Northern Illinois vs. Central Michigan: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
NIUTeam statsCMU
- Q4 10:13CMURyan Tice 31 Yd Field Goal 10–48
- Q4 14:20CMUJonathan Ward 3 Yd Run (Ryan Tice Kick)10–45
- Q2 0:49CMUTyrone Scott 16 Yd pass from Quinten Dormady (Ryan Tice Kick)10–38
- Q2 4:59CMUTony Poljan 39 Yd pass from Quinten Dormady (Ryan Tice Kick)10–31
- Q2 10:48NIUSpencer Tears 9 Yd pass from Ross Bowers (John Richardson Kick)10–24
- Q2 12:00CMURyan Tice 32 Yd Field Goal 3–24
- Q1 0:51CMUKobe Lewis 16 Yd Run (Ryan Tice Kick)3–21
- Q1 2:51NIUJohn Richardson 33 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 6:34CMUTommy Lazzaro 3 Yd Run (Ryan Tice Kick)0–14
- Q1 10:37CMUKalil Pimpleton 14 Yd pass from Quinten Dormady (Ryan Tice Kick)0–7
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- NIU played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and CMU did not face the same ones. 3rd & 8.5 vs 3rd & 5.8
- PassRoss Bowers 18/29, 221 YDS, 1 TD, 3 INT
- RushMarcus Childers 7 CAR, 19 YDS
- RecCole Tucker 3 REC, 75 YDS
- PassQuinten Dormady 18/24, 288 YDS, 3 TD
- RushKobe Lewis 17 CAR, 143 YDS, 1 TD
- RecJaCorey Sullivan 5 REC, 88 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsCMU up 28 entering the 4th quarter. Across 465 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 10:37CMU +18%
Quinten Dormady pass complete to Kalil Pimpleton for 14 yds for a TD, (Ryan Tice KICK)
- Q1 6:34CMU +18%
Tommy Lazzaro run for 3 yds for a TD, (Ryan Tice KICK)
- Q1 0:51CMU +15%
Kobe Lewis run for 16 yds for a TD, (Ryan Tice KICK)
- Q2 10:48NIU +12%
Ross Bowers pass complete to Spencer Tears for 9 yds for a TD, (John Richardson KICK)
- Q2 4:59CMU +11%
Quinten Dormady pass complete to Tony Poljan for 39 yds for a TD, (Ryan Tice KICK)
- Q1 2:51NIU +6%
John Richardson 33 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Northern Illinois vs. Central Michigan?
Northern Illinois 10, Central Michigan 48.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked NIU, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| NIU | CMU | |
|---|---|---|
| 251 | Total yards | 615 |
| 229 | Passing yards | 288 |
| 22 | Rushing yards | 327 |
| 13 | First downs | 24 |
| 1-12 | 3rd down | 8-15 |
| 2-2 | 4th down | 0-1 |
| 19/31 | Comp/Att | 18/25 |
| 7.4 | Yards per pass | 11.5 |
| 0.9 | Yards per rush | 6.5 |
| 4 | Turnovers | 0 |
| 1-5 | Penalties | 5-53 |
| 25:59 | Possession | 34:01 |
Costliest call
Q4 4:57 CMU go for it on 4th & 6 at NIU 9. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.41 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 10:13CMURyan Tice 31 Yd Field Goal 10–48
- Q4 14:20CMUJonathan Ward 3 Yd Run (Ryan Tice Kick)10–45
- Q2 0:49CMUTyrone Scott 16 Yd pass from Quinten Dormady (Ryan Tice Kick)10–38
- Q2 4:59CMUTony Poljan 39 Yd pass from Quinten Dormady (Ryan Tice Kick)10–31
- Q2 10:48NIUSpencer Tears 9 Yd pass from Ross Bowers (John Richardson Kick)10–24
- Q2 12:00CMURyan Tice 32 Yd Field Goal 3–24
- Q1 0:51CMUKobe Lewis 16 Yd Run (Ryan Tice Kick)3–21
- Q1 2:51NIUJohn Richardson 33 Yd Field Goal 3–14
- Q1 6:34CMUTommy Lazzaro 3 Yd Run (Ryan Tice Kick)0–14
- Q1 10:37CMUKalil Pimpleton 14 Yd pass from Quinten Dormady (Ryan Tice Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (CMU Elo 1253, NIU Elo 1429 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects CMU +4.6 (39% to win) — 3.1 points clear of NIU's market line of +1.5. 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 1 · through week 1 · drive simulation
Season form — 2019
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#6 of 105 in 2019 by biggest miss · #100 of 124 in 2019 by longest odds.
The 2019 upset archive →Central Michigan leads 21–18 · 36% have been one-possession games
| NIU | CMU | |
|---|---|---|
| -15.1 (#110) | CORE overall | -0.3 (#65) |
| -8 / +7 | offense / defense | +1 / +1 |
| 1.73 | points / drive | 2.48 |
| 2.41 | allowed / drive | 2.16 |
| 32% | three-and-outs | 29% |
| -2 | pass over expected | +5 |
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 →