Vegas Line
UTSA -28.5
Total 59.5
Model Projection
UTSA -25.0
UTSA 97.9% win · O/U 59.5
Value Edge
3.5 pt edge: URGV
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
- UTSA -11.6
Both rosters returned largely intact this cycle, so the 2021–2025 archive keeps its full weight in the preseason baseline.
UT Rio Grande Valley — Keys to Victory
1Establish the run
UTSA ranks #110 nationally allowing 177.0 rush yards per game — softer than their #101 pass defense.
2Contain Will Henderson III
UTSA's top producer this season: 99 rushing yards (RB). Their production line is the first thing UT Rio Grande Valley has to take away.
3Protect the turnover edge
UT Rio Grande Valley is +0 in turnover margin (0 forced, 0 lost) across 1 recorded games; UTSA sits at +2.
4Clear 30 points
The market total for this game is 59.5. Anything above 30 points puts UT Rio Grande Valley on the winning side of an even split.
UTSA — Keys to Victory
1Protect the turnover edge
UTSA is +2 in turnover margin (2 forced, 0 lost) across 1 recorded games; UT Rio Grande Valley sits at +0.
2Clear 30 points
The market total for this game is 59.5. Anything above 30 points puts UTSA on the winning side of an even split.
Key Position Matchups
Quarterbacks
Owen McCownUTSA · QB
- Passing Yds
- 275
- Completion %
- 81.5%
- Yards / Attempt
- 10.2
- TD : INT
- 3 : 0
- TD/INT Ratio
- No INTs
- Passer Rating
- 203.7
Leading Rusher
Will Henderson IIIUTSA · RB
- Rushing Yds
- 99
- Carries
- 9
- Yards / Carry
- 11.0
- Rushing TD
- 1
- Long
- 75
Primary Receiver
DJ AllenUTSA · WR
- Receiving Yds
- 116
- Receptions
- 3
- Yards / Catch
- 38.7
- Receiving TD
- 1
- Long
- 62
Defensive Leader
Joel RogersUTSA · S
- Tackles
- 7
- 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
UTSA by 25.0
Baseline UTSA -25.0
Simulated Total
59.5
Baseline 59.5
Unit Edge
UTSA QB
UTSA FBS average · URGV Below average
URGV passing vs UTSA coverage
| 0.0 | Passing YPG vs Pass yards allowed / G | 245.0 |
| 0.0% | Completion % vs Yards / Target allowed | 5.2 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Attempt vs Completion % allowed | 55.3% |
| 0.00:1 | TD / INT ratio vs Sack / pressure rate | 2.1% |
| 0.000 | EPA / Pass vs Defensive EPA / Pass | -0.172 |
URGV rushing vs UTSA run defense
| 0.0 | Rushing YPG vs Rush yards allowed / G | 177.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Carry vs Yards / Carry allowed | 5.2 |
| 0.0 | Line yards (post-contact proxy) vs Stuff rate | 22.7% |
| 0.0% | Stuffed-run rate vs Tackles for loss | 3 |
| 0.000 | EPA / Rush vs Defensive EPA / Rush | 0.083 |
UTSA passing vs URGV coverage
| 0.0 | Pass yards allowed / G vs Passing YPG | 275.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards / Target allowed vs Completion % | 75.9% |
| 0.0% | Completion % allowed vs Yards / Attempt | 9.5 |
| 0.0% | Sack / pressure rate vs TD / INT ratio | 3.00:1 |
| 0.000 | Defensive EPA / Pass vs EPA / Pass | 0.462 |
Efficiency & situational
| — | Third-down conversion | 33.3% |
| 0.0 | Total yards / game | 525.0 |
| 0.0 | Yards allowed / game | 422.0 |
| 0 | Turnover margin | +2 |
Red-zone efficiency is not published in the official feed yet, so it is left out rather than estimated.