Louisiana Tech vs. UTEP: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
LTTeam statsUTEP
- Q3 0:38UTEPGavin Baechle 41 Yd Field Goal 3–19
- Q2 6:56LTJacob Barnes 25 Yd Field Goal 3–16
- Q2 11:53UTEPJalen Rudolph Safety0–16
- Q1 6:02UTEPDeion Hankins 4 Yd Run (Gavin Baechle Kick)0–14
- Q1 9:19UTEPDeion Hankins 16 Yd Run (Gavin Baechle Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassAustin Kendall 14/28, 174 YDS, 3 INT
- RushMarcus Williams Jr. 7 CAR, 42 YDS
- RecMarcus Williams Jr. 2 REC, 59 YDS
- PassGavin Hardison 19/29, 283 YDS, 1 INT
- RushDeion Hankins 15 CAR, 55 YDS, 2 TD
- RecJacob Cowing 9 REC, 166 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsUTEP up 16 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,243 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 9:19UTEP +18%
Deion Hankins run for 16 yds for a TD (Gavin Baechle KICK)
- Q1 6:02UTEP +15%
Deion Hankins run for 4 yds for a TD (Gavin Baechle KICK)
- Q3 0:38UTEP +10%
Gavin Baechle 41 yd FG GOOD
- Q2 6:56LT +6%
Jacob Barnes 25 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Louisiana Tech vs. UTEP?
Louisiana Tech 3, UTEP 19.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked LT, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| LT | UTEP | |
|---|---|---|
| 288 | Total yards | 385 |
| 196 | Passing yards | 283 |
| 92 | Rushing yards | 102 |
| 14 | First downs | 18 |
| 3-12 | 3rd down | 5-16 |
| 0-2 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 15/29 | Comp/Att | 19/29 |
| 6.8 | Yards per pass | 9.8 |
| 3.3 | Yards per rush | 2.3 |
| 3 | Turnovers | 4 |
| 6-54 | Penalties | 5-50 |
| 23:17 | Possession | 36:43 |
Costliest call
Q4 4:03 UTEP punt on 4th & 1 at UTEP 29. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.11 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q3 0:38UTEPGavin Baechle 41 Yd Field Goal 3–19
- Q2 6:56LTJacob Barnes 25 Yd Field Goal 3–16
- Q2 11:53UTEPJalen Rudolph Safety0–16
- Q1 6:02UTEPDeion Hankins 4 Yd Run (Gavin Baechle Kick)0–14
- Q1 9:19UTEPDeion Hankins 16 Yd Run (Gavin Baechle Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (UTEP Elo 1271, LT Elo 1353 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects UTEP +0.9 (49% to win) — 5.6 points clear of UTEP'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 — 2021
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#56 of 112 in 2021 by biggest miss · #74 of 128 in 2021 by longest odds.
The 2021 upset archive →Louisiana Tech leads 18–3–1 · Louisiana Tech has won 4 straight · 36% have been one-possession games
| LT | UTEP | |
|---|---|---|
| -7.2 (#95) | CORE overall | +3.6 (#58) |
| -3 / +5 | offense / defense | +1 / -3 |
| 2.16 | points / drive | 1.88 |
| 2.48 | allowed / drive | 1.87 |
| 24% | three-and-outs | 31% |
| +4 | 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 →