Iowa State vs. Cincinnati: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
ISUTeam statsCIN
- Q4 1:56ISUChase Sowell 3 Yd pass from Rocco Becht (Rocco Becht Pass to Benjamin Brahmer for Two-Point Conversion)30–38
- Q4 5:57CINCaleb Goodie 82 Yd pass from Brendan Sorsby (Stephen Rusnak Kick)22–38
- Q3 8:06ISUBrett Eskildsen 11 Yd pass from Rocco Becht (Chase Smith Kick)22–31
- Q2 0:00ISURocco Becht 4 Yd Run (Major Cantrell Pass to Benjamin Brahmer for Two-Point Conversion)15–31
- Q2 1:08CINBrendan Sorsby 20 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–31
- Q2 13:40CINEvan Pryor 18 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–24
- Q2 14:55ISURocco Becht 14 Yd Run (Chase Smith Kick)7–17
- Q1 0:23CINJoe Royer 12 Yd pass from Brendan Sorsby (Stephen Rusnak Kick)0–17
- Q1 7:54CINStephen Rusnak 38 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 12:25CINEvan Pryor 30 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)0–7
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- CIN played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and ISU did not face the same ones. 3rd & 8.8 vs 3rd & 6.8
- ISU lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 13% explosive on a 39% success rate
- PassRocco Becht 30/48, 314 YDS, 2 TD
- RushAbu Sama III 18 CAR, 96 YDS
- RecBrett Eskildsen 8 REC, 105 YDS, 1 TD
- PassBrendan Sorsby 13/25, 214 YDS, 2 TD
- RushEvan Pryor 10 CAR, 111 YDS, 2 TD
- RecCaleb Goodie Sr. 2 REC, 83 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsCIN up 9 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,697 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 14:07ISU +20%
PENALTY ISU Offside (Gilbert,Jace J.) 5 yards from CIN27 to CIN32, 1ST DOWN. NO PLAY
- Q4 6:14CIN +8%
PENALTY CIN False Start (Cotton,Joe) 5 yards from CIN23 to CIN18. NO PLAY
- Q3 3:10CIN +8%
Max Fletcher punt for 60 yds
- Q4 13:52CIN +7%
Cincinnati Penalty, Personal Foul (-15 Yards) to the CIN 23
- Q3 1:25CIN +7%
Brendan Sorsby pass complete to Caleb Goodie for 1 yd to the ISU 44
- Q4 11:27ISU +6%
Cincinnati Penalty, Personal Foul (Logan Wilson) to the CIN 44 for a 1ST down
FAQ
What was the final score of Iowa State vs. Cincinnati?
Iowa State 30, Cincinnati 38.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked ISU, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| ISU | CIN | |
|---|---|---|
| 470 | Total yards | 474 |
| 314 | Passing yards | 214 |
| 156 | Rushing yards | 260 |
| 29 | First downs | 20 |
| 4-16 | 3rd down | 4-11 |
| 4-7 | 4th down | 1-2 |
| 30/48 | Comp/Att | 13/25 |
| 6.5 | Yards per pass | 8.6 |
| 4.2 | Yards per rush | 7.6 |
| 0 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 8-60 | Penalties | 13-128 |
| 34:56 | Possession | 25:04 |
Costliest call
Q3 9:53 ISU go for it on 4th & 5 at CIN 23. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.46 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 1:56ISUChase Sowell 3 Yd pass from Rocco Becht (Rocco Becht Pass to Benjamin Brahmer for Two-Point Conversion)30–38
- Q4 5:57CINCaleb Goodie 82 Yd pass from Brendan Sorsby (Stephen Rusnak Kick)22–38
- Q3 8:06ISUBrett Eskildsen 11 Yd pass from Rocco Becht (Chase Smith Kick)22–31
- Q2 0:00ISURocco Becht 4 Yd Run (Major Cantrell Pass to Benjamin Brahmer for Two-Point Conversion)15–31
- Q2 1:08CINBrendan Sorsby 20 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–31
- Q2 13:40CINEvan Pryor 18 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–24
- Q2 14:55ISURocco Becht 14 Yd Run (Chase Smith Kick)7–17
- Q1 0:23CINJoe Royer 12 Yd pass from Brendan Sorsby (Stephen Rusnak Kick)0–17
- Q1 7:54CINStephen Rusnak 38 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 12:25CINEvan Pryor 30 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (CIN Elo 1520, ISU Elo 1655 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects CIN +3 (43% to win) — 4.5 points clear of ISU's market line of -1.5. 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#113 of 129 in 2025 by longest odds · #19 of 57 in 2025 by biggest poll gap.
The 2025 upset archive →| ISU | CIN | |
|---|---|---|
| +6.4 (#51) | CORE overall | +6.7 (#50) |
| +2 / -4 | offense / defense | +12 / +5 |
| 2.26 | points / drive | 2.63 |
| 2.08 | allowed / drive | 2.77 |
| 23% | three-and-outs | 31% |
| -2 | pass over expected | +0 |
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 →