Miami (OH) vs. Buffalo: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
M-OHTeam statsBUF
- Q4 3:44M-OHDom Dzioban 49 Yd Field Goal 37–20
- Q4 8:04M-OHDom Dzioban 37 Yd Field Goal 34–20
- Q3 0:34M-OHD'Shawntae Jones 1 Yd Run (Dom Dzioban Kick)31–20
- Q3 5:32M-OHD'Shawntae Jones 7 Yd Run (Dom Dzioban Kick)24–20
- Q3 6:50BUFJack Howes 47 Yd Field Goal 17–20
- Q3 12:31BUFJasaiah Gathings 10 Yd pass from Ta'Quan Roberson (Jack Howes Kick)17–17
- Q2 0:13BUFVictor Snow 9 Yd pass from Ta'Quan Roberson (Jack Howes Kick)17–10
- Q2 1:51M-OHDom Dzioban 42 Yd Field Goal 17–3
- Q2 3:16M-OHThomas Gotkowski 3 Yd Run (Dom Dzioban Kick)14–3
- Q2 13:42M-OHKam Perry 32 Yd pass from Thomas Gotkowski (Dom Dzioban Kick)7–3
- Q1 0:56BUFJack Howes 33 Yd Field Goal 0–3
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- BUF played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and M-OH did not face the same ones. 3rd & 10.3 vs 3rd & 7.1
- BUF lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 12% explosive on a 34% success rate
- PassThomas Gotkowski 13/23, 185 YDS, 1 TD
- RushJordan Brunson 16 CAR, 123 YDS
- RecCole Weaver 5 REC, 82 YDS
- PassTa'Quan Roberson 24/48, 303 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT
- RushTerrance Shelton Jr. 8 CAR, 27 YDS
- RecNik McMillan 8 REC, 147 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsM-OH up 11 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,142 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q3 5:32M-OH +28%
No Huddle-Shotgun #14 D.Jones rush middle for 7 yards gain to the BUF00 TOUCHDOWN, 1ST DOWN
- Q3 12:31BUF +24%
No Huddle-Shotgun #2 T.Roberson pass complete short left to #8 J.Gathings caught at MIA00, for 10 yards to the MIA00 TOUCHDOWN, 1ST DOWN
- Q2 13:42M-OH +20%
No Huddle-Shotgun #13 T.Gotkowski pass complete deep left to #8 K.Perry caught at BUF00, for 32 yards to the BUF00 TOUCHDOWN, 1ST DOWN. The previous play is under auto…
- Q3 0:34M-OH +19%
No Huddle-Shotgun #14 D.Jones rush middle for 1 yard gain to the BUF00 TOUCHDOWN
- Q2 3:16M-OH +17%
No Huddle-Shotgun #13 T.Gotkowski rush left for 3 yards gain to the BUF00 TOUCHDOWN
- Q2 0:13BUF +16%
No Huddle-Shotgun #2 T.Roberson pass complete short left to #0 V.Snow caught at MIA00, for 9 yards to the MIA00 TOUCHDOWN, 1ST DOWN
FAQ
What was the final score of Miami (OH) vs. Buffalo?
Miami (OH) 37, Buffalo 20.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (M-OH) was correct.
| M-OH | BUF | |
|---|---|---|
| 347 | Total yards | 349 |
| 185 | Passing yards | 303 |
| 162 | Rushing yards | 46 |
| 16 | First downs | 21 |
| 2-13 | 3rd down | 6-18 |
| 0-2 | 4th down | 2-3 |
| 13/25 | Comp/Att | 24/48 |
| 7.4 | Yards per pass | 6.3 |
| 4.0 | Yards per rush | 1.4 |
| 0 | Turnovers | 3 |
| 4-25 | Penalties | 8-44 |
| 29:25 | Possession | 30:35 |
Costliest call
Q4 12:49 M-OH punt on 4th & 4 at M-OH 47. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.32 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 3:44M-OHDom Dzioban 49 Yd Field Goal 37–20
- Q4 8:04M-OHDom Dzioban 37 Yd Field Goal 34–20
- Q3 0:34M-OHD'Shawntae Jones 1 Yd Run (Dom Dzioban Kick)31–20
- Q3 5:32M-OHD'Shawntae Jones 7 Yd Run (Dom Dzioban Kick)24–20
- Q3 6:50BUFJack Howes 47 Yd Field Goal 17–20
- Q3 12:31BUFJasaiah Gathings 10 Yd pass from Ta'Quan Roberson (Jack Howes Kick)17–17
- Q2 0:13BUFVictor Snow 9 Yd pass from Ta'Quan Roberson (Jack Howes Kick)17–10
- Q2 1:51M-OHDom Dzioban 42 Yd Field Goal 17–3
- Q2 3:16M-OHThomas Gotkowski 3 Yd Run (Dom Dzioban Kick)14–3
- Q2 13:42M-OHKam Perry 32 Yd pass from Thomas Gotkowski (Dom Dzioban Kick)7–3
- Q1 0:56BUFJack Howes 33 Yd Field Goal 0–3
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (BUF Elo 1318, M-OH Elo 1421 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects BUF +1.7 (47% 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 profilesMiami (OH) leads 17–9 · Miami (OH) has won 2 straight · 27% have been one-possession games
| M-OH | BUF | |
|---|---|---|
| -6.0 (#81) | CORE overall | -19.7 (#124) |
| -7 / -1 | offense / defense | -15 / +5 |
| 1.96 | points / drive | 1.56 |
| 1.91 | allowed / drive | 1.93 |
| 26% | three-and-outs | 34% |
| -1 | pass over expected | +3 |
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 →