Matchup analysis
Before kickoff our model projected NC State 33.4, Louisville 32.1 at Carter-Finley Stadium in Week 5. That is a genuine toss-up: NC State wins about 53% of the time by our estimate, with a projected margin of 1.3 points and 65.5 combined points. Tags: coin flip, leans high scoring.
Louisville is 2-2, scoring 41.3 and allowing 28.8 points per game (+12.5 per game). NC State is 2-2, scoring 38.3 and allowing 25 points per game (+13.3 per game).
The most lopsided unit battle: Louisville's strong offense (28th of 138 in our opponent-adjusted ratings, worth about 32 points against an average defense) against NC State's middle-of-the-pack defense (74th). NC State's strong offense (22nd of 138 in our opponent-adjusted ratings, worth about 32.9 points against an average defense) has the clear edge over Louisville's middle-of-the-pack defense (71st); that mismatch is where most of NC State's projected points come from.
College football is noisy: even a well-rated projection misses the final margin by about 14 points on average. Based on how real results have scattered around our numbers, the final margin should land somewhere between Louisville by 21 and NC State by 24 about 80% of the time.
NC State gets about 2.1 points for playing at home. That home edge is the difference: on a neutral field Louisville would be favoured by 0.8. The game is on ACC Network.
Result: Louisville 28, NC State 31. The model had the right winner; the margin was off by 1.7 points and the total by 6.5.
Market lines
Market lines · Source: The Odds API, ESPN, Action Network · Updated Oct 29, 9:25 AM UTC. Shown for information; not an input to our projections.
| Provider | Spread (open → now) | Total (open → now) | Moneyline (Louisville / NC State) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | Louisville -6.75 → Louisville -4.25 | 60 → 57 | -227.5 / +187.5 |
| DraftKings | Louisville -7.5 → Louisville -5.5 | 59.5 → 56.5 | -225 / +185 |
| Bovada | Louisville -6 → Louisville -3 | 60.5 → 57.5 | -230 / +190 |
This game's lines: CollegeFootballData.com · read Oct 22, 6:37 PM UTC.
| Projection | Margin | Total | NC State win |
|---|---|---|---|
| Our model | NC State -1.5 | 65.5 | 53% |
| Market consensus | Louisville -4 | 57.0 | 33% |
| Blended projection | Louisville -3.5 | 57.7 | 41% |
Blended projection = 0.16 x our margin + 0.84 x the market margin, weights fitted on past seasons (see methodology).
Model vs market
- NC State win probability
- model 53% · market (no-vig) 33% · difference +20 pts
- Margin
- model NC State -1.3 · market Louisville -4.25 · difference +5.6 pts (NC State view)
- Total
- model 65.5 · market 57 · difference +8.5
Model margin is 5.6 pts more toward NC State than the market.
21+ only where legal. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER.
Original projection vs new formula
| Projection | Score | Win prob | Margin miss | Total miss |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original projection | Louisville 32.1, NC State 33.4 | NC State 53%right winner | 1.7 | 6.5 |
| New formula | Louisville 31.5, NC State 34.1 | NC State 57%right winner | 0.4 | 6.6 |
Final: Louisville 28, NC State 31. Original = the number we posted before kickoff. New formula (2026-10-21 matchup terms) = the current model re-run with only the games played before this one.
Louisville vs NC State: stat comparison
Season to date before kickoff: these numbers are frozen at kickoff and do not include this game or anything after it.
| Stat | Louisville | NC State |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 41.3#18 | 38.3#31 |
| Points allowed per game | 28.8#110 | 25.0#89 |
| Yards per play | 7.47#12 | 6.47#59 |
| Yards per play allowed | 5.85#88 | 5.69#84 |
| Rushing yards per game | 208.5#34 | 221.3#27 |
| Net passing yards per game | 284.3#27 | 218.5#83 |
| Rushing yards allowed per game | 170.5#103 | 131.8#55 |
| Net passing yards allowed per game | 232.0#100 | 199.8#67 |
| Turnovers per game | 0.25#24 | 1.00#86 |
| Takeaways per game | 1.25#43 | 0.75#97 |
| Sacks per game | 1.50#103 | 1.00#125 |
| Sacks allowed per game | 1.75#81 | 1.50#64 |
| Stat | Louisville | NC State |
|---|---|---|
| EPA per play | +0.24#15 | +0.21#21 |
| EPA per play allowed | +0.09#94 | +0.17#120 |
| Success rate | 47.6%#29 | 47.3%#32 |
| Success rate allowed | 40.6%#75 | 44.1%#107 |
| Explosive play rate | 17.9%#4 | 13.2%#70 |
| Explosive plays allowed | 10.7%#56 | 13.9%#110 |
| Havoc rate | 10.8%#125 | 11.4%#117 |
| Havoc allowed | 14.4%#92 | 14.5%#97 |
| Points per scoring opportunity | 4.45#51 | 5.56#2 |
| Points per opportunity allowed | 3.98#84 | 4.24#99 |
| Average starting field position | own 30#69 | own 29#84 |
| Opponents' starting field position | own 29#77 | own 29#74 |
| Offensive plays per game (pace) | 66.0#68 | 68.0#49 |
| Stat | Louisville | NC State |
|---|---|---|
| Rushing EPA per play | +0.15#32 | +0.23#9 |
| Passing EPA per play | +0.33#17 | +0.19#46 |
| Rushing EPA allowed | +0.03#77 | +0.10#104 |
| Passing EPA allowed | +0.15#101 | +0.24#115 |
| Rushing success rate | 47.3%#45 | 44.3%#75 |
| Passing success rate | 50.0%#27 | 50.5%#23 |
| Run stuff rate | 18.6%#91 | 14.6%#38 |
| Passing-down success rate | 29.9%#84 | 33.3%#57 |
| Passing-down success allowed | 27.5%#57 | 29.3%#71 |
| Third-down conversion rate | 44.9%#54 | 52.6%#15 |
| Third-down rate allowed | 29.6%#22 | 28.8%#16 |
| Red-zone touchdown rate | 71.2%#40 | 83.3%#7 |
| Red-zone TD rate allowed | 59.1%#79 | 90.0%#135 |
# = rank among 138 FBS teams. Efficiency numbers exclude garbage time. Per-play numbers of teams with a weak schedule are pulled toward their opponent-adjusted values (fully at one standard deviation below an average schedule). Source: play-by-play (cfbfastR / sportsdataverse), aggregated by us.
More: Louisville schedule · NC State schedule · all Week 5 projections
Share this prediction
Projections are statistical estimates for entertainment and analysis only. They are not betting advice and nothing here guarantees any result.
Free weekly projections email
One email a week in season: the closest projected games, the biggest mismatches and how the model graded out last week. Email address only — no spam, unsubscribe any time.