Texas Tech vs. Iowa State: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
TTUTeam statsISU
- Q4 8:39ISUJoel Lanning 10 Yd Run (Peyton Paddock Kick)10–66
- Q4 14:19ISUJoel Lanning 35 Yd Run (Peyton Paddock Kick)10–59
- Q3 4:13ISUJoel Lanning 19 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)10–52
- Q3 7:17TTUKeke Coutee 11 Yd pass from Patrick Mahomes II (Clayton Hatfield Kick)10–45
- Q2 0:00ISUCole Netten 27 Yd Field Goal 3–45
- Q2 6:50ISUKamari Cotton-Moya 48 Yd Interception Return (Cole Netten Kick)3–42
- Q2 7:47ISUHakeem Butler 39 Yd pass from Jacob Park (Cole Netten Kick)3–35
- Q2 12:27ISUJoel Lanning 5 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)3–28
- Q2 14:52ISUAllen Lazard 34 Yd pass from Jacob Park (Cole Netten Kick)3–21
- Q1 2:21ISUJacob Park 2 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)3–14
- Q1 6:17TTUClayton Hatfield 31 Yd Field Goal 3–7
- Q1 11:17ISUJoel Lanning 24 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassPatrick Mahomes 18/36, 219 YDS, 1 TD, 2 INT
- RushDa'Leon Ward 25 CAR, 97 YDS
- RecKeke Coutee 8 REC, 115 YDS, 1 TD
- PassJacob Park 14/18, 285 YDS, 2 TD
- RushJoel Lanning 17 CAR, 171 YDS, 5 TD
- RecAllen Lazard 7 REC, 137 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsISU up 42 entering the 4th quarter. Across 170 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 11:17ISU +18%
Joel Lanning run for 24 yds for a TD, (Cole Netten KICK)
- Q1 2:21ISU +18%
Jacob Park run for 2 yds for a TD, (Cole Netten KICK)
- Q2 14:52ISU +13%
Jacob Park pass complete to Allen Lazard for 34 yds for a TD, (Cole Netten KICK)
- Q2 12:27ISU +7%
Joel Lanning run for 5 yds for a TD, (Cole Netten KICK)
- Q1 6:17TTU +7%
Clayton Hatfield 31 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Texas Tech vs. Iowa State?
Texas Tech 10, Iowa State 66.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked TTU, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| TTU | ISU | |
|---|---|---|
| 306 | Total yards | 608 |
| 222 | Passing yards | 336 |
| 84 | Rushing yards | 272 |
| 17 | First downs | 25 |
| 4-14 | 3rd down | 10-13 |
| 0-2 | 4th down | 0-0 |
| 19/39 | Comp/Att | 17/22 |
| 5.7 | Yards per pass | 15.3 |
| 2.8 | Yards per rush | 6.3 |
| 3 | Turnovers | 0 |
| 2-7 | Penalties | 2-25 |
| 27:06 | Possession | 32:54 |
Costliest call
Q4 8:32 TTU punt on 4th & 4 at ISU 46. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.61 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 8:39ISUJoel Lanning 10 Yd Run (Peyton Paddock Kick)10–66
- Q4 14:19ISUJoel Lanning 35 Yd Run (Peyton Paddock Kick)10–59
- Q3 4:13ISUJoel Lanning 19 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)10–52
- Q3 7:17TTUKeke Coutee 11 Yd pass from Patrick Mahomes II (Clayton Hatfield Kick)10–45
- Q2 0:00ISUCole Netten 27 Yd Field Goal 3–45
- Q2 6:50ISUKamari Cotton-Moya 48 Yd Interception Return (Cole Netten Kick)3–42
- Q2 7:47ISUHakeem Butler 39 Yd pass from Jacob Park (Cole Netten Kick)3–35
- Q2 12:27ISUJoel Lanning 5 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)3–28
- Q2 14:52ISUAllen Lazard 34 Yd pass from Jacob Park (Cole Netten Kick)3–21
- Q1 2:21ISUJacob Park 2 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)3–14
- Q1 6:17TTUClayton Hatfield 31 Yd Field Goal 3–7
- Q1 11:17ISUJoel Lanning 24 Yd Run (Cole Netten Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (ISU Elo 1416, TTU Elo 1530 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects ISU +2.2 (45% 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 — 2016
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#1 of 113 in 2016 by biggest miss · #96 of 124 in 2016 by longest odds.
The 2016 upset archive →Texas Tech leads 14–8 · Texas Tech has won 3 straight · 27% have been one-possession games
| TTU | ISU | |
|---|---|---|
| -1.2 (#68) | CORE overall | -6.9 (#91) |
| +13 / +14 | offense / defense | +0 / +7 |
| 3.10 | points / drive | 2.38 |
| 3.50 | allowed / drive | 2.69 |
| 24% | three-and-outs | 25% |
| +16 | pass over expected | +1 |
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 →