Northwestern vs. Wisconsin: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
NUTeam statsWIS
- Q4 0:11WISJackson Acker 3 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)24–10
- Q2 1:06NUJack Olsen 28 Yd Field Goal 24–3
- Q2 6:41NUCam Johnson 24 Yd pass from Ben Bryant (Jack Olsen Kick)21–3
- Q2 12:54NUBen Bryant 1 Yd Run (Jack Olsen Kick)14–3
- Q1 4:12NUA.J. Henning 23 Yd pass from Ben Bryant (Jack Olsen Kick)7–3
- Q1 10:25WISNathanial Vakos 33 Yd Field Goal 0–3
How the model called it
- PassBen Bryant 18/26, 195 YDS, 2 TD
- RushCam Porter 18 CAR, 72 YDS
- RecAJ Henning 3 REC, 70 YDS, 1 TD
- PassTanner Mordecai 31/45, 255 YDS
- RushCade Yacamelli 9 CAR, 47 YDS
- RecWill Pauling 10 REC, 96 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsNU up 21 entering the 4th quarter. Across 669 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q2 6:41NU +22%
Ben Bryant pass complete to Cam Johnson for 24 yds for a TD (Jack Olsen KICK)
- Q2 12:54NU +21%
Ben Bryant run for 1 yd for a TD (Jack Olsen KICK)
- Q1 4:12NU +16%
Ben Bryant pass complete to A.J. Henning for 23 yds for a TD (Jack Olsen KICK)
- Q2 1:06NU +6%
Jack Olsen 28 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Northwestern vs. Wisconsin?
Northwestern 24, Wisconsin 10.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked WIS, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| NU | WIS | |
|---|---|---|
| 324 | Total yards | 341 |
| 195 | Passing yards | 255 |
| 129 | Rushing yards | 86 |
| 18 | First downs | 17 |
| 11-17 | 3rd down | 9-17 |
| 0-0 | 4th down | 0-1 |
| 18/26 | Comp/Att | 31/45 |
| 7.5 | Yards per pass | 5.7 |
| 3.4 | Yards per rush | 3.6 |
| 0 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 5-27 | Penalties | 5-50 |
| 32:10 | Possession | 27:50 |
Costliest call
Q2 10:13 WIS punt on 4th & 3 at NU 42. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.08 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 0:11WISJackson Acker 3 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)24–10
- Q2 1:06NUJack Olsen 28 Yd Field Goal 24–3
- Q2 6:41NUCam Johnson 24 Yd pass from Ben Bryant (Jack Olsen Kick)21–3
- Q2 12:54NUBen Bryant 1 Yd Run (Jack Olsen Kick)14–3
- Q1 4:12NUA.J. Henning 23 Yd pass from Ben Bryant (Jack Olsen Kick)7–3
- Q1 10:25WISNathanial Vakos 33 Yd Field Goal 0–3
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (WIS Elo 1655, NU Elo 1379 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects WIS -13.4 (82% to win) — 2.4 points clear of WIS's market line of -11. 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 — 2023
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#28 of 117 in 2023 by biggest miss · #22 of 127 in 2023 by longest odds.
The 2023 upset archive →Wisconsin leads 62–37–4 · 38% have been one-possession games
| NU | WIS | |
|---|---|---|
| -3.1 (#78) | CORE overall | +7.4 (#38) |
| -7 / -4 | offense / defense | +1 / -7 |
| 1.87 | points / drive | 1.95 |
| 2.02 | allowed / drive | 1.71 |
| 31% | three-and-outs | 25% |
| +3 | pass over expected | +4 |
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 →