UL Monroe vs. Northwestern: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
ULMTeam statsNU
- Q4 8:43NUJack Olsen 33 Yd Field Goal 7–42
- Q3 0:16NUDrew Wagner 6 Yd pass from Preston Stone (Jack Olsen Kick)7–39
- Q3 5:12NUGriffin Wilde 49 Yd pass from Preston Stone (Jack Olsen Kick)7–32
- Q3 12:04NUCaleb Komolafe 39 Yd Run (Jack Olsen Kick)7–25
- Q2 2:00NUJack Olsen 34 Yd Field Goal 7–18
- Q2 13:57NUHayden Eligon II 37 Yd pass from Preston Stone (Lawson Albright Run for Two-Point Conversion)7–15
- Q1 5:22NUCaleb Komolafe 3 Yd Run (Jack Olsen Kick)7–7
- Q1 10:47ULMNic Trujillo 34 Yd pass from Aidan Armenta (Luke Stagg Kick)7–0
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- ULM played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and NU did not face the same ones. 3rd & 9.6 vs 3rd & 6.2
- PassAidan Armenta 10/19, 129 YDS, 1 TD
- RushBam McReynolds 8 CAR, 49 YDS
- RecNic Trujillo 2 REC, 61 YDS, 1 TD
- PassPreston Stone 20/31, 262 YDS, 3 TD
- RushDashun Reeder 11 CAR, 79 YDS
- RecHayden Eligon II 3 REC, 80 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsNU up 32 entering the 4th quarter. Across 373 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
FAQ
What was the final score of UL Monroe vs. Northwestern?
UL Monroe 7, Northwestern 42.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (NU) was correct.
| ULM | NU | |
|---|---|---|
| 273 | Total yards | 515 |
| 186 | Passing yards | 269 |
| 87 | Rushing yards | 246 |
| 18 | First downs | 26 |
| 3-10 | 3rd down | 11-17 |
| 0-1 | 4th down | 2-2 |
| 12/23 | Comp/Att | 21/33 |
| 8.1 | Yards per pass | 8.2 |
| 2.9 | Yards per rush | 6.5 |
| 0 | Turnovers | 0 |
| 5-67 | Penalties | 6-49 |
| 24:18 | Possession | 35:42 |
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 8:43NUJack Olsen 33 Yd Field Goal 7–42
- Q3 0:16NUDrew Wagner 6 Yd pass from Preston Stone (Jack Olsen Kick)7–39
- Q3 5:12NUGriffin Wilde 49 Yd pass from Preston Stone (Jack Olsen Kick)7–32
- Q3 12:04NUCaleb Komolafe 39 Yd Run (Jack Olsen Kick)7–25
- Q2 2:00NUJack Olsen 34 Yd Field Goal 7–18
- Q2 13:57NUHayden Eligon II 37 Yd pass from Preston Stone (Lawson Albright Run for Two-Point Conversion)7–15
- Q1 5:22NUCaleb Komolafe 3 Yd Run (Jack Olsen Kick)7–7
- Q1 10:47ULMNic Trujillo 34 Yd pass from Aidan Armenta (Luke Stagg Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (NU Elo 1411, ULM Elo 1168 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects NU -12.1 (79% 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 15 · through week 2 · drive simulation
Season form — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| ULM | NU | |
|---|---|---|
| -15.2 (#108) | CORE overall | -1.8 (#67) |
| -8 / +7 | offense / defense | -0 / +1 |
| 1.37 | points / drive | 2.35 |
| 2.91 | allowed / drive | 2.19 |
| 32% | three-and-outs | 22% |
| -8 | pass over expected | -1 |
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 →