Matchup analysis
Before kickoff our model projected St. Thomas 31.5, Southern Utah 30.6 at O'Shaughnessy Stadium in Week 3. That is a genuine toss-up: St. Thomas wins about 52% of the time by our estimate, with a projected margin of 0.9 points and 62.1 combined points. Tags: coin flip, leans high scoring.
Southern Utah is 1-2, scoring 30.7 and allowing 42.7 points per game (-12 per game). St. Thomas is 2-1, scoring 32.3 and allowing 28.3 points per game (+4 per game).
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 Southern Utah by 22 and St. Thomas by 23 about 80% of the time.
St. Thomas gets about 2.1 points for playing at home. That home edge is the difference: on a neutral field Southern Utah would be favoured by 1.2.
Result: Southern Utah 26, St. Thomas 28. The model had the right winner; the margin was off by 1.1 points and the total by 8.1.
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 (Southern Utah / St. Thomas) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | Southern Utah -14 → Southern Utah -12.5 | 57.5 → 62.5 | -398 / +294 |
| DraftKings | Southern Utah -14 → Southern Utah -12.5 | 57.5 → 62.5 | -398 / +294 |
This game's lines: CollegeFootballData.com · read Oct 22, 6:37 PM UTC.
| Projection | Margin | Total | St. Thomas win |
|---|---|---|---|
| Our model | St. Thomas -1 | 62.1 | 52% |
| Market consensus | Southern Utah -12.5 | 62.5 | 24% |
| Blended projection | Southern Utah -10.5 | 62.3 | 24% |
Blended projection = 0.16 x our margin + 0.84 x the market margin, weights fitted on past seasons (see methodology).
Model vs market
- St. Thomas win probability
- model 52% · market (no-vig) 24% · difference +28 pts
- Margin
- model St. Thomas -0.9 · market Southern Utah -12.5 · difference +13.4 pts (St. Thomas view)
- Total
- model 62.1 · market 62.5 · difference -0.4
Model margin is 13.4 pts more toward St. Thomas 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 | Southern Utah 30.6, St. Thomas 31.5 | St. Thomas 52%right winner | 1.1 | 8.1 |
| New formula | Southern Utah 30.0, St. Thomas 33.9 | St. Thomas 60%right winner | 1.9 | 9.9 |
Final: Southern Utah 26, St. Thomas 28. 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.
Southern Utah vs St. Thomas: stat comparison
2025 season numbers (this season's sample is still too small).
| Stat | Southern Utah | St. Thomas |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 33.8 | 30.9 |
| Points allowed per game | 29.6 | 20.5 |
| Yards per play | 6.66 | 6.59 |
| Yards per play allowed | 6.35 | 6.08 |
| Rushing yards per game | 219.6 | 184.9 |
| Net passing yards per game | 219.6 | 247.6 |
| Rushing yards allowed per game | 199.2 | 167.9 |
| Net passing yards allowed per game | 200.0 | 234.4 |
| Turnovers per game | 0.64 | 0.75 |
| Takeaways per game | 0.82 | 1.17 |
| Sacks per game | 2.18 | 2.83 |
| Sacks allowed per game | 2.36 | 1.75 |
| Stat | Southern Utah | St. Thomas |
|---|---|---|
| EPA per play | +0.16 | +0.08 |
| EPA per play allowed | +0.06 | +0.03 |
| Success rate | 48.5% | 42.3% |
| Success rate allowed | 42.6% | 41.0% |
| Explosive play rate | 15.0% | 15.3% |
| Explosive plays allowed | 14.5% | 13.6% |
| Havoc rate | 12.4% | 16.7% |
| Havoc allowed | 12.0% | 14.0% |
| Points per scoring opportunity | 0.00 | 3.66 |
| Points per opportunity allowed | 0.00 | 3.17 |
| Average starting field position | opp 0 | opp 0 |
| Opponents' starting field position | opp 0 | opp 0 |
| Offensive plays per game (pace) | 65.9 | 65.7 |
| Stat | Southern Utah | St. Thomas |
|---|---|---|
| Rushing EPA per play | +0.14 | +0.01 |
| Passing EPA per play | +0.17 | +0.16 |
| Rushing EPA allowed | +0.12 | -0.11 |
| Passing EPA allowed | -0.01 | +0.19 |
| Rushing success rate | 47.9% | 40.1% |
| Passing success rate | 50.8% | 46.5% |
| Run stuff rate | 18.7% | 22.2% |
| Passing-down success rate | 37.4% | 34.2% |
| Passing-down success allowed | 29.0% | 31.4% |
| Third-down conversion rate | 45.7% | 41.2% |
| Third-down rate allowed | 40.0% | 39.4% |
| Red-zone touchdown rate | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Red-zone TD rate allowed | 0.0% | 0.0% |
# = 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: Southern Utah schedule · St. Thomas schedule · all Week 3 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.