Texas A&M vs. South Carolina: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
TA&MTeam statsSC
- Q4 2:22SCRaheim Sanders 7 Yd Run (Alex Herrera Kick)20–44
- Q4 3:24SCJoshua Simon 57 Yd pass from LaNorris Sellers (Alex Herrera Kick)20–37
- Q3 6:50SCAlex Herrera 43 Yd Field Goal 20–30
- Q3 9:19SCRaheim Sanders 52 Yd Run (Alex Herrera Kick)20–27
- Q2 0:02SCAlex Herrera 44 Yd Field Goal 20–20
- Q2 1:08TA&MJabre Barber 2 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Randy Bond Kick)20–17
- Q2 7:29TA&MAmari Daniels 56 Yd Run (Randy Bond Kick)13–17
- Q2 8:45SCAlex Herrera 25 Yd Field Goal 6–17
- Q2 13:12TA&MRandy Bond 55 Yd Field Goal 6–14
- Q1 5:15TA&MRandy Bond 52 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 8:24SCJoshua Simon 15 Yd pass from LaNorris Sellers (Alex Herrera Kick)0–14
- Q1 10:46SCLaNorris Sellers 23 Yd Run (Alex Herrera Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassMarcel Reed 18/28, 206 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushAmari Daniels 13 CAR, 83 YDS, 1 TD
- RecJabre Barber 7 REC, 80 YDS, 1 TD
- PassLaNorris Sellers 13/27, 244 YDS, 2 TD
- RushRaheim Sanders 20 CAR, 144 YDS, 2 TD
- RecJoshua Simon 4 REC, 132 YDS, 2 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsSC up 10 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,137 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q3 9:19SC +25%
Raheim Sanders 52 Yd Run (Alex Herrera Kick)
- Q2 1:08TA&M +24%
Marcel Reed pass complete to Jabre Barber for 2 yds for a TD (Randy Bond KICK)
- Q2 7:29TA&M +19%
Amari Daniels run for 56 yds for a TD (Randy Bond KICK)
- Q1 10:46SC +18%
LaNorris Sellers run for 23 yds for a TD (Alex Herrera KICK)
- Q1 8:24SC +15%
LaNorris Sellers pass complete to Joshua Simon for 15 yds for a TD (Alex Herrera KICK)
- Q2 0:02SC +10%
Alex Herrera 44 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Texas A&M vs. South Carolina?
Texas A&M 20, South Carolina 44.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (SC) was correct.
| TA&M | SC | |
|---|---|---|
| 350 | Total yards | 530 |
| 206 | Passing yards | 244 |
| 144 | Rushing yards | 286 |
| 19 | First downs | 26 |
| 4-15 | 3rd down | 4-13 |
| 1-3 | 4th down | 1-2 |
| 18/28 | Comp/Att | 13/27 |
| 7.4 | Yards per pass | 9.0 |
| 3.4 | Yards per rush | 6.7 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 7-68 | Penalties | 3-25 |
| 30:48 | Possession | 29:12 |
Costliest call
Q1 5:15 TA&M field goal on 4th & 2 at SC 34. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.88 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 2:22SCRaheim Sanders 7 Yd Run (Alex Herrera Kick)20–44
- Q4 3:24SCJoshua Simon 57 Yd pass from LaNorris Sellers (Alex Herrera Kick)20–37
- Q3 6:50SCAlex Herrera 43 Yd Field Goal 20–30
- Q3 9:19SCRaheim Sanders 52 Yd Run (Alex Herrera Kick)20–27
- Q2 0:02SCAlex Herrera 44 Yd Field Goal 20–20
- Q2 1:08TA&MJabre Barber 2 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Randy Bond Kick)20–17
- Q2 7:29TA&MAmari Daniels 56 Yd Run (Randy Bond Kick)13–17
- Q2 8:45SCAlex Herrera 25 Yd Field Goal 6–17
- Q2 13:12TA&MRandy Bond 55 Yd Field Goal 6–14
- Q1 5:15TA&MRandy Bond 52 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 8:24SCJoshua Simon 15 Yd pass from LaNorris Sellers (Alex Herrera Kick)0–14
- Q1 10:46SCLaNorris Sellers 23 Yd Run (Alex Herrera Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (SC Elo 1744, TA&M Elo 1814 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects SC +0.4 (50% to win) — 2.6 points clear of SC's market line of +3. 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 — 2024
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#36 of 120 in 2024 by biggest miss · #88 of 129 in 2024 by longest odds · #12 of 60 in 2024 by biggest poll gap.
The 2024 upset archive →Texas A&M leads 10–2 · 42% have been one-possession games
| TA&M | SC | |
|---|---|---|
| +14.7 (#24) | CORE overall | +19.1 (#10) |
| +5 / -10 | offense / defense | +9 / -10 |
| 2.48 | points / drive | 2.32 |
| 1.75 | allowed / drive | 1.58 |
| 21% | three-and-outs | 28% |
| -5 | pass over expected | -7 |
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 →