← All Teams
MEM
Memphis
TigersRun-HeavyAmerican Conference2-0
Early-season ratings are provisional. Opponent adjustment relies on a thin schedule graph until teams are connected through more games; expect movement through late September.
Analytical Fingerprint
SS-native team profile — opponent-adjusted and garbage-filtered EPA, success, and explosiveness.
Opp-Adj Offense
+0.102
Opp-Adj Defense
-0.012
higher = better
Offensive EPA/play
+0.211
Defensive EPA/play
+0.015
lower = better
Off Success Rate
48.8%
Def Success Rate
44.9%
allowed · lower = better
Explosive Rate
30.1%
pass EPA > 1.0 · rush > 0.8
Explosive Allowed
25.4%
lower = better
Net EPA/play
+0.197
net · higher = better
Recent EPA Trend
-0.002
last 3 weeks
Points / Drive
2.88
Peer Context
Where Memphis ranks among all FBS teams in 2026 (percentile).
Opp-adjusted offense99th
Opp-adjusted defense42th
Offensive EPA/play72th
Defensive EPA/play36th
Offensive success rate52th
Explosiveness90th
Defensive havoc66th
Points per drive53th
Historical Fingerprint
Most statistically similar team-seasons, 2017–2025, by the same 44-feature profile The Archive uses. Descriptive context, not a forecast.
1Oklahoma State2019OA +0.084 / +0.036similar: offensive EPA, passing offense, turnover rate3762Michigan State2021OA +0.076 / -0.001similar: havoc rate, takeaway rate, defensive EPA3693Utah State2023OA +0.011 / -0.063similar: offensive EPA, defensive success rate, defensive EPA3564Mississippi State2019OA +0.064 / -0.030similar: rushing offense, run defense, havoc rate3535Michigan2025OA +0.091 / +0.024similar: rushing offense, offensive EPA, TD drive rate349
2026 Schedule & Results
12 games
| Wk | Opponent | Score | W/L | Spread | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | @ UNLV | 27-21 | W | +4.0 | W | 55.5 | U |
| 1 | vs Arkansas State | 42-24 | W | -11.0 | W | 53.5 | O |
| 2 | @ Boise State | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 3 | vs UT Martin | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 5 | @ Charlotte | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 6 | vs UAB | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 7 | @ Tulane | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 8 | vs East Carolina | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 9 | vs Army | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 11 | @ South Florida | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 12 | @ Navy | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 13 | vs Temple | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Betting Profile
ATS Record
2-0
100.0%
O/U Record
1-1
50.0%
Straight Up
2-0
100.0%
Home ATS1-0
Away ATS1-0
Favorite ATS1-0
Underdog ATS1-0
Last 5 ATS
WW
Graded against consensus market lines (median across multiple sportsbooks). Games the market never lined — mostly early-season non-FBS matchups — are excluded from ATS and O/U records; individual games may grade differently than closing-line sources.
Situational Profile
Situational EPA percentile across 8 phases (the larger the shape, the more dominant). Within-FBS ranks.
| Situation | OFF EPA | OFF Rank | DEF EPA | DEF Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | +0.211 | 80th | +0.015 | 35th |
| Red Zone | +0.161 | 58th | -0.302 | 65th |
| Third Down | +0.084 | 50th | -0.161 | 57th |
| No Garbage Time | +0.211 | 74th | +0.015 | 37th |
| First Half | +0.167 | 64th | +0.170 | 18th |
| Second Half | +0.249 | 81th | -0.145 | 59th |
| Early Downs | +0.296 | 91th | +0.133 | 17th |
| Passing Downs | -0.070 | 36th | -0.393 | 85th |
| Standard Downs | +0.327 | 93th | +0.261 | 7th |
| Goal to Go | +0.431 | 63th | +0.183 | 62th |
Style & Tendencies
Pass 33.3%Rush 66.7%
Havoc/Game
-
Havoc Rate
23.6%
TO Margin
-
Explosive/G
-
Yards/Game
-
Pts/Drive
2.88
3rd Down%
-
3&Out%
20.8%