Rutgers vs. Washington: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
RUTGTeam statsWASH
- Q4 6:52WASHDemond Williams Jr. 7 Yd Run (Grady Gross Kick)19–38
- Q3 2:53WASHDemond Williams Jr. 11 Yd Run (Grady Gross Kick)19–31
- Q3 9:17RUTGAntwan Raymond 48 Yd pass from Athan Kaliakmanis (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)19–24
- Q3 10:06WASHDenzel Boston 38 Yd pass from Demond Williams Jr. (Grady Gross Kick)13–24
- Q3 13:01WASHJonah Coleman 1 Yd Run (Grady Gross Kick)13–17
- Q2 0:00WASHGrady Gross 36 Yd Field Goal 13–10
- Q2 0:39RUTGJai Patel 37 Yd Field Goal 13–7
- Q2 13:21WASHDenzel Boston 23 Yd pass from Demond Williams Jr. (Grady Gross Kick)10–7
- Q1 5:38RUTGJai Patel 35 Yd Field Goal 10–0
- Q1 13:42RUTGKJ Duff 20 Yd pass from Athan Kaliakmanis (Jai Patel Kick)7–0
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- WASH played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and RUTG did not face the same ones. 3rd & 8.1 vs 3rd & 5.8
- RUTG lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 16% explosive on a 40% success rate
- PassAthan Kaliakmanis 31/50, 386 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT
- RushAntwan Raymond 15 CAR, 89 YDS
- RecIan Strong 7 REC, 124 YDS
- PassDemond Williams Jr. 21/27, 402 YDS, 2 TD
- RushDemond Williams Jr. 13 CAR, 136 YDS, 2 TD
- RecDezmen Roebuck 4 REC, 108 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsWASH up 12 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,519 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q3 13:01WASH +23%
Jonah Coleman run for 1 yd for a TD (Grady Gross KICK)
- Q2 13:21WASH +20%
Demond Williams Jr. pass complete to Denzel Boston for 23 yds for a TD (Grady Gross KICK)
- Q1 13:42RUTG +17%
Athan Kaliakmanis pass complete to KJ Duff for 20 yds for a TD (Jai Patel KICK)
- Q3 10:06WASH +16%
Demond Williams Jr. pass complete to Denzel Boston for 38 yds for a TD (Grady Gross KICK)
- Q3 9:17RUTG +15%
Athan Kaliakmanis pass complete to Antwan Raymond for 48 yds for a TD (Two-Point Conversion failed)
- Q3 2:53WASH +14%
Demond Williams Jr. run for 11 yds for a TD (Grady Gross KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Rutgers vs. Washington?
Rutgers 19, Washington 38.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (WASH) was correct.
| RUTG | WASH | |
|---|---|---|
| 493 | Total yards | 579 |
| 386 | Passing yards | 402 |
| 107 | Rushing yards | 177 |
| 25 | First downs | 26 |
| 5-15 | 3rd down | 4-9 |
| 3-5 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 31/50 | Comp/Att | 21/27 |
| 7.7 | Yards per pass | 14.9 |
| 4.0 | Yards per rush | 5.5 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 4-31 | Penalties | 9-83 |
| 30:12 | Possession | 29:48 |
Costliest call
Q4 11:46 RUTG go for it on 4th & 10 at WASH 11. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.75 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 6:52WASHDemond Williams Jr. 7 Yd Run (Grady Gross Kick)19–38
- Q3 2:53WASHDemond Williams Jr. 11 Yd Run (Grady Gross Kick)19–31
- Q3 9:17RUTGAntwan Raymond 48 Yd pass from Athan Kaliakmanis (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)19–24
- Q3 10:06WASHDenzel Boston 38 Yd pass from Demond Williams Jr. (Grady Gross Kick)13–24
- Q3 13:01WASHJonah Coleman 1 Yd Run (Grady Gross Kick)13–17
- Q2 0:00WASHGrady Gross 36 Yd Field Goal 13–10
- Q2 0:39RUTGJai Patel 37 Yd Field Goal 13–7
- Q2 13:21WASHDenzel Boston 23 Yd pass from Demond Williams Jr. (Grady Gross Kick)10–7
- Q1 5:38RUTGJai Patel 35 Yd Field Goal 10–0
- Q1 13:42RUTGKJ Duff 20 Yd pass from Athan Kaliakmanis (Jai Patel Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (WASH Elo 1666, RUTG Elo 1582 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects WASH -5.8 (66% to win) — 3.7 points clear of RUTG'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 1 · through week 1 · drive simulation
Season form — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| RUTG | WASH | |
|---|---|---|
| -4.9 (#79) | CORE overall | +21.7 (#11) |
| +10 / +14 | offense / defense | +13 / -9 |
| 2.60 | points / drive | 3.06 |
| 3.60 | allowed / drive | 1.93 |
| 23% | three-and-outs | 19% |
| +3 | pass over expected | +2 |
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 →