As we come down to the final moments of the 2016 season, Louisiana Tech is firing on all cylinders offensively. Here, we'll look at some of the numbers behind the upcoming UTSA game.

These stats come from Football Study Hall, which uses two statistical models (the S&P+ and the FEI) to rank team and individual performance. S&P+ compares the situation in question to a baseline of 100 (the higher the better).

Overall, there are really only five metrics that matter in the outcome of a football game: explosiveness, efficiency, field position, finishing drives, and turnovers. More information can be found at the above links, but here's a quick breakdown:

Explosiveness is a points per play (PPP) statistic, adjusted to only include "successful" plays (isolated PPP, or IsoPPP). This captures the difference between a quick scoring drive (as Tech fans have become accustomed to) and an extended, plodding drive. A high offensive IsoPPP means a team is good at creating "big plays," while a low defensive IsoPPP means a defense limits those big plays.

Efficiency is one of the simpler metrics, giving the success rate (SR) of all plays. A successful play gains 50% of available first down yards, 70% of available second down yards, and 100% of available third or fourth down yards. It's not merely conversion percentage.

Starting field position is self explanatory. Even a couple of yards advantage over the opponent can improve a team's chances of scoring dramatically.

Finish! It's no good to get close to the endzone if you come away with nothing. The metric used here is points per trip inside the 40 (PP40). If this number is 5 or higher, you'll win most games regardless of other factors.

Turnovers, while incredibly important, actually are fairly random. Teams can improve ball handling and practice recoveries, but the actual in-game rates tend to fluctuate from season to season. The turnover luck metric describes how many points a team can expect to lose or gain due to this randomness and their actual performance to date.

[RELATED: Keys to Victory: UTSA]

Jaylon Ferguson! He's registered 11 TFL (10 sacks) despite accounting for only 4% of total tackles. If he's involved on the play, it doesn't end well for the opponent.

The defense doesn't give up that many big plays but they get worn down. The overall IsoPPP is 1.14 (good for no. 12 in the country!) and but the success rate is 0.49 (no. 109). Tech is a little better at limiting run value than pass value. This translates to the defense giving up long, sustained drives that will generally end in points if the opposing team crosses the 40.

Tech's defensive PP40 is 5.07 (no. 115). While the offense is almost unstoppable inside the 40, the defense turns that on its head and allows almost as much. Most of the teams on our schedule have been unable to take advantage of this, resulting in a few blowouts. The offense is really good. But you knew that already.

Tech's offensive PP40 is 5.26 (no. 12). That means we're very good at putting points on the board (statisticians generally agree this is a good indicator of winning). Teams this good at finishing drives generally win about two-thirds of their games regardless of the quality of the opponent.

A lot of that success comes from the offensive line. They don't give up sacks, and they give a good push for the RBs to punch through. On standard downs, the Adjusted Line Yards Per Carry (a metric that shows the contribution of the OL to a play) was 3.6 (no. 3). The sack rate on passing downs is only 3% (no. 5). This unit is one of the best in the country at creating opportunities for the backfield to shine.

The DBs create a lot of havoc, but the LBs are the opposite. Havoc rate (HV) is the percentage of plays where the defense records a TFL, FF, INT, or pass breakup. For the DBs (thanks largely to Xavier Woods), this is 8% (no. 22). But for the LBs, it's much lower at 2.5% (no. 116). Deep passes are a lot riskier for the opponent than short passes targeting the linebackers in coverage.

Tech is unlikely going to be able to get the defense off the field in 3rd and short situations. Offenses convert this type of down (by rushing) 76% of the time against Tech (no. 108), and UTSA is about average at it at 69% (no. 50). In fact, most rushing by UTSA will probably be successful. Tech allows a success on a rush 48% of the time (no. 109), while UTSA succeeds 44% of the time (no. 66). UTSA is pretty good at producing explosive runs, with an IsoPPP of 1.18 (no. 25), but Tech is even better at limiting them, with an IsoPPP of 0.86 (no. 3). We're likely to see a couple long clock-burning drives from UTSA.

Tech has to buckle down on punts and kicks. UTSA has a kick return success rate (based on average punting distances vs return distance) of 61% (no. 3), while Tech is weak across the board in both kicking and returning stats.

This game could get boring in the 4th quarter. Tech plays some of its best offense here, but UTSA's defense steps up as well. On the other side of the ball, UTSA has the worst offense (4Q S&P+ no. 128) against Tech's equally bad defense (4Q S&P+ no. 124). If Tech can storm out of the gate in the first quarter, then settle into a rhythm for the next two it would bode well for the Bulldogs.

Despite UTSA's probable running success, Tech's offense is strong everywhere UTSA's defense is weak. UTSA might have a chance to stop the drive if they can force a 3rd and long, but on standard downs, Tech should move with ease. Tech is explosive on standard downs: most of the highlight reels are coming from these situations. UTSA just won't be able to stop it. If the Tech defense can prevent a few big plays, the score should get out of hand quickly.

All in all, UTSA simply shouldn't be able to keep up with Tech's high-powered offense when you look inside the numbers, and should run out of steam.

Las Vegas sees this game a little differently than the nerds at Football Study Hall, Vegas has it as a 20-point Tech favorite while FSH see the score in the range of 42.3-25.5. Tech has an 83% chance to win and move closer to hosting the conference championship.