USC vs. Illinois: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
USCTeam statsILL
- Q4 0:00ILLDavid Olano 41 Yd Field Goal 32–34
- Q4 1:55USCMakai Lemon 16 Yd pass from Jayden Maiava (Ryon Sayeri Kick)32–31
- Q4 9:54USCMakai Lemon 19 Yd pass from Jayden Maiava (Jayden Maiava Pass to Makai Lemon for Two-Point Conversion)25–31
- Q4 14:34ILLJustin Bowick 25 Yd pass from Luke Altmyer (David Olano Kick)17–31
- Q3 1:46USCWaymond Jordan 2 Yd Run (Ryon Sayeri Kick)17–24
- Q3 6:59ILLKaden Feagin 64 Yd pass from Luke Altmyer (David Olano Kick)10–24
- Q3 11:34ILLDavid Olano 45 Yd Field Goal 10–17
- Q2 0:02USCRyon Sayeri 21 Yd Field Goal 10–14
- Q2 10:49ILLLuke Altmyer 3 Yd pass from Hank Beatty (David Olano Kick)7–14
- Q1 1:22USCWaymond Jordan 1 Yd Run (Ryon Sayeri Kick)7–7
- Q1 5:49ILLLuke Altmyer 12 Yd Run (David Olano Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassJayden Maiava 30/43, 364 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT
- RushWaymond Jordan 20 CAR, 94 YDS, 2 TD
- RecMakai Lemon 11 REC, 151 YDS, 2 TD
- PassLuke Altmyer 20/26, 328 YDS, 2 TD
- RushKaden Feagin 14 CAR, 60 YDS
- RecCollin Dixon 4 REC, 90 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsILL up 7 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,299 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q4 1:55USC +73%
Jayden Maiava pass complete to Makai Lemon for 16 yds for a TD (Ryon Sayeri KICK)
- Q4 0:55ILL +43%
No Huddle-Shotgun Altmyer,Luke pass incomplete short left to Dixon,Collin thrown to USC49 PENALTY USC Pass Interference (Harvey,DJ) 12 yards from ILL42 to USC46, 1ST D…
- Q4 0:00ILL +41%
David Olano 41 yd FG GOOD
- Q4 9:46ILL +39%
Ca'Lil Valentine run for 4 yds to the ILL 16
- Q4 9:54USC +27%
Makai Lemon 19 Yd pass from Jayden Maiava (Jayden Maiava Pass to Makai Lemon for Two-Point Conversion)
- Q1 14:55USC +27%
Jayden Maiava run for a loss of 2 yards to the USC 23
FAQ
What was the final score of USC vs. Illinois?
USC 32, Illinois 34.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked USC, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| USC | ILL | |
|---|---|---|
| 490 | Total yards | 502 |
| 364 | Passing yards | 331 |
| 126 | Rushing yards | 171 |
| 29 | First downs | 25 |
| 8-14 | 3rd down | 6-10 |
| 4-5 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 30/43 | Comp/Att | 21/27 |
| 8.5 | Yards per pass | 12.3 |
| 3.7 | Yards per rush | 4.9 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 8-69 | Penalties | 5-42 |
| 32:34 | Possession | 27:26 |
Costliest call
Q4 9:54 USC go for it on 4th & 8 at ILL 19. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.78 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 0:00ILLDavid Olano 41 Yd Field Goal 32–34
- Q4 1:55USCMakai Lemon 16 Yd pass from Jayden Maiava (Ryon Sayeri Kick)32–31
- Q4 9:54USCMakai Lemon 19 Yd pass from Jayden Maiava (Jayden Maiava Pass to Makai Lemon for Two-Point Conversion)25–31
- Q4 14:34ILLJustin Bowick 25 Yd pass from Luke Altmyer (David Olano Kick)17–31
- Q3 1:46USCWaymond Jordan 2 Yd Run (Ryon Sayeri Kick)17–24
- Q3 6:59ILLKaden Feagin 64 Yd pass from Luke Altmyer (David Olano Kick)10–24
- Q3 11:34ILLDavid Olano 45 Yd Field Goal 10–17
- Q2 0:02USCRyon Sayeri 21 Yd Field Goal 10–14
- Q2 10:49ILLLuke Altmyer 3 Yd pass from Hank Beatty (David Olano Kick)7–14
- Q1 1:22USCWaymond Jordan 1 Yd Run (Ryon Sayeri Kick)7–7
- Q1 5:49ILLLuke Altmyer 12 Yd Run (David Olano Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (ILL Elo 1567, USC Elo 1869 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects ILL +9.7 (27% to win) — 3.2 points clear of USC's market line of +6.5. 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 15 · through week 2 · drive simulation
Season form — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profilesUSC leads 11–3 · 29% have been one-possession games
| USC | ILL | |
|---|---|---|
| +22.5 (#10) | CORE overall | +11.1 (#36) |
| +18 / -4 | offense / defense | +10 / -1 |
| 3.53 | points / drive | 2.76 |
| 2.14 | allowed / drive | 2.56 |
| 14% | three-and-outs | 18% |
| +6 | pass over expected | +3 |
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 →