UTSA · Week 4 analysis

Where the team stands

UTSA ranks No. 63 in the reconstructed EP field, with a rating of +0.19 points against the average FBS opponent.

The previous snapshot ranked it No. 57; this update moves it -6 places and -1.19 rating points.

The rating snapshot includes 4 eligible games, with an eligible-results record of 3–1. The 24-hour kickoff embargo is applied consistently in historical forecast snapshots.

What enters this model

Opponent-adjusted current margin: +2.134. Prior-season margin: +9.634.

Opponent-adjusted first-down rate: +0.0002; EPA/play net: -0.0394; success-rate net: -0.0055; explosiveness net: -0.1111. These are adjusted net signals, not raw offensive rates.

EP inputs cover 1 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

UTSA beat Colorado State by 14 points. The pre-result reconstruction projected a margin of +18.64; the result was -4.64 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 2026-10-03. That fixture is schedule information; its later outcome is not used in this report.

Offense: production and workload

Total yards: 542 versus 500; Net passing yards: 303 versus 344; Rushing yards: 239 versus 156; First downs: 25 versus 21

Completions–attempts: 20-30 versus 29-46; Rush attempts: 42 versus 32; Yards per pass: 10.1 versus 7.5; Yards per rush: 5.7 versus 4.9

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 45 points and recorded 500 total yards. This describes the conceded production; it does not identify a particular player or coverage as its cause.

Recorded sacks: 1 versus 1; Tackles for loss: 4 versus 5; Third downs: 9-16 versus 6-17; Fourth downs: 0-0 versus 5-6

Turnovers: 0 versus 1; Fumbles lost: 0 versus 0; Interceptions thrown: 0 versus 1; Penalties–yards: 3-45 versus 11-61; Possession time: 28:43 versus 31:17

The season outlook at this snapshot

The recorded regular-season record is 3–1. The expected final record is 7.4–4.6 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. 62 Liberty (+0.74); No. 64 Florida State (+0.15).

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.