St. Francis (PA) vs. UL Monroe: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
St. Francis (PA)
UL Monroe
▸Final
Malone Stadium
ST. Team statsULM
131Total yards434
50Pass123
81Rush311
7First downs24
2-123rd down5-12
1Turnovers1
29:11Possession30:49
- Q4 4:39ULMTyler Griffin 19 Yd pass from Landon Graves (Luke Stagg PAT blocked)0–29
- Q4 12:00ULMAidan Armenta 7 Yd Run (Luke Stagg PAT blocked)0–23
- Q3 9:37ULMBraylon McReynolds 13 Yd pass from Aidan Armenta (Luke Stagg Kick)0–17
- Q2 1:55ULMLuke Stagg 32 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 9:25ULMHunter Herring 1 Yd Run (Luke Stagg Kick)0–7
How the model called it
Market line
ULM −30.5
Against the number
ST. covered
line ULM −30.5
Kickoff137 plays →Final
Tap or hover on the chart to see play details
ULM (top)ST. (bottom)· colored dots = scoresFinal: ULM 100%
Closing line
ULM −30.5
Closing total
47.5
Model line
—
Actual result
ST. 0 – 29 ULM
St. Francis (PA)
- PassNick Whitfield Jr. 9/16, 36 YDS, 1 INT
- RushRaph Ekechi 10 CAR, 37 YDS
- RecZachary Betts 2 REC, 16 YDS
UL Monroe
- PassAidan Armenta 12/23, 95 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushBam McReynolds 11 CAR, 113 YDS
- RecTyler Griffin 3 REC, 32 YDS, 1 TD
30.4sper snap · slower the national 24.5s
fastnational avgslow
Snaps run
118
Points / snap
0.25
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsULM up 17 entering the 4th quarter. Across 841 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
97%
ULM went on to win
A near-lock historically
FAQ
What was the final score of St. Francis (PA) vs. UL Monroe?
St. Francis (PA) 0, UL Monroe 29.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (ULM) was correct.
ST.
ULM
29%
Success rate
44%
-0.25
EPA / pass
0.02
0.01
EPA / rush
0.51
34%
Early-down success
44%
22%
Pass success
33%
36%
Rush success
53%
0%
Explosive play rate (15+ yds)
11%
8%
Stuffed rush rate
18%
48%
Pass rate
43%
8.9
Avg 3rd-down distance
7.5
ST.
8.9 yards to go on 3rd down
48 scrimmage snaps
ULM
7.5 yards to go on 3rd down
70 scrimmage snaps
| ST. | ULM | |
|---|---|---|
| 131 | Total yards | 434 |
| 50 | Passing yards | 123 |
| 81 | Rushing yards | 311 |
| 7 | First downs | 24 |
| 2-12 | 3rd down | 5-12 |
| 0-1 | 4th down | 2-2 |
| 12/20 | Comp/Att | 14/26 |
| 2.5 | Yards per pass | 4.7 |
| 3.0 | Yards per rush | 7.2 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 6-58 | Penalties | 5-45 |
| 29:11 | Possession | 30:49 |
ST.
7/8 with the model
−0.5 pts · −0.0% win prob
ULM
5/6 with the model
−0.1 pts · −0.0% win prob
Costliest call
Q2 0:26 ST. punt on 4th & 2 at ST. 39. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.49 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finishST. 0/10 scoring drives← own end zone →ULM 5/11 scoring drives
ST. PUNT5 pl, 11 yds· own 20Q1
ULMTD6 pl, 81 yds· own 19Q1
ST. PUNT8 pl, 30 yds· own 13Q1
ULMMISS8 pl, 49 yds· own 20Q1
ST. INT3 pl, 6 yds· own 31Q1
ULMPUNT3 pl, -5 yds· opp 40Q2
ST. PUNT5 pl, 6 yds· own 20Q2
ULMPUNT3 pl, -10 yds· own 35Q2
ST. PUNT3 pl, 6 yds· own 24Q2
ULMFG11 pl, 60 yds· own 26Q2
ST. PUNT5 pl, 20 yds· own 19Q2
ULMEND3 pl, -3 yds· own 16Q2
ULMTD10 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q3
ST. PUNT8 pl, 19 yds· own 29Q3
ULMTD15 pl, 91 yds· own 9Q3
ST. PUNT3 pl, -2 yds· own 24Q4
ULMINT1 pl, 0 yds· midfieldQ4
ST. DOWNS4 pl, 8 yds· own 25Q4
ULMTD4 pl, 33 yds· opp 33Q4
ST. PUNT3 pl, 7 yds· own 13Q4
ULMEND7 pl, 43 yds· own 39Q4
- Q4 4:39ULMTyler Griffin 19 Yd pass from Landon Graves (Luke Stagg PAT blocked)0–29
- Q4 12:00ULMAidan Armenta 7 Yd Run (Luke Stagg PAT blocked)0–23
- Q3 9:37ULMBraylon McReynolds 13 Yd pass from Aidan Armenta (Luke Stagg Kick)0–17
- Q2 1:55ULMLuke Stagg 32 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 9:25ULMHunter Herring 1 Yd Run (Luke Stagg Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOne or both teams lack a power rating (often an FCS opponent), so the model prediction is low-confidence for this game.
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 →