Clemson vs. Boston College: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
CLEMTeam statsBC
- Q4 0:24CLEMKeith Adams Jr. 1 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)41–10
- Q2 0:00CLEMNolan Hauser 50 Yd Field Goal 34–10
- Q2 1:23CLEMBryant Wesco Jr. 38 Yd pass from Cade Klubnik (Nolan Hauser Kick)31–10
- Q2 5:31CLEMCade Klubnik 6 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)24–10
- Q2 9:10BCTurbo Richard 2 Yd Run (Luca Lombardo Kick)17–10
- Q2 13:05CLEMPeter Woods 2 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)17–3
- Q1 1:37BCLuca Lombardo 45 Yd Field Goal 10–3
- Q1 4:05CLEMAdam Randall 8 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)10–0
- Q1 8:24CLEMNolan Hauser 46 Yd Field Goal 3–0
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- BC played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and CLEM did not face the same ones. 3rd & 7.2 vs 3rd & 3.2
- PassCade Klubnik 22/30, 280 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushKeith Adams Jr. 7 CAR, 49 YDS, 1 TD
- RecBryant Wesco Jr. 5 REC, 106 YDS, 1 TD
- PassDylan Lonergan 12/19, 117 YDS
- RushTurbo Richard 18 CAR, 75 YDS, 1 TD
- RecLewis Bond 7 REC, 70 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsCLEM up 24 entering the 4th quarter. Across 555 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 4:05CLEM +11%
Adam Randall 8 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)
- Q2 13:05CLEM +10%
Peter Woods 2 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)
- Q2 5:31CLEM +8%
Cade Klubnik 6 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)
- Q2 9:10BC +6%
Turbo Richard 2 Yd Run (Luca Lombardo Kick)
- Q2 5:31BC +5%
Turbo Richard run for 2 yds to the BC 27
FAQ
What was the final score of Clemson vs. Boston College?
Clemson 41, Boston College 10.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (CLEM) was correct.
| CLEM | BC | |
|---|---|---|
| 504 | Total yards | 221 |
| 278 | Passing yards | 136 |
| 226 | Rushing yards | 85 |
| 28 | First downs | 15 |
| 6-12 | 3rd down | 3-12 |
| 3-4 | 4th down | 1-4 |
| 23/33 | Comp/Att | 15/29 |
| 8.4 | Yards per pass | 4.7 |
| 5.3 | Yards per rush | 2.7 |
| 3 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 3-28 | Penalties | 3-40 |
| 37:21 | Possession | 22:39 |
Costliest call
Q4 14:56 BC punt on 4th & 2 at BC 28. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.48 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 0:24CLEMKeith Adams Jr. 1 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)41–10
- Q2 0:00CLEMNolan Hauser 50 Yd Field Goal 34–10
- Q2 1:23CLEMBryant Wesco Jr. 38 Yd pass from Cade Klubnik (Nolan Hauser Kick)31–10
- Q2 5:31CLEMCade Klubnik 6 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)24–10
- Q2 9:10BCTurbo Richard 2 Yd Run (Luca Lombardo Kick)17–10
- Q2 13:05CLEMPeter Woods 2 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)17–3
- Q1 1:37BCLuca Lombardo 45 Yd Field Goal 10–3
- Q1 4:05CLEMAdam Randall 8 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)10–0
- Q1 8:24CLEMNolan Hauser 46 Yd Field Goal 3–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (BC Elo 1349, CLEM Elo 1688 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects BC +11.2 (24% to win) — 2.8 points clear of BC's market line of +14. 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 — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profilesClemson leads 22–9–2 · Clemson has won 13 straight · 39% have been one-possession games
| CLEM | BC | |
|---|---|---|
| +4.9 (#56) | CORE overall | -10.0 (#95) |
| +2 / -3 | offense / defense | -1 / +9 |
| 2.25 | points / drive | 1.81 |
| 1.84 | allowed / drive | 3.19 |
| 26% | three-and-outs | 28% |
| +9 | 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 →