Next up projections
at Kentucky
Week 8 · Sat Oct 24, 6:30 PM CT / 7:30 PM ET · Kroger Field (Lexington) · Kentucky (FBS, SEC)
·
Our call: Kentucky by 6.8Lean
All three models favor Kentucky (SP+ from the week 7 snapshot). The line, shown for comparison only, has Kentucky by 10.5.
The average of SP+, Elo and Our model; the line is left out and kept as a benchmark. Toss-up under 3 points, Lean 3 to 7, Strong 7 and over. More ›
Regression watch: Last game's 10-point loss matched the play (score +3 against play), inside the 7-point band: no flag. More ›
Schedule: Played the 31st-toughest schedule in FBS so far (average opponent rating +1.0); 2nd-toughest remaining (+13.9). More ›
Opponents by our model's rating 7 played · 5 left
- Week 1 vs Austin Peay (-33.2) · FCS, pooled
- Week 2 vs Delaware (-12.4)
- Week 3 vs NC State (+5.4)
- Week 4 at Auburn (+10.2)
- Week 5 at Georgia (+21.9)
- Week 6 vs Ole Miss (+16.1)
- Week 7 vs Arkansas (-1.4)
- Remaining:
- Week 8 at Kentucky (+7.9)
- Week 10 at Mississippi State (+9.0)
- Week 11 vs Alabama (+22.9)
- Week 12 at Florida (+13.4)
- Week 13 vs Tennessee (+16.1)
Each opponent's rating from our model's week 8 snapshot, in points against an average FBS team; the averages are ranked among the 138 FBS teams. Played means through week 7. Experimental, like the Our model card.
Series: Kentucky leads 49–42–4 · last: Vanderbilt 45–17, 2025 · Vanderbilt has won 2 straight
Series history 95 meetings since 1906
- All-time: Kentucky leads 49–42–4 (95 meetings since 1906)
- Last meeting: Vanderbilt 45–17, 2025, FirstBank Stadium
- Streak: Vanderbilt has won 2 straight
- At Kroger Field: Kentucky leads 8–4 (12 meetings)
- Biggest margins: Vanderbilt 45–0 (1916) · Kentucky 53–2 (1978)
- Since 2000: Kentucky leads 16–10 (26 meetings)
| Season | Result | Site |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Vanderbilt 45–17 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2024 | Vanderbilt 20–13 | Kroger Field |
| 2023 | Kentucky 45–28 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2022 | Vanderbilt 24–21 | Kroger Field |
| 2021 | Kentucky 34–17 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2020 | Kentucky 38–35 | Kroger Field |
| 2019 | Kentucky 38–14 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2018 | Kentucky 14–7 | Kroger Field |
| 2017 | Kentucky 44–21 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2016 | Kentucky 20–13 | Kroger Field |
| 2015 | Vanderbilt 21–17 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2014 | Kentucky 17–7 | Kroger Field |
| 2013 | Vanderbilt 22–6 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2012 | Vanderbilt 40–0 | Kroger Field |
| 2011 | Vanderbilt 38–8 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2010 | Kentucky 38–20 | Kroger Field |
| 2009 | Kentucky 24–13 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2008 | Vanderbilt 31–24 | Kroger Field |
| 2007 | Kentucky 27–20 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2006 | Kentucky 38–26 | Kroger Field |
| 2005 | Kentucky 48–43 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2004 | Kentucky 14–13 | Kroger Field |
| 2003 | Vanderbilt 28–17 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2002 | Kentucky 41–21 | Kroger Field |
| 2001 | Kentucky 56–30 | FirstBank Stadium |
| 2000 | Vanderbilt 24–20 | away |
| Rating | Vanderbilt | Kentucky |
|---|---|---|
| SP+ | +1.2 #65 | +8.0 #46 |
| Elo | 1577 | 1599 |
Projected margin for Vanderbilt · three models and the line, side by side
How to read this
- SP+ is a rating of how good a team is, in points better or worse than an average team, built from its play-by-play, so the gap between two teams' ratings is a projected margin.
- Elo is a rating that goes up with every win and down with every loss, more for beating a strong team, less for beating a weak one. The gap between two ratings is divided by 25 to turn it into points.
- The line is the pregame line, the margin the market expected, shown from Vanderbilt's side. It is not one of the models: it is shown for comparison only, as the benchmark the models and Our call are measured against.
- Our model is this site's own experimental rating, built from each team's play-by-play adjusted for who it has played, blended with a preseason estimate from last season, returning players and recruiting. "prior 67%" means 67 percent of the rating is still that preseason estimate; the share shrinks as games are played.
- In SP+, Elo and our model the home team gets 2.5 points (Kentucky); the line already includes the market's own home edge. The conversion to points is approximate.
- "avg miss 9.8" under a card is how far that model's projections have been from the actual margins this season, on average, in points. "closest 10/39" is how many of the season's 39 finished games that model came closest on (a tie counts for every tied model); the line, a benchmark, shows its average miss only. Shown once a model has 20 finished games.
- Our call, above the cards, is the site's prediction: the simple average of the SP+, Elo and our model margins. The pregame line is left out of it and kept as a benchmark to measure it against. Toss-up means the average is under 3 points, Lean 3 to 7, Strong 7 or more. It is made only when all three of those models have a number, and it is scored after the game like the models.
- Each card is one method's estimate, shown side by side; when they disagree, that is worth knowing.
- After a game, the sentence under the score shows every model and the line against the actual margin: ✓ when a model named the winner, ✗ when it did not (the line, a benchmark, gets no mark), and Closest: the model nearest the final margin among those present, never the line (an exact tie goes to the first listed). The "closest 10/39" counts keep the accuracy report's scoring of SP+ and Elo, where a tie credits both.
- Metrics explained: the four models and their track record ›
Efficiency matchup · season to date · Vanderbilt 7 games, Kentucky 7 games
Edge: Kentucky wins 3 of 5
Kentucky moves the ball better, is more disruptive and allows fewer big plays. Vanderbilt stops plays better and has the edge on big plays.
-
40% Moves the ballsuccessful plays ✓48%
-
43%✓ Stops playssuccessful plays allowed 45%
-
14% Disruptionsacks, TFLs, turnovers ✓18%
-
1.29✓ Big playson offense 1.15
-
1.22 Big plays allowedon defense ✓1.17
Run game, head to head · season to date
Vanderbilt's runs work 40% of the time; Kentucky's run defense allows 45%. Kentucky's runs work 51% of the time; Vanderbilt's run defense allows 44%.
More numbers
| Measure | Vanderbilt | Kentucky | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Off. success rate | 40.2% | 47.9% | Kentucky |
| Off. explosiveness | 1.29 | 1.15 | Vanderbilt |
| Def. success rate allowed | 43.3% | 44.6% | Vanderbilt |
| Def. explosiveness allowed | 1.22 | 1.17 | Kentucky |
| Havoc created | 14.5% | 18.4% | Kentucky |
- Run game, success rate: Vanderbilt offense 39.7% · Kentucky defense allows 44.9% · edge: even
- Run game, success rate: Kentucky offense 51.0% · Vanderbilt defense allows 44.0% · edge: Kentucky
- Run game, PPA per play: Vanderbilt offense +0.11 · Kentucky defense allows +0.08 · edge: even
- Run game, PPA per play: Kentucky offense +0.18 · Vanderbilt defense allows +0.04 · edge: Kentucky
- 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 43%, PPA per play +0.08, 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 ›
Rest of the season experimental
| Date | Opponent | Our win chance | Projected |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sat Oct 24 | at #15 Kentucky | 33% | by 6.8 them |
| Fri Nov 6 | at #16 Mississippi State | 30% | by 8.2 them |
| Fri Nov 13 | vs #6 Alabama | 14% | by 16.3 them |
| Fri Nov 20 | at Florida | 25% | by 10.2 them |
| Fri Nov 27 | vs #14 Tennessee | 24% | by 10.5 them |
Projected record: 4.3 wins on average; most likely 4-8 (35%). Conference title: 0%. Playoff: 0%. Playoff chances ›
From our model's simulation of the rest of the season (10,000 times); the win chance is how often we won that game in the simulations, the projected margin is Our call's (SP+, Elo and Our model averaged, 2.5 points to the home team).
Injuries
No injury report yet for this game. First reports usually come Wednesday.
Coverage (AI-assisted) · 4
Gathered by an AI model from public posts, not from CollegeFootballData. Not used in any number on this page. Verify against the linked sources.
- Arkansas wins on the road at Vanderbilt, snapping a 14-game SEC losing streak
- Georgia tailback Nate Frazier is expected to start for the Bulldogs tonight, per a source
-
Vanderbilt backup quarterback Blaze Berlowitz out after surgery
Blaze Berlowitz had surgery to repair a broken collarbone and will be out a month.
-
Florida receiver Vernell Brown ruled out against South Carolina
Florida wide receiver Vernell Brown has been ruled out for the game against South Carolina.
1 entry about games now final not shown.
Score and result
Vanderbilt 21, Arkansas 31L
Game page: the call before kickoff and how each model did ›
Projected: SP+ +6.1 ✗ · Elo +7.6 ✗ · Our model +8.6 ✗ · the line (benchmark) n/a · actual -10 · Closest: SP+
Home at FirstBank Stadium · Sat Oct 17, 6:00 PM CT / 7:00 PM ET · vs Arkansas (FBS, SEC)
Opponent for every game-level number: Arkansas (FBS, SEC).
- By quarter: Vanderbilt 7-7-7-0 · Arkansas 0-14-14-3
- Week 7 polls: neither team ranked
- Pregame Elo: Vanderbilt 1610, Arkansas 1482
- Postgame win probability: 25.9%
Verdict
The 10-point loss matched the play: Arkansas's per-play edge (PPA (expected points added per play) +0.10 vs +0.27, success rate 44% vs 48%) implies roughly a -13 margin.
The verdict compares the score with the margin the plays earned. How it is reached ›
Efficiency
Edge: Arkansas won 3 of 4
Arkansas moved the ball better, got more from each play and was more disruptive. Vanderbilt hit the bigger plays.
-
44% Moved the ballsuccessful plays ✓48%
-
+0.10 Points per playwhat a play was worth ✓+0.27
-
1.27✓ Big playssize of the good plays 1.12
-
10% Disruptionsacks, TFLs, turnovers ✓12%
More numbers
Vanderbilt ran 62 plays, Arkansas 73. Each number is that team's offense; Arkansas's column is also what Vanderbilt's defense allowed.
| Measure | Vanderbilt | Arkansas | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| PPA / play | +0.10 | +0.27 | Arkansas |
| Total PPA | +6.3 | +19.5 | Arkansas |
| Success rate | 43.5% | 47.9% | Arkansas |
| Explosiveness | 1.27 | 1.12 | Vanderbilt |
| Havoc created | 9.6% | 11.7% | Arkansas |
- Success rate: how often a play did its job, gaining enough yards to keep the offense on schedule.
- Explosiveness: how big a team's successful plays were on average; a higher number means more big gains.
- Havoc: how often the defense blew up a play with a sack, a tackle for loss, a takeaway or a pass broken up. Counted from the play-by-play, so it is approximate.
- PPA (predicted points added): how many points an average play was worth to the offense. Total PPA adds up every play, and is what the Verdict compares with the score.
How to read this
- The four rows at the top compare the two offenses in this game; the longer bar is the better number, scaled within each row. A number at or below zero draws no bar.
- A check marks the better side of a row. The line above the rows counts them: it describes how the game was played, not who won it.
- Metrics explained ›
Top performers
Vanderbilt players by cumulative PPA in this game. Usage is the share of the team's plays of that type involving the player. Receiving is passing-play PPA for non-quarterbacks.
Passing
| Player | Pass usage | PPA | /play |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Curtis QB | 100% | +9.0 | +0.29 |
Rushing
| Player | Rush usage | PPA | /play |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sedrick Alexander RB | 36% | +2.5 | +0.25 |
| Makhilyn Young RB | 32% | +1.1 | +0.12 |
| Jared Curtis QB | 25% | +0.8 | +0.11 |
| Jamezell Lassiter RB | 7% | -1.9 | -0.93 |
Receiving
| Player | Target usage | PPA | /play |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junior Sherrill WR | 32% | +7.9 | +0.79 |
| Ja'Cory Thomas WR | 13% | +3.5 | +0.89 |
| Sedrick Alexander RB | 10% | +3.5 | +1.17 |
| Maurice Veney TE | 3% | +2.8 | +2.78 |
By play type
| Measure | Vanderbilt | Arkansas | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rushing PPA | +0.09 | +0.20 | Arkansas |
| Rushing success | 39.3% | 43.9% | Arkansas |
| Passing PPA | +0.29 | +0.39 | Arkansas |
| Passing success | 51.6% | 54.8% | Arkansas |
| Standard downs PPA | +0.39 | +0.34 | Vanderbilt |
| Standard downs success | 53.5% | 54.0% | Arkansas |
| Passing downs PPA | -0.54 | +0.11 | Arkansas |
| Passing downs success | 21.1% | 34.8% | Arkansas |
Havoc detail — Vanderbilt defense: TFL 2, sacks 0, takeaways 0, breakups 5 on 73 snaps. Arkansas defense: TFL 2, sacks 1, takeaways 2, breakups 2 on 60 snaps.
Drives
A scoring opportunity is a drive that reaches the opponent's 40-yard line or scores; points per opportunity is the points those drives produced divided by their number.
Recruiting
| Measure | Vanderbilt | Arkansas |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 class rank | 33 | 46 |
| 2026 class points | 225.43 | 212.68 |
| Talent composite | 727.4 #42 of 138 |
745.5 #36 of 138 |
Transfer portal · 18 in, 20 out
Arrivals (18)
| Player | From | ★ | Elig. | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brian Allen EDGE | Iowa | 4 | Immediate | Jan 11, 2026 |
| Ja'Cory Thomas WR | Old Dominion | 4 | Immediate | Jan 12, 2026 |
| Maurice Veney TE | Morehouse | 3 | Immediate | Nov 17, 2025 |
| Jayvontay Conner TE | East Carolina | 3 | Immediate | Jan 5, 2026 |
| Beau Johnson OT | North Dakota State | 3 | Immediate | Jan 5, 2026 |
| Talan Carter DL | Jacksonville State | 3 | Immediate | Jan 5, 2026 |
| Cobey Sellers CB | Texas A&M | 3 | Immediate | Jan 6, 2026 |
| Lyndon Cooper IOL | Pittsburgh | 3 | Immediate | Jan 7, 2026 |
| CJ Jackson EDGE | LSU | 3 | Immediate | Jan 9, 2026 |
| Cole Adams WR | Alabama | 3 | Immediate | Jan 9, 2026 |
+8 more not shown (18 total).
Departures (20)
| Player | To | ★ | Elig. | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremiah Dillon WR | undecided | 4 | Immediate | Dec 30, 2025 |
| Tre Richardson WR | Louisville | 4 | Immediate | Jan 9, 2026 |
| Chance Fitzgerald WR | Austin Peay | 4 | Immediate | Jan 23, 2026 |
| Chris Tangelo S | Virginia Tech | 4 | Immediate | Mar 3, 2026 |
| Jailen Ruth LB | undecided | 3 | Immediate | Dec 21, 2025 |
| Drew Dickey QB | Arkansas State | 3 | Immediate | Jan 4, 2026 |
| Cooper Starks IOL | South Dakota State | 3 | Immediate | Jan 7, 2026 |
| Linus Zunk EDGE | Washington State | 3 | Immediate | Jan 9, 2026 |
| Randon Fontenette S | Colorado | 3 | Immediate | Jan 11, 2026 |
| Jeremy St-Hilaire QB | Arkansas State | 3 | Immediate | Jan 12, 2026 |
+10 more not shown (20 total).
2026 commits · 23
| Player | Hometown | ★ | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Curtis QB | Nashville, TN | 5 | 0.9985 |
| Mitchell Smith OT | Picayune, MS | 4 | 0.8999 |
| Collin Flanigan CB | Oxford, MS | 4 | 0.8992 |
| Chris Tangelo ATH | Germantown, MD | 4 | 0.8953 |
| Evan Hampton RB | Owensboro, KY | 4 | 0.8911 |
| Tilden Riley TE | Orangeburg, SC | 3 | 0.8878 |
| Jace McCallum EDGE | Mooresville, NC | 3 | 0.8856 |
| Bradley Brown S | Plano, TX | 3 | 0.8822 |
| Owen Cabell WR | Nashville, TN | 3 | 0.8822 |
| Pulelei'ite Primus IOL | Midland, TX | 3 | 0.8811 |
| Mason Lewis S | Chandler, AZ | 3 | 0.8800 |
| Daryl Campbell DL | Katy, TX | 3 | 0.8789 |
| Adam Gehm TE | Harmony, PA | 3 | 0.8778 |
| Tripp Skewes OT | Englewood, CO | 3 | 0.8767 |
| Daniel Vollmer Jr. LB | Cincinnati, OH | 3 | 0.8756 |
+8 more not shown (23 total).
Returning production
Share of last season's production returning for Vanderbilt in 2026.
| Unit | % PPA | PPA | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 35.4% | 203.3 | 32.6% |
| Passing | 8.7% | 17.8 | 6.1% |
| Receiving | 50.1% | 126.2 | 44.9% |
| Rushing | 50.1% | 59.3 | 50.1% |
A figure above 100% or below 0% is expected when last season's returning players had negative PPA in that phase, since PPA can be negative.