Utah State vs. Texas A&M: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
USUTeam statsTA&M
- Q4 4:24USUMiles Davis 1 Yd pass from Bryson Barnes (Bryson Barnes Pass to Braden Pegan for Two-Point Conversion)22–44
- Q4 13:36TA&MMario Craver 72 Yd pass from Miles O'Neill (Jared Zirkel Kick)14–44
- Q3 6:07TA&MKC Concepcion 8 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Jared Zirkel Kick)14–37
- Q3 12:45USUBraden Pegan 16 Yd pass from Bryson Barnes (Bryson Barnes Pass to Javen Jacobs for Two-Point Conversion)14–30
- Q2 0:16TA&MKC Concepcion 12 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Jared Zirkel PAT failed)6–30
- Q2 3:18TA&MLe'Veon Moss 21 Yd Run (Jared Zirkel Kick)6–24
- Q2 12:01TA&MMarcel Reed 1 Yd Run (Jared Zirkel Kick)6–17
- Q1 2:55TA&MJared Zirkel 37 Yd Field Goal 6–10
- Q1 7:02USUMiles Davis 3 Yd pass from Anthony Garcia (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)6–7
- Q1 10:51TA&MTerry Bussey 34 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Jared Zirkel Kick)0–7
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- USU played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and TA&M did not face the same ones. 3rd & 9.6 vs 3rd & 5.0
- USU lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 14% explosive on a 33% success rate
- PassBryson Barnes 15/30, 169 YDS, 2 TD
- RushMiles Davis 10 CAR, 50 YDS
- RecBrady Boyd 6 REC, 87 YDS
- PassMarcel Reed 19/28, 220 YDS, 3 TD
- RushLe'Veon Moss 10 CAR, 68 YDS, 1 TD
- RecMario Craver 5 REC, 114 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsTA&M up 23 entering the 4th quarter. Across 836 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
FAQ
What was the final score of Utah State vs. Texas A&M?
Utah State 22, Texas A&M 44.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (TA&M) was correct.
| USU | TA&M | |
|---|---|---|
| 250 | Total yards | 554 |
| 172 | Passing yards | 319 |
| 78 | Rushing yards | 235 |
| 18 | First downs | 30 |
| 2-14 | 3rd down | 5-13 |
| 1-1 | 4th down | 1-3 |
| 16/31 | Comp/Att | 22/34 |
| 5.5 | Yards per pass | 9.4 |
| 2.2 | Yards per rush | 5.2 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 11-72 | Penalties | 5-54 |
| 25:46 | Possession | 34:14 |
Costliest call
Q3 4:16 USU punt on 4th & 5 at USU 46. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.07 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 4:24USUMiles Davis 1 Yd pass from Bryson Barnes (Bryson Barnes Pass to Braden Pegan for Two-Point Conversion)22–44
- Q4 13:36TA&MMario Craver 72 Yd pass from Miles O'Neill (Jared Zirkel Kick)14–44
- Q3 6:07TA&MKC Concepcion 8 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Jared Zirkel Kick)14–37
- Q3 12:45USUBraden Pegan 16 Yd pass from Bryson Barnes (Bryson Barnes Pass to Javen Jacobs for Two-Point Conversion)14–30
- Q2 0:16TA&MKC Concepcion 12 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Jared Zirkel PAT failed)6–30
- Q2 3:18TA&MLe'Veon Moss 21 Yd Run (Jared Zirkel Kick)6–24
- Q2 12:01TA&MMarcel Reed 1 Yd Run (Jared Zirkel Kick)6–17
- Q1 2:55TA&MJared Zirkel 37 Yd Field Goal 6–10
- Q1 7:02USUMiles Davis 3 Yd pass from Anthony Garcia (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)6–7
- Q1 10:51TA&MTerry Bussey 34 Yd pass from Marcel Reed (Jared Zirkel Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (TA&M Elo 1700, USU Elo 1418 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects TA&M -13.7 (82% to win) — 20.8 points clear of USU's market line of -34.5. 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 profiles| USU | TA&M | |
|---|---|---|
| -4.1 (#77) | CORE overall | +22.7 (#9) |
| -1 / +3 | offense / defense | +12 / -11 |
| 2.33 | points / drive | 2.65 |
| 2.43 | allowed / drive | 1.67 |
| 31% | three-and-outs | 20% |
| +4 | 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 →