Tulsa · Week 6 analysis

Where the team stands

Tulsa ranks No. 103 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -6.25 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 102; this update moves it -1 places and +0.22 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 6 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 3–3. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: +2.406. Prior-season margin: -4.225.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: -0.0092; EPA/play net: +0.0271; success-rate net: +0.0007; explosiveness net: +0.0079. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 5 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

Tulsa lost to Navy by 8 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -14.72; the result was +6.72 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 Rice on 2026-10-17. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 376 versus 481; Net passing yards: 278 versus 95; Rushing yards: 98 versus 386; First downs: 16 versus 24

Completions–attempts: 21-36 versus 5-7; Rush attempts: 28 versus 67; Yards per pass: 7.7 versus 13.6; Yards per rush: 3.5 versus 5.8

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 34 points and recorded 481 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 0 versus 1; Tackles for loss: 1 versus 4; Third downs: 7-16 versus 8-11; Fourth downs: 2-3 versus 2-3

Turnovers: 0 versus 4; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 3; Interceptions thrown: 0 versus 1; Penalties–yards: 2-20 versus 2-19; Possession time: 25:29 versus 34:31

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 3–3. The expected final record is 6.0–6.0 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. 102 California (-6.17); No. 104 App State (-6.85).

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.