Middle Tennessee vs. Nevada: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
MTSUTeam statsNEV
- Q4 0:21MTSUNicholas Vattiato 5 Yd Run (Jacob Hathaway Kick)14–13
- Q4 6:30MTSUNahzae Cox 13 Yd pass from Nicholas Vattiato (Jacob Hathaway Kick)7–13
- Q2 1:02NEVJoe McFadden 33 Yd Field Goal 0–13
- Q2 8:59NEVJoe McFadden 38 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q2 14:42NEVKy Woods 47 Yd pass from Chubba Purdy (Joe McFadden Kick)0–7
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- NEV played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and MTSU did not face the same ones. 3rd & 9.2 vs 3rd & 6.7
- NEV lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 15% explosive on a 34% success rate
- PassNicholas Vattiato 27/44, 247 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushJekail Middlebrook 10 CAR, 67 YDS
- RecMyles Butler 7 REC, 65 YDS
- PassChubba Purdy 5/7, 88 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushHerschel Turner 12 CAR, 90 YDS
- RecJordan Brown 5 REC, 58 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsNEV up 13 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,180 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q4 0:21MTSU +98%
Nicholas Vattiato run for 5 yds for a TD (Jacob Hathaway KICK)
- Q4 0:11NEV +74%
Chubba Purdy pass complete to Jett Carpenter for 9 yds to the MTSU 48
- Q4 0:00NEV +27%
Joe McFadden 56 Yard Field Goal Missed
- Q2 14:42NEV +19%
Chubba Purdy pass complete to Ky Woods for 47 yds for a TD (Joe McFadden KICK)
- Q4 2:15NEV +15%
Joe McFadden 41 Yard Field Goal Missed
- Q4 6:30MTSU +15%
Nicholas Vattiato pass complete to Nahzae Cox for 13 yds for a TD (Jacob Hathaway KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Middle Tennessee vs. Nevada?
Middle Tennessee 14, Nevada 13.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked NEV, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| MTSU | NEV | |
|---|---|---|
| 352 | Total yards | 369 |
| 247 | Passing yards | 166 |
| 105 | Rushing yards | 203 |
| 23 | First downs | 16 |
| 7-17 | 3rd down | 3-13 |
| 0-1 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 27/45 | Comp/Att | 14/25 |
| 5.5 | Yards per pass | 6.6 |
| 3.5 | Yards per rush | 5.8 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 7-50 | Penalties | 4-55 |
| 31:10 | Possession | 28:50 |
Costliest call
Q2 5:18 NEV punt on 4th & 5 at MTSU 42. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.67 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 0:21MTSUNicholas Vattiato 5 Yd Run (Jacob Hathaway Kick)14–13
- Q4 6:30MTSUNahzae Cox 13 Yd pass from Nicholas Vattiato (Jacob Hathaway Kick)7–13
- Q2 1:02NEVJoe McFadden 33 Yd Field Goal 0–13
- Q2 8:59NEVJoe McFadden 38 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q2 14:42NEVKy Woods 47 Yd pass from Chubba Purdy (Joe McFadden Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (NEV Elo 1284, MTSU Elo 1182 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects NEV -6.5 (68% to win) — 3.0 points clear of MTSU's market line of -9.5. 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#98 of 112 in 2025 by biggest miss · #46 of 129 in 2025 by longest odds.
The 2025 upset archive →| MTSU | NEV | |
|---|---|---|
| -15.9 (#113) | CORE overall | -15.3 (#110) |
| -5 / +11 | offense / defense | -11 / +4 |
| 1.93 | points / drive | 1.33 |
| 2.66 | allowed / drive | 2.49 |
| 27% | three-and-outs | 30% |
| +10 | pass over expected | -8 |
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 →