Clemson vs. Louisville: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
CLEMTeam statsLOU
- Q4 7:16CLEMA. Randall run for 1 yd, for a TD (N. Hauser KICK)20–19
- Q3 1:32LOUCooper Ranvier 39 Yd Field Goal 13–19
- Q3 7:07CLEMNolan Hauser 48 Yd Field Goal 13–16
- Q3 11:16LOUNate Kurisky 2 Yd pass from Caullin Lacy (Cooper Ranvier Kick)10–16
- Q2 3:13CLEMAdam Randall 25 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)10–9
- Q2 8:47LOUMiller Moss 1 Yd Run (Cooper Ranvier PAT failed)3–9
- Q1 0:45LOUCooper Ranvier 51 Yd Field Goal 3–3
- Q1 8:38CLEMNolan Hauser 27 Yd Field Goal 3–0
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- LOU played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and CLEM did not face the same ones. 3rd & 9.5 vs 3rd & 5.2
- PassCade Klubnik 22/34, 187 YDS
- RushAdam Randall 15 CAR, 105 YDS, 2 TD
- RecT.J. Moore 6 REC, 68 YDS
- PassMiller Moss 19/27, 212 YDS
- RushKeyjuan Brown 15 CAR, 135 YDS
- RecChris Bell 5 REC, 79 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsLOU up 6 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,662 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q4 0:02CLEM +90%
Kneel down by Clemson at LOU31 for loss of 2 yards
- Q4 0:12LOU +70%
Shotgun #7 M.Moss pass incomplete, Spike
- Q4 1:24CLEM +44%
Shotgun #8 A.Randall rush middle for 4 yards gain to the CLE47 (#34 T.Quinn)
- Q4 1:54LOU +36%
Shotgun #26 D.Watson rush middle for 3 yards gain to the CLE27 (#11 P.Woods) PENALTY LOU UNS: Unsportsmanlike Conduct (#53 L.Robinson) 15 yards from CLE27 to CLE42
- Q4 11:24CLEM +33%
Shotgun #22 K.Brown rush right for 18 yards gain to the LOU20 (#6 R.Jones) PENALTY LOU Holding (#85 N.Kurisky) 1 yard from LOU02 to LOU01. NO PLAY
- Q4 3:56CLEM +28%
Shotgun #2 C.Klubnik pass complete short right to #8 A.Randall caught at CLE26, for 4 yards to the CLE36 (#92 M.Carter; #9 A.Watts)
FAQ
What was the final score of Clemson vs. Louisville?
Clemson 20, Louisville 19.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked LOU, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| CLEM | LOU | |
|---|---|---|
| 308 | Total yards | 385 |
| 187 | Passing yards | 214 |
| 121 | Rushing yards | 171 |
| 19 | First downs | 16 |
| 1-13 | 3rd down | 2-11 |
| 2-5 | 4th down | 0-1 |
| 22/34 | Comp/Att | 20/29 |
| 5.5 | Yards per pass | 7.4 |
| 4.0 | Yards per rush | 5.7 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 3-30 | Penalties | 10-84 |
| 30:55 | Possession | 29:05 |
Costliest call
Q2 5:26 CLEM punt on 4th & 5 at LOU 45. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.50 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 7:16CLEMA. Randall run for 1 yd, for a TD (N. Hauser KICK)20–19
- Q3 1:32LOUCooper Ranvier 39 Yd Field Goal 13–19
- Q3 7:07CLEMNolan Hauser 48 Yd Field Goal 13–16
- Q3 11:16LOUNate Kurisky 2 Yd pass from Caullin Lacy (Cooper Ranvier Kick)10–16
- Q2 3:13CLEMAdam Randall 25 Yd Run (Nolan Hauser Kick)10–9
- Q2 8:47LOUMiller Moss 1 Yd Run (Cooper Ranvier PAT failed)3–9
- Q1 0:45LOUCooper Ranvier 51 Yd Field Goal 3–3
- Q1 8:38CLEMNolan Hauser 27 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 (LOU Elo 1709, CLEM Elo 1725 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects LOU -1.8 (56% 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 — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#112 of 112 in 2025 by biggest miss · #112 of 129 in 2025 by longest odds · #30 of 57 in 2025 by biggest poll gap.
The 2025 upset archive →Clemson leads 9–1 · 50% have been one-possession games
| CLEM | LOU | |
|---|---|---|
| +4.9 (#56) | CORE overall | +18.6 (#18) |
| +2 / -3 | offense / defense | +5 / -14 |
| 2.25 | points / drive | 2.32 |
| 1.84 | allowed / drive | 1.71 |
| 26% | three-and-outs | 25% |
| +9 | pass over expected | +9 |
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 →