Sacramento State
2–7 · Ours #137Our rank on the rankings page. The board's line comes from the betting model, which sees more than this one number.
17–30Our projected score
Central Michigan
3–5 · Ours #130Our rank on the rankings page. The board's line comes from the betting model, which sees more than this one number.
Win chanceHow often each team wins the game outright when we play it out thousands of times from our line.CMU 80%
CMU 80%SpreadThe betting line right now: the middle of the sportsbooks we track, updated through the day.—oursOur 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. CMU −13.6
TotalThe betting line right now: the middle of the sportsbooks we track, updated through the day.—oursOur computer's projected combined score for both teams, built from team stats, not from the betting odds. 47.3
Our call · No priceNeither DraftKings nor FanDuel is offering our side at our number right now, so there is no price to judge.—
Quarterbackslast game's starter · most dropbacks in each team's last game
Jackson Sharman6 starts this year
- EPA / dropbackExpected points added per dropback: passes, sacks (college play-by-play logs scrambles as runs). The rank is among the 128 FBS passers with 15+ dropbacks per team game.
- −0.10121st
- Comp %
- 56.8
- TD
- 8
- Turnovers
- 55 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 6
Central Michigan
No passer on record this season
The matchupeach offense against the defense it faces · FBS rank in the colored cell
| Central Michiganoffense | Defense edge · 4 of 5 | defenseSacramento State | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 112th | −0.01 | Overall efficiencyEfficiencyExpected points added per play. FBS average: +0.08. | +0.02 | 60th |
| 110th | 39.7% | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that keep the offense on schedule. FBS average: 43.3%. | 39.8% | 49th |
| 138th | −0.23 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback. FBS average: +0.09. | 0.00 | 56th |
| 39th | +0.13 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run. FBS average: +0.07. | +0.04 | 73rd |
| 137th | 7.3% | Big playsBig playsShare of plays gaining 20+ yards passing or 10+ rushing. FBS average: 12.7%. | 14.2% | 117th |
| Sacramento Stateoffense | Defense edge · 5 of 5 | defenseCentral Michigan | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 137th | −0.17 | Overall efficiencyEfficiencyExpected points added per play. FBS average: +0.08. | +0.06 | 79th |
| 133rd | 36.3% | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that keep the offense on schedule. FBS average: 43.3%. | 46.2% | 125th |
| 135th | −0.21 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback. FBS average: +0.09. | −0.12 | 18th |
| 131st | −0.12 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run. FBS average: +0.07. | +0.21 | 129th |
| 136th | 7.6% | Big playsBig playsShare of plays gaining 20+ yards passing or 10+ rushing. FBS average: 12.7%. | 11.9% | 77th |
Team stats
| Central MichiganCMU | Sacramento StateSAC | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Special teamsSpecial teams expected points added per game. | −0.799th | +1.145th |
| Field positionAverage starting field position against the opponent's, in yards. | −2.1105th | +0.771st |
| Drives & pace | ||
| Scoring chancesShare of drives that reach the opponent's 40. | 40%128th | 33%136th |
| Points per chancePoints scored per drive that reaches the opponent's 40. | 3.55102nd | 3.28119th |
| Time of possession | 27:42101st | 28:5466th |
| Plays per game | 59129th | 6487th |
| Turnovers & havoc | ||
| Turnover margin | +2 | −4 |
| Giveaways – takeaways | 12 – 14 | 17 – 13 |
| Havoc rateShare of defensive plays with a sack, tackle for loss, interception or forced fumble. | 11.9%121st | 10.4%130th |
Season so far
Sacramento State2–7 · 131st-hardest schedule
L
at Eastern Michigan17–28missed +9
at Eastern Michigan17–28missed +9Wvs Mississippi Valley State52–0covered −38.5
L
at Fresno State3–49missed +17.5
at Fresno State3–49missed +17.5L
vs North Dakota State10–31covered +25
vs North Dakota State10–31covered +25L
vs Massachusetts6–35missed +5
vs Massachusetts6–35missed +5L
at Bowling Green10–38missed +9
at Bowling Green10–38missed +9L
vs Ohio7–48missed +17
vs Ohio7–48missed +17L
at Ball State17–34missed +14.5
at Ball State17–34missed +14.5W
vs Kent State31–10covered +7
vs Kent State31–10covered +7Central Michigan3–5 · 83rd-hardest schedule
L
at 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 −7Lat 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 +3.5Model cfb_scratch · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Oct 27, 7:26 AM EDT · freezes at kickoff and grades as-is