Duke vs. Tulane: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
DUKETeam statsTULN
- Q4 1:06DUKETodd Pelino 47 Yd Field Goal 27–34
- Q4 2:57DUKENate Sheppard 4 Yd pass from Darian Mensah (Nate Sheppard Run for Two-Point Conversion)24–34
- Q4 14:12TULNPatrick Durkin 27 Yd Field Goal 16–34
- Q3 6:31TULNJake Retzlaff 11 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)16–31
- Q3 11:46DUKELanden King 3 Yd pass from Darian Mensah (Todd Pelino Kick)16–24
- Q2 0:18DUKESahmir Hagans 29 Yd pass from Darian Mensah (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)9–24
- Q2 1:54TULNPatrick Durkin 29 Yd Field Goal 3–24
- Q2 6:00TULNJake Retzlaff 20 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)3–21
- Q2 15:00DUKETodd Pelino 28 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 2:56TULNJake Retzlaff 6 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)0–14
- Q1 10:50TULNJake Retzlaff 19 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)0–7
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- TULN lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 14% explosive on a 38% success rate
- PassDarian Mensah 30/51, 313 YDS, 3 TD, 1 INT
- RushNate Sheppard 5 CAR, 75 YDS
- RecQue'Sean Brown 6 REC, 81 YDS
- PassJake Retzlaff 15/23, 245 YDS
- RushJake Retzlaff 17 CAR, 111 YDS, 4 TD
- RecShazz Preston 3 REC, 95 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsTULN up 15 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,206 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 10:50TULN +13%
Jake Retzlaff run for 19 yds for a TD (Patrick Durkin KICK)
- Q3 11:46DUKE +10%
Darian Mensah pass complete to Landen King for 3 yds for a TD (Todd Pelino KICK)
- Q1 2:56TULN +9%
Jake Retzlaff run for 6 yds for a TD (Patrick Durkin KICK)
- Q3 6:31TULN +8%
Jake Retzlaff run for 11 yds for a TD (Patrick Durkin KICK)
- Q2 6:00TULN +6%
Jake Retzlaff run for 20 yds for a TD (Patrick Durkin KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Duke vs. Tulane?
Duke 27, Tulane 34.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (TULN) was correct.
| DUKE | TULN | |
|---|---|---|
| 452 | Total yards | 426 |
| 313 | Passing yards | 270 |
| 139 | Rushing yards | 156 |
| 27 | First downs | 22 |
| 6-14 | 3rd down | 5-13 |
| 1-3 | 4th down | 1-2 |
| 30/51 | Comp/Att | 17/25 |
| 6.1 | Yards per pass | 10.8 |
| 5.8 | Yards per rush | 4.1 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 9-85 | Penalties | 8-100 |
| 26:43 | Possession | 33:17 |
Costliest call
Q2 9:14 DUKE go for it on 4th & 7 at TULN 33. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.35 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 1:06DUKETodd Pelino 47 Yd Field Goal 27–34
- Q4 2:57DUKENate Sheppard 4 Yd pass from Darian Mensah (Nate Sheppard Run for Two-Point Conversion)24–34
- Q4 14:12TULNPatrick Durkin 27 Yd Field Goal 16–34
- Q3 6:31TULNJake Retzlaff 11 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)16–31
- Q3 11:46DUKELanden King 3 Yd pass from Darian Mensah (Todd Pelino Kick)16–24
- Q2 0:18DUKESahmir Hagans 29 Yd pass from Darian Mensah (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)9–24
- Q2 1:54TULNPatrick Durkin 29 Yd Field Goal 3–24
- Q2 6:00TULNJake Retzlaff 20 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)3–21
- Q2 15:00DUKETodd Pelino 28 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 2:56TULNJake Retzlaff 6 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)0–14
- Q1 10:50TULNJake Retzlaff 19 Yd Run (Patrick Durkin Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (TULN Elo 1642, DUKE Elo 1462 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects TULN -9.6 (75% to win) — 9.1 points clear of TULN's market line of -0.5. 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 15 · through week 2 · drive simulation
Season form — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| DUKE | TULN | |
|---|---|---|
| +2.4 (#60) | CORE overall | +7.0 (#47) |
| +9 / +7 | offense / defense | +5 / -2 |
| 3.04 | points / drive | 2.56 |
| 2.85 | allowed / drive | 2.20 |
| 23% | three-and-outs | 27% |
| +6 | pass over expected | +2 |
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 →