Matchup summary
| |
Alabama |
Texas A&M |
| Model predicted score |
30 |
23 |
| Win probability |
68% |
32% |
| Adj. EPA/play, offense |
+0.20 (#12) |
+0.08 (#45) |
| Adj. EPA/play, defense allows |
-0.14 (#15) |
-0.11 (#19) |
| Adj. success rate, offense |
46% (#15) |
44% (#41) |
| Adj. success rate, defense allows |
37% (#10) |
38% (#19) |
| Adj. points/drive, offense |
3.15 (#11) |
2.84 (#27) |
| Adj. points/drive, defense allows |
1.92 (#20) |
1.98 (#23) |
| Kicking units, EPA/kick |
+0.13 (#4) |
+0.15 (#2) |
The model has this game as Alabama -7.2. Vegas is at Bama -14.5. This is the 3rd week in a row that the model is more bearish on Alabama than Vegas, and so far the model has been on the right side of that. Make of that what you will.
This is sort of similar to Tennessee where the model is pretty bearish on A&M's offense, but thinks that the defense might give Alabama some problems. The model also rates A&M's kicking game as the #2 unit in the country and its overall special teams #1 in the country. At a high level A&M's profile is sort of a worse Tennessee. They get there differently than Tennessee, but that combined with it being a home game is why the model ends up with Alabama as a touchdown favorite.
Alabama offense vs Texas A&M defense
| |
Bama O (rank) |
Texas A&M D allows (rank) |
Expected (pctile) |
FBS avg |
SEC O avg |
| EPA/play (overall) |
+0.20 (#12) |
-0.11 (#19) |
+0.06 (64th) |
+0.03 |
+0.13 |
| EPA/play (rush) |
+0.15 (#7) |
-0.09 (#19) |
+0.05 (70th) |
+0.01 |
+0.10 |
| EPA/play (pass) |
+0.20 (#19) |
-0.12 (#17) |
+0.04 (49th) |
+0.05 |
+0.16 |
| Success rate (overall) |
46% (#15) |
38% (#19) |
42% (51st) |
42% |
45% |
| Success rate (rush) |
47% (#7) |
38% (#16) |
43% (59th) |
42% |
45% |
| Success rate (pass) |
44% (#27) |
39% (#19) |
41% (47th) |
42% |
44% |
| Explosive-play rate (overall) |
35% (#16) |
28% (#34) |
33% (67th) |
31% |
34% |
| Explosive-play rate (rush) |
31% (#12) |
25% (#29) |
29% (76th) |
27% |
30% |
| Explosive-play rate (pass) |
38% (#32) |
31% (#18) |
34% (46th) |
35% |
38% |
| Yards/play (overall) |
6.9 (#10) |
5.5 (#36) |
6.5 (83rd) |
5.9 |
6.4 |
| Points/drive |
3.15 (#11) |
1.98 (#23) |
2.71 (70th) |
2.42 |
2.79 |
| Drives reaching opp. 40 |
56% (#18) |
41% (#7) |
47% (26th) |
50% |
54% |
| Points per trip past the 40 |
4.46 (#12) |
3.70 (#17) |
4.15 (66th) |
4.01 |
4.30 |
| Available yards % |
57% (#17) |
43% (#18) |
50% (50th) |
50% |
54% |
| Three-and-out rate |
18% (#31) |
27% (#3) |
25% (3rd) |
20% |
18% |
| Avg start (yards to goal) |
70 (#11) |
72 (#14) |
71 (58th) |
71 |
71 |
Statistically their defense is a little better against the pass than the run, but it's not an extreme split like Tennessee's defense where it really profiles out as a coverage-focused defense. TAMU is a bit more balanced, which bodes well for Alabama in this game. The Alabama offense tends to really struggle against coverage-focused defenses, but that's not what TAMU is. They're also not a bend-but-don't-break defense. They have a really high 3-and-out rate, and they are elite at keeping opponents from reaching scoring territory.
Overall, by my model this is the 3rd-best defense Alabama will have played so far, and I think it's going to be a tougher test for Alabama than many are giving it credit for.
Texas A&M offense vs Alabama defense
| |
Texas A&M O (rank) |
Bama D allows (rank) |
Expected (pctile) |
FBS avg |
SEC O avg |
| EPA/play (overall) |
+0.08 (#45) |
-0.14 (#15) |
-0.09 (20th) |
+0.03 |
+0.13 |
| EPA/play (rush) |
+0.11 (#17) |
-0.13 (#13) |
-0.02 (39th) |
+0.01 |
+0.10 |
| EPA/play (pass) |
+0.11 (#47) |
-0.12 (#18) |
-0.05 (22nd) |
+0.05 |
+0.16 |
| Success rate (overall) |
44% (#41) |
37% (#10) |
39% (20th) |
42% |
45% |
| Success rate (rush) |
46% (#10) |
37% (#6) |
41% (24th) |
42% |
45% |
| Success rate (pass) |
43% (#48) |
39% (#29) |
40% (38th) |
42% |
44% |
| Explosive-play rate (overall) |
34% (#33) |
26% (#9) |
29% (30th) |
31% |
34% |
| Explosive-play rate (rush) |
32% (#5) |
22% (#8) |
27% (51st) |
27% |
30% |
| Explosive-play rate (pass) |
37% (#41) |
32% (#28) |
34% (46th) |
35% |
38% |
| Yards/play (overall) |
6.0 (#59) |
5.1 (#19) |
5.3 (20th) |
5.9 |
6.4 |
| Points/drive |
2.84 (#27) |
1.92 (#20) |
2.34 (43rd) |
2.42 |
2.79 |
| Drives reaching opp. 40 |
56% (#17) |
43% (#12) |
49% (41st) |
50% |
54% |
| Points per trip past the 40 |
4.30 (#26) |
4.09 (#82) |
4.38 (88th) |
4.01 |
4.30 |
| Available yards % |
54% (#35) |
42% (#15) |
46% (22nd) |
50% |
54% |
| Three-and-out rate |
19% (#46) |
23% (#20) |
22% (28th) |
20% |
18% |
| Avg start (yards to goal) |
70 (#9) |
72 (#9) |
71 (59th) |
71 |
71 |
TAMU is a middle-of-the-road SEC offense. Much like Tennessee they're better running the ball than throwing it. Particularly from an explosiveness standpoint. They're the fifth most explosive rushing offense in the country. That gives me a bit of indigestion having watched Alabama's defense the last couple of weeks. I think the defense really needs to force this to be a Marcel Reed game. He's really struggling this year, and has been an absolute turnover machine. I would play the run aggressively, and if Reed beats you he beats you. The offense needs to help here too. Start hot and force TAMU out of their comfort zone early.
Ultimately this should be a good chance to be a get-right game for Bama, and lord knows we need it heading into the bye week and then LSU. Our defense has been good in every game, except the Tennessee game, creating havoc and generating INTs. If the offense can have any amount of success this week, Bama should win, and if they can get a lead and force TAMU to throw the ball this game could quickly snowball into a full-on rout.