UT Martin vs. UTEP: Final Score & Recap

CommandBoxAnalyticsMatchup

UT Martin0-1

0017

UTEP0-1

▸0042

Final

Sun Bowl

	1	2	3	4	T
UT M	0	7	3	7	17
UTEP	7	21	14	0	42

UT MTeam statsUTEP

371Total yards472

295Pass278

76Rush194

19First downs14

4-173rd down4-10

1Turnovers1

38:48Possession21:12

Scoring plays

• Q4 12:07UT MPhaizon Wilson 20 Yd pass from Jase Bauer (Cade Hechter Kick)17–42
• Q3 3:11UTEPAshten Emory 12 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Carlos Arreola Kick)10–42
• Q3 6:25UTEPKenny Odom 74 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Carlos Arreola Kick)10–35
• Q3 7:21UT MCade Hechter 21 Yd Field Goal 10–28
• Q2 5:00UTEPHahsaun Wilson 94 Yd Run (Carlos Arreola PAT blocked)7–28
• Q2 8:02UTEPAshten Emory 8 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Cade McConnell Run for Two-Point Conversion)7–22
• Q2 12:27UTEPToric Goins Jr. 48 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Carlos Arreola Kick)7–14
• Q2 14:48UT MBryce Bailey 11 Yd Run (Cade Hechter Kick)7–7
• Q1 11:34UTEPAshten Emory 2 Yd Run (Carlos Arreola Kick)0–7

How the model called it

Market line

UTEP −7.5

Against the number

UTEP covered

line UTEP −7.5

What the numbers say

• UTEP played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and UT M did not face the same ones. 3rd & 7.2 vs 3rd & 5.1

Win probability

ours solid · ESPN dashed

UT M aheadUTEP ahead

Cumulative margin after each quarter. Above the line = UT M ahead, below = UTEP ahead.

GRIDPEX.COM

Play-by-play win probability isn't available for this game — scoreboard margin by quarter shown instead.

How the line closed

model vs market

Closing line

UTEP −7.5

Closing total

49.5

Model line

—

Actual result

UT M 17 – 42 UTEP

Leaders

UT Martin

• PassJase Bauer 23/33, 273 YDS, 1 TD
• RushJohn Gentry 12 CAR, 32 YDS
• RecBryce Bailey 4 REC, 92 YDS

UTEP

• PassMalachi Nelson 14/26, 278 YDS, 4 TD
• RushHahsaun Wilson 8 CAR, 117 YDS, 1 TD
• RecKenny Odom 5 REC, 124 YDS, 1 TD

Tempo

what this pace leaves on the clock

26.9sper snap · slower the national 24.5s

fastnational avgslow

Snaps run

132

Points / snap

0.45

This exact spot, historically

empirical, no ratings

UTEP up 32 entering the 4th quarter. Across 373 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):

100%

UTEP went on to win

A near-lock historically

Most comparable games

WArkansas vs Western Carolina56-13WMontana State vs Utah Tech63-20WTexas A&M vs New Mexico52-10WArizona vs Northern Arizona38-3WNC State vs VMI45-7

Fourth downs

21 calls

UT M gave up 2.2 points to the model on fourth down.UT M 10/13 · UTEP 5/5 agreed

FAQ

What was the final score of UT Martin vs. UTEP?

UT Martin 17, UTEP 42.

Did Gridpex's model pick hit?

Yes — the model's pick (UTEP) was correct.

Situational splits

what the averages hide

UT M

UTEP

38%

Success rate

36%

0.26

EPA / pass

0.28

-0.17

EPA / rush

0.59

41%

Early-down success

36%

43%

Pass success

38%

31%

Rush success

35%

10%

Explosive play rate (15+ yds)

11%

26%

Stuffed rush rate

17%

55%

Pass rate

58%

5.1

Avg 3rd-down distance

7.2

UT M

5.1 yards to go on 3rd down

77 scrimmage snaps

UTEP

7.2 yards to go on 3rd down

55 scrimmage snaps

Team stats

the basics, from ESPN

UT M		UTEP
371	Total yards	472
295	Passing yards	278
76	Rushing yards	194
19	First downs	14
4-17	3rd down	4-10
2-6	4th down	0-0
24/36	Comp/Att	15/29
8.2	Yards per pass	9.6
1.9	Yards per rush	7.8
1	Turnovers	1
6-35	Penalties	4-40
38:48	Possession	21:12

Fourth downs

21 calls

UT M

10/13 with the model

−2.2 pts · −0.0% win prob

UTEP

5/5 with the model

nothing given up

Costliest call

Q3 7:21 UT M field goal on 4th & 2 at UTEP 2. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.39 points.

Every call, priced (21)

Drive chart

every possession, start to finish

UT M 3/14 scoring drives← own end zone →UTEP 6/15 scoring drives

UT MFUM4 pl, -5 yds· own 30Q1

UTEPTD4 pl, 25 yds· opp 25Q1

UT MPUNT4 pl, 10 yds· own 25Q1

UTEPPUNT4 pl, 16 yds· own 27Q1

UT MDOWNS8 pl, 55 yds· own 17Q1

UTEPFUM4 pl, 5 yds· own 28Q1

UT MTD5 pl, 33 yds· opp 33Q1

UTEPTD6 pl, 76 yds· own 24Q2

UT MPUNT3 pl, 3 yds· own 19Q2

UTEPTD6 pl, 76 yds· own 24Q2

UT MDOWNS5 pl, 71 yds· own 25Q2

UTEPTD2 pl, 96 yds· own 4Q2

UT MPUNT4 pl, 1 yds· own 25Q2

UTEPPUNT3 pl, 4 yds· own 40Q2

UT MPUNT3 pl, 8 yds· own 5Q2

UTEPEND2 pl, 6 yds· own 40Q2

UTEPPUNT4 pl, 13 yds· own 16Q3

UT MFG13 pl, 68 yds· own 30Q3

UTEPTD2 pl, 70 yds· own 30Q3

UT MDOWNS4 pl, 8 yds· own 26Q3

UTEPTD4 pl, 34 yds· opp 34Q3

UT MTD12 pl, 79 yds· own 21Q3

UTEPPUNT3 pl, -2 yds· own 25Q4

UT MPUNT3 pl, 8 yds· own 6Q4

UTEPPUNT3 pl, 6 yds· own 30Q4

UT MPUNT3 pl, 10 yds· own 28Q4

UTEPMISS7 pl, 43 yds· own 22Q4

UT MDOWNS6 pl, 27 yds· own 31Q4

UTEPEND1 pl, -6 yds· own 42Q4

Scoring plays

• Q4 12:07UT MPhaizon Wilson 20 Yd pass from Jase Bauer (Cade Hechter Kick)17–42
• Q3 3:11UTEPAshten Emory 12 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Carlos Arreola Kick)10–42
• Q3 6:25UTEPKenny Odom 74 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Carlos Arreola Kick)10–35
• Q3 7:21UT MCade Hechter 21 Yd Field Goal 10–28
• Q2 5:00UTEPHahsaun Wilson 94 Yd Run (Carlos Arreola PAT blocked)7–28
• Q2 8:02UTEPAshten Emory 8 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Cade McConnell Run for Two-Point Conversion)7–22
• Q2 12:27UTEPToric Goins Jr. 48 Yd pass from Malachi Nelson (Carlos Arreola Kick)7–14
• Q2 14:48UT MBryce Bailey 11 Yd Run (Cade Hechter Kick)7–7
• Q1 11:34UTEPAshten Emory 2 Yd Run (Carlos Arreola Kick)0–7

Model prediction

how the number is built

One 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 →