Temple vs. South Florida: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
TEMTeam statsUSF
- Q4 2:38USFMarlon Mack 48 Yd Run (Emilio Nadelman Kick)23–44
- Q4 6:07TEMAustin Jones 34 Yd Field Goal 23–37
- Q4 8:40USFEmilio Nadelman 37 Yd Field Goal 20–37
- Q3 3:17USFEmilio Nadelman 24 Yd Field Goal 20–34
- Q3 8:30TEMAustin Jones 35 Yd Field Goal 20–31
- Q3 12:48TEMVentell Bryant 14 Yd pass from P.J. Walker (Austin Jones Kick)17–31
- Q2 0:15USFEmilio Nadelman 47 Yd Field Goal 10–31
- Q2 6:17USFMarlon Mack 20 Yd pass from Quinton Flowers (Emilio Nadelman Kick)10–28
- Q2 9:16USFMarlon Mack 57 Yd Run (Emilio Nadelman Kick)10–21
- Q2 10:46TEMAustin Jones 33 Yd Field Goal 10–14
- Q2 14:49USFQuinton Flowers 5 Yd Run (Emilio Nadelman Kick)7–14
- Q1 0:06USFRodney Adams 68 Yd pass from Quinton Flowers (Emilio Nadelman Kick)7–7
- Q1 0:26TEMJahad Thomas 1 Yd Run (Austin Jones Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassPJ Walker 20/48, 259 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushJahad Thomas 16 CAR, 65 YDS, 1 TD
- RecVentell Bryant 5 REC, 86 YDS, 1 TD
- PassQuinton Flowers 15/22, 230 YDS, 2 TD
- RushMarlon Mack 21 CAR, 230 YDS, 2 TD
- RecRodney Adams 7 REC, 147 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsUSF up 14 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,012 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q2 14:49USF +22%
Quinton Flowers run for 5 yds for a TD, (Emilio Nadelman KICK)
- Q2 9:16USF +21%
Marlon Mack 57 Yd Run (Emilio Nadelman Kick)
- Q1 0:06USF +18%
Quinton Flowers pass complete to Rodney Adams for 68 yds for a TD, (Emilio Nadelman KICK)
- Q2 6:17USF +16%
Quinton Flowers pass complete to Marlon Mack for 20 yds for a TD, (Emilio Nadelman KICK)
- Q1 0:26TEM +16%
Jahad Thomas run for 1 yd for a TD, (Austin Jones KICK)
- Q3 12:48TEM +12%
P.J. Walker pass complete to Ventell Bryant for 14 yds for a TD, (Austin Jones KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Temple vs. South Florida?
Temple 23, South Florida 44.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked TEM, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| TEM | USF | |
|---|---|---|
| 380 | Total yards | 556 |
| 259 | Passing yards | 230 |
| 121 | Rushing yards | 326 |
| 22 | First downs | 22 |
| 4-16 | 3rd down | 5-13 |
| 2-4 | 4th down | 0-0 |
| 20/48 | Comp/Att | 15/22 |
| 5.4 | Yards per pass | 10.5 |
| 3.9 | Yards per rush | 6.8 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 5-48 | Penalties | 8-86 |
| 32:16 | Possession | 27:44 |
Costliest call
Q1 4:25 USF punt on 4th & 16 at TEM 40. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.44 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 2:38USFMarlon Mack 48 Yd Run (Emilio Nadelman Kick)23–44
- Q4 6:07TEMAustin Jones 34 Yd Field Goal 23–37
- Q4 8:40USFEmilio Nadelman 37 Yd Field Goal 20–37
- Q3 3:17USFEmilio Nadelman 24 Yd Field Goal 20–34
- Q3 8:30TEMAustin Jones 35 Yd Field Goal 20–31
- Q3 12:48TEMVentell Bryant 14 Yd pass from P.J. Walker (Austin Jones Kick)17–31
- Q2 0:15USFEmilio Nadelman 47 Yd Field Goal 10–31
- Q2 6:17USFMarlon Mack 20 Yd pass from Quinton Flowers (Emilio Nadelman Kick)10–28
- Q2 9:16USFMarlon Mack 57 Yd Run (Emilio Nadelman Kick)10–21
- Q2 10:46TEMAustin Jones 33 Yd Field Goal 10–14
- Q2 14:49USFQuinton Flowers 5 Yd Run (Emilio Nadelman Kick)7–14
- Q1 0:06USFRodney Adams 68 Yd pass from Quinton Flowers (Emilio Nadelman Kick)7–7
- Q1 0:26TEMJahad Thomas 1 Yd Run (Austin Jones Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (USF Elo 1437, TEM Elo 1676 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects USF +7.2 (33% to win) — 4.2 points clear of TEM's market line of +3. That is a disagreement, not a betting edge — sides we favour have not covered at better than breakeven.
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 — 2015
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#38 of 92 in 2015 by biggest miss · #80 of 108 in 2015 by longest odds · #35 of 58 in 2015 by biggest poll gap.
The 2015 upset archive →Temple leads 6–4 · 20% have been one-possession games
| TEM | USF | |
|---|---|---|
| +8.6 (#38) | CORE overall | +11.4 (#31) |
| -2 / -10 | offense / defense | +5 / -6 |
| 2.23 | points / drive | 2.45 |
| 1.42 | allowed / drive | 1.89 |
| 26% | three-and-outs | 30% |
| +1 | pass over expected | -11 |
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 →