Boston College vs. Purdue: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
BCTeam statsPUR
- Q4 0:18BCEJ Perry 1 Yd Run (John Tessitore PAT failed)13–30
- Q3 5:57PURTerry Wright 36 Yd pass from David Blough (J.D. Dellinger Kick)7–30
- Q2 0:05PURJ.D. Dellinger 21 Yd Field Goal 7–23
- Q2 6:52PURRondale Moore 9 Yd pass from David Blough (J.D. Dellinger Kick)7–20
- Q2 14:40PURRondale Moore 70 Yd pass from David Blough (Spencer Evans PAT failed)7–13
- Q1 4:32BCTommy Sweeney 15 Yd pass from Anthony Brown (John Tessitore Kick)7–7
- Q1 7:48PURD.J. Knox 1 Yd Run (Spencer Evans Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassAnthony Brown Jr. 13/27, 96 YDS, 1 TD, 4 INT
- RushAJ Dillon 19 CAR, 59 YDS
- RecCJ Lewis 4 REC, 65 YDS
- PassDavid Blough 21/28, 296 YDS, 3 TD
- RushD.J. Knox 20 CAR, 51 YDS, 1 TD
- RecRondale Moore 8 REC, 110 YDS, 2 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsPUR up 23 entering the 4th quarter. Across 836 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q2 14:40PUR +19%
David Blough pass complete to Rondale Moore for 70 yds for a TD (Spencer Evans PAT MISSED)
- Q1 7:48PUR +19%
D.J. Knox run for 1 yd for a TD (Spencer Evans KICK)
- Q1 4:32BC +19%
Anthony Brown pass complete to Tommy Sweeney for 15 yds for a TD (John Tessitore KICK)
- Q2 6:52PUR +18%
David Blough pass complete to Rondale Moore for 9 yds for a TD (J.D. Dellinger KICK)
- Q2 0:05PUR +9%
J.D. Dellinger 21 yd FG GOOD
- Q3 5:57PUR +7%
David Blough pass complete to Terry Wright for 36 yds for a TD (J.D. Dellinger KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Boston College vs. Purdue?
Boston College 13, Purdue 30.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked BC, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| BC | PUR | |
|---|---|---|
| 229 | Total yards | 372 |
| 144 | Passing yards | 296 |
| 85 | Rushing yards | 76 |
| 14 | First downs | 17 |
| 3-12 | 3rd down | 8-18 |
| 1-2 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 15/29 | Comp/Att | 21/28 |
| 5.0 | Yards per pass | 10.6 |
| 2.5 | Yards per rush | 1.9 |
| 4 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 7-60 | Penalties | 2-25 |
| 22:58 | Possession | 37:02 |
Costliest call
Q4 14:52 PUR punt on 4th & 1 at PUR 29. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.11 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 0:18BCEJ Perry 1 Yd Run (John Tessitore PAT failed)13–30
- Q3 5:57PURTerry Wright 36 Yd pass from David Blough (J.D. Dellinger Kick)7–30
- Q2 0:05PURJ.D. Dellinger 21 Yd Field Goal 7–23
- Q2 6:52PURRondale Moore 9 Yd pass from David Blough (J.D. Dellinger Kick)7–20
- Q2 14:40PURRondale Moore 70 Yd pass from David Blough (Spencer Evans PAT failed)7–13
- Q1 4:32BCTommy Sweeney 15 Yd pass from Anthony Brown (John Tessitore Kick)7–7
- Q1 7:48PURD.J. Knox 1 Yd Run (Spencer Evans Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (PUR Elo 1553, BC Elo 1681 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects PUR +2.7 (44% to win) — 3.8 points clear of PUR's market line of +6.5. 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 — 2018
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#55 of 109 in 2018 by biggest miss · #67 of 122 in 2018 by longest odds · #49 of 64 in 2018 by biggest poll gap.
The 2018 upset archive →| BC | PUR | |
|---|---|---|
| +3.1 (#50) | CORE overall | +1.3 (#56) |
| -4 / -7 | offense / defense | +4 / +3 |
| 2.01 | points / drive | 2.29 |
| 1.68 | allowed / drive | 2.36 |
| 28% | three-and-outs | 23% |
| -7 | pass over expected | +16 |
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 →