Ohio State vs. Texas: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
OSUTeam statsTEX
- Q4 0:25TEXHollywood Smothers 1 Yd Run (Gianni Spetic Kick)23–24
- Q4 7:14TEXHollywood Smothers 1 Yd Run (Gianni Spetic Kick)23–17
- Q4 14:19TEXRyan Wingo 3 Yd pass from Arch Manning (Gianni Spetic Kick)23–10
- Q3 8:09OSUConnor Hawkins 48 Yd Field Goal 23–3
- Q2 0:10OSUJeremiah Smith 19 Yd pass from Julian Sayin (Connor Hawkins Kick)20–3
- Q2 1:41OSUConnor Hawkins 30 Yd Field Goal 13–3
- Q2 5:42TEXGianni Spetic 37 Yd Field Goal 10–3
- Q1 5:39OSUJa'Kobi Jackson 8 Yd Run (Connor Hawkins Kick)10–0
- Q1 12:04OSUConnor Hawkins 26 Yd Field Goal 3–0
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- OSU played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and TEX did not face the same ones. 3rd & 7.9 vs 3rd & 5.6
- OSU started drives roughly 15 yards closer than TEX — a scoreboard edge that never shows up as a stat line. own 36 vs own 21
- TEX won this on the ground — that lane, not the scoreboard, was the story against OSU. +0.27 vs -0.23 EPA/play
Ohio State owns every matchup edge but one. Texas keeps explosive plays, and that is the only way it scores in Austin.
These two met in Columbus a year ago and produced a 14-7 game, and that scoreline, not last week's pair of blowouts, is the honest preview of the rematch. Ohio State holds the widest single edge on the field, Texas's run game against its front, and holds the passing and overall-efficiency edges besides. Texas is favored anyway, projected 22-8, on the quality of its roster and on playing at home.
- PassJulian Sayin 17/32, 278 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushBo Jackson 19 CAR, 74 YDS
- RecJeremiah Smith 8 REC, 164 YDS, 1 TD
- PassArch Manning 23/37, 195 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushHollywood Smothers 21 CAR, 74 YDS, 2 TD
- RecEmmett Mosley V 5 REC, 65 YDS
- Q4 0:25TEX +96%
#2 H.Smothers rush middle for 1 yard gain to the OSU00 TOUCHDOWN
- Q4 0:25OSU +65%
Shotgun #10 J.Sayin pass incomplete deep left to #3 D.McCuin thrown to TEX30 broken up by #4 J.McDonald PENALTY OSU Holding (#67 A.Siereveld) 10 yards from OSU25 to OS…
- Q4 7:14TEX +17%
#2 H.Smothers rush left for 1 yard gain to the OSU00 TOUCHDOWN
- Q1 5:39OSU +15%
Shotgun #24 J.Jackson rush middle for 8 yards gain to the TEX00 TOUCHDOWN, 1ST DOWN
- Q4 0:06OSU +15%
Shotgun #10 J.Sayin pass complete short right to #3 D.McCuin caught at OSU20, for 5 yards to the OSU20 (#40 L.Jackson; #29 G.Littleton)
- Q4 7:10OSU +11%
Shotgun #10 J.Sayin pass incomplete short left to #4 J.Smith thrown to OSU40
FAQ
What was the final score of Ohio State vs. Texas?
Ohio State 23, Texas 24.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked OSU, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| OSU | TEX | |
|---|---|---|
| 372 | Total yards | 336 |
| 278 | Passing yards | 195 |
| 94 | Rushing yards | 141 |
| 19 | First downs | 25 |
| 6-14 | 3rd down | 9-16 |
| 0-1 | 4th down | 2-3 |
| 17/32 | Comp/Att | 23/37 |
| 8.7 | Yards per pass | 5.3 |
| 3.0 | Yards per rush | 3.4 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 4-35 | Penalties | 2-12 |
| 28:32 | Possession | 31:28 |
Costliest call
Q3 11:55 OSU punt on 4th & 4 at TEX 39. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.96 points.
- OSUInterception2 plays · -5 yds · from OSU 35 · Q4 0:25+0.0 EPA−17% WP
- TEXTouchdown12 plays · 73 yds · from TEX 27 · Q4 4:16+4.0 EPA+70% WP
- OSUMissed FG7 plays · 48 yds · from OSU 35 · Q4 7:14−0.4 EPA+5% WP
- TEXTouchdown13 plays · 72 yds · from TEX 28 · Q4 12:46+4.0 EPA+9% WP
- OSUPunt3 plays · 6 yds · from OSU 35 · Q4 14:19−1.0 EPA+1% WP
- TEXTouchdown15 plays · 91 yds · from TEX 9 · Q3 5:47+2.3 EPA+3% WP
- OSUPunt3 plays · 1 yds · from OSU 38 · Q3 6:52−2.1 EPA
- TEXPunt3 plays · 1 yds · from TEX 35 · Q3 8:09−1.2 EPA
- OSUField Goal7 plays · 43 yds · from OSU 27 · Q3 10:00+0.8 EPA+2% WP
- TEXPunt4 plays · 17 yds · from TEX 13 · Q3 11:55−0.5 EPA
- OSUPunt6 plays · 36 yds · from OSU 35 · Q3 15:00−1.6 EPA+1% WP
- TEXEnd of Half1 plays · -1 yds · from TEX 35 · Q2 0:05−0.9 EPA
- OSUTouchdown4 plays · 49 yds · from TEX 49 · Q2 0:49+1.2 EPA+11% WP
- TEXDowns7 plays · 24 yds · from TEX 35 · Q2 1:41+2.3 EPA
- Q4 0:25TEXHollywood Smothers 1 Yd Run (Gianni Spetic Kick)23–24
- Q4 7:14TEXHollywood Smothers 1 Yd Run (Gianni Spetic Kick)23–17
- Q4 14:19TEXRyan Wingo 3 Yd pass from Arch Manning (Gianni Spetic Kick)23–10
- Q3 8:09OSUConnor Hawkins 48 Yd Field Goal 23–3
- Q2 0:10OSUJeremiah Smith 19 Yd pass from Julian Sayin (Connor Hawkins Kick)20–3
- Q2 1:41OSUConnor Hawkins 30 Yd Field Goal 13–3
- Q2 5:42TEXGianni Spetic 37 Yd Field Goal 10–3
- Q1 5:39OSUJa'Kobi Jackson 8 Yd Run (Connor Hawkins Kick)10–0
- Q1 12:04OSUConnor Hawkins 26 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 (TEX Elo 1913, OSU Elo 1986 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects TEX +3 (41% to win) — 5.0 points clear of OSU's market line of -2. 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 — 2026
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| OSU | TEX | |
|---|---|---|
| +33.9 (#1) | CORE overall | +17.3 (#18) |
| +15 / -19 | offense / defense | +10 / -8 |
| 4.67 | points / drive | 5.78 |
| 0.27 | allowed / drive | 1.56 |
| 17% | three-and-outs | 0% |
| +13 | 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.
Texas can't run on Ohio State's front
Ohio State owns every matchup edge but one. Texas keeps explosive plays, and that is the only way it scores in Austin.
Ohio State wins
The range of outcomes for this game. Each bar is how often the final margin lands in that range — the more it leans toward Texas, the more likely Texas wins.
Ohio State owns four of the five matchups
The matchup board runs one direction. Texas's run game grades 2.22 standard deviations underwater against the Ohio State front, and its short-yardage and power work sits 1.79 under. Ohio State's passing game comes back 1.97 to the good, its overall offensive efficiency 1.85. That is four of five categories in one color, held by the team given a 17% chance of winning the game. The fifth category decides it.
Texas takes the big-play category by 1.60, and that is the entire offensive case. An offense that cannot run and cannot convert on third-and-short has to score in chunks, which makes Texas a variance play: two long completions and it is ahead, none and it is punting. That profile is also why the projection can favor Texas by two scores while the game itself stays in the low twenties.
Each unit matchup this season, sorted by how decisive it is — the top bar is what most tilts the game. Bars toward Texas are battles it should win; toward Ohio State are ones Ohio State wins.
Last Saturday flattered both teams, Texas more
Ohio State beat Ball State 56-3 and Texas beat Texas State 59-7, seven days ago, both at home. The drive rates are the part worth keeping. Texas scored on 88.9% of nine possessions at 55.7 yards a drive; Ohio State scored on 66.7% of twelve at 53.0.
The three-and-out numbers matter more. Ohio State went three-and-out on 25.0% of its drives, and it will face a top-five unit in Austin. Texas's 11.1% is the tidier figure and it will need to be, because the Ohio State front ends possessions before they start.
Two defenses this good keep the number down
Texas fields a top-five defense nationally, and that single fact explains how Ohio State projects for eight points while winning the passing matchup outright. Ohio State answers by closing the ground. Two units of that quality on the same field is why the projection lands nowhere near 48.2. The under is given about a 91% chance, the firmest read anywhere on this game.
Points allowed per drive across all FBS defenses (lower is better). Ohio State's defense is one of the best in the country — better than 100% of FBS defenses.
The 2.22-standard-deviation gap against Texas's run game is the most lopsided unit matchup in the game. Take the ground away and Texas lives on third-and-long, which is where a front collects the sacks and the short fields that turned last year's meeting into a 14-7 result rather than a shootout.
Manning has to win this from the pocket
Arch Manning projects for 142 to 272 passing yards with an 82% chance of throwing a touchdown, against an Ohio State secondary that ranks 17th of 185 in what it allows. Ryan Wingo's band runs 32 to 77 receiving yards, Emmett Mosley V's 19 to 58. Nobody in that group projects as a volume answer, which fits an offense built to hit rather than to accumulate.
Julian Sayin's band runs 183 to 324 passing yards with an 89% touchdown chance, the highest of anyone here, and the pass defense in front of him sits 179th of 185 by what it allows. Jeremiah Smith projects 45 to 143 receiving yards at a 60% touchdown chance, the widest range on the field. Texas grades top-five overall and near the bottom in passing yardage conceded, and Ohio State still projects for eight points. The yards are there; converting them is the problem.
The ground game does not fix that. Bo Jackson projects 48 to 91 rushing yards with a 32% touchdown chance, Isaiah West 14 to 38, Brandon Inniss 10 to 31 receiving. Nothing in that spread describes an offense grinding Texas down over four quarters. Ohio State throws to Smith and finishes, or it trades field position all night with a defense that does not give up cheap ones.
Texas wins the roster, not the matchup
Each ingredient of our projection and the side it favors — bars toward Texas are why it's the pick (home field is counted separately).
Strip the unit grades out and Texas is still the better team on roster depth and its portal additions. That never shows on a single snap. It shows in the fourth quarter, in whether a defensive front holds its shape for sixty minutes against the passing attack that grades 1.97 better, and in how many bodies each side can rotate.
Ohio State's path is Short and plausible
The underdog case is simple. Ohio State won this fixture 14-7, it holds four of five matchup edges, and Sayin faces the softest coverage numbers on the field. If those throws become touchdowns instead of punts from midfield, the two-score projection collapses. The market already sits closer to that view, with Texas laid at just -1.2, while the projection clears that number in roughly 85% of its outcomes, the largest disagreement on this page.
Texas needs the chunk plays it grades for and needs to avoid third-and-short, where Ohio State is 1.79 standard deviations better. Ohio State needs red-zone finishing, because the yardage is available and the drives currently project to die short of the end zone. A one-score finish is given about a 30% chance, nearer the game these two actually played than the 22-8 on the projection.
Our coverage of 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 →