Old Dominion vs. UL Monroe: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
ODUTeam statsULM
- Q4 4:15ULMRylan Green 4 Yd pass from Aidan Armenta (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)31–6
- Q4 12:29ODUColton Joseph 1 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)31–0
- Q2 9:09ODUColton Joseph 14 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)24–0
- Q1 1:35ODUNathanial Eichner 30 Yd Field Goal 17–0
- Q1 4:00ODUColton Joseph 7 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)14–0
- Q1 9:53ODUKe'Travion Hargrove 12 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassColton Joseph 12/22, 231 YDS
- RushColton Joseph 16 CAR, 72 YDS, 3 TD
- RecTre' Brown 5 REC, 83 YDS
- PassAidan Armenta 12/20, 150 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushZach Palmer-Smith 18 CAR, 96 YDS
- RecJP Coulter 3 REC, 54 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsODU up 24 entering the 4th quarter. Across 555 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
FAQ
What was the final score of Old Dominion vs. UL Monroe?
Old Dominion 31, UL Monroe 6.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (ODU) was correct.
| ODU | ULM | |
|---|---|---|
| 391 | Total yards | 293 |
| 231 | Passing yards | 161 |
| 160 | Rushing yards | 132 |
| 20 | First downs | 11 |
| 4-13 | 3rd down | 0-13 |
| 0-2 | 4th down | 2-7 |
| 12/23 | Comp/Att | 13/21 |
| 10.0 | Yards per pass | 7.7 |
| 3.6 | Yards per rush | 2.8 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 9-68 | Penalties | 11-77 |
| 26:17 | Possession | 33:43 |
Costliest call
Q4 7:03 ULM go for it on 4th & 14 at ODU 20. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 1.18 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 4:15ULMRylan Green 4 Yd pass from Aidan Armenta (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)31–6
- Q4 12:29ODUColton Joseph 1 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)31–0
- Q2 9:09ODUColton Joseph 14 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)24–0
- Q1 1:35ODUNathanial Eichner 30 Yd Field Goal 17–0
- Q1 4:00ODUColton Joseph 7 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)14–0
- Q1 9:53ODUKe'Travion Hargrove 12 Yd Run (Nathanial Eichner Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (ULM Elo 1015, ODU Elo 1463 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects ULM +15.5 (17% 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 profiles| ODU | ULM | |
|---|---|---|
| +18.9 (#17) | CORE overall | -15.2 (#108) |
| +5 / -14 | offense / defense | -8 / +7 |
| 2.46 | points / drive | 1.37 |
| 1.52 | allowed / drive | 2.91 |
| 23% | three-and-outs | 32% |
| -3 | 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 →