Week 1 · Final
6 – 51
Vegas Line
Kansas -44.5
Total 57.5
Model Projection
KU -41.0
KU 99.8% win · O/U 57.5
Value Edge
3.5 pt edge: LIU
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
- KU -10.0
- KU: 3 portal additions / 0 departures — 2021–2025 archive weighted 90%, incoming portal talent +1.4 pts.
Long Island University — Keys to Victory
1Attack through the air
Kansas ranks #28 nationally allowing 111.0 pass yards per game — a softer target than their #11 run defense.
2Contain Yasin Willis
Kansas's top producer this season: 72 rushing yards (RB). Their production line is the first thing Long Island University has to take away.
3Protect the turnover edge
Long Island University is +0 in turnover margin (0 forced, 0 lost) across 1 recorded games; Kansas sits at +0.
4Clear 29 points
The market total for this game is 57.5. Anything above 29 points puts Long Island University on the winning side of an even split.
Kansas — Keys to Victory
1Protect the turnover edge
Kansas is +0 in turnover margin (1 forced, 1 lost) across 1 recorded games; Long Island University sits at +0.
2Clear 29 points
The market total for this game is 57.5. Anything above 29 points puts Kansas on the winning side of an even split.
Key Position Matchups
Quarterbacks
Isaiah MarshallKU · QB
- Passing Yds
- 246
- Completion %
- 73.7%
- Yards / Attempt
- 12.9
- TD : INT
- 2 : 0
- TD/INT Ratio
- No INTs
- Passer Rating
- 217.2
Leading Rusher
Yasin WillisKU · RB
- Rushing Yds
- 72
- Carries
- 11
- Yards / Carry
- 6.5
- Rushing TD
- 2
- Long
- 20
Primary Receiver
Nik McMillanKU · WR
- Receiving Yds
- 130
- Receptions
- 6
- Yards / Catch
- 21.7
- Receiving TD
- 1
- Long
- 46
Defensive Leader
Quincy DavisKU · LB
- Tackles
- 5
- Solo
- 3
- 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
KU by 41.0
Baseline KU -41.0
Simulated Total
57.5
Baseline 57.5
Unit Edge
KU QB
KU Above average · LIU Below average
LIU passing vs KU coverage
| 0.0 | Passing YPG vs Pass yards allowed / G | 111.0 |
| 0.0% | Completion % vs Yards / Target allowed | 5.5 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Attempt vs Completion % allowed | 50.0% |
| 0.00:1 | TD / INT ratio vs Sack / pressure rate | 15.0% |
| 0.000 | EPA / Pass vs Defensive EPA / Pass | -0.034 |
LIU rushing vs KU run defense
| 0.0 | Rushing YPG vs Rush yards allowed / G | 35.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Carry vs Yards / Carry allowed | 1.1 |
| 0.0 | Line yards (post-contact proxy) vs Stuff rate | 61.5% |
| 0.0% | Stuffed-run rate vs Tackles for loss | 11 |
| 0.000 | EPA / Rush vs Defensive EPA / Rush | -0.503 |
KU passing vs LIU coverage
| 0.0 | Pass yards allowed / G vs Passing YPG | 336.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Target allowed vs Completion % | 72.0% |
| 0.0% | Completion % allowed vs Yards / Attempt | 13.4 |
| 0.0% | Sack / pressure rate vs TD / INT ratio | 2.00:1 |
| 0.000 | Defensive EPA / Pass vs EPA / Pass | 1.006 |
Efficiency & situational
| — | Third-down conversion | 61.5% |
| 0.0 | Total yards / game | 613.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards allowed / game | 146.0 |
| 0 | Turnover margin | 0 |
Red-zone efficiency is not published in the official feed yet, so it is left out rather than estimated.