Week 3 of the college football season will see some tension. No. 16 SMU walks into Louisville as the underdog against the 23rd-ranked Cardinals, which tells you the rankings and the betting market are telling two different stories.
SMU arrives unbeaten, while Louisville has already been tested by Ole Miss in a game that went from controlled to completely off the rails. Now they meet with early ACC positioning at stake. One team has the higher ranking. The other has home field and the market's respect. By Saturday night, one of those things is going to look wrong.
Here's my read on the game.
Odds by DraftKings
and subject to change.
No. 16 SMU Mustangs at No. 23 Louisville Cardinals -1.5
Saturday, 3:30 p.m., ESPN2
Records: Louisville 1-1, 0-1 vs. AP Top 25; SMU 2-0, 1-0 vs. AP Top 25
Money line: Louisville (-120); SMU (+100)
Over/Under: 59.5 (O -102, U -118)
SMU: Jennings can win without relying on the deep ball
Pressure can be misleading. It only matters if it changes the play. Louisville has created 31 pressures through two games. That sounds disruptive until you notice that the Cardinals have produced just one sack. Against Mustangs QB Kevin Jennings, that can be the difference in this game.
Jennings has also been sacked only once and pressured on only 19% of his drop backs, one of the best rates in the country. When kept clean, the SMU passing game changes shape. He has multiple touchdown passes with his best work coming from the intermediate range, giving SMU's passing production more sustainable substance. The Mustangs can create big time plays without relying on low percentage deep balls. He can attack the middle, move the chains and let his receivers create after the catch.
One missed tackle or one extra second in the pocket can turn a routine completion into the play that changes the game. That's where this matchup starts to tilt. Louisville will still likely make Jennings uncomfortable; whether it can finish the play before Jennings finds an answer, is the question. SMU ultimately has the better quarterback and the clear passing advantage.
Louisville's run game is the equalizer
The Cardinals run game has produced 6.4 yards per designed carry, including 4.4 after contact, which is top 30 in the FBS. That's an offensive line creating clean running lanes, helping its backs turn plays that should gain three yards into something much bigger.
Villanova inflated those numbers, sure, however the reason I still weigh it heavily is that burst came from several different places.
QB Lincoln Kienholz is part of the run game himself. SMU can't just account for the running back and assume the play is over. If Kienholz escapes pressure or takes off when coverage turns downfield, Louisville suddenly has an extra runner for SMU to handle.
Isaac Brown is interesting for a different reason. He's averaging only 3.3 yards per carry, not impressive on its own, yet he keeps forcing missed tackles and salvaging plays when the blocking doesn't give him much to work with. Then the Cardinals can rotate the other backs, who have been producing the chunk-play runs.
Essentially, Louisville can definitely do damage on the ground. SMU owns the passing advantage. Louisville owns the rushing advantage. Both by margin.
So which style wins out?
Prediction: SMU +1.5
Ultimately, I'm looking at the Mustangs. I was tempted by the moneyline but we tried last week with Ohio State and Texas and lost by one point. This time, I'm keeping the protection. Call me conservative. Burn me once ...
The deciding factor is SMU's defense. Louisville wants to run. SMU has the defense more capable of interrupting that and forcing Kienholz into a less comfortable game script. The Mustangs have seven sacks through two games. That pressure and follow through can force the Cardinals into second-and-long, third-and-long, create rushed throws or take away the deep shots that have made Kienholz passing numbers looks explosive.
Both offense should still have success. But it's SMU's defense that's capable of creating a one or two more bad situations that Louisville can't run its way out of.
