Week 5 report · Thu, Oct 1 · 2026 Week 5
North Texas
6–2 · Ours #54 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.
45–44FinalWe had UNT 34 – TLSA 27
Tulsa
4–4 · Ours #97 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.UNT 67%UNT won
UNT 67%UNT 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 UNT +2.5.UNT −2.5oursOur 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. −6.8 · TLSA 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 60.3.56final 89 · over by 33
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.UNT +1Wbeat the close by 3.5
UNT +1Wbeat the close by 3.5Quarterbacksthis game
Tayven Jackson24/39 · 332 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.
- +0.4783rd pct
- Comp %
- 61.5
- TD
- 4
- Turnovers
- 22 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
Baylor Hayes25/43 · 211 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.
- −0.0733rd pct
- Comp %
- 58.1
- TD
- 3
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| North Texasoffense | Played like UNT +2.2Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseTulsa | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 39th | 38.8%▼11.6 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 38.8%▲2.8 | 61st |
| 66th | +0.17▼0.15 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.17▼0.11 | 34th |
| 84th | +0.47▲0.01 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.47▼0.46 | 16th |
| 28th | −0.11▼0.26 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | −0.11▲0.16 | 72nd |
| 4th | 3▼2.3 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 3▲2.0 | 96th |
| Tulsaoffense | defenseNorth Texas | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47th | 41.1%▲3.2 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 41.1%▲3.7 | 53rd |
| 55th | +0.08▼0.07 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.08▲0.09 | 45th |
| 37th | −0.07▼0.24 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.07▲0.61 | 63rd |
| 82nd | +0.28▲0.13 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.28▼0.37 | 18th |
| 79th | 0▲0.5 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼1.0 | 21st |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| North TexasUNT | TulsaTLSA | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 3058th | Own 3688th |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | +0.3 pts54th | +1.0 pts75th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 8096th | 7387th |
| 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. | +3.461st | −3.439th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 127th | 372nd |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | +0.7 pts88th | +2.2 pts100th |
| 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. TLSA +14.0: turnovers +7.8, field position +2.1, kicking +0.5, 4th downs +1.9, penalty first downs +1.5. | −14.04th | +14.096th |
Season so far
North Texas6–2 · 87th-hardest schedule
L
at Indiana16–52covered +40
at Indiana16–52covered +40W
vs UNLV44–6covered +3
vs UNLV44–6covered +3L
at Texas State35–49missed +3
at Texas State35–49missed +3Wvs Houston Christian63–14covered −38.5
Wat Tulsa45–44missed −2.5
at Tulsa45–44missed −2.5W
vs Charlotte50–10covered −28
vs Charlotte50–10covered −28W
at Navy49–39covered −3
at Navy49–39covered −3W
vs Florida Atlantic48–41missed −14.5
vs Florida Atlantic48–41missed −14.5Tulsa4–4 · 94th-hardest schedule
W
vs Oklahoma State24–10covered +13
vs Oklahoma State24–10covered +13W
at Sam Houston23–17missed −12.5
at Sam Houston23–17missed −12.5Wvs East Texas A&M42–0covered −41
L
at Arkansas6–34missed +7
at Arkansas6–34missed +7Lvs North Texas44–45covered +2.5
vs North Texas44–45covered +2.5Lat Navy26–34missed +3
at Navy26–34missed +3W
at Rice38–17covered −4.5
at Rice38–17covered −4.5L
vs Army35–38missed +1
vs Army35–38missed +1Model cfb_scratch · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Oct 1, 8:41 AM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is