Kansas State vs. TCU: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
KSUTeam statsTCU
- Q4 2:32KSUJustin Silmon 3 Yd Run (Ian Patterson Kick)30–6
- Q3 8:22KSUJustin Silmon 5 Yd Run (Ian Patterson PAT failed)23–6
- Q3 13:01KSUByron Pringle 83 Yd pass from Jesse Ertz (Ian Patterson Kick)17–6
- Q2 0:09TCUBrandon Hatfield 40 Yd Field Goal 10–6
- Q2 9:17KSUJesse Ertz 32 Yd Run (Ian Patterson Kick)10–3
- Q1 2:12TCUBrandon Hatfield 31 Yd Field Goal 3–3
- Q1 9:56KSUIan Patterson 27 Yd Field Goal 3–0
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- KSU lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 12% explosive on a 40% success rate
- PassJesse Ertz 9/21, 159 YDS, 1 TD
- RushJesse Ertz 19 CAR, 170 YDS, 1 TD
- RecByron Pringle 6 REC, 126 YDS, 1 TD
- PassFoster Sawyer 12/25, 86 YDS, 1 INT
- RushKyle Hicks 17 CAR, 60 YDS
- RecDeante Gray 2 REC, 59 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsKSU up 17 entering the 4th quarter. Across 841 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q3 13:01KSU +24%
Jesse Ertz pass complete to Byron Pringle for 83 yds for a TD, (Ian Patterson KICK)
- Q2 9:17KSU +22%
Jesse Ertz run for 32 yds for a TD, (Ian Patterson KICK)
- Q3 8:22KSU +14%
Justin Silmon run for 5 yds for a TD, (Ian Patterson PAT MISSED)
- Q2 0:09TCU +12%
Brandon Hatfield 40 yd FG GOOD
- Q1 9:56KSU +8%
Ian Patterson 27 yd FG GOOD
- Q1 2:12TCU +8%
Brandon Hatfield 31 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Kansas State vs. TCU?
Kansas State 30, TCU 6.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked TCU, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| KSU | TCU | |
|---|---|---|
| 495 | Total yards | 280 |
| 159 | Passing yards | 138 |
| 336 | Rushing yards | 142 |
| 21 | First downs | 15 |
| 10-17 | 3rd down | 7-20 |
| 0-0 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 9/21 | Comp/Att | 17/36 |
| 7.6 | Yards per pass | 3.8 |
| 6.6 | Yards per rush | 3.8 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 6-61 | Penalties | 4-45 |
| 34:34 | Possession | 25:26 |
Costliest call
Q1 9:49 TCU punt on 4th & 3 at KSU 39. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.21 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 2:32KSUJustin Silmon 3 Yd Run (Ian Patterson Kick)30–6
- Q3 8:22KSUJustin Silmon 5 Yd Run (Ian Patterson PAT failed)23–6
- Q3 13:01KSUByron Pringle 83 Yd pass from Jesse Ertz (Ian Patterson Kick)17–6
- Q2 0:09TCUBrandon Hatfield 40 Yd Field Goal 10–6
- Q2 9:17KSUJesse Ertz 32 Yd Run (Ian Patterson Kick)10–3
- Q1 2:12TCUBrandon Hatfield 31 Yd Field Goal 3–3
- Q1 9:56KSUIan Patterson 27 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 (TCU Elo 1799, KSU Elo 1663 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects TCU -7.8 (71% to win) — 3.8 points clear of TCU's market line of -4. 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 — 2016
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#38 of 113 in 2016 by biggest miss · #92 of 124 in 2016 by longest odds.
The 2016 upset archive →Kansas State leads 11–8 · Kansas State has won 3 straight · 37% have been one-possession games
| KSU | TCU | |
|---|---|---|
| +7.1 (#38) | CORE overall | +5.4 (#45) |
| +4 / -3 | offense / defense | -2 / -7 |
| 2.60 | points / drive | 2.10 |
| 1.81 | allowed / drive | 1.97 |
| 19% | three-and-outs | 29% |
| -7 | pass over expected | +6 |
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 →