Week 1 · Final
10 – 33
Vegas Line
Texas Tech -45.5
Total 60.5
Model Projection
TTU -42.0
TTU 99.8% win · O/U 60.5
Value Edge
3.5 pt edge: ACU
Total delta 0.0
Model Rationale
Preseason baseline: portal composite talent blended with the 2021–2025 archive by roster continuity.
- Phase
- Preseason baseline
- 2026 sample
- 0 games · 0%
- Historical baseline
- 100%
- Baseline margin
- TTU -14.9
- TTU: 8 portal additions / 1 departures — 2021–2025 archive weighted 71%, incoming portal talent +6.0 pts.
Abilene Christian — Keys to Victory
1Establish the run
Texas Tech ranks #41 nationally allowing 75.0 rush yards per game — softer than their #35 pass defense.
2Contain J'Koby Williams
Texas Tech's top producer this season: 71 rushing yards (RB). Their production line is the first thing Abilene Christian has to take away.
3Protect the turnover edge
Abilene Christian is +0 in turnover margin (0 forced, 0 lost) across 1 recorded games; Texas Tech sits at +0.
4Clear 31 points
The market total for this game is 60.5. Anything above 31 points puts Abilene Christian on the winning side of an even split.
Texas Tech — Keys to Victory
1Protect the turnover edge
Texas Tech is +0 in turnover margin (1 forced, 1 lost) across 1 recorded games; Abilene Christian sits at +0.
2Clear 31 points
The market total for this game is 60.5. Anything above 31 points puts Texas Tech on the winning side of an even split.
Key Position Matchups
Quarterbacks
Will HammondTTU · QB
- Passing Yds
- 298
- Completion %
- 78.8%
- Yards / Attempt
- 9.0
- TD : INT
- 1 : 1
- TD/INT Ratio
- 1.00:1
- Passer Rating
- 158.6
Leading Rusher
J'Koby WilliamsTTU · RB
- Rushing Yds
- 71
- Carries
- 13
- Yards / Carry
- 5.5
- Rushing TD
- 1
- Long
- 14
Primary Receiver
Kenny JohnsonTTU · WR
- Receiving Yds
- 76
- Receptions
- 4
- Yards / Catch
- 19.0
- Receiving TD
- 0
- Long
- 31
Defensive Leader
Jamond MathisTTU · LB
- Tackles
- 6
- Solo
- 3
- Sacks
- 2.5
- TFL
- 2.5
- INT
- 0
Matchup Simulator
Starts from the CFB 360 projection for this exact game. Turnover swings are valued at 4.2 points each; pace scales the projected total against a 140-play baseline.
Simulated Winner
TTU by 42.0
Baseline TTU -42.0
Simulated Total
60.5
Baseline 60.5
Unit Edge
TTU QB
TTU Above average · ACU Below average
ACU passing vs TTU coverage
| 0.0 | Passing YPG vs Pass yards allowed / G | 119.0 |
| 0.0% | Completion % vs Yards / Target allowed | 3.7 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Attempt vs Completion % allowed | 56.3% |
| 0.00:1 | TD / INT ratio vs Sack / pressure rate | 9.4% |
| 0.000 | EPA / Pass vs Defensive EPA / Pass | -0.079 |
ACU rushing vs TTU run defense
| 0.0 | Rushing YPG vs Rush yards allowed / G | 75.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Carry vs Yards / Carry allowed | 2.6 |
| 0.0 | Line yards (post-contact proxy) vs Stuff rate | 17.6% |
| 0.0% | Stuffed-run rate vs Tackles for loss | 6 |
| 0.000 | EPA / Rush vs Defensive EPA / Rush | -0.155 |
TTU passing vs ACU coverage
| 0.0 | Pass yards allowed / G vs Passing YPG | 298.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Target allowed vs Completion % | 76.5% |
| 0.0% | Completion % allowed vs Yards / Attempt | 8.8 |
| 0.0% | Sack / pressure rate vs TD / INT ratio | 1.00:1 |
| 0.000 | Defensive EPA / Pass vs EPA / Pass | 0.451 |
Efficiency & situational
| — | Third-down conversion | 41.7% |
| 0.0 | Total yards / game | 471.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards allowed / game | 194.0 |
| 0 | Turnover margin | 0 |
Red-zone efficiency is not published in the official feed yet, so it is left out rather than estimated.