Purdue vs. Wisconsin: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
PURTeam statsWIS
- Q4 6:15WISNathanial Vakos 26 Yd Field Goal 6–52
- Q4 10:59WISCade Yacamelli 30 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–49
- Q3 0:12WISTawee Walker 17 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–42
- Q3 4:42WISTrech Kekahuna 25 Yd pass from Braedyn Locke (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–35
- Q3 12:14WISTrech Kekahuna 69 Yd pass from Braedyn Locke (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–28
- Q2 0:09WISTawee Walker 1 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–21
- Q2 3:27PURSpencer Porath 23 Yd Field Goal 6–14
- Q2 8:41PURSpencer Porath 21 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 1:56WISVinny Anthony II 52 Yd pass from Braedyn Locke (Nathanial Vakos Kick)0–14
- Q1 8:04WISTawee Walker 12 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)0–7
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- PUR played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and WIS did not face the same ones. 3rd & 8.4 vs 3rd & 6.4
- PassHudson Card 11/21, 111 YDS
- RushDevin Mockobee 11 CAR, 45 YDS
- RecJahmal Edrine 2 REC, 26 YDS
- PassBraedyn Locke 20/31, 359 YDS, 3 TD, 2 INT
- RushTawee Walker 19 CAR, 94 YDS, 3 TD
- RecTrech Kekahuna 6 REC, 134 YDS, 2 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsWIS up 36 entering the 4th quarter. Across 338 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 8:04WIS +12%
Tawee Walker run for 12 yds for a TD (Nathanial Vakos KICK)
- Q1 1:56WIS +9%
Braedyn Locke pass complete to Vinny Anthony II for 52 yds for a TD (Nathanial Vakos KICK)
- Q2 0:09WIS +7%
Tawee Walker run for 1 yd for a TD (Nathanial Vakos KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Purdue vs. Wisconsin?
Purdue 6, Wisconsin 52.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (WIS) was correct.
| PUR | WIS | |
|---|---|---|
| 216 | Total yards | 589 |
| 117 | Passing yards | 361 |
| 99 | Rushing yards | 228 |
| 10 | First downs | 28 |
| 1-11 | 3rd down | 8-14 |
| 0-0 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 12/22 | Comp/Att | 21/32 |
| 5.3 | Yards per pass | 11.3 |
| 3.8 | Yards per rush | 5.6 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 6-55 | Penalties | 3-30 |
| 28:13 | Possession | 31:47 |
Costliest call
Q1 4:31 PUR punt on 4th & 1 at PUR 46. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.36 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 6:15WISNathanial Vakos 26 Yd Field Goal 6–52
- Q4 10:59WISCade Yacamelli 30 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–49
- Q3 0:12WISTawee Walker 17 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–42
- Q3 4:42WISTrech Kekahuna 25 Yd pass from Braedyn Locke (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–35
- Q3 12:14WISTrech Kekahuna 69 Yd pass from Braedyn Locke (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–28
- Q2 0:09WISTawee Walker 1 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)6–21
- Q2 3:27PURSpencer Porath 23 Yd Field Goal 6–14
- Q2 8:41PURSpencer Porath 21 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 1:56WISVinny Anthony II 52 Yd pass from Braedyn Locke (Nathanial Vakos Kick)0–14
- Q1 8:04WISTawee Walker 12 Yd Run (Nathanial Vakos Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (WIS Elo 1536, PUR Elo 1322 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects WIS -11 (77% 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 — 2024
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profilesWisconsin leads 54–29–8 · Wisconsin has won 18 straight · 44% have been one-possession games
| PUR | WIS | |
|---|---|---|
| -18.9 (#121) | CORE overall | -4.0 (#81) |
| -7 / +12 | offense / defense | -5 / -1 |
| 0.86 | points / drive | 1.82 |
| 3.88 | allowed / drive | 2.07 |
| 43% | three-and-outs | 31% |
| +0 | 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 →