Central Arkansas vs. Missouri: Final Score & Recap

ReplayCommandBoxAnalyticsMatchup

Central Arkansas

06

Missouri

▸0061

Final

Memorial Stadium

	1	2	3	4	T
CENT	0	0	0	6	6
MIZ	9	17	14	21	61

CENTTeam statsMIZ

227Total yards560

73Pass341

154Rush219

15First downs25

2-133rd down9-13

2Turnovers0

29:51Possession30:09

Scoring plays

• Q4 0:22CENTManny Smith 3 Yd pass from Luther Richesson (Two-Point Run Conversion Failed)6–61
• Q4 2:48MIZDante McClellan 83 Yd Interception Return (Robert Meyer Kick)0–61
• Q4 7:32MIZMarquise Davis 3 Yd Run (Robert Meyer Kick)0–54
• Q4 11:05MIZJude James 40 Yd pass from Matt Zollers (Robert Meyer Kick)0–47
• Q3 4:54MIZBeau Pribula 1 Yd Run (Robert Meyer Kick)0–40
• Q3 11:23MIZAhmad Hardy 4 Yd Run (Blake Craig Kick)0–33
• Q2 0:08MIZBrett Norfleet 1 Yd pass from Beau Pribula (Blake Craig Kick)0–26
• Q2 6:48MIZBeau Pribula 31 Yd Run (Blake Craig Kick)0–19
• Q2 9:33MIZBlake Craig 55 Yd Field Goal 0–12
• Q1 2:22MIZBlake Craig 49 Yd Field Goal 0–9
• Q1 11:06MIZMarquis Johnson 49 Yd pass from Beau Pribula (Two-Point Run Conversion Failed)0–6

How the model called it

Market line

MIZ −39

Against the number

MIZ covered

line MIZ −39

What the numbers say

• CENT played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and MIZ did not face the same ones. 3rd & 8.0 vs 3rd & 5.0

Win probability

ours solid · ESPN dashed

MIZ 100%50%CENT 100%

Kickoff149 plays →Final

Tap or hover on the chart to see play details

MIZ (top)CENT (bottom)· colored dots = scoresFinal: MIZ 100%

How the line closed

model vs market

Closing line

MIZ −39

Closing total

53.0

Model line

—

Actual result

CENT 6 – 61 MIZ

Leaders

Central Arkansas

• PassLuther Richesson 13/23, 73 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
• RushLanden Chambers 15 CAR, 63 YDS
• RecMalachi Henry 3 REC, 18 YDS

Missouri

• PassBeau Pribula 23/28, 283 YDS, 2 TD
• RushAhmad Hardy 10 CAR, 100 YDS, 1 TD
• RecMarquis Johnson 5 REC, 134 YDS, 1 TD

This exact spot, historically

empirical, no ratings

MIZ up 40 entering the 4th quarter. Across 267 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):

100%

MIZ went on to win

A near-lock historically

Most comparable games

WWashington State vs Portland State70-30WFlorida Atlantic vs Tulsa63-16WWagner vs Post University48-21WGeorgia Southern vs Ball State40-3WFresno State vs Kent State56-10

Fourth downs

13 calls

MIZ gave up 0.6 points to the model on fourth down.CENT 8/9 · MIZ 2/4 agreed

FAQ

What was the final score of Central Arkansas vs. Missouri?

Central Arkansas 6, Missouri 61.

Did Gridpex's model pick hit?

Yes — the model's pick (MIZ) was correct.

Situational splits

what the averages hide

CENT

MIZ

39%

Success rate

62%

-0.60

EPA / pass

0.69

0.16

EPA / rush

0.43

42%

Early-down success

60%

29%

Pass success

64%

47%

Rush success

61%

3%

Explosive play rate (15+ yds)

14%

22%

Stuffed rush rate

17%

44%

Pass rate

48%

8.0

Avg 3rd-down distance

5.0

CENT

8.0 yards to go on 3rd down

64 scrimmage snaps

MIZ

5.0 yards to go on 3rd down

69 scrimmage snaps

Team stats

the basics, from ESPN

CENT		MIZ
227	Total yards	560
73	Passing yards	341
154	Rushing yards	219
15	First downs	25
2-13	3rd down	9-13
1-1	4th down	1-1
13/23	Comp/Att	26/31
3.2	Yards per pass	11.0
3.9	Yards per rush	5.8
2	Turnovers	0
5-60	Penalties	8-70
29:51	Possession	30:09

Fourth downs

13 calls

CENT

8/9 with the model

−0.4 pts · −0.0% win prob

MIZ

2/4 with the model

−0.6 pts · −0.0% win prob

Costliest call

Q2 3:38 CENT punt on 4th & 3 at CENT 45. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.39 points.

Every call, priced (13)

Drive chart

every possession, start to finish

CENT 2/12 scoring drives← own end zone →MIZ 9/11 scoring drives

CENTPUNT4 pl, 7 yds· own 25Q1

MIZTD4 pl, 64 yds· own 36Q0

CENTPUNT7 pl, 25 yds· own 25Q1

MIZFG10 pl, 50 yds· own 18Q1

CENTPUNT3 pl, 7 yds· own 25Q1

MIZFG14 pl, 35 yds· own 27Q1

CENTPUNT3 pl, 4 yds· own 20Q2

MIZTD2 pl, 33 yds· opp 33Q2

CENTPUNT5 pl, 20 yds· own 25Q2

MIZTD15 pl, 99 yds· own 1Q2

CENTEND1 pl, -1 yds· own 33Q2

MIZTD7 pl, 85 yds· own 15Q3

CENTPUNT6 pl, 30 yds· own 15Q3

MIZTD7 pl, 99 yds· own 1Q3

CENTPUNT5 pl, 16 yds· own 16Q3

MIZPUNT3 pl, 7 yds· own 34Q3

CENTPUNT3 pl, 6 yds· own 11Q4

MIZTD4 pl, 54 yds· own 46Q4

CENTFUM3 pl, -1 yds· own 15Q4

MIZTD4 pl, 14 yds· opp 14Q4

CENTTD12 pl, 49 yds· own 29Q4

CENTTD10 pl, 63 yds· own 37Q4

MIZEND1 pl, -2 yds· own 25Q4

Scoring plays

• Q4 0:22CENTManny Smith 3 Yd pass from Luther Richesson (Two-Point Run Conversion Failed)6–61
• Q4 2:48MIZDante McClellan 83 Yd Interception Return (Robert Meyer Kick)0–61
• Q4 7:32MIZMarquise Davis 3 Yd Run (Robert Meyer Kick)0–54
• Q4 11:05MIZJude James 40 Yd pass from Matt Zollers (Robert Meyer Kick)0–47
• Q3 4:54MIZBeau Pribula 1 Yd Run (Robert Meyer Kick)0–40
• Q3 11:23MIZAhmad Hardy 4 Yd Run (Blake Craig Kick)0–33
• Q2 0:08MIZBrett Norfleet 1 Yd pass from Beau Pribula (Blake Craig Kick)0–26
• Q2 6:48MIZBeau Pribula 31 Yd Run (Blake Craig Kick)0–19
• Q2 9:33MIZBlake Craig 55 Yd Field Goal 0–12
• Q1 2:22MIZBlake Craig 49 Yd Field Goal 0–9
• Q1 11:06MIZMarquis Johnson 49 Yd pass from Beau Pribula (Two-Point Run Conversion Failed)0–6

Model prediction

how the number is built

One or both teams lack a power rating (often an FCS opponent), so the model prediction is low-confidence for this game.

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 →