Matchup analysis
Before kickoff our model projected Gardner-Webb 25.6, UT Martin 24.4 at Hardy M. Graham Stadium in Week 7. That is a genuine toss-up: Gardner-Webb wins about 53% of the time by our estimate, with a projected margin of 1.2 points and 50 combined points. Tags: coin flip.
Gardner-Webb is 2-5, scoring 21.6 and allowing 23.3 points per game (-1.7 per game). UT Martin is 2-4, scoring 24.7 and allowing 33.8 points per game (-9.1 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 Gardner-Webb by 24 and UT Martin by 21 about 80% of the time.
UT Martin gets about 2.1 points for playing at home. Gardner-Webb is still favoured on the road, so the ratings gap is bigger than the value of playing at home. The game is on ESPN+.
Result: Gardner-Webb 6, UT Martin 17. UT Martin won, so this goes down as a miss for the model (margin off by 12.2 points).
Market lines
Market lines · Source: The Odds API, ESPN, Action Network · Updated Oct 29, 11:25 AM UTC. Shown for information; not an input to our projections.
| Provider | Spread (open → now) | Total (open → now) | Moneyline (Gardner-Webb / UT Martin) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | Gardner-Webb -1.5 | 48.5 → 51.5 | -121 / -102 |
| DraftKings | Gardner-Webb -1.5 | 48.5 → 51.5 | -121 / -102 |
This game's lines: CollegeFootballData.com · read Oct 22, 6:37 PM UTC.
| Projection | Margin | Total | UT Martin win |
|---|---|---|---|
| Our model | Gardner-Webb -1 | 50.0 | 47% |
| Market consensus | Gardner-Webb -1.5 | 51.5 | 48% |
| Blended projection | Gardner-Webb -1.5 | 52.1 | 46% |
Blended projection = 0.16 x our margin + 0.84 x the market margin, weights fitted on past seasons (see methodology).
Model vs market
- UT Martin win probability
- model 47% · market (no-vig) 48% · difference -1 pts
- Margin
- model Gardner-Webb -1.2 · market Gardner-Webb -1.5 · difference +0.3 pts (UT Martin view)
- Total
- model 50.0 · market 51.5 · difference -1.5
Model and market margins agree within half a point.
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 | Gardner-Webb 25.6, UT Martin 24.4 | Gardner-Webb 53%wrong winner | 12.2 | 27.0 |
| New formula | Gardner-Webb 25.7, UT Martin 24.6 | Gardner-Webb 53%wrong winner | 12.1 | 27.4 |
Final: Gardner-Webb 6, UT Martin 17. 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.
Gardner-Webb vs UT Martin: stat comparison
2025 season numbers (this season's sample is still too small).
| Stat | Gardner-Webb | UT Martin |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 27.5 | 20.7 |
| Points allowed per game | 29.8 | 23.9 |
| Yards per play | 6.05 | 5.25 |
| Yards per play allowed | 6.14 | 6.44 |
| Rushing yards per game | 192.5 | 172.7 |
| Net passing yards per game | 224.6 | 167.6 |
| Rushing yards allowed per game | 180.7 | 122.3 |
| Net passing yards allowed per game | 216.7 | 247.0 |
| Turnovers per game | 1.17 | 0.75 |
| Takeaways per game | 1.08 | 1.08 |
| Sacks per game | 2.67 | 2.08 |
| Sacks allowed per game | 2.50 | 2.00 |
| Stat | Gardner-Webb | UT Martin |
|---|---|---|
| EPA per play | -0.03 | -0.05 |
| EPA per play allowed | +0.07 | +0.10 |
| Success rate | 38.9% | 40.5% |
| Success rate allowed | 43.0% | 44.1% |
| Explosive play rate | 12.0% | 10.8% |
| Explosive plays allowed | 14.4% | 12.9% |
| Havoc rate | 14.3% | 12.0% |
| Havoc allowed | 14.3% | 12.4% |
| Points per scoring opportunity | 3.70 | 3.44 |
| Points per opportunity allowed | 4.38 | 4.78 |
| Average starting field position | opp 12 | opp 20 |
| Opponents' starting field position | opp 11 | opp 20 |
| Offensive plays per game (pace) | 68.9 | 64.8 |
| Stat | Gardner-Webb | UT Martin |
|---|---|---|
| Rushing EPA per play | -0.02 | -0.05 |
| Passing EPA per play | -0.04 | -0.06 |
| Rushing EPA allowed | +0.08 | -0.01 |
| Passing EPA allowed | +0.06 | +0.20 |
| Rushing success rate | 38.4% | 41.8% |
| Passing success rate | 41.3% | 41.6% |
| Run stuff rate | 19.5% | 18.0% |
| Passing-down success rate | 28.1% | 29.3% |
| Passing-down success allowed | 33.5% | 31.9% |
| Third-down conversion rate | 31.8% | 46.2% |
| Third-down rate allowed | 39.8% | 39.7% |
| Red-zone touchdown rate | 66.9% | 54.7% |
| Red-zone TD rate allowed | 60.3% | 71.2% |
# = 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: Gardner-Webb schedule · UT Martin schedule · all Week 7 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.