Wisconsin vs. Indiana: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
WISTeam statsIU
- Q4 5:21IUOmar Cooper Jr. 5 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)7–31
- Q3 4:44IURiley Nowakowski 21 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)7–24
- Q3 10:19IUHolden Staes 2 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)7–17
- Q2 0:55IUNico Radicic 37 Yd Field Goal 7–10
- Q2 3:42WISLance Mason 45 Yd pass from Carter Smith (Nathanial Vakos Kick)7–7
- Q1 2:56IUCharlie Becker 31 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)0–7
How the model called it
- PassCarter Smith 9/15, 98 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushGideon Ituka 9 CAR, 32 YDS
- RecLance Mason 1 REC, 45 YDS, 1 TD
- PassFernando Mendoza 22/24, 299 YDS, 4 TD
- RushRoman Hemby 14 CAR, 58 YDS
- RecCharlie Becker 5 REC, 108 YDS, 1 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsIU up 17 entering the 4th quarter. Across 841 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
FAQ
What was the final score of Wisconsin vs. Indiana?
Wisconsin 7, Indiana 31.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (IU) was correct.
| WIS | IU | |
|---|---|---|
| 168 | Total yards | 388 |
| 98 | Passing yards | 305 |
| 70 | Rushing yards | 83 |
| 8 | First downs | 19 |
| 2-11 | 3rd down | 7-12 |
| 2-2 | 4th down | 0-0 |
| 9/15 | Comp/Att | 23/25 |
| 6.5 | Yards per pass | 12.2 |
| 2.3 | Yards per rush | 2.2 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 0 |
| 1-5 | Penalties | 1-10 |
| 26:02 | Possession | 33:58 |
Costliest call
Q2 7:46 IU punt on 4th & 1 at IU 43. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.15 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 5:21IUOmar Cooper Jr. 5 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)7–31
- Q3 4:44IURiley Nowakowski 21 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)7–24
- Q3 10:19IUHolden Staes 2 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)7–17
- Q2 0:55IUNico Radicic 37 Yd Field Goal 7–10
- Q2 3:42WISLance Mason 45 Yd pass from Carter Smith (Nathanial Vakos Kick)7–7
- Q1 2:56IUCharlie Becker 31 Yd pass from Fernando Mendoza (Nico Radicic Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (IU Elo 2150, WIS Elo 1459 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects IU -30 (96% to win) — 2.0 points clear of IU's market line of -28. 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 profilesWisconsin leads 41–21–2 · Indiana has won 3 straight · 38% have been one-possession games
| WIS | IU | |
|---|---|---|
| -3.3 (#72) | CORE overall | +35.3 (#3) |
| -11 / -8 | offense / defense | +19 / -17 |
| 1.23 | points / drive | 3.69 |
| 2.09 | allowed / drive | 0.94 |
| 35% | three-and-outs | 17% |
| -8 | 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 →