Western Kentucky vs. Southern Miss: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
WKUTeam statsUSM
- Q4 3:38WKUMarvis Parrish 54 Yd Run (John Cannon Kick)27–16
- Q4 7:51WKUG. Hart III run for 1 yd, for a TD (J. Cannon KICK)20–16
- Q3 1:36USMCreighton Wilbanks 41 Yd Field Goal 13–16
- Q3 6:57WKUM. McIvor run for 11 yds, for a TD (J. Cannon KICK)13–13
- Q2 0:00USMCreighton Wilbanks 29 Yd Field Goal 6–13
- Q2 3:10USMCreighton Wilbanks 25 Yd Field Goal 6–10
- Q2 11:09WKUJohn Cannon 30 Yd Field Goal 6–7
- Q1 4:06USMB. Braxton pass to T. Chapman for 35 yds, for a TD (C. Wilbanks KICK)3–7
- Q1 11:38WKUJohn Cannon 31 Yd Field Goal 3–0
How the model called it
- PassMaverick McIvor 12/19, 199 YDS, 1 INT
- RushMarvis Parrish 7 CAR, 65 YDS, 1 TD
- RecMatthew Henry 7 REC, 126 YDS
- PassBraylon Braxton 24/47, 258 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushJeffery Pittman 10 CAR, 55 YDS
- RecTychaun Chapman 3 REC, 50 YDS, 1 TD
FAQ
What was the final score of Western Kentucky vs. Southern Miss?
Western Kentucky 27, Southern Miss 16.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (WKU) was correct.
| WKU | USM | |
|---|---|---|
| 422 | Total yards | 377 |
| 267 | Passing yards | 258 |
| 155 | Rushing yards | 119 |
| 18 | First downs | 21 |
| 9-17 | 3rd down | 7-20 |
| 0-0 | 4th down | 1-3 |
| 22/40 | Comp/Att | 24/48 |
| 6.7 | Yards per pass | 5.4 |
| 4.7 | Yards per rush | 3.3 |
| 3 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 8-74 | Penalties | 12-100 |
| 31:24 | Possession | 28:36 |
- Q4 3:38WKUMarvis Parrish 54 Yd Run (John Cannon Kick)27–16
- Q4 7:51WKUG. Hart III run for 1 yd, for a TD (J. Cannon KICK)20–16
- Q3 1:36USMCreighton Wilbanks 41 Yd Field Goal 13–16
- Q3 6:57WKUM. McIvor run for 11 yds, for a TD (J. Cannon KICK)13–13
- Q2 0:00USMCreighton Wilbanks 29 Yd Field Goal 6–13
- Q2 3:10USMCreighton Wilbanks 25 Yd Field Goal 6–10
- Q2 11:09WKUJohn Cannon 30 Yd Field Goal 6–7
- Q1 4:06USMB. Braxton pass to T. Chapman for 35 yds, for a TD (C. Wilbanks KICK)3–7
- Q1 11:38WKUJohn Cannon 31 Yd Field Goal 3–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (USM Elo 1282, WKU Elo 1401 for reference), on a neutral field. That projects USM +4.8 (39% to win) — 7.8 points clear of WKU's market line of -3. 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 1 · through week 1 · drive simulation
Season form — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| WKU | USM | |
|---|---|---|
| -6.3 (#83) | CORE overall | -6.7 (#86) |
| -6 / +0 | offense / defense | -6 / +1 |
| 2.09 | points / drive | 2.09 |
| 1.79 | allowed / drive | 2.19 |
| 28% | three-and-outs | 25% |
| +10 | 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 →