Week 1 report · Sat, Sep 5 · 2026 Week 1
Central Michigan
3–5 · Ours #98 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.
7–38FinalWe had CMU 24 – UNM 32
New Mexico
7–1 · Ours #87 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.UNM 69%UNM won
UNM 69%UNM 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 UNM −10.5.UNM −11oursOur 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. −8.2 · UNM covered by 20
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 55.3.47.5final 45 · under by 2.5
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.CMU +10.5Llost 0.5 to the close
CMU +10.5Llost 0.5 to the closeQuarterbacksthis game
Jadyn Glasser4/10 · 16 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.
- −0.662nd pct
- Comp %
- 40.0
- TD
- 0
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 2
Replaced Angel Flores in Q1
Luke Moga13/17 · 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.
- +0.2767th pct
- Comp %
- 76.5
- TD
- 1
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 0
Replaced Toa Fa'avae in Q1
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Central Michiganoffense | Played like UNM +36.8Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseNew Mexico | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4th | 21.7%▼18.5 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 21.7%▲11.8 | 96th |
| 2nd | −0.51▼0.52 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | −0.51▲0.27 | 98th |
| 2nd | −0.86▼0.80 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.86▲0.70 | 98th |
| 26th | −0.13▼0.11 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | −0.13▼0.20 | 74th |
| 41st | 1▼0.3 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 1▼1.3 | 59th |
| New Mexicooffense | defenseCentral Michigan | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 80th | 50.9%▲9.8 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 50.9%▼2.3 | 20th |
| 64th | +0.15▲0.13 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.15▼0.04 | 36th |
| 38th | −0.06▼0.05 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.06▲0.03 | 62nd |
| 84th | +0.30▲0.28 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.30▼0.05 | 16th |
| 79th | 0▲1.2 | 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
| Central MichiganCMU | New MexicoUNM | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 2526th | Own 3481st |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | 0.0 pts39th | +2.0 pts94th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 231st | 5336th |
| 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. | −12.118th | +12.182nd |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 08th | 799th |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | +0.3 pts63rd | +0.3 pts68th |
| 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. UNM +12.6: turnovers +2.6, field position +3.1, kicking +1.4, 4th downs +0.1, penalty first downs +5.4. | −12.65th | +12.695th |
Season so far
Central Michigan3–5 · 83rd-hardest schedule
Lat New Mexico7–38missed +11
at New Mexico7–38missed +11Wvs Colgate13–10missed −18.5
W
vs Wyoming24–10covered +1
vs Wyoming24–10covered +1L
at Miami3–52missed +41
at Miami3–52missed +41W
vs Akron41–17covered −7
vs Akron41–17covered −7L
at Ohio14–31missed +2.5
at Ohio14–31missed +2.5L
vs Western Michigan14–21covered +7.5
vs Western Michigan14–21covered +7.5L
vs Miami (OH)27–28covered +3.5
vs Miami (OH)27–28covered +3.5New Mexico7–1 · 127th-hardest schedule
Wvs Central Michigan38–7covered −11QB change mid-game
vs Central Michigan38–7covered −11QB change mid-gameWvs Mercyhurst70–7covered −42.5
L
at Oklahoma6–14covered +21
at Oklahoma6–14covered +21W
at New Mexico State42–18covered −11.5
at New Mexico State42–18covered −11.5W
vs UTEP61–7covered −23.5
vs UTEP61–7covered −23.5W
at Hawai'i21–10missed −14.5
at Hawai'i21–10missed −14.5W
vs North Dakota State21–16covered −4.5
vs North Dakota State21–16covered −4.5W
at San José State21–16missed −14.5
at San José State21–16missed −14.5Model cfb_best · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Sep 5, 8:05 PM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is