Offense#72
-0.0vs. FBS average
2025 PPA/play0.25 #24 FBSSuccess rate44.9% #39 FBS
American Athletic · #71 of 138
Memphis
Implied Strength-0.9vs. FBS average · ±3.1
Record2–1through completed games
Playoff Odds5%make the 12-team field
Conference Title15%win American Athletic
Strength of Schedule86thof 138 FBS teams
Schedule lens
What matters next
The headline numbers are above. Here is where the season starts to take shape.
Next matchupvs. UT MartinWeek 3 · OV Line MEM -29.5 · 98% win chance →Toughest remaining test#70 NavyWeek 12 · 41% site win chance · View matchup →
Team identity
Where the strength lives
New head coach in 2026
The model sees a balanced team, with neither unit separating meaningfully from the other.
Defense#71
-0.9vs. FBS average
2025 PPA/play allowed0.17 #78 FBSSuccess rate allowed40.9% #60 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 Memphis's 2026 could unfold
The current projection is 8–4 (8.3 expected wins), with a 5% 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 8 winsCentral 80% 7–10 winsBowl eligible 97.9%
Simulated (schedule-aware)Central 80% rangeMarket win total
Postseason path
2026 playoff outlook
5.2%Make the 12-team field
Still outside the median outcome across the schedule-aware simulations.
How the field is reached5.2% total
Auto-bid4.4%
At-large0.8%
Outside field94.8%
Conference title14.7%
What could move the outlook
Biggest questions
Unresolved does not mean negative. A point estimate appears only when the historical evidence supports one.
Marcus Stokes enters with limited established experience
Marcus Stokes enters the season with no career passing attempts. That uncertainty can matter more to an individual spread than to an aggregate season forecast.
17 comparable openers averaged about 0.9 points away from the low-experience quarterback's team. 1 upcoming matchup carries the Factor.How quickly does the new coaching staff take shape?
A first-year staff creates early-season implementation uncertainty even though the team-level baseline already incorporates the available preseason information.
The opener study found about a one-point market shade toward a retained coach, with a wide uncertainty range.A large share of last season's production must be replaced
6% of prior-year PPA returns, placing Memphis 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 Production5.6%share of prior-year PPA returning for 2026
Coaching ContinuityNew HCfirst season under a new head coach
2026 Transfer Class17thof 138 FBS teams by combined portal talentHeavy portal activity
Recent NFL Draft Production62ndof 138 FBS teams by NFL talent produced
Market win total7.4Consensus preseason line
Final · Sep 5Suggested side covered
Arkansas State at Memphis · Memphis, TN · Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium
Pregame evidence · 2022–25
Memphis 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 ATS59%10–7 against consensus
Average line gap4.1 pts41% inside 3 points · 7 of 17
Factor coverage41%7 of 17 games
Factor signals71% aligned5 of 7 individual observations · 0 neutral
Historical sample17 gamesmarket-covered games from 2022–25
Explanatory history
Factors present in Memphis games
| Factor | Games | Average estimate | Aligned with market | Research status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lopsided Game-Flow Uncertainty | 3 | 1.9 pts toward opponents | 100%3 of 3 directional cases | Supported · wider uncertainty |
| Rest Differential | 3 | 0.6 pts toward Memphis | 67%2 of 3 directional cases | Supported |
| Season-Opening Quarterback Experience | 1 | 0.9 pts toward Memphis | 0%0 of 1 directional cases | Research candidate |
Underlying recordInspect all 17 historical gamesView games
| Season | Game | OV baseline | Market | Market gap | Identified adjustment | Remaining gap | Result | Market ATS | Factors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 · W14 | vs. NavyHome | Memphis -8.5 | Memphis -3.5 | 4.8 pts toward opponents | None identified | 4.8 pts toward opponents | L 17–28 | L | None identified |
| 2025 · W12 | at East CarolinaAway | Memphis +1 | Memphis +3 | 1.9 pts toward opponents | None identified | 1.9 pts toward opponents | L 27–31 | L | None identified |
| 2025 · W11 | vs. TulaneHome | Memphis -3.5 | Memphis -3 | 0.5 pts toward opponents | None identified | 0.5 pts toward opponents | L 32–38 | L | None identified |
| 2025 · W10 | at RiceAway | Memphis -17 | Memphis -14 | 3.1 pts toward opponents | None identified | 3.1 pts toward opponents | W 38–14 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W9 | vs. South FloridaHome | Memphis -2.5 | Memphis +3.5 | 6.1 pts toward opponents | None identified | 6.1 pts toward opponents | W 34–31 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W8 | at UABAway | Memphis -20.5 | Memphis -23.5 | 3.2 pts toward Memphis | 1.7 pts toward Memphis | 1.5 pts toward Memphis | L 24–31 | L | Rest Differential |
| 2025 · W6 | vs. TulsaHome | Memphis -22.5 | Memphis -21 | 1.5 pts toward opponents | 2.8 pts toward opponents | 1.4 pts toward Memphis | W 45–7 | W | Lopsided Game-Flow Uncertainty |
| 2025 · W5 | at Florida AtlanticAway | Memphis -14 | Memphis -14 | 0.1 pts toward Memphis | 1.0 pts toward opponents | 1.1 pts toward Memphis | W 55–26 | W | Rest Differential |
| 2025 · W4 | vs. ArkansasHome | Memphis +9 | Memphis +7 | 1.8 pts toward Memphis | None identified | 1.8 pts toward Memphis | W 32–31 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W3 | at TroyAway | Memphis -7.5 | Memphis -4.5 | 2.9 pts toward opponents | None identified | 2.9 pts toward opponents | W 28–7 | W | None identified |
| 2025 · W2 | at Georgia StateAway | Memphis -28 | Memphis -15 | 12.8 pts toward opponents | 3.6 pts toward opponents | 9.2 pts toward opponents | W 38–16 | W | Lopsided Game-Flow Uncertainty |
| 2025 · W1 | vs. ChattanoogaHome | Memphis -20.5 | Memphis -30.5 | 10.2 pts toward Memphis | None identified | 10.2 pts toward Memphis | W 45–10 | W | None identified |
| 2022 · W13 | at SMUAway | Memphis +0.5 | Memphis +4.5 | 3.9 pts toward opponents | None identified | 3.9 pts toward opponents | L 31–34 | W | None identified |
| 2022 · W12 | vs. North AlabamaHome | Memphis -31 | Memphis -36 | 5.2 pts toward Memphis | 0.6 pts toward Memphis | 4.6 pts toward Memphis | W 59–0 | W | Lopsided Game-Flow Uncertainty |
| 2022 · W10 | vs. UCFHome | Memphis +8.5 | Memphis +3 | 5.7 pts toward Memphis | 1.1 pts toward Memphis | 4.6 pts toward Memphis | L 28–35 | L | Rest Differential |
| 2022 · W6 | vs. HoustonHome | Memphis -4.5 | Memphis -1.5 | 2.9 pts toward opponents | None identified | 2.9 pts toward opponents | L 32–33 | L | None identified |
| 2022 · W1 | at Mississippi StateAway | Memphis +13.5 | Memphis +17 | 3.5 pts toward opponents | 0.9 pts toward Memphis | 4.3 pts toward opponents | L 23–49 | L | Season-Opening Quarterback Experience |
Sample: 17 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.