Navy vs. Cincinnati: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
NAVYTeam statsCIN
- Q4 2:54NAVYColeman Cauley 5 Yd Interception Return (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)35–13
- Q4 6:52CINCyrus Allen 4 Yd pass from Brady Lichtenberg (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)28–13
- Q4 10:00NAVYAlex Tecza 3 Yd Run (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)28–7
- Q3 10:15NAVYEli Heidenreich 13 Yd pass from Blake Horvath (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)21–7
- Q2 0:40NAVYLuke Hutchison 30 Yd pass from Blake Horvath (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)14–7
- Q2 9:47CINSamaj Jones 6 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–7
- Q1 3:19NAVYBlake Horvath 2 Yd Run (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassBlake Horvath 9/15, 108 YDS, 2 TD
- RushAlex Tecza 16 CAR, 80 YDS, 1 TD
- RecEli Heidenreich 5 REC, 64 YDS, 1 TD
- PassBrady Lichtenberg 10/15, 78 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushManny Covey 11 CAR, 78 YDS
- RecManny Covey 5 REC, 28 YDS
FAQ
What was the final score of Navy vs. Cincinnati?
Navy 35, Cincinnati 13.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked CIN, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| NAVY | CIN | |
|---|---|---|
| 349 | Total yards | 239 |
| 108 | Passing yards | 97 |
| 241 | Rushing yards | 142 |
| 22 | First downs | 12 |
| 9-15 | 3rd down | 4-13 |
| 1-1 | 4th down | 2-3 |
| 9/15 | Comp/Att | 12/20 |
| 7.2 | Yards per pass | 4.9 |
| 4.7 | Yards per rush | 3.7 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 2-10 | Penalties | 9-76 |
| 33:42 | Possession | 26:18 |
- Q4 2:54NAVYColeman Cauley 5 Yd Interception Return (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)35–13
- Q4 6:52CINCyrus Allen 4 Yd pass from Brady Lichtenberg (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)28–13
- Q4 10:00NAVYAlex Tecza 3 Yd Run (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)28–7
- Q3 10:15NAVYEli Heidenreich 13 Yd pass from Blake Horvath (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)21–7
- Q2 0:40NAVYLuke Hutchison 30 Yd pass from Blake Horvath (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)14–7
- Q2 9:47CINSamaj Jones 6 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–7
- Q1 3:19NAVYBlake Horvath 2 Yd Run (Nathan Kirkwood Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (CIN Elo 1519, NAVY Elo 1527 for reference), on a neutral field. That projects CIN +0.3 (50% to win) — 6.2 points clear of CIN's market line of +6.5. 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 1 · through week 1 · drive simulation
Season form — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| NAVY | CIN | |
|---|---|---|
| +9.3 (#43) | CORE overall | +6.7 (#50) |
| +13 / +3 | offense / defense | +12 / +5 |
| 3.12 | points / drive | 2.63 |
| 2.74 | allowed / drive | 2.77 |
| 21% | three-and-outs | 31% |
| -20 | 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 →