Richmond vs. Michigan State: Final Score & Recap

ReplayCommandBoxAnalyticsMatchup

Richmond

0014

Michigan State1-0

▸0045

Final

Spartan Stadium

	1	2	3	4	T
RICH	0	0	0	14	14
MSU	7	10	21	7	45

RICHTeam statsMSU

193Total yards465

118Pass303

75Rush162

11First downs21

1-123rd down5-9

1Turnovers2

29:49Possession30:11

Scoring plays

• Q4 5:16RICHSean Clarke 5 Yd pass from Jackson Hardy (Jayden Alsheskie Kick)14–45
• Q4 11:33MSUAntonio Gates Jr. 45 Yd pass from Noah Kim (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–45
• Q4 14:36RICHAaron Banks 47 Yd Fumble Return (Jayden Alsheskie Kick)7–38
• Q3 1:12MSUNathan Carter 6 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)0–38
• Q3 8:25MSUNathan Carter 44 Yd Run (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–31
• Q3 12:28MSUNathan Carter 2 Yd Run (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–24
• Q2 5:17MSUJonathan Kim 52 Yd Field Goal 0–17
• Q2 13:44MSUTyneil Hopper 13 Yd pass from Noah Kim (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–14
• Q1 7:26MSUTre Mosley 11 Yd pass from Noah Kim (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–7

How the model called it

Market line

MSU −29.5

Against the number

MSU covered

line MSU −29.5

What the numbers say

• RICH played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and MSU did not face the same ones. 3rd & 8.3 vs 3rd & 6.2

Win probability

ours solid · ESPN dashed

MSU 100%50%RICH 100%

Kickoff133 plays →Final

Tap or hover on the chart to see play details

MSU (top)RICH (bottom)· colored dots = scoresFinal: MSU 100%

How the line closed

model vs market

Closing line

MSU −29.5

Closing total

43.5

Model line

—

Actual result

RICH 14 – 45 MSU

Leaders

Richmond

• PassKyle Wickersham 16/22, 102 YDS
• RushOwen Laughlin 1 CAR, 20 YDS
• RecJerry Garcia Jr. 4 REC, 34 YDS

Michigan State

• PassNoah Kim 18/22, 292 YDS, 3 TD
• RushNathan Carter 19 CAR, 111 YDS, 3 TD
• RecTre Mosley 5 REC, 84 YDS, 1 TD

Tempo

what this pace leaves on the clock

30.5sper snap · slower the national 24.5s

fastnational avgslow

Snaps run

118

Points / snap

0.50

This exact spot, historically

empirical, no ratings

MSU up 38 entering the 4th quarter. Across 181 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):

100%

MSU went on to win

A near-lock historically

Most comparable games

WKansas State vs Southeast Missouri State45-0WSoutheast Missouri State vs Lindenwood45-7WMontana State vs Stetson57-20WMissouri State vs Utah Tech59-14WSouth Alabama vs UL Monroe55-7

Fourth downs

14 calls

RICH gave up 2.7 points to the model on fourth down.RICH 6/10 · MSU 3/3 agreed

FAQ

What was the final score of Richmond vs. Michigan State?

Richmond 14, Michigan State 45.

Did Gridpex's model pick hit?

Yes — the model's pick (MSU) was correct.

Situational splits

what the averages hide

RICH

MSU

30%

Success rate

53%

-0.07

EPA / pass

1.05

0.04

EPA / rush

0.08

37%

Early-down success

53%

27%

Pass success

64%

36%

Rush success

46%

5%

Explosive play rate (15+ yds)

16%

23%

Stuffed rush rate

19%

61%

Pass rate

40%

8.3

Avg 3rd-down distance

6.2

RICH

8.3 yards to go on 3rd down

56 scrimmage snaps

MSU

6.2 yards to go on 3rd down

62 scrimmage snaps

Team stats

the basics, from ESPN

RICH		MSU
193	Total yards	465
118	Passing yards	303
75	Rushing yards	162
11	First downs	21
1-12	3rd down	5-9
1-2	4th down	0-0
18/25	Comp/Att	19/23
4.7	Yards per pass	13.2
2.6	Yards per rush	4.3
1	Turnovers	2
3-25	Penalties	5-45
29:49	Possession	30:11

Fourth downs

14 calls

RICH

6/10 with the model

−2.7 pts · −0.0% win prob

MSU

3/3 with the model

nothing given up

Costliest call

Q2 10:20 RICH punt on 4th & 1 at MSU 48. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.51 points.

Every call, priced (14)

Drive chart

every possession, start to finish

RICH 1/11 scoring drives← own end zone →MSU 8/13 scoring drives

RICHPUNT3 pl, -6 yds· own 25Q1

MSUPUNT3 pl, 1 yds· own 47Q1

RICHPUNT3 pl, 8 yds· own 12Q1

MSUPUNT3 pl, 4 yds· own 38Q1

MSUTD5 pl, 19 yds· opp 19Q1

RICHDOWNS10 pl, 44 yds· own 25Q1

MSUTD8 pl, 69 yds· own 31Q1

RICHPUNT5 pl, 27 yds· own 25Q2

MSUFG9 pl, 58 yds· own 7Q2

RICHMISS13 pl, 60 yds· own 25Q2

MSUEND1 pl, -1 yds· own 20Q2

MSUTD5 pl, 65 yds· own 35Q3

RICHPUNT3 pl, -1 yds· own 25Q3

MSUTD4 pl, 63 yds· own 37Q3

RICHPUNT3 pl, 5 yds· own 25Q3

MSUTD9 pl, 70 yds· own 30Q3

RICHPUNT3 pl, -7 yds· own 25Q3

MSUTD1 pl, 1 yds· own 46Q4

MSUTD6 pl, 69 yds· own 31Q4

RICHPUNT5 pl, 22 yds· own 25Q4

MSUFUM2 pl, 10 yds· own 15Q4

RICHTD4 pl, 25 yds· opp 25Q4

MSUPUNT6 pl, 17 yds· own 35Q4

RICHEND3 pl, 6 yds· own 30Q4

Scoring plays

• Q4 5:16RICHSean Clarke 5 Yd pass from Jackson Hardy (Jayden Alsheskie Kick)14–45
• Q4 11:33MSUAntonio Gates Jr. 45 Yd pass from Noah Kim (Stephen Rusnak Kick)7–45
• Q4 14:36RICHAaron Banks 47 Yd Fumble Return (Jayden Alsheskie Kick)7–38
• Q3 1:12MSUNathan Carter 6 Yd Run (Stephen Rusnak Kick)0–38
• Q3 8:25MSUNathan Carter 44 Yd Run (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–31
• Q3 12:28MSUNathan Carter 2 Yd Run (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–24
• Q2 5:17MSUJonathan Kim 52 Yd Field Goal 0–17
• Q2 13:44MSUTyneil Hopper 13 Yd pass from Noah Kim (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–14
• Q1 7:26MSUTre Mosley 11 Yd pass from Noah Kim (Jonathan Kim Kick)0–7

Model prediction

how the number is built

One or both teams lack a power rating (often an FCS opponent), so the model prediction is low-confidence for this game.

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 →