Rice vs. UTSA: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
RICETeam statsUTSA
- Q4 9:41RICEChase Allen 45 Yd Field Goal 13–61
- Q3 4:00UTSAWill Henderson III 57 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)10–61
- Q3 4:15UTSAJon Jones Safety10–54
- Q3 11:45UTSAShad Banks Jr. 41 Yd Fumble Return (Michael Petro Kick)10–52
- Q3 14:16UTSAKendrick Blackshire 17 Yd Interception Return (Michael Petro Kick)10–45
- Q2 1:15RICEDaelen Alexander 3 Yd Run (Enock Gota Kick)10–38
- Q2 2:14UTSAWill Henderson III 43 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)3–38
- Q2 4:57UTSAMichael Petro 45 Yd Field Goal 3–31
- Q2 11:39UTSADJ Allen Jr. 43 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)3–28
- Q1 0:54UTSAAJ Wilson 20 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)3–21
- Q1 4:14UTSADevin McCuin 2 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)3–14
- Q1 7:53RICEEnock Gota 36 Yd Field Goal 3–7
- Q1 12:47UTSARobert Henry Jr. 1 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassChase Jenkins 1/3, 33 YDS
- RushDaelen Alexander 12 CAR, 129 YDS, 1 TD
- RecDrayden Dickmann 2 REC, 33 YDS
- PassOwen McCown 15/21, 236 YDS, 3 TD
- RushWill Henderson III 5 CAR, 115 YDS, 2 TD
- RecAJ Wilson 2 REC, 77 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsUTSA up 51 entering the 4th quarter. Across 76 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 12:47UTSA +12%
Robert Henry Jr. run for 1 yd for a TD (Michael Petro KICK)
- Q1 4:14UTSA +10%
Owen McCown pass complete to Devin McCuin for 2 yds for a TD (Michael Petro KICK)
- Q1 7:53RICE +6%
Enock Gota 36 yd FG GOOD
- Q1 0:54UTSA +5%
Owen McCown pass complete to AJ Wilson for 20 yds for a TD (Michael Petro KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Rice vs. UTSA?
Rice 13, UTSA 61.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (UTSA) was correct.
| RICE | UTSA | |
|---|---|---|
| 269 | Total yards | 437 |
| 79 | Passing yards | 246 |
| 190 | Rushing yards | 191 |
| 12 | First downs | 21 |
| 6-18 | 3rd down | 4-10 |
| 1-4 | 4th down | 1-2 |
| 10/19 | Comp/Att | 16/25 |
| 4.2 | Yards per pass | 9.8 |
| 3.8 | Yards per rush | 5.6 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 0 |
| 6-65 | Penalties | 6-50 |
| 32:35 | Possession | 27:25 |
Costliest call
Q1 7:53 RICE field goal on 4th & 1 at UTSA 18. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.01 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 9:41RICEChase Allen 45 Yd Field Goal 13–61
- Q3 4:00UTSAWill Henderson III 57 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)10–61
- Q3 4:15UTSAJon Jones Safety10–54
- Q3 11:45UTSAShad Banks Jr. 41 Yd Fumble Return (Michael Petro Kick)10–52
- Q3 14:16UTSAKendrick Blackshire 17 Yd Interception Return (Michael Petro Kick)10–45
- Q2 1:15RICEDaelen Alexander 3 Yd Run (Enock Gota Kick)10–38
- Q2 2:14UTSAWill Henderson III 43 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)3–38
- Q2 4:57UTSAMichael Petro 45 Yd Field Goal 3–31
- Q2 11:39UTSADJ Allen Jr. 43 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)3–28
- Q1 0:54UTSAAJ Wilson 20 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)3–21
- Q1 4:14UTSADevin McCuin 2 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)3–14
- Q1 7:53RICEEnock Gota 36 Yd Field Goal 3–7
- Q1 12:47UTSARobert Henry Jr. 1 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (UTSA Elo 1471, RICE Elo 1273 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects UTSA -10.3 (76% 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 profilesUTSA leads 9–4 · 31% have been one-possession games
| RICE | UTSA | |
|---|---|---|
| -26.8 (#132) | CORE overall | +4.7 (#58) |
| -20 / +7 | offense / defense | +3 / -2 |
| 1.40 | points / drive | 2.63 |
| 3.09 | allowed / drive | 1.99 |
| 38% | three-and-outs | 22% |
| -24 | pass over expected | +5 |
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 →