← Matchups

Tulane

AAC · 1-1 · power +13.0 · #66
Our side · spreadKSU -19.5 our number KSU -20.7 · 1.2 pts from the market our number starts from the opening line and is corrected +7.0 for this matchup by our data on both teams

Kansas State

B12 · 2-0 · power +24.9 · #17
Our side
SpreadKSU -19.5 ours KSU -20.7
TotalUnder 50.5 ours 48.6
MoneylineKSU to win ours 78% · book 91%
Distance from the market 1.2 pts / -1.9 total a caution, not a signal
Projected score 14–35 TULN – KSU
2026-09-19 · 12:00 PM Bill Snyder Family Stadium · Manhattan, KS Early season

The books 1 account books · tap any price — the ticket builds at that book

Book TULN spreadKSU spread OverUnder TULN winKSU win TULN TT overTULN TT under KSU TT overKSU TT under
FanDuel

The gold price is the best available on that side; a gold marks the side our number implies — a read, not a pick. TT is a team total — that team’s own points, not the game’s; columns are empty where no book hangs one. Send to book opens whichever book you tapped, not the one we would have picked. Prices are the books’ own.

Ours vs the market

SpreadKansas State -20.7
the marketKansas State -19.5
Total48.6
the market50.5
Kansas State win78% vs 91%

Both percentages are Kansas State’s chance to win — ours, then the book’s with the vig removed, medianed across the books we track.

What the gap has been worth 10,740 games · 2016–2025

0–3 pts52.0%
3–750.2%
7–1449.3%
14+46.8%

How often the side we favoured covered, by how far our number sat from the market’s. Break-even at −110 is 52.4% — no bucket reaches it, and the rate falls as we disagree more. The further we sit from the market, the worse we have done.

Series Tulane lead 2–1 · 3 meetings since 1988
2025 unit ranks — last completed season, from games actually played
Run game even 33 ranks apart
Tulane Green Wave #119 rush offense Kansas State Wildcats #152 run defense
Pass game even 12 ranks apart
Tulane Green Wave #63 pass offense Kansas State Wildcats #75 pass defense
Run game even 8 ranks apart
Kansas State Wildcats #88 rush offense Tulane Green Wave #80 run defense
Pass game even 16 ranks apart
Kansas State Wildcats #124 pass offense Tulane Green Wave #140 pass defense
Tulane Green Wave Balanced · 57% run Avg pace Dual-threat QB · 47 rush ypg Kansas State Wildcats Balanced · 57% run Avg pace Dual-threat QB · 40 rush ypg
Jon Sumrall · 43-12 Chris Klieman · 54-34

Ranked by team-unit strength (rush & pass offense vs. run & pass defense) across all 265 D1 teams, not by individual players. Identity, tempo and unit strength are measured from the 2025 season.

The evidence 2025 production and power ratings · supporting the number above

Who carried each team in 2025
Tulane Green Wave
DB Kevin Adams III 21 tkl #105 DB
DB Jack Tchienchou 17 tkl · 1 PD #129 DB
LB Dickson Agu 23 tkl #85 LB
WR Destyn Hill 9 rec · 158 yds · 1 TD #122 WR
Kansas State Wildcats
RB Joe Jackson 106 rush yds · 1 TD · 6 rec #22 RB
WR Josh Manning 13 rec · 130 yds · 2 TD #51 WR
DL Wendell Gregory 7 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 3.5 TFL #121 DL
RB Rodney Fields Jr. 206 rush yds · 2 TD #55 RB

Top-rated players from last season, ranked within their position across D1. A grade measures what a player produced, and no 2026 game has been played yet — so this is who produced for these programs in 2025, not a claim about who is on the field this year.

Power breakdown
TeamPowerOffDefRank
Tulane Green WaveAAC +13.0 -0.1 +13.1 #66
Kansas State WildcatsB12 +24.9 +15.7 +9.2 #17

Def is higher = better. The projection assumes a 2.4-pt home edge (0 at neutral sites).

Where the number comes from
Tulane offense vs Kansas State defense-9.3 pts
Kansas State offense vs Tulane defense+2.6 pts
Travel · context onlyAway team travels 738 mi
Altitude · context only328 m higher than the visitor's home elevation

An efficiency adjustment from season-to-date EPA and success rate applies once teams have played enough games; before then it is 0 and the number is the power rating alone.

Situational spots are shown for context, not baked in: travel, altitude and rest were tested against 6,000+ games and the power and efficiency ratings already account for them. Adding them again would double-count.