Week 1 · Final
16 – 52
Vegas Line
Indiana -39.5
Total 56.5
Model Projection
IU -36.0
IU 99.6% win · O/U 56.5
Value Edge
3.5 pt edge: UNT
Total delta 0.0
Model Rationale
Shifted by +5.3 pts toward IU on the 2026 2-game sample vs. the historical baseline.
- Phase
- Sample phase
- 2026 sample
- 2 games · 50%
- Historical baseline
- 50%
- Baseline margin
- IU -7.5
- IU: 10 portal additions / 2 departures — 2021–2025 archive weighted 62%, incoming portal talent +6.3 pts.
- UNT: 0 portal additions / 5 departures, first year under Neal Brown — 2021–2025 archive weighted 54%, incoming portal talent −4.4 pts.
North Texas — Keys to Victory
1Establish the run
Indiana ranks #96 nationally allowing 152.0 rush yards per game — softer than their #85 pass defense.
2Contain Turbo Richard
Indiana's top producer this season: 58 rushing yards (RB). Their production line is the first thing North Texas has to take away.
3Stay ahead on third down
North Texas converts 40.0% of third downs (#83 nationally) versus Indiana's 55.6%. Sustaining drives is the cleanest edge on the board.
4Fix the turnover margin
North Texas is -1 in turnover margin (0 forced, 1 lost) across 1 recorded games; Indiana sits at +1.
5Clear 29 points
The market total for this game is 56.5. Anything above 29 points puts North Texas on the winning side of an even split.
Indiana — Keys to Victory
1Attack through the air
North Texas ranks #94 nationally allowing 231.0 pass yards per game — a softer target than their #80 run defense.
2Stay ahead on third down
Indiana converts 55.6% of third downs (#33 nationally) versus North Texas's 40.0%. Sustaining drives is the cleanest edge on the board.
3Protect the turnover edge
Indiana is +1 in turnover margin (1 forced, 0 lost) across 1 recorded games; North Texas sits at -1.
4Clear 29 points
The market total for this game is 56.5. Anything above 29 points puts Indiana on the winning side of an even split.
Key Position Matchups
Quarterbacks
Josh HooverIU · QB
- Passing Yds
- 231
- Completion %
- 81.3%
- Yards / Attempt
- 14.4
- TD : INT
- 4 : 0
- TD/INT Ratio
- No INTs
- Passer Rating
- 285.0
Leading Rusher
Turbo RichardIU · RB
- Rushing Yds
- 58
- Carries
- 15
- Yards / Carry
- 3.9
- Rushing TD
- 2
- Long
- 23
Primary Receiver
Charlie BeckerIU · WR
- Receiving Yds
- 64
- Receptions
- 4
- Yards / Catch
- 16.0
- Receiving TD
- 2
- Long
- 35
Defensive Leader
Isaiah JonesIU · LB
- Tackles
- 12
- Solo
- 8
- 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
IU by 36.0
Baseline IU -36.0
Simulated Total
56.5
Baseline 56.5
Unit Edge
IU QB
IU Above average · UNT FBS average
UNT passing vs IU coverage
| 215.0 | Passing YPG vs Pass yards allowed / G | 215.0 |
| 79.3% | Completion % vs Yards / Target allowed | 7.4 |
| 7.4 | Yards / Attempt vs Completion % allowed | 79.3% |
| 0.00:1 | TD / INT ratio vs Sack / pressure rate | 3.4% |
| 0.382 | EPA / Pass vs Defensive EPA / Pass | 0.382 |
UNT rushing vs IU run defense
| 152.0 | Rushing YPG vs Rush yards allowed / G | 152.0 |
| 4.0 | Yards / Carry vs Yards / Carry allowed | 4.0 |
| 3.0 | Line yards (post-contact proxy) vs Stuff rate | 6.7% |
| 6.7% | Stuffed-run rate vs Tackles for loss | 7 |
| 0.043 | EPA / Rush vs Defensive EPA / Rush | 0.043 |
IU passing vs UNT coverage
| 231.0 | Pass yards allowed / G vs Passing YPG | 231.0 |
| 14.4 | Yards / Target allowed vs Completion % | 81.3% |
| 81.3% | Completion % allowed vs Yards / Attempt | 14.4 |
| 0.0% | Sack / pressure rate vs TD / INT ratio | 4.00:1 |
| 1.639 | Defensive EPA / Pass vs EPA / Pass | 1.639 |
Efficiency & situational
| 40.0% | Third-down conversion | 55.6% |
| 367.0 | Total yards / game | 365.0 |
| 365.0 | Yards allowed / game | 367.0 |
| -1 | Turnover margin | +1 |
Red-zone efficiency is not published in the official feed yet, so it is left out rather than estimated.