Western Michigan vs. Massachusetts: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
WMUTeam statsMASS
- Q4 8:04WMUDevin Miles 25 Yd Run (Palmer Domschke Kick)21–3
- Q3 1:26WMUBroc Lowry 4 Yd Run (Palmer Domschke Kick)14–3
- Q2 9:23WMUMichael Brescia 8 Yd pass from Broc Lowry (Palmer Domschke Kick)7–3
- Q1 9:42MASSDerek Morris 36 Yd Field Goal 0–3
How the model called it
- PassBroc Lowry 18/25, 163 YDS, 1 TD
- RushBroc Lowry 15 CAR, 92 YDS, 1 TD
- RecAveion Chenault 2 REC, 51 YDS
- PassAJ Hairston Jr 11/18, 131 YDS, 1 INT
- RushJuwaun Price 6 CAR, 54 YDS
- RecJacquon Gibson 6 REC, 70 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsWMU up 11 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,142 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 14:54MASS +6%
Brandon Hood run for 2 yds to the MASS 27
FAQ
What was the final score of Western Michigan vs. Massachusetts?
Western Michigan 21, Massachusetts 3.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (WMU) was correct.
| WMU | MASS | |
|---|---|---|
| 380 | Total yards | 260 |
| 163 | Passing yards | 203 |
| 217 | Rushing yards | 57 |
| 23 | First downs | 14 |
| 4-11 | 3rd down | 5-15 |
| 1-1 | 4th down | 0-2 |
| 18/25 | Comp/Att | 20/35 |
| 6.5 | Yards per pass | 5.8 |
| 5.2 | Yards per rush | 2.0 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 5-44 | Penalties | 5-47 |
| 32:26 | Possession | 27:34 |
Costliest call
Q2 6:14 MASS punt on 4th & 2 at MASS 44. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.75 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 8:04WMUDevin Miles 25 Yd Run (Palmer Domschke Kick)21–3
- Q3 1:26WMUBroc Lowry 4 Yd Run (Palmer Domschke Kick)14–3
- Q2 9:23WMUMichael Brescia 8 Yd pass from Broc Lowry (Palmer Domschke Kick)7–3
- Q1 9:42MASSDerek Morris 36 Yd Field Goal 0–3
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (MASS Elo 1039, WMU Elo 1254 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects MASS +6.2 (35% to win) — 6.3 points clear of MASS's market line of +12.5. 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| WMU | MASS | |
|---|---|---|
| +1.8 (#62) | CORE overall | -40.3 (#136) |
| -5 / -7 | offense / defense | -22 / +18 |
| 2.04 | points / drive | 0.88 |
| 1.60 | allowed / drive | 3.71 |
| 24% | three-and-outs | 43% |
| -13 | 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 →