UAB · Week 6 analysis

Where the team stands

UAB ranks No. 118 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of -9.76 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 116; this update moves it -2 places and +0.34 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: -1.108. Prior-season margin: -6.373.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: -0.0117; EPA/play net: -0.0322; success-rate net: -0.0174; explosiveness net: +0.0178. 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

UAB lost to Memphis by 25 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of -21.20; the result was -3.80 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 2026-10-15. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 310 versus 394; Net passing yards: 131 versus 164; Rushing yards: 179 versus 230; First downs: 20 versus 24

Completions–attempts: 10-22 versus 11-21; Rush attempts: 49 versus 46; Yards per pass: 6.0 versus 7.8; Yards per rush: 3.7 versus 5.0

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 38 points and recorded 394 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 1 versus 3; Tackles for loss: 1 versus 7; Third downs: 3-15 versus 7-14; Fourth downs: 0-2 versus 0-0

Turnovers: 3 versus 0; Fumbles lost: 2 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 1 versus 0; Penalties–yards: 3-28 versus 7-74; Possession time: 33:42 versus 26:18

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 3–3. The expected final record is 5.0–7.0 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. 117 Coastal Carolina (-9.48); No. 119 Rice (-10.86).

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.