UTSA vs. Charlotte: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
UTSATeam statsCLT
- Q4 5:46UTSAOwen McCown 2 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)28–7
- Q4 9:40CLTDerrick Eley 88 Yd Kickoff Return (Liam Boyd Kick)21–7
- Q4 9:53UTSADavid Amador II 7 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)21–0
- Q3 3:17UTSAWill Henderson III 59 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)14–0
- Q1 8:34UTSADevin McCuin 45 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassOwen McCown 24/37, 306 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT
- RushWill Henderson III 19 CAR, 185 YDS, 1 TD
- RecDevin McCuin 7 REC, 100 YDS, 1 TD
- PassGrayson Loftis 13/24, 100 YDS
- RushCameren Smith 9 CAR, 37 YDS
- RecJaven Nicholas 6 REC, 45 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsUTSA up 14 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,012 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 8:34UTSA +9%
Devin McCuin 45 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)
- Q3 3:17UTSA +6%
#23 W.Henderson III rush right for 59 yards gain to the CLT00 TOUCHDOWN, 1ST DOWN
FAQ
What was the final score of UTSA vs. Charlotte?
UTSA 28, Charlotte 7.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (UTSA) was correct.
| UTSA | CLT | |
|---|---|---|
| 521 | Total yards | 197 |
| 306 | Passing yards | 146 |
| 215 | Rushing yards | 51 |
| 29 | First downs | 13 |
| 7-13 | 3rd down | 6-15 |
| 1-2 | 4th down | 0-2 |
| 24/37 | Comp/Att | 16/28 |
| 8.3 | Yards per pass | 5.2 |
| 5.7 | Yards per rush | 1.7 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 2-30 | Penalties | 6-50 |
| 31:14 | Possession | 28:46 |
Costliest call
Q3 5:19 CLT punt on 4th & 16 at UTSA 42. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.10 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 5:46UTSAOwen McCown 2 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)28–7
- Q4 9:40CLTDerrick Eley 88 Yd Kickoff Return (Liam Boyd Kick)21–7
- Q4 9:53UTSADavid Amador II 7 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)21–0
- Q3 3:17UTSAWill Henderson III 59 Yd Run (Michael Petro Kick)14–0
- Q1 8:34UTSADevin McCuin 45 Yd pass from Owen McCown (Michael Petro Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (CLT Elo 1020, UTSA Elo 1465 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects CLT +15.4 (17% 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 1 · through week 1 · drive simulation
Season form — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| UTSA | CLT | |
|---|---|---|
| +4.7 (#58) | CORE overall | -33.1 (#135) |
| +3 / -2 | offense / defense | -23 / +10 |
| 2.63 | points / drive | 0.88 |
| 1.99 | allowed / drive | 2.98 |
| 22% | three-and-outs | 40% |
| +5 | 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 →