Charleston Southern vs. Coastal Carolina: Final Score & Recap

CommandBoxAnalyticsMatchup

Charleston Southern0-1

00

Coastal Carolina0-1

▸0013

Final

Brooks Stadium (SC)

	1	2	3	4	T
CHAR	0	0	0	0	0
CCU	0	3	0	10	13

CHARTeam statsCCU

153Total yards384

55Pass139

98Rush245

10First downs27

0-113rd down7-14

1Turnovers3

24:25Possession35:35

Scoring plays

• Q4 1:11CCUKian Afrookhteh 29 Yd Field Goal 0–13
• Q4 10:02CCUTad Hudson 4 Yd Run (Kian Afrookhteh Kick)0–10
• Q2 11:12CCUKian Afrookhteh 21 Yd Field Goal 0–3

How the model called it

Market line

CCU −28

Against the number

CHAR covered

line CCU −28

Win probability

ours solid · ESPN dashed

CHAR aheadCCU ahead

Cumulative margin after each quarter. Above the line = CHAR ahead, below = CCU ahead.

GRIDPEX.COM

Play-by-play win probability isn't available for this game — scoreboard margin by quarter shown instead.

How the line closed

model vs market

Closing line

CCU −28

Closing total

49.0

Model line

—

Actual result

CHAR 0 – 13 CCU

Leaders

Charleston Southern

• PassZolten Osborne 10/22, 55 YDS, 1 INT
• RushKe'Marion Baldwin 8 CAR, 62 YDS
• RecChris Rhone 5 REC, 32 YDS

Coastal Carolina

• PassMJ Morris 13/22, 102 YDS, 3 INT
• RushDominic Lee-Knicely 10 CAR, 97 YDS
• RecBryson Graves 5 REC, 61 YDS

Tempo

what this pace leaves on the clock

8.7sper snap · faster the national 24.5s

fastnational avgslow

Snaps run

130

Points / snap

0.10

This exact spot, historically

empirical, no ratings

CCU up 3 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,457 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):

61%

CCU went on to win

A genuinely vulnerable lead — comebacks are common

Most comparable games

LMerrimack vs Holy Cross24-49LPurdue vs Fresno State35-39LRichmond vs Morgan State10-17WBoston College vs Holy Cross31-28LNorth Texas vs Florida International39-48

Fourth downs

17 calls

CHAR gave up 1.3 points to the model on fourth down.CHAR 6/9 · CCU 5/6 agreed

FAQ

What was the final score of Charleston Southern vs. Coastal Carolina?

Charleston Southern 0, Coastal Carolina 13.

Did Gridpex's model pick hit?

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

Situational splits

what the averages hide

CHAR

CCU

26%

Success rate

43%

-0.49

EPA / pass

0.01

0.03

EPA / rush

0.17

31%

Early-down success

42%

17%

Pass success

40%

35%

Rush success

45%

9%

Explosive play rate (15+ yds)

12%

22%

Stuffed rush rate

19%

51%

Pass rate

36%

7.9

Avg 3rd-down distance

6.4

CHAR

7.9 yards to go on 3rd down

47 scrimmage snaps

CCU

6.4 yards to go on 3rd down

83 scrimmage snaps

Team stats

the basics, from ESPN

CHAR		CCU
153	Total yards	384
55	Passing yards	139
98	Rushing yards	245
10	First downs	27
0-11	3rd down	7-14
1-1	4th down	1-1
10/22	Comp/Att	16/27
2.5	Yards per pass	5.1
3.8	Yards per rush	4.8
1	Turnovers	3
10-65	Penalties	8-80
24:25	Possession	35:35

Fourth downs

17 calls

CHAR

6/9 with the model

−1.3 pts · −0.0% win prob

CCU

5/6 with the model

−0.8 pts · −0.0% win prob

Costliest call

Q2 11:12 CCU field goal on 4th & 3 at CHAR 3. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.83 points.

Every call, priced (17)

Drive chart

every possession, start to finish

CHAR 0/10 scoring drives← own end zone →CCU 3/11 scoring drives

CCUPUNT6 pl, 13 yds· own 25Q1

CHARPUNT4 pl, 6 yds· own 1Q1

CCUINT5 pl, 46 yds· own 11Q1

CHARPUNT3 pl, 9 yds· own 7Q1

CCUPUNT3 pl, -7 yds· opp 49Q1

CHARPUNT3 pl, 1 yds· own 26Q1

CCUFG15 pl, 57 yds· own 40Q1

CHARPUNT3 pl, -1 yds· own 25Q2

CCUINT5 pl, 34 yds· own 45Q2

CHARPUNT9 pl, 55 yds· own 3Q2

CCUPUNT4 pl, 19 yds· own 14Q2

CHARINT5 pl, 31 yds· own 34Q2

CCUEND2 pl, 23 yds· own 41Q2

CHARPUNT5 pl, 11 yds· own 25Q3

CCUINT7 pl, 41 yds· own 30Q3

CHARPUNT10 pl, 54 yds· own 4Q3

CCUTD16 pl, 83 yds· own 17Q3

CHARPUNT3 pl, 7 yds· own 27Q4

CCUFG15 pl, 75 yds· own 14Q4

CHARPUNT3 pl, 0 yds· own 9Q4

CCUEND2 pl, -4 yds· own 45Q4

Scoring plays

• Q4 1:11CCUKian Afrookhteh 29 Yd Field Goal 0–13
• Q4 10:02CCUTad Hudson 4 Yd Run (Kian Afrookhteh Kick)0–10
• Q2 11:12CCUKian Afrookhteh 21 Yd Field Goal 0–3

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 →