Vegas Line
Tennessee -49.5
Total 66.5
Model Projection
TENN -46.0
TENN 99.9% win · O/U 66.5
Value Edge
3.5 pt edge: FUR
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
- TENN -13.4
- TENN: 5 portal additions / 8 departures — 2021–2025 archive weighted 59%, incoming portal talent −2.9 pts.
Furman — Keys to Victory
1Establish the run
Tennessee ranks #111 nationally allowing 178.0 rush yards per game — softer than their #5 pass defense.
2Contain DeSean Bishop
Tennessee's top producer this season: 97 rushing yards (RB). Their production line is the first thing Furman has to take away.
3Protect the turnover edge
Furman is +0 in turnover margin (0 forced, 0 lost) across 1 recorded games; Tennessee sits at -2.
4Clear 34 points
The market total for this game is 66.5. Anything above 34 points puts Furman on the winning side of an even split.
Tennessee — Keys to Victory
1Fix the turnover margin
Tennessee is -2 in turnover margin (0 forced, 2 lost) across 1 recorded games; Furman sits at +0.
2Clear 34 points
The market total for this game is 66.5. Anything above 34 points puts Tennessee on the winning side of an even split.
Key Position Matchups
Quarterbacks
Faizon BrandonTENN · QB
- Passing Yds
- 226
- Completion %
- 76.5%
- Yards / Attempt
- 13.3
- TD : INT
- 3 : 0
- TD/INT Ratio
- No INTs
- Passer Rating
- 246.4
Leading Rusher
DeSean BishopTENN · RB
- Rushing Yds
- 97
- Carries
- 14
- Yards / Carry
- 6.9
- Rushing TD
- 1
- Long
- 20
Primary Receiver
Mike MatthewsTENN · WR
- Receiving Yds
- 132
- Receptions
- 4
- Yards / Catch
- 33.0
- Receiving TD
- 2
- Long
- 57
Defensive Leader
Amare CampbellTENN · LB
- Tackles
- 6
- Solo
- 4
- Sacks
- 0.0
- TFL
- 0.0
- 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
TENN by 46.0
Baseline TENN -46.0
Simulated Total
66.5
Baseline 66.5
Unit Edge
TENN QB
TENN Above average · FUR Below average
FUR passing vs TENN coverage
| 0.0 | Passing YPG vs Pass yards allowed / G | 43.0 |
| 0.0% | Completion % vs Yards / Target allowed | 2.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Attempt vs Completion % allowed | 50.0% |
| 0.00:1 | TD / INT ratio vs Sack / pressure rate | 27.3% |
| 0.000 | EPA / Pass vs Defensive EPA / Pass | -0.550 |
FUR rushing vs TENN run defense
| 0.0 | Rushing YPG vs Rush yards allowed / G | 178.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Carry vs Yards / Carry allowed | 4.9 |
| 0.0 | Line yards (post-contact proxy) vs Stuff rate | 33.3% |
| 0.0% | Stuffed-run rate vs Tackles for loss | 12 |
| 0.000 | EPA / Rush vs Defensive EPA / Rush | 0.249 |
TENN passing vs FUR coverage
| 0.0 | Pass yards allowed / G vs Passing YPG | 309.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Target allowed vs Completion % | 77.8% |
| 0.0% | Completion % allowed vs Yards / Attempt | 11.4 |
| 0.0% | Sack / pressure rate vs TD / INT ratio | 4.00:1 |
| 0.000 | Defensive EPA / Pass vs EPA / Pass | 0.632 |
Efficiency & situational
| — | Third-down conversion | 45.5% |
| 0.0 | Total yards / game | 638.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards allowed / game | 221.0 |
| 0 | Turnover margin | -2 |
Red-zone efficiency is not published in the official feed yet, so it is left out rather than estimated.