Matchup analysis
Before kickoff our model projected UNLV 31.1, Memphis 28.6 at Allegiant Stadium in Week 1. That is a genuine toss-up: UNLV wins about 57% of the time by our estimate, with a projected margin of 2.5 points and 59.6 combined points. Tags: coin flip, leans high scoring.
Memphis has not played a game yet this season, so its number leans on last year's results. UNLV has not played a game yet this season, so its number leans on last year's results.
Memphis's middle-of-the-pack offense (48th of 139 in our opponent-adjusted ratings, worth about 29 points against an average defense) has the clear edge over UNLV's middle-of-the-pack defense (76th); that mismatch is where most of Memphis's projected points come from. UNLV's below-average offense (88th of 139 in our opponent-adjusted ratings, worth about 24.6 points against an average defense) meets Memphis's middle-of-the-pack defense (82nd) — an even matchup on paper, so game script and turnovers will decide how many points UNLV puts up.
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 Memphis by 20 and UNLV by 25 about 80% of the time.
UNLV gets about 2.1 points for playing at home. Even on a neutral field the ratings would still favour UNLV by about 0.4. The game is on Fox.
Result: Memphis 27, UNLV 21. Memphis won, so this goes down as a miss for the model (margin off by 8.5 points).
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 (Memphis / UNLV) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | UNLV -3 → UNLV -4.75 | 60.5 → 55.5 | +154.5 / -184 |
| Bovada | UNLV -3 → UNLV -5 | 60.5 → 55.5 | +145 / -170 |
| DraftKings | UNLV -3 → UNLV -4.5 | 55.5 | +164 / -198 |
This game's lines: CollegeFootballData.com · read Oct 22, 6:37 PM UTC.
| Projection | Margin | Total | UNLV win |
|---|---|---|---|
| Our model | UNLV -2.5 | 59.6 | 57% |
| Market consensus | UNLV -5 | 55.5 | 62% |
| Blended projection | UNLV -4.5 | 56.1 | 62% |
Blended projection = 0.16 x our margin + 0.84 x the market margin, weights fitted on past seasons (see methodology).
Model vs market
- UNLV win probability
- model 57% · market (no-vig) 62% · difference -6 pts
- Margin
- model UNLV -2.5 · market UNLV -4.75 · difference -2.2 pts (UNLV view)
- Total
- model 59.6 · market 55.5 · difference +4.1
Model margin is 2.2 pts more toward Memphis 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 | Memphis 28.6, UNLV 31.1 | UNLV 57%wrong winner | 8.5 | 11.6 |
| New formula | Memphis 22.7, UNLV 34.5 | UNLV 75%wrong winner | 17.8 | 9.2 |
Final: Memphis 27, UNLV 21. 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.
Memphis vs UNLV: stat comparison
2025 season numbers (this season's sample is still too small).
| Stat | Memphis | UNLV |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 32.5#25 | 34.1#18 |
| Points allowed per game | 23.2#52 | 28.0#89 |
| Yards per play | 6.38#31 | 7.05#11 |
| Yards per play allowed | 5.77#66 | 6.34#118 |
| Rushing yards per game | 208.8#21 | 204.6#26 |
| Net passing yards per game | 224.6#71 | 253.2#41 |
| Rushing yards allowed per game | 151.1#50 | 187.5#104 |
| Net passing yards allowed per game | 232.4#96 | 232.2#94 |
| Turnovers per game | 0.85#38 | 0.93#56 |
| Takeaways per game | 1.23#48 | 1.29#38 |
| Sacks per game | 1.62#100 | 2.29#44 |
| Sacks allowed per game | 2.62#116 | 1.71#63 |
| Stat | Memphis | UNLV |
|---|---|---|
| EPA per play | +0.16#14 | +0.16#12 |
| EPA per play allowed | 0.00#62 | +0.05#95 |
| Success rate | 45.5%#34 | 46.8%#21 |
| Success rate allowed | 40.1%#49 | 43.2%#92 |
| Explosive play rate | 13.5%#39 | 15.8%#9 |
| Explosive plays allowed | 12.5%#70 | 13.5%#110 |
| Havoc rate | 13.9%#30 | 11.9%#88 |
| Havoc allowed | 11.6%#56 | 12.8%#92 |
| Points per scoring opportunity | 4.36#29 | 4.24#38 |
| Points per opportunity allowed | 4.01#87 | 3.74#55 |
| Average starting field position | own 30#71 | own 29#102 |
| Opponents' starting field position | own 27#13 | own 28#41 |
| Offensive plays per game (pace) | 67.9#49 | 64.9#87 |
| Stat | Memphis | UNLV |
|---|---|---|
| Rushing EPA per play | +0.26#2 | +0.18#7 |
| Passing EPA per play | +0.06#58 | +0.13#31 |
| Rushing EPA allowed | -0.07#25 | +0.11#125 |
| Passing EPA allowed | +0.06#88 | -0.00#68 |
| Rushing success rate | 49.5%#11 | 48.3%#18 |
| Passing success rate | 40.8%#71 | 45.4%#26 |
| Run stuff rate | 18.9%#85 | 18.7%#77 |
| Passing-down success rate | 32.6%#40 | 35.8%#18 |
| Passing-down success allowed | 28.7%#57 | 31.0%#89 |
| Third-down conversion rate | 42.3%#53 | 46.1%#31 |
| Third-down rate allowed | 42.2%#90 | 35.5%#23 |
| Red-zone touchdown rate | 73.4%#13 | 64.1%#52 |
| Red-zone TD rate allowed | 63.2%#90 | 64.7%#101 |
# = rank among 136 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: Memphis schedule · UNLV schedule · all Week 1 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.