·
Sat Nov 14, 6:00 PM CT · Beaver Stadium
Our call: Penn State by 11.6 · 77% pregame win chance
23%Our win chance77%
Our win chance: Penn State 77% · Minnesota 23% · experimental, see how it is tested
Model comparison
10 of 10 models favor Penn State
| Model | Says | Win chance | Use this |
|---|---|---|---|
| Elo Minnesota 1451 vs Penn State 1798 | Penn State by 16.4 | Penn State 88% | Use this |
| The Margin The Margin's model | Penn State by 14.7 | Penn State 86% | Use this |
| ESPN FPI Minnesota +1.9 vs Penn State +12.1 | Penn State by 12.7 | Penn State 82% | Use this |
| SP+ Minnesota +1.3 vs Penn State +9.3 | Penn State by 10.5 | Penn State 78% | Use this |
| Our model · experimental Minnesota +3.2 vs Penn State +8.6 | Penn State by 7.9 | Penn State 72% | Use this |
| Sagarin Minnesota +76.7 vs Penn State +81.4 | Penn State by 7.3 | Penn State 70% | Use this |
| Market the market's pregame margin | Penn State by 7 | Penn State 69% | Use this |
| Sonny Moore Minnesota +78.7 vs Penn State +81.6 | Penn State by 6.9 | Penn State 69% | Use this |
| SRS Minnesota +2.3 vs Penn State +6.4 | Penn State by 6.6 | Penn State 68% | Use this |
| Record Penn State 5-4, Minnesota 5-4 | Penn State (better record) | – | Use this |
| Our call average of SP+, Elo and Our model | Penn State by 11.6 | Penn State 77% | Use this |
Each margin is from the same weekly ratings the team pages use: SP+ and Elo from their rating gap, the home team given 2.5 points (none at a neutral site); Our model is this site's experimental rating; Market is the margin the market expected before kickoff; ESPN FPI, SRS, Sagarin and Sonny Moore are rating gaps like SP+'s (each with its own home field), The Margin is that site's own model, and Record names the team with the better record (the home team on equal records). How these work ›
Matchup efficiency
Efficiency matchup · season to date · Penn State 9 games, Minnesota 9 games
Edge: Penn State wins 3 of 5
Penn State moves the ball better, stops plays better and has the edge on big plays. Minnesota is more disruptive and allows fewer big plays.
-
40%✓ Moves the ballsuccessful plays 36%
-
39%✓ Stops playssuccessful plays allowed 40%
-
18% Disruptionsacks, TFLs, turnovers ✓20%
-
1.29✓ Big playson offense 1.20
-
1.29 Big plays allowedon defense ✓1.26
Run game, head to head · season to date
Penn State's runs work 38% of the time; Minnesota's run defense allows 43%. Minnesota's runs work 34% of the time; Penn State's run defense allows 43%.
More numbers
| Measure | Penn State | Minnesota | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Off. success rate | 40.5% | 36.2% | Penn State |
| Off. explosiveness | 1.29 | 1.20 | Penn State |
| Def. success rate allowed | 38.9% | 39.7% | Penn State |
| Def. explosiveness allowed | 1.29 | 1.26 | Minnesota |
| Havoc created | 17.5% | 20.0% | Minnesota |
- Run game, success rate: Penn State offense 37.7% · Minnesota defense allows 42.6% · edge: Minnesota
- Run game, success rate: Minnesota offense 34.4% · Penn State defense allows 42.9% · edge: Penn State
- Run game, PPA per play: Penn State offense +0.06 · Minnesota defense allows +0.04 · edge: even
- Run game, PPA per play: Minnesota offense -0.11 · Penn State defense allows +0.21 · edge: even
- Success rate: how often a play does its job, gaining enough yards to keep the offense on schedule.
- Explosiveness: how big a team's successful plays are on average; a higher number means more big gains.
- Havoc: how often the defense blows up a play with a sack, a tackle for loss, a takeaway or a pass broken up.
- PPA (predicted points added): how many points an average play is worth to the offense; above zero is good for the offense, below zero good for the defense.
How to read this
- Each row compares the two teams on one measure of how well they have played this season, offense and defense, using every game so far with garbage time (plays late in a decided game) left out.
- The run game rows pair one team's rushing offense with the other's run defense. The row goes to whichever side is further from the FBS baseline this season, the offense by how far it runs above it, the defense by how much less it allows (baseline: run success rate 42%, PPA per play +0.07, the midpoint of what FBS offenses gain and FBS defenses allow, since both also play FCS teams), so two strong sides or two weak ones are judged by which is the more so. Edges within 3 points of success rate or 0.05 PPA are even. A strong run offense against a weak run defense is where a team can control the game on the ground.
- In the five rows at the top the longer bar is the better number: bars are scaled within each row, and in the two "allowed" rows the lower number gets the longer bar.
- Success rate is the share of plays that kept the offense on schedule (half the yards needed on first down, most of them on second, all of them on third or fourth). Explosiveness is how big the successful plays were, on average, in points. Havoc is the share of the opponent's snaps the defense wrecked: a tackle for loss, a sack, a takeaway or a pass broken up.
- "Allowed" rows are what each defense gave up, so the lower value wins.
- These are not adjusted for who each team has played, so a light schedule flatters a team, and early in the season they rest on very few games.
- Metrics explained: success rate, explosiveness and havoc ›
The prediction
All 10 models favor Penn State.
SP+ has Penn State by 10.5, Elo has Penn State by 16.4, Our model has Penn State by 7.9, ESPN FPI has Penn State by 12.7, SRS has Penn State by 6.6, Sagarin has Penn State by 7.3, Sonny Moore has Penn State by 6.9, The Margin has Penn State by 14.7, and Market has Penn State by 7.0. They are within 9.8 points of each other.
Last 5 meetings
Penn State leads 11–6 · last: Penn State 26–25, 2024 · Penn State has won 2 straight
| Season | Result | Site |
|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Penn State 26–25 | Huntington Bank Stadium |
| 2022 | Penn State 45–17 | Beaver Stadium |
| 2019 | Minnesota 31–26 | Huntington Bank Stadium |
| 2016 | Penn State 29–26 | Beaver Stadium |
| 2013 | Minnesota 24–10 | Huntington Bank Stadium |