Our side
MoneylineUTM to win
ours 70%
Projected score
23–31
LIN – UTM
2026-11-14 · 3:00 PM
Hardy M. Graham Stadium · Martin, TN
Conference game
Early season
The books
No book has priced this game. Nothing to compare, and no ticket to build.
Series
UT Martin lead
2–1
· 3 meetings since 2022
2025 unit ranks —
last completed season, from games actually played
Run game
edge UT Martin Skyhawks
95 ranks
Lindenwood Lions #180 rush offense
UT Martin Skyhawks #85 run defense
Pass game
edge Lindenwood Lions
188 ranks
Lindenwood Lions #60 pass offense
UT Martin Skyhawks #248 pass defense
Run game
even
29 ranks apart
UT Martin Skyhawks #199 rush offense
Lindenwood Lions #170 run defense
Pass game
edge UT Martin Skyhawks
64 ranks
UT Martin Skyhawks #108 pass offense
Lindenwood Lions #172 pass defense
Lindenwood Lions
Run-heavy · 58% run
Ball-control
UT Martin Skyhawks
Run-heavy · 63% run
Ball-control
Dual-threat QB · 38 rush ypg
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
Lindenwood Lions
DL
Mason Burke
8 tkl · 2.0 sacks · 3.5 TFL
#152 DL
DL
King Smith
8 tkl · 2.5 sacks · 4.0 TFL
#182 DL
DB
Isaac Edwards
7 tkl · 1 INT
#378 DB
DL
David Amaliri
10 tkl · 1.0 sacks · 2.0 TFL
#451 DL
UT Martin Skyhawks
P
Max Zuluaga
8 punts · 51.4 yd avg
#1 P
DB
Trey Cotton
23 tkl · 1 INT
#12 DB
DL
Chris Wilson
14 tkl · 0.5 sacks · 2.0 TFL
#78 DL
DB
Jamal Mayers
12 tkl · 3 PD
#73 DB
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
Def is higher = better. The projection assumes a 2.4-pt home edge (0 at neutral sites).
Where the number comes from
Lindenwood offense vs UT Martin defense-3.5 pts
UT Martin offense vs Lindenwood defense+0.3 pts
Efficiency adjustment · EPA, success rate, explosiveness+1.5 pts
Power projection before adjustment+6.8
The projection carries an efficiency adjustment —
a residual from season-to-date EPA, success rate and explosiveness, which earned its place by
walk-forward test (margin error 12.90 → 12.72 across seven held-out seasons).