Army Black Knights at Tulsa Golden Hurricane college football matchup
- Kickoff
- Fri, Oct 23
- 8:30 PM EDT
- Venue
- Tulsa home
- H. A. Chapman Stadium
- Captured market
- Line not posted
- No verified spread
- Player model
- 16 players
- preseason · cfb-fantasy-quantile-2026.1
Army visits Tulsa in Week 8.
Army travels to Tulsa at H. A. Chapman Stadium. No sourced spread is attached to this game yet, so the page does not infer a favorite.
The published player model covers 16 featured skill players in this matchup. Its highest median fantasy forecasts belong to Baylor Hayes (TLSA), Cale Hellums (ARMY), and David Wells Jr. (TLSA).
Market pending
There is no verified spread for this matchup in the committed snapshot.
Player projection coverage
16 player distributions are available, led by Baylor Hayes (TLSA).
Venue context
Tulsa is the designated home team at H. A. Chapman Stadium.
cfb-fantasy-quantile-2026.1 · preseason
As of 2026-08-13T21:35:14+00:00No favorite inferred
context onlyPreseason model
As of 2026-08-13T21:35:14+00:00Unit ledger
Every bar rewards the better low-number rank, while exact values stay visible for both teams.
Unit edges from the 2025 charting
Offense units paired against the defense units they will face, from snap-weighted 2025 PFF grades, national ranks, and returning-snap shares. Historical form, never a game prediction.
Each offense unit paired against the defense unit it will actually face, using 2025 snap-weighted PFF grades and national ranks, with returning-snap caveats where an edge rests on departed players. Measured history, not a game prediction.
Army pass protection vs Tulsa pass rush
Army's pass protection graded 60.2 in 2025 (104th of 136); Tulsa's pass rush graded 69.8 (17th). On 2025 form that is a clear edge for Tulsa's pass rush.
Tulsa pass protection vs Army pass rush
Tulsa's pass protection graded 62.5 in 2025 (94th of 136); Army's pass rush graded 61.7 (117th). On 2025 form that is a modest edge for Tulsa's pass protection.
Army receiving corps vs Tulsa coverage
Army's receiving corps graded 66.2 in 2025 (41st of 136); Tulsa's coverage graded 68.3 (25th). On 2025 form that is a modest edge for Tulsa's coverage.
Tulsa receiving corps vs Army coverage
Tulsa's receiving corps graded 62.2 in 2025 (104th of 136); Army's coverage graded 60.3 (109th). On 2025 form this pairing is effectively a push.
Army rush offense vs Tulsa run defense
Army's rush offense graded 69.7 in 2025 (121st of 136); Tulsa's run defense graded 74.3 (7th). On 2025 form that is a clear edge for Tulsa's run defense.
Tulsa rush offense vs Army run defense
Tulsa's rush offense graded 78.7 in 2025 (35th of 136); Army's run defense graded 64.3 (107th). On 2025 form that is a clear edge for Tulsa's rush offense. Tulsa's rush offense returns only 12.0% of those snaps, so the edge rests on departed production.
Where the player model concentrates
The two highest median model players for each side. Context-only prior and baseline rows are excluded.
League projected stat lines
Means and 20th–80th percentile ranges for every published model player; missing stats stay missing.
Army
4 League projections| Player | Pos | Fantasy pts | Pass yds | Rush yds | Receptions | Rec yds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cale HellumsHIGH CEILING · Tier 5 | QB | 18.57.0–27.9 | — | 8634–119 | — | — |
| Brady Andersonbalanced · Tier 5 | WR | 8.72.6–13.7 | — | — | — | 4414–72 |
| Parker PoloskeyELITE · Tier 6 | TE | 7.32.1–10.7 | — | — | — | 3610–57 |
| Jake RendinaHIGH CEILING · Tier 6 | RB | 6.91.1–10.9 | — | 304–49 | — | — |
Tulsa
12 League projections| Player | Pos | Fantasy pts | Pass yds | Rush yds | Receptions | Rec yds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baylor Hayesbalanced · Tier 5 | QB | 16.46.2–25.7 | 18792–255 | — | — | — |
| David Wells Jr.balanced · Tier 5 | WR | 12.84.5–21.1 | — | — | 4.21.0–6.2 | 5219–74 |
| DJ McKinneyHIGH CEILING · Tier 6 | RB | 11.03.0–17.0 | — | 389–61 | — | 150–18 |
| Dexter Williams IIVOLATILE · Tier 6 | QB | 9.21.3–16.3 | — | — | — | — |
| Josh Smithbalanced · Tier 5 | WR | 8.92.9–14.4 | — | — | 2.91.0–4.1 | 3913–58 |
| Grayson TempestSAFE FLOOR · Tier 5 | WR | 8.92.8–14.5 | — | — | 3.31.0–5.0 | 3812–56 |
| Trequan Jonesbalanced · Tier 6 | RB | 7.91.6–12.8 | — | 4111–64 | — | — |
| Jimmy CallowayHIGH CEILING · Tier 5 | WR | 7.21.5–12.0 | — | — | — | 328–43 |
| Damari AlstonHIGH CEILING · Tier 6 | RB | 7.42.1–11.9 | — | — | — | — |
| Micah TeaseHIGH CEILING · Tier 5 | WR | 6.61.9–10.9 | — | — | — | 298–36 |
| Donnell Gee Jr.HIGH CEILING · Tier 5 | WR | 6.01.6–10.1 | — | — | — | 276–35 |
| Jewlyen Robertsbalanced · Tier 6 | TE | 5.81.5–9.4 | — | — | — | — |
Army
- Rush yds
- 86
- Rec yds
- 44
- Rec yds
- 36
- Rush yds
- 30
Tulsa
- Pass yds
- 187
- Receptions
- 4.2
- Rec yds
- 52
- Rush yds
- 38
- Rec yds
- 15
- Receptions
- 2.9
- Rec yds
- 39
- Receptions
- 3.3
- Rec yds
- 38
- Rush yds
- 41
- Rec yds
- 32
- Rec yds
- 29
- Rec yds
- 27
The League does not publish a game-side, total, or moneyline prediction without a validated game-market model.
Generated Aug 13, 5:35 PM EDT · collegefootballdata · Player outcomes are ranges, not guarantees. No game-side, total, or moneyline prediction is inferred.
Props to compare after a line posts
Model ranges are not recommendations. No player-prop line or price is captured in this artifact.
| Player | Market | Projection | Median | 20th–80th | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baylor HayesQB · TLSA | Passing yards | 186.9 | 190.5 | 92.4–254.6 | Shop the line |
| Cale HellumsQB · ARMY | Rushing yards | 85.6 | 70.1 | 33.7–118.5 | Shop the line |
| David Wells Jr.WR · TLSA | Receiving yards | 51.6 | 37.9 | 18.5–74.3 | Shop the line |
| DJ McKinneyRB · TLSA | Rushing yards | 37.6 | 31.0 | 8.7–60.8 | Shop the line |
| Brady AndersonWR · ARMY | Receiving yards | 44.4 | 35.5 | 13.8–72.0 | Shop the line |
| Josh SmithWR · TLSA | Receiving yards | 39.3 | 32.3 | 12.8–57.9 | Shop the line |
Passing yards
- Projection
- 186.9
- Median
- 190.5
- 20th–80th
- 92.4–254.6
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Rushing yards
- Projection
- 85.6
- Median
- 70.1
- 20th–80th
- 33.7–118.5
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Receiving yards
- Projection
- 51.6
- Median
- 37.9
- 20th–80th
- 18.5–74.3
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Rushing yards
- Projection
- 37.6
- Median
- 31.0
- 20th–80th
- 8.7–60.8
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Receiving yards
- Projection
- 44.4
- Median
- 35.5
- 20th–80th
- 13.8–72.0
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Receiving yards
- Projection
- 39.3
- Median
- 32.3
- 20th–80th
- 12.8–57.9
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Methodology and data boundary
Schedule and venue facts come from the committed ESPN 2026 catalog. Spreads are dated market snapshots, prioritizing DraftKings where available. Player stat lines and fantasy ranges come only from the versioned weekly CFB quantile model; prior and baseline context do not enter this page. Missing data stays missing.
- Line snapshot
- No line
- Model update
- Aug 13, 5:35 PM EDT
- Game prediction
- Not validated