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

Composite projection engine

Matchup Simulator

Away team (Team A)
MTSU logo
Home team (Team B)
MRSH logo
ABC| Sat 1:30 PM MT
MTSU logoMiddle Tennessee
1-1 ยท 55.8 PWR
64%

MTSU win probability

Projected line: MTSU -2.5

MRSH logoMarshall
1-1 ยท 51.7 PWR

Positional unit index โ€” 0 to 100 scale

50 = FBS average ยท 72+ = Top 25 level ยท 90+ = elite national top five. Week 3 weighting: 60% preseason roster talent + 40% live 2026 game EPA.

43QB vs QB40

+1.3 MTSU advantage โ€” 3-point index gap over Marshall (passing EPA per play, completion rate and yards per attempt). MTSU FBS average.

42WR Room vs WR Room40

+0.8 MTSU advantage โ€” 2-point index gap over Marshall (explosive pass rate and yards per target). MTSU FBS average.

52RB Room vs RB Room33

+8.0 MTSU advantage โ€” 19-point index gap over Marshall (yards per carry, line yards and rush EPA). MTSU FBS average.

50Run Blocking vs Run Defense43

+2.9 MTSU advantage โ€” 7-point index gap over Marshall (line yards against stuff rate). MTSU FBS average.

48Offensive Line vs Pass Rush38

+4.2 MTSU advantage โ€” 10-point index gap over Marshall (pass-block win rate against pressure rate). MTSU FBS average.

42Pass Game vs Coverage31

+4.6 MTSU advantage โ€” 11-point index gap over Marshall (passing EPA against coverage efficiency). MTSU FBS average.

37Pass Rush vs Offensive Line39

-0.8 MRSH advantage โ€” 2-point index gap over Middle Tennessee (pressure differential in the trenches). MRSH Below average.

42Coverage vs Pass Game40

+0.8 MTSU advantage โ€” 2-point index gap over Marshall (coverage grade against target efficiency). MTSU FBS average.

Projections use opponent-adjusted efficiency, SOS, and unit-level grades derived from live 2026 team data.