·
Sat Nov 14, 11:00 AM CT · Gerald J. Ford Stadium
Our call: Wake Forest by 2.1 · 55% pregame win chance
55%Our win chance45%
Our win chance: Wake Forest 55% · SMU 45% · experimental, see how it is tested
Model comparison
9 of 10 models favor Wake Forest
| Model | Says | Win chance | Use this |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Margin The Margin's model | Wake Forest by 4.8 | Wake Forest 64% | Use this |
| SRS Wake Forest +14.3 vs SMU +7.9 | Wake Forest by 3.9 | Wake Forest 61% | Use this |
| ESPN FPI Wake Forest +18.0 vs SMU +11.9 | Wake Forest by 3.6 | Wake Forest 60% | Use this |
| Our model · experimental Wake Forest +15.7 vs SMU +10.0 | Wake Forest by 3.2 | Wake Forest 59% | Use this |
| Market the market's pregame margin | Wake Forest by 3 | Wake Forest 59% | Use this |
| Sagarin Wake Forest +85.2 vs SMU +80.6 | Wake Forest by 2.0 | Wake Forest 56% | Use this |
| SP+ Wake Forest +20.0 vs SMU +15.8 | Wake Forest by 1.7 | Wake Forest 55% | Use this |
| Elo Wake Forest 1877 vs SMU 1783 | Wake Forest by 1.3 | Wake Forest 54% | Use this |
| Sonny Moore Wake Forest +88.3 vs SMU +84.6 | SMU by 0.2 | SMU 51% | Use this |
| Record SMU 7-2, Wake Forest 8-1 | Wake Forest (better record) | – | Use this |
| Our call average of SP+, Elo and Our model | Wake Forest by 2.1 | Wake Forest 55% | 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 · SMU 9 games, Wake Forest 9 games
Edge: Wake Forest wins 4 of 5
Wake Forest moves the ball better, stops plays better, has the edge on big plays and allows fewer big plays. SMU is more disruptive.
-
50% Moves the ballsuccessful plays ✓52%
-
39% Stops playssuccessful plays allowed ✓38%
-
17%✓ Disruptionsacks, TFLs, turnovers 15%
-
1.26 Big playson offense ✓1.31
-
1.30 Big plays allowedon defense ✓1.12
Run game, head to head · season to date
SMU's runs work 49% of the time; Wake Forest's run defense allows 34%. Wake Forest's runs work 52% of the time; SMU's run defense allows 44%.
More numbers
| Measure | SMU | Wake Forest | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Off. success rate | 49.9% | 51.8% | Wake Forest |
| Off. explosiveness | 1.26 | 1.31 | Wake Forest |
| Def. success rate allowed | 39.2% | 38.0% | Wake Forest |
| Def. explosiveness allowed | 1.30 | 1.12 | Wake Forest |
| Havoc created | 17.4% | 15.3% | SMU |
- Run game, success rate: SMU offense 48.7% · Wake Forest defense allows 34.0% · edge: even
- Run game, success rate: Wake Forest offense 52.2% · SMU defense allows 43.8% · edge: Wake Forest
- Run game, PPA per play: SMU offense +0.10 · Wake Forest defense allows -0.07 · edge: Wake Forest
- Run game, PPA per play: Wake Forest offense +0.30 · SMU defense allows +0.12 · edge: Wake Forest
- 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
SP+, Elo, Our model, ESPN FPI, SRS, Sagarin, The Margin, Record and Market favor Wake Forest; Sonny Moore favors SMU.
SP+ has Wake Forest by 1.7, Elo has Wake Forest by 1.3, Our model has Wake Forest by 3.2, ESPN FPI has Wake Forest by 3.6, SRS has Wake Forest by 3.9, Sagarin has Wake Forest by 2.0, Sonny Moore has SMU by 0.2, The Margin has Wake Forest by 4.8, and Market has Wake Forest by 3.0. The furthest apart are 5.0 points from each other.
Last 4 meetings
SMU leads 3–1 · last: Wake Forest 13–12, 2025
| Season | Result | Site |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Wake Forest 13–12 | Allegacy Federal Credit Union Stadium |
| 1975 | SMU 14–7 | — |
| 1972 | SMU 56–10 | — |
| 1949 | SMU 13–7 | — |