Matchup analysis
Before kickoff our model projected UT Rio Grande Valley 33.4, East Texas A&M 21.6 at Memorial Stadium (Commerce, TX) in Week 5. That is a solid edge: UT Rio Grande Valley wins about 78% of the time by our estimate, with a projected margin of 11.8 points and 55 combined points.
UT Rio Grande Valley is 2-2, scoring 28.8 and allowing 21.5 points per game (+7.3 per game). East Texas A&M is 1-4, scoring 16.8 and allowing 30 points per game (-13.2 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 UT Rio Grande Valley by 34 and East Texas A&M by 11 about 80% of the time.
East Texas A&M gets about 2.1 points for playing at home. UT Rio Grande Valley 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: UT Rio Grande Valley 17, East Texas A&M 20. East Texas A&M won, so this goes down as a miss for the model (margin off by 14.8 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 (UT Rio Grande Valley / East Texas A&M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | UT Rio Grande Valley -10.5 | 51.5 → 50.5 | -398 / +294 |
| DraftKings | UT Rio Grande Valley -10.5 | 51.5 → 50.5 | -398 / +294 |
This game's lines: CollegeFootballData.com · read Oct 22, 6:37 PM UTC.
| Projection | Margin | Total | East Texas A&M win |
|---|---|---|---|
| Our model | UT Rio Grande Valley -12 | 55.0 | 22% |
| Market consensus | UT Rio Grande Valley -10.5 | 50.5 | 24% |
| Blended projection | UT Rio Grande Valley -11 | 51.5 | 23% |
Blended projection = 0.16 x our margin + 0.84 x the market margin, weights fitted on past seasons (see methodology).
Model vs market
- East Texas A&M win probability
- model 22% · market (no-vig) 24% · difference -2 pts
- Margin
- model UT Rio Grande Valley -11.8 · market UT Rio Grande Valley -10.5 · difference -1.3 pts (East Texas A&M view)
- Total
- model 55.0 · market 50.5 · difference +4.5
Model margin is 1.3 pts more toward UT Rio Grande Valley 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 | UT Rio Grande Valley 33.4, East Texas A&M 21.6 | UT Rio Grande Valley 78%wrong winner | 14.8 | 18.0 |
| New formula | UT Rio Grande Valley 33.1, East Texas A&M 21.1 | UT Rio Grande Valley 78%wrong winner | 15.0 | 17.3 |
Final: UT Rio Grande Valley 17, East Texas A&M 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.
UT Rio Grande Valley vs East Texas A&M: stat comparison
2025 season numbers (this season's sample is still too small).
| Stat | UT Rio Grande Valley | East Texas A&M |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 39.6 | 25.6 |
| Points allowed per game | 18.8 | 39.8 |
| Yards per play | 7.50 | 5.89 |
| Yards per play allowed | 4.99 | 6.34 |
| Rushing yards per game | 207.9 | 136.8 |
| Net passing yards per game | 242.0 | 269.0 |
| Rushing yards allowed per game | 134.4 | 193.6 |
| Net passing yards allowed per game | 221.6 | 246.3 |
| Turnovers per game | 0.73 | 1.75 |
| Takeaways per game | 1.64 | 1.17 |
| Sacks per game | 2.45 | 1.83 |
| Sacks allowed per game | 1.45 | 2.83 |
| Stat | UT Rio Grande Valley | East Texas A&M |
|---|---|---|
| EPA per play | +0.10 | -0.03 |
| EPA per play allowed | +0.05 | +0.06 |
| Success rate | 44.5% | 42.3% |
| Success rate allowed | 42.3% | 45.3% |
| Explosive play rate | 14.9% | 13.3% |
| Explosive plays allowed | 10.7% | 13.2% |
| Havoc rate | 12.6% | 11.0% |
| Havoc allowed | 11.3% | 14.9% |
| Points per scoring opportunity | 3.66 | 3.29 |
| Points per opportunity allowed | 3.16 | 4.04 |
| Average starting field position | opp 0 | opp 13 |
| Opponents' starting field position | opp 0 | opp 10 |
| Offensive plays per game (pace) | 60.0 | 68.9 |
| Stat | UT Rio Grande Valley | East Texas A&M |
|---|---|---|
| Rushing EPA per play | +0.05 | +0.06 |
| Passing EPA per play | +0.16 | -0.11 |
| Rushing EPA allowed | +0.06 | +0.03 |
| Passing EPA allowed | +0.03 | +0.10 |
| Rushing success rate | 46.9% | 43.8% |
| Passing success rate | 45.5% | 39.8% |
| Run stuff rate | 17.2% | 17.9% |
| Passing-down success rate | 33.3% | 30.1% |
| Passing-down success allowed | 31.7% | 33.2% |
| Third-down conversion rate | 48.0% | 39.6% |
| Third-down rate allowed | 45.5% | 44.6% |
| Red-zone touchdown rate | 0.0% | 42.2% |
| Red-zone TD rate allowed | 0.0% | 48.3% |
# = 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: UT Rio Grande Valley schedule · East Texas A&M 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.