How to read this: every angle below is a true fact about these teams — and there are hundreds, so some will look striking by pure chance. Each side's combinations carry a chance baseline telling you how good the best one would look if nothing were going on. FBS teams carry far less history than NFL ones (a median of 148 graded games vs ~435), so that baseline runs higher here — a perfect record is cheaper in college. Signals disagreeing is normal; weigh them yourself.
Virginia Tech — the basics
150 graded games since 2014
| on the road | 27-36 | 43% | +0.3 | n=63 |
| vs Boston College | 6-5 | 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| in a conference game | 47-51 | 48% | +1.4 | n=98 |
| vs an FBS opponent | 63-79 | 44% | -0.3 | n=142 |
| vs a P5 opponent | 54-67 | 45% | +0.2 | n=121 |
| vs the ACC | 47-50 | 48% | +1.5 | n=97 |
| in September | 19-25 | 43% | -1.7 | n=44 |
| at this venue | 2-3 | 40% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| in the last 5 seasons | 26-36 | 42% | -1.3 | n=62 |
record vs the closing number · pts = avg margin vs the line
Virginia Tech — form & streaks
| Last 12 games: -6.5 pts vs their number per game | n=12 |
| All 150 graded games: -0.7 pts vs their number per game | n=150 |
Virginia Tech — combinations
42 lean Virginia Tech · 98 lean against
Read this first. 149 combinations shown. The best one here is 80%. With this many combinations you'd expect the best to be about 62% by chance alone, and about 0 perfect records — this matchup has 0.
| Combination | Rec | % | Pts | Sample |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| in a conference game + in September | 8-2 | 80%from 48% | +11.4 | n=10 |
| vs the ACC + in September | 8-2 | 80%from 48% | +11.4 | n=10 |
| on the road + in September | 8-6 | 57%from 43% | +4.8 | n=14 |
| + in the last 5 seasons | 3-4 | 43%from 57% | +0.4 | n=7 |
| vs Boston College + in a conference game | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + vs an FBS opponent | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + vs a P5 opponent | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + vs the ACC | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| + vs a P5 opponent | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + vs the ACC | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| + vs the ACC | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| vs Boston College + vs an FBS opponent | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + vs a P5 opponent | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + vs the ACC | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| + vs the ACC | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| vs Boston College + vs a P5 opponent | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + vs the ACC | 6-5 | 55%from 55% | +6.8 | n=11 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
| + at this venue | 2-3 | 40%from 55% | +1.7 | n=5 |
indented rows narrow the one above · click any row for the games behind it
Informational only. Historical splits are shared for analysis and entertainment — not betting advice or any guarantee of outcome. A trend describes the past; it does not predict. Must be 21+ where applicable. If gambling is a problem, call 1-800-GAMBLER.