SMU vs. Clemson: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
SMUTeam statsCLEM
- Q4 1:03SMUChris Johnson Jr. 6 Yd Run (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)35–24
- Q4 6:44CLEMTristan Smith 23 Yd pass from Christopher Vizzina (Nolan Hauser Kick)29–24
- Q4 12:30SMUMatthew Hibner 22 Yd pass from Kevin Jennings (Sam Keltner PAT failed)29–17
- Q3 0:07CLEMNolan Hauser 28 Yd Field Goal 23–17
- Q3 7:29SMUDerrick McFall 35 Yd Run (Sam Keltner Kick)23–14
- Q3 8:48CLEMT.J. Moore 62 Yd pass from Christopher Vizzina (Nolan Hauser Kick)16–14
- Q2 1:09SMUSam Keltner 48 Yd Field Goal 16–7
- Q2 4:29SMUSam Keltner 48 Yd Field Goal 13–7
- Q2 8:51CLEMT.J. Moore 32 Yd pass from Christopher Vizzina (Nolan Hauser Kick)10–7
- Q2 11:26SMUSam Keltner 51 Yd Field Goal 10–0
- Q1 3:52SMUJordan Hudson 70 Yd pass from Kevin Jennings (Sam Keltner Kick)7–0
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- SMU lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 12% explosive on a 36% success rate
- PassKevin Jennings 23/43, 290 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT
- RushChris Johnson Jr. 6 CAR, 59 YDS, 1 TD
- RecJordan Hudson 7 REC, 131 YDS, 1 TD
- PassChristopher Vizzina 29/42, 317 YDS, 3 TD
- RushAdam Randall 10 CAR, 29 YDS
- RecT.J. Moore 5 REC, 124 YDS, 2 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsSMU up 6 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,662 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q3 8:48CLEM +26%
Christopher Vizzina pass complete to T.J. Moore for 62 yds for a TD (Nolan Hauser KICK)
- Q4 2:39SMU +25%
No Huddle-Shotgun Jennings,Kevin pass incomplete short middle to Knight,Yamir thrown to CLE35, 1ST DOWN, PENALTY CLE Pass Interference (Hanafin,Ronan) 4 yards from CLE…
- Q3 7:29SMU +24%
Derrick McFall run for 35 yds for a TD (Sam Keltner KICK)
- Q4 6:44CLEM +24%
Christopher Vizzina pass complete to Tristan Smith for 23 yds for a TD SMU Penalty, Defensive Offside (William Nettles) declined (Nolan Hauser KICK)
- Q1 3:52SMU +21%
Kevin Jennings pass complete to Jordan Hudson for 70 yds for a TD (Sam Keltner KICK)
- Q2 8:51CLEM +20%
Christopher Vizzina pass complete to T.J. Moore for 32 yds for a TD (Nolan Hauser KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of SMU vs. Clemson?
SMU 35, Clemson 24.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked CLEM, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| SMU | CLEM | |
|---|---|---|
| 429 | Total yards | 352 |
| 290 | Passing yards | 317 |
| 139 | Rushing yards | 35 |
| 21 | First downs | 19 |
| 7-17 | 3rd down | 8-19 |
| 0-0 | 4th down | 1-2 |
| 23/43 | Comp/Att | 29/42 |
| 6.7 | Yards per pass | 7.5 |
| 5.0 | Yards per rush | 1.2 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 5-60 | Penalties | 2-9 |
| 28:45 | Possession | 31:15 |
Costliest call
Q4 6:44 CLEM go for it on 4th & 21 at SMU 23. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 1.27 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 1:03SMUChris Johnson Jr. 6 Yd Run (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)35–24
- Q4 6:44CLEMTristan Smith 23 Yd pass from Christopher Vizzina (Nolan Hauser Kick)29–24
- Q4 12:30SMUMatthew Hibner 22 Yd pass from Kevin Jennings (Sam Keltner PAT failed)29–17
- Q3 0:07CLEMNolan Hauser 28 Yd Field Goal 23–17
- Q3 7:29SMUDerrick McFall 35 Yd Run (Sam Keltner Kick)23–14
- Q3 8:48CLEMT.J. Moore 62 Yd pass from Christopher Vizzina (Nolan Hauser Kick)16–14
- Q2 1:09SMUSam Keltner 48 Yd Field Goal 16–7
- Q2 4:29SMUSam Keltner 48 Yd Field Goal 13–7
- Q2 8:51CLEMT.J. Moore 32 Yd pass from Christopher Vizzina (Nolan Hauser Kick)10–7
- Q2 11:26SMUSam Keltner 51 Yd Field Goal 10–0
- Q1 3:52SMUJordan Hudson 70 Yd pass from Kevin Jennings (Sam Keltner Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (CLEM Elo 1734, SMU Elo 1709 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects CLEM -3.4 (60% 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| SMU | CLEM | |
|---|---|---|
| +14.6 (#27) | CORE overall | +4.9 (#56) |
| +9 / -5 | offense / defense | +2 / -3 |
| 2.63 | points / drive | 2.25 |
| 1.64 | allowed / drive | 1.84 |
| 30% | three-and-outs | 26% |
| +10 | pass over expected | +9 |
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 →