Stanford vs. UCLA: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
STANTeam statsUCLA
- Q4 10:40STANJordan Williamson 34 Yd Field Goal 31–10
- Q3 9:16STANRemound Wright 2 Yd Run (Jordan Williamson Kick)28–10
- Q2 0:41STANDevon Cajuste 37 Yd pass from Kevin Hogan (Jordan Williamson Kick)21–10
- Q2 6:24STANMichael Rector 22 Yd pass from Kevin Hogan (Jordan Williamson Kick)14–10
- Q2 11:46UCLAKa'imi Fairbairn 42 Yd Field Goal 7–10
- Q1 6:00STANRemound Wright 1 Yd Run (Jordan Williamson Kick)7–7
- Q1 11:18UCLAThomas Duarte 15 Yd pass from Brett Hundley (Ka'imi Fairbairn Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassKevin Hogan 16/19, 234 YDS, 2 TD
- RushRemound Wright 15 CAR, 64 YDS, 2 TD
- RecAustin Hooper 3 REC, 51 YDS
- PassBrett Hundley 17/32, 146 YDS, 1 TD
- RushPaul Perkins 17 CAR, 116 YDS
- RecThomas Duarte 4 REC, 63 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsSTAN up 18 entering the 4th quarter. Across 838 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q2 6:24STAN +22%
Michael Rector 22 Yd pass from Kevin Hogan (Jordan Williamson Kick)
- Q2 0:41STAN +21%
Devon Cajuste 37 Yd pass from Kevin Hogan (Jordan Williamson Kick)
- Q3 9:16STAN +18%
Remound Wright 2 Yd Run (Jordan Williamson Kick)
- Q1 6:00STAN +17%
Remound Wright 1 Yd Run (Jordan Williamson Kick)
- Q1 11:18UCLA +16%
Thomas Duarte 15 Yd pass from Brett Hundley (Ka'imi Fairbairn Kick)
- Q2 11:46UCLA +8%
Ka'imi Fairbairn 42 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Stanford vs. UCLA?
Stanford 31, UCLA 10.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked UCLA, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| STAN | UCLA | |
|---|---|---|
| 436 | Total yards | 262 |
| 234 | Passing yards | 162 |
| 202 | Rushing yards | 100 |
| 22 | First downs | 17 |
| 9-14 | 3rd down | 5-14 |
| 0-0 | 4th down | 1-4 |
| 16/19 | Comp/Att | 20/41 |
| 12.3 | Yards per pass | 4.0 |
| 4.5 | Yards per rush | 3.8 |
| 0 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 7-65 | Penalties | 4-38 |
| 37:49 | Possession | 22:02 |
Costliest call
Q4 5:00 STAN punt on 4th & 1 at STAN 13. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.12 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 10:40STANJordan Williamson 34 Yd Field Goal 31–10
- Q3 9:16STANRemound Wright 2 Yd Run (Jordan Williamson Kick)28–10
- Q2 0:41STANDevon Cajuste 37 Yd pass from Kevin Hogan (Jordan Williamson Kick)21–10
- Q2 6:24STANMichael Rector 22 Yd pass from Kevin Hogan (Jordan Williamson Kick)14–10
- Q2 11:46UCLAKa'imi Fairbairn 42 Yd Field Goal 7–10
- Q1 6:00STANRemound Wright 1 Yd Run (Jordan Williamson Kick)7–7
- Q1 11:18UCLAThomas Duarte 15 Yd pass from Brett Hundley (Ka'imi Fairbairn Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (UCLA Elo 1826, STAN Elo 1778 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects UCLA -4.3 (63% to win), essentially in line with the market.
Why that percentage is worth reading: across 604 graded in-season games, the calls this model put near 58% came in at 58.2%. The full calibration table is published, bin by bin. Early in the season the cold-start path runs instead and calibrates less well (Brier 0.2028 against 0.1889).
Model as of Sep 1 · through week 1 · drive simulation
Season form — 2014
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#44 of 94 in 2014 by biggest miss · #73 of 94 in 2014 by longest odds.
The 2014 upset archive →UCLA leads 49–43–3 · UCLA has won 3 straight · 44% have been one-possession games
| STAN | UCLA | |
|---|---|---|
| 2.32 | points / drive | 2.20 |
| 1.40 | allowed / drive | 1.91 |
| 31% | three-and-outs | 23% |
Bold is the side ahead. CORE strips the situation from every play and solves the schedule out across the league, so these compare two teams that never met.
Key matchups
The analyst read: each team's offense splits crossed against the opponent's defense, with the edges called out.
Create a free account →You get Pro free for 6 months. No card required.
Where this number comes from. Every projection on this page is produced by the same model, run before kickoff on opponent-adjusted efficiency, power ratings and situational data — walk-forward validated on eleven seasons and never adjusted after the fact. How the model works →