Matchup analysis
Before kickoff our model projected Lindenwood 26.5, Charleston Southern 21 at Hunter Stadium in Week 1. That is a lean: Lindenwood wins about 64% of the time by our estimate, with a projected margin of 5.5 points and 47.5 combined points. Tags: upset alert.
Charleston Southern has not played a game yet this season, so its number leans on last year's results. Lindenwood has not played a game yet this season, so its number leans on last year's results.
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 Charleston Southern by 17 and Lindenwood by 28 about 80% of the time.
Lindenwood gets about 2.1 points for playing at home. Even on a neutral field the ratings would still favour Lindenwood by about 3.4. The game is on ESPN+.
Result: Charleston Southern 17, Lindenwood 20. The model had the right winner; the margin was off by 2.5 points and the total by 10.5.
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 (Charleston Southern / Lindenwood) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | Lindenwood -7.5 | 45.5 | — / — |
| DraftKings | Lindenwood -7.5 | 45.5 | — / — |
This game's lines: CollegeFootballData.com · read Oct 22, 6:37 PM UTC.
| Projection | Margin | Total | Lindenwood win |
|---|---|---|---|
| Our model | Lindenwood -5.5 | 47.5 | 64% |
| Market consensus | Lindenwood -7.5 | 45.5 | 69% |
| Blended projection | Lindenwood -7 | 46.8 | 69% |
Blended projection = 0.16 x our margin + 0.84 x the market margin, weights fitted on past seasons (see methodology).
Model vs market
- Lindenwood win probability
- model 64% · market (no-vig) —
- Margin
- model Lindenwood -5.5 · market Lindenwood -7.5 · difference -2.0 pts (Lindenwood view)
- Total
- model 47.5 · market 45.5 · difference +2.0
Model margin is 2.0 pts more toward Charleston Southern 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 | Charleston Southern 21.0, Lindenwood 26.5 | Lindenwood 64%right winner | 2.5 | 10.5 |
| New formula | Charleston Southern 18.0, Lindenwood 30.0 | Lindenwood 76%right winner | 9.0 | 11.0 |
Final: Charleston Southern 17, Lindenwood 20. 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.
Charleston Southern vs Lindenwood: stat comparison
2025 season numbers (this season's sample is still too small).
| Stat | Charleston Southern | Lindenwood |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 16.6 | 24.8 |
| Points allowed per game | 24.0 | 27.0 |
| Yards per play | 5.44 | 5.96 |
| Yards per play allowed | 5.98 | 5.75 |
| Rushing yards per game | 130.9 | 148.5 |
| Net passing yards per game | 179.9 | 224.6 |
| Rushing yards allowed per game | 181.4 | 185.1 |
| Net passing yards allowed per game | 229.4 | 191.9 |
| Turnovers per game | 0.83 | 1.08 |
| Takeaways per game | 1.08 | 0.75 |
| Sacks per game | 1.50 | 1.67 |
| Sacks allowed per game | 2.17 | 2.00 |
| Stat | Charleston Southern | Lindenwood |
|---|---|---|
| EPA per play | -0.06 | -0.01 |
| EPA per play allowed | +0.06 | +0.09 |
| Success rate | 35.6% | 40.1% |
| Success rate allowed | 45.5% | 44.3% |
| Explosive play rate | 12.1% | 12.6% |
| Explosive plays allowed | 14.2% | 13.4% |
| Havoc rate | 11.2% | 11.0% |
| Havoc allowed | 14.7% | 14.6% |
| Points per scoring opportunity | 2.89 | 3.16 |
| Points per opportunity allowed | 3.13 | 3.70 |
| Average starting field position | opp 12 | opp 14 |
| Opponents' starting field position | opp 10 | opp 13 |
| Offensive plays per game (pace) | 57.2 | 62.6 |
| Stat | Charleston Southern | Lindenwood |
|---|---|---|
| Rushing EPA per play | -0.07 | -0.08 |
| Passing EPA per play | -0.05 | +0.06 |
| Rushing EPA allowed | -0.01 | +0.08 |
| Passing EPA allowed | +0.12 | +0.12 |
| Rushing success rate | 33.7% | 37.3% |
| Passing success rate | 37.1% | 43.9% |
| Run stuff rate | 23.7% | 23.3% |
| Passing-down success rate | 25.0% | 28.3% |
| Passing-down success allowed | 33.9% | 31.1% |
| Third-down conversion rate | 33.3% | 36.8% |
| Third-down rate allowed | 46.0% | 41.0% |
| Red-zone touchdown rate | 57.6% | 69.5% |
| Red-zone TD rate allowed | 45.1% | 43.6% |
# = 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: Charleston Southern schedule · Lindenwood 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.