Rice · Week 5 analysis

Where the team stands

Rice ranks No. 124 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -11.65 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 124; this update moves it +0 places and -0.95 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 5 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 1–4. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: -3.507. Prior-season margin: -9.448.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: -0.0137; EPA/play net: -0.0374; success-rate net: +0.0123; explosiveness net: -0.0283. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 4 eligible games. Excluded games contribute no fabricated EP observation. Opponent results can move a rating even during a bye.

The result and the reconstructed expectation

Rice lost to UTSA by 2 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -7.92; the result was +5.92 points relative to that expectation.

This is a newly reconstructed forecast under the frozen EP model. It is not represented as a prediction published before the game, and it does not replace the original published grade.

Next scheduled test

The next scheduled opponent at this snapshot is East Carolina on 2026-10-10. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 232 versus 314; Net passing yards: 88 versus 148; Rushing yards: 144 versus 166; First downs: 13 versus 20

Completions–attempts: 6-14 versus 19-29; Rush attempts: 46 versus 43; Yards per pass: 6.3 versus 5.1; Yards per rush: 3.1 versus 3.9

Read production alongside workload: more attempts can raise a yardage total without raising efficiency. The model uses opponent-adjusted rate signals, not this box score alone.

Defense and possession

The opponent scored 16 points and recorded 314 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 2 versus 3; Tackles for loss: 6 versus 10; Third downs: 2-13 versus 6-16; Fourth downs: 4-6 versus 2-2

Turnovers: 1 versus 2; Fumbles lost: 1 versus 1; Interceptions thrown: 0 versus 1; Penalties–yards: 7-45 versus 7-64; Possession time: 27:54 versus 32:06

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 1–4. The expected final record is 2.7–9.3 over 12 scheduled games.

Expected wins add recorded results to the estimated win probabilities of remaining games. They are not a list of certain winners. Probabilities use a symmetric approximation from historical development residuals; independent calibration has not been established.

The comparison around the ranking

Nearby in this same snapshot: No. 123 Hawai'i (-10.98); No. 125 Missouri State (-11.66).

PSR compares predictive strength rather than sorting teams by wins. A team can win and move down, or lose and move up, as its performance and opponents change the adjusted evidence.

How to read this assessment

This is a fresh assessment under the frozen EP model, using this period's eligible inputs. Earlier published releases remain preserved separately; the reconstructed archive is not presented as a prediction published before those games.

Scoring margin, prior-season margin, first-down efficiency, EPA per play, success rate and explosiveness contribute together. Correlated signals should not be interpreted as independent proof of an advantage, and a model disagreement with a betting line is not proof of profit.