CFB 360 is currently a work in progress! Learn more about our unbiased ranking engine & upcoming Player Recruiting Hub
360
UL Monroe logo

Away · #135

UL Monroe

0-2 · Sun Belt · 20 pts

Week 2 · Final

20 – 26

UAB logo

Home · #95

UAB

1-1 · American Athletic · 26 pts

Sat, Sep 12, 1:30 PM MT Protective Stadium ESPN+

Vegas Line

UAB -10

Total 55.5

Model Projection

UAB -11.5

UAB 85.0% win · O/U 55.5

Value Edge

1.3 pt edge: UAB

Total delta 0.0

Model Rationale

Shifted by +3.3 pts toward UAB on the 2026 2-game sample vs. the historical baseline.

Phase
Sample phase
2026 sample
2 games · 50%
Historical baseline
50%
Baseline margin
UAB -4.0
  • UAB: 0 portal additions / 1 departures, first year under Alex Mortensen — 2021–2025 archive weighted 67%, incoming portal talent −0.5 pts.
UL Monroe logo

UL Monroe — Keys to Victory

  1. 1Establish the run

    UAB ranks #95 nationally allowing 150.0 rush yards per game — softer than their #66 pass defense.

  2. 2Contain Roderick Robinson II

    UAB's top producer this season: 59 rushing yards (RB). Their production line is the first thing UL Monroe has to take away.

  3. 3Stay ahead on third down

    UL Monroe converts 18.8% of third downs (#128 nationally) versus UAB's 52.6%. Sustaining drives is the cleanest edge on the board.

  4. 4Protect the turnover edge

    UL Monroe is +0 in turnover margin (0 forced, 0 lost) across 1 recorded games; UAB sits at -1.

  5. 5Clear 28 points

    The market total for this game is 55.5. Anything above 28 points puts UL Monroe on the winning side of an even split.

UAB logo

UAB — Keys to Victory

  1. 1Establish the run

    UL Monroe ranks #138 nationally allowing 345.0 rush yards per game — softer than their #136 pass defense.

  2. 2Contain Austin Carlisle

    UL Monroe's top producer this season: 50 rushing yards (QB). Their production line is the first thing UAB has to take away.

  3. 3Stay ahead on third down

    UAB converts 52.6% of third downs (#41 nationally) versus UL Monroe's 18.8%. Sustaining drives is the cleanest edge on the board.

  4. 4Fix the turnover margin

    UAB is -1 in turnover margin (0 forced, 1 lost) across 1 recorded games; UL Monroe sits at +0.

  5. 5Clear 28 points

    The market total for this game is 55.5. Anything above 28 points puts UAB on the winning side of an even split.

Key Position Matchups

Quarterbacks

Austin CarlisleULM · QB

Passing Yds
73
Completion %
60.0%
Yards / Attempt
7.3
TD : INT
1 : 0
TD/INT Ratio
No INTs
Passer Rating
154.3

Ryder BurtonUAB · QB

Passing Yds
219
Completion %
58.1%
Yards / Attempt
7.1
TD : INT
1 : 1
TD/INT Ratio
1.00:1
Passer Rating
121.6

Leading Rusher

Austin CarlisleULM · QB

Rushing Yds
50
Carries
7
Yards / Carry
7.1
Rushing TD
0
Long
18

Roderick Robinson IIUAB · RB

Rushing Yds
59
Carries
14
Yards / Carry
4.2
Rushing TD
0
Long
13

Primary Receiver

Derrick JamesonULM · RB

Receiving Yds
40
Receptions
1
Yards / Catch
40.0
Receiving TD
1
Long
40

C.J. SmithUAB · WR

Receiving Yds
57
Receptions
2
Yards / Catch
28.5
Receiving TD
0
Long
42

Defensive Leader

Noah FlemmingsULM · LB

Tackles
9
Solo
4
Sacks
0.0
TFL
0.0
INT
0

Muaaz ByardUAB · LB

Tackles
7
Solo
3
Sacks
0.0
TFL
1.5
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

UAB by 11.3

Baseline UAB -11.5

Simulated Total

55.5

Baseline 55.5

Unit Edge

UAB QB

UAB Below average · ULM Below average

Open the full simulator

ULM passing vs UAB coverage

140.0Passing YPG vs Pass yards allowed / G182.0
57.1%Completion % vs Yards / Target allowed10.7
5.0Yards / Attempt vs Completion % allowed76.5%
1.00:1TD / INT ratio vs Sack / pressure rate0.0%
-0.095EPA / Pass vs Defensive EPA / Pass0.885

ULM rushing vs UAB run defense

138.0Rushing YPG vs Rush yards allowed / G150.0
3.5Yards / Carry vs Yards / Carry allowed5.8
2.8Line yards (post-contact proxy) vs Stuff rate23.1%
12.5%Stuffed-run rate vs Tackles for loss2
-0.123EPA / Rush vs Defensive EPA / Rush0.236

UAB passing vs ULM coverage

417.0Pass yards allowed / G vs Passing YPG219.0
9.9Yards / Target allowed vs Completion %58.1%
64.3%Completion % allowed vs Yards / Attempt7.1
0.0%Sack / pressure rate vs TD / INT ratio1.00:1
0.540Defensive EPA / Pass vs EPA / Pass-0.078

Efficiency & situational

18.8%Third-down conversion52.6%
278.0Total yards / game413.0
762.0Yards allowed / game332.0
0Turnover margin-1

Red-zone efficiency is not published in the official feed yet, so it is left out rather than estimated.