Offense#133
-11.5vs. FBS average
2025 PPA/play0.03 #129 FBSSuccess rate35.9% #127 FBS
Mid-American · #124 of 138
Bowling Green
Implied Strength-17.4vs. FBS average · ±3.7
Record0–2through completed games
Bowl Eligibility17%reach six wins
Strength of Schedule124thof 138 FBS teams
Schedule lens
What matters next
The headline numbers are above. Here is where the season starts to take shape.
Next matchupat Iowa StateWeek 3 · OV Line BGSU +22 · 4% win chance →Toughest remaining test#60 Iowa StateWeek 3 · 4% site win chance · View matchup →
Team identity
Where the strength lives
Low returning production
Defense projects as the stronger unit by 5.7 rating points.
Defense#109
-5.8vs. FBS average
2025 PPA/play allowed0.15 #62 FBSSuccess rate allowed40.5% #55 FBS
2025 PPA (predicted points added per play) and success rate. How this split works →
Build Your Ratings
Who would win on a neutral field?
Pick the team you think is better. Your answers help build your personal ratings.
VS
Looks like you’re high on this year.
Want to explore new teams or keep comparing ?
Stored only in this browser -- nothing is sent anywhere.
Season outlook · 50,000 simulations
How Bowling Green's 2026 could unfold
The current projection is 4–8 (4.1 expected wins), with a <0.01% chance to reach the playoff. The distribution below shows how often each regular-season win total appeared across the schedule-aware simulations.
Range of outcomes
Projected win distribution
Most common and median 4 winsCentral 80% 2–6 winsBowl eligible 16.8%Winless 0.5%
Simulated (schedule-aware)Central 80% rangeMarket win total
Postseason path
2026 playoff outlook
<0.01%Make the 12-team field
Still outside the median outcome across the schedule-aware simulations.
How the field is reached<0.01% total
Auto-bid<0.01%
At-large<0.01%
Outside field>99.9%
Conference title2.2%
What could move the outlook
Biggest questions
Unresolved does not mean negative. A point estimate appears only when the historical evidence supports one.
A large share of last season's production must be replaced
<0.01% of prior-year PPA returns, placing Bowling Green in the bottom quarter of the current FBS field.
This information already contributes to the team baseline; historical testing has not supported an additional generic continuity adjustment.Projection contextRoster, continuity, and market inputsView details
The market win total, returning production, coaching continuity, transfer talent, and recent NFL production help explain the evidence surrounding this projection.
Returning Production-6.2%share of prior-year PPA returning for 2026
2026 Transfer Class114thof 138 FBS teams by combined portal talent
Recent NFL Draft Production125thof 138 FBS teams by NFL talent produced
Market win total5.0Consensus preseason line
Final · Sep 5Suggested side covered
Tarleton State at Bowling Green · Bowling Green, OH · Doyt L. Perry Stadium
Pregame evidence · 2022–25
Bowling Green through the lens
The OV Line is the aggregate-rating baseline. The market gap shows where the game-level consensus differed, while identified Factors show how much of that difference our research may explain. ATS records are descriptive context—not a claim that OV should outperform the market.
Market ATS45%5–6 against consensus
Average line gap2.5 pts82% inside 3 points · 9 of 11
Factor coverage45%5 of 11 games
Factor signals50% aligned3 of 6 individual observations · 0 neutral
Historical sample11 gamesmarket-covered games from 2022–25
Explanatory history
Factors present in Bowling Green games
| Factor | Games | Average estimate | Aligned with market | Research status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rest Differential | 4 | 0.9 pts toward opponents | 50%2 of 4 directional cases | Supported |
| Lopsided Game-Flow Uncertainty | 2 | 3.3 pts toward Bowling Green | 50%1 of 2 directional cases | Supported · wider uncertainty |
Underlying recordInspect all 11 historical gamesView games
| Season | Game | OV baseline | Market | Market gap | Identified adjustment | Remaining gap | Result | Market ATS | Factors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 · W14 | at MassachusettsAway | Bowling Green -13 | Bowling Green -14 | 0.9 pts toward Bowling Green | None identified | 0.9 pts toward Bowling Green | W 45–14 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W13 | vs. AkronHome | Bowling Green -8 | Bowling Green -2.5 | 5.5 pts toward opponents | 0.5 pts toward Bowling Green | 6.0 pts toward opponents | L 16–19 | L | Rest Differential |
| 2025 · W11 | at Eastern MichiganAway | Bowling Green 0 | Bowling Green +3 | 3.0 pts toward opponents | 1.1 pts toward opponents | 2.0 pts toward opponents | L 21–27 | L | Rest Differential |
| 2025 · W9 | at Kent StateAway | Bowling Green -10 | Bowling Green -7.5 | 2.4 pts toward opponents | None identified | 2.4 pts toward opponents | L 21–24 | L | None identified |
| 2025 · W8 | vs. Central MichiganHome | Bowling Green -5.5 | Bowling Green -3 | 2.6 pts toward opponents | 1.7 pts toward opponents | 0.9 pts toward opponents | L 6–27 | L | Rest Differential |
| 2025 · W7 | vs. ToledoHome | Bowling Green +11 | Bowling Green +10.5 | 0.7 pts toward Bowling Green | None identified | 0.7 pts toward Bowling Green | W 28–23 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W5 | at OhioAway | Bowling Green +10.5 | Bowling Green +7.5 | 3.0 pts toward Bowling Green | None identified | 3.0 pts toward Bowling Green | L 20–35 | L | None identified |
| 2025 · W4 | at LouisvilleAway | Bowling Green +28 | Bowling Green +26.5 | 1.7 pts toward Bowling Green | 2.6 pts toward Bowling Green | 0.8 pts toward opponents | L 17–40 | W | Lopsided Game-Flow UncertaintyRest Differential |
| 2025 · W3 | vs. LibertyHome | Bowling Green +3 | Bowling Green +6 | 2.8 pts toward opponents | None identified | 2.8 pts toward opponents | W 23–13 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W2 | at CincinnatiAway | Bowling Green +20.5 | Bowling Green +22 | 1.6 pts toward opponents | None identified | 1.6 pts toward opponents | L 20–34 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W1 | vs. LafayetteHome | Bowling Green -24 | Bowling Green -21.5 | 2.9 pts toward opponents | 2.9 pts toward Bowling Green | 5.8 pts toward opponents | W 26–7 | L | Lopsided Game-Flow Uncertainty |
Sample: 11 market-covered games from 2022–25. Identified adjustments are rough sums of the Factors shown and are not a replacement betting line. Remaining gap is market consensus minus the OV baseline and identified adjustments. A push means the team’s scoring margin exactly matched the market line.