Week 9 report · Fri, Oct 30 · 2026 Week 9
Tulane
4–4 · Ours #93 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.
38–31FinalWe had TULN 31 – CLT 20
Charlotte
1–7 · Ours #133 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.TULN 75%TULN won
TULN 75%TULN 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 TULN −10.5.TULN −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. −10.6 · CLT 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 50.4.46.5final 69 · over by 22.5
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.TULN −10Llost 1.5 to the close
TULN −10Llost 1.5 to the closeThe matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Tulaneoffense | Played like TULN +6.7Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseCharlotte | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95th | 61.4%▲28.9 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 61.4%▼11.1 | 5th |
| 85th | +0.34▲0.34 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.34▼0.08 | 15th |
| 77th | +0.35▲0.38 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.35▼0.03 | 23rd |
| 87th | +0.33▲0.31 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.33▼0.15 | 13th |
| 41st | 1▼0.1 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 1▲0.7 | 59th |
| Charlotteoffense | defenseTulane | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 61st | 44.9%▲11.5 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 44.9%▼1.2 | 39th |
| 77th | +0.26▲0.35 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.26▼0.19 | 23rd |
| 71st | +0.28▲0.39 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.28▼0.29 | 29th |
| 78th | +0.24▲0.31 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.24▼0.14 | 22nd |
| 79th | 0▲1.7 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼0.9 | 21st |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| TulaneTULN | CharlotteCLT | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 2843rd | Own 3689th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 7081st | 7895th |
| 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. | +13.584th | −13.516th |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | +0.3 pts68th | −0.2 pts35th |
| 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. CLT +2.4: field position +3.0, 4th downs −0.7. | −2.438th | +2.462nd |
Season so far
Tulane4–4 · 88th-hardest schedule
L
at Duke3–17missed +9QB change mid-game
at Duke3–17missed +9QB change mid-gameW
vs South Alabama28–24missed −9.5
vs South Alabama28–24missed −9.5L
at Kansas State20–31covered +20.5
at Kansas State20–31covered +20.5W
vs Southern Miss24–21missed −18.5
vs Southern Miss24–21missed −18.5L
at Army17–20covered +4
at Army17–20covered +4W
vs Memphis31–17covered +6.5
vs Memphis31–17covered +6.5L
vs UTSA19–42missed +3
vs UTSA19–42missed +3Wat Charlotte38–31missed −8.5
at Charlotte38–31missed −8.5Charlotte1–7 · 64th-hardest schedule
Lvs The Citadel41–43missed −20.5
L
at Ole Miss9–41covered +45
at Ole Miss9–41covered +45L
at App State21–26covered +17.5
at App State21–26covered +17.5L
vs Louisiana7–34missed +9.5
vs Louisiana7–34missed +9.5Lvs Memphis8–59missed +20.5
vs Memphis8–59missed +20.5L
at North Texas10–50missed +28
at North Texas10–50missed +28W
at Temple38–31covered +17.5
at Temple38–31covered +17.5Lvs Tulane31–38covered +8.5
vs Tulane31–38covered +8.5Model cfb_scratch · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Oct 30, 5:20 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is