +4.063rd | −4.037th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 251st | 251st |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | −0.1 pts39th | +0.1 pts60th |
| 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. WMU +3.6: turnovers +2.6, field position −0.2, kicking +1.4, 4th downs −0.3. | +3.668th | −3.632nd |
Season so far
Western Michigan6–3 · 123rd-hardest schedule
L
at Michigan12–13covered +27.5
at Michigan12–13covered +27.5Wvs Monmouth49–14covered −29.5
Wat Rice28–21missed −8.5
at Rice28–21missed −8.5L
vs Boise State7–32missed +8.5
vs Boise State7–32missed +8.5W
at Buffalo20–17missed −12.5
at Buffalo20–17missed −12.5W
vs Kent State38–7covered −14
vs Kent State38–7covered −14W
at Central Michigan21–14missed −7.5
at Central Michigan21–14missed −7.5L
at Toledo38–45missed +2.5
at Toledo38–45missed +2.5W
vs Bowling Green23–10missed −14
vs Bowling Green23–10missed −14Rice1–7 · 60th-hardest schedule
Wvs Houston Christian31–3covered −22.5
L
at Notre Dame0–52missed +44.5
at Notre Dame0–52missed +44.5Lvs Western Michigan21–28covered +8.5
vs Western Michigan21–28covered +8.5L
at Fresno State24–38missed +13
at Fresno State24–38missed +13L
vs UTSA14–16covered +12.5
vs UTSA14–16covered +12.5L
at East Carolina12–28missed +10
at East Carolina12–28missed +10L
vs Tulsa17–38missed +4.5
vs Tulsa17–38missed +4.5L
at Florida Atlantic49–51covered +9
at Florida Atlantic49–51covered +9Model cfb_best · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Sep 19, 6:05 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is