Iowa State vs. Texas Tech: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
ISUTeam statsTTU
- Q4 9:07ISUMarcel Spears Jr. 61 Yd Interception Return (Garrett Owens Kick)31–13
- Q3 5:31TTUNic Shimonek 2 Yd Run (Michael Barden Kick)24–13
- Q2 0:26ISUMatthew Eaton 3 Yd pass from Kyle Kempt (Garrett Owens Kick)24–6
- Q2 10:40ISUMatthew Eaton 4 Yd pass from Kyle Kempt (Garrett Owens Kick)17–6
- Q2 12:22ISUGarrett Owens 22 Yd Field Goal 10–6
- Q1 6:26ISUAllen Lazard 13 Yd pass from Kyle Kempt (Garrett Owens Kick)7–6
- Q1 12:36TTUDesmond Nisby 4 Yd Run (Michael Ewton PAT failed)0–6
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- TTU played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and ISU did not face the same ones. 3rd & 6.7 vs 3rd & 3.9
- PassKyle Kempt 22/32, 192 YDS, 3 TD, 1 INT
- RushDavid Montgomery 28 CAR, 164 YDS
- RecMarchie Murdock 4 REC, 68 YDS
- PassNic Shimonek 31/41, 207 YDS, 1 INT
- RushTre King 20 CAR, 82 YDS
- RecKeke Coutee 8 REC, 72 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsISU up 11 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,142 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q2 10:40ISU +20%
Kyle Kempt pass complete to Matthew Eaton for 4 yds for a TD, (Garrett Owens KICK)
- Q1 6:26ISU +18%
Kyle Kempt pass complete to Allen Lazard for 13 yds for a TD, (Garrett Owens KICK)
- Q1 12:36TTU +15%
Desmond Nisby run for 4 yds for a TD, (Michael Ewton PAT MISSED)
- Q2 0:26ISU +11%
Kyle Kempt pass complete to Matthew Eaton for 3 yds for a TD, (Garrett Owens KICK)
- Q3 5:31TTU +9%
Nic Shimonek run for 2 yds for a TD, (Michael Barden KICK)
- Q2 12:22ISU +9%
Garrett Owens 22 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Iowa State vs. Texas Tech?
Iowa State 31, Texas Tech 13.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (ISU) was correct.
| ISU | TTU | |
|---|---|---|
| 400 | Total yards | 336 |
| 192 | Passing yards | 207 |
| 208 | Rushing yards | 129 |
| 20 | First downs | 24 |
| 8-16 | 3rd down | 9-17 |
| 2-2 | 4th down | 1-3 |
| 22/32 | Comp/Att | 31/41 |
| 6.0 | Yards per pass | 5.0 |
| 5.8 | Yards per rush | 3.1 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 3 |
| 0-0 | Penalties | 3-30 |
| 30:23 | Possession | 29:37 |
Costliest call
Q4 6:31 ISU punt on 4th & 1 at ISU 48. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.41 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 9:07ISUMarcel Spears Jr. 61 Yd Interception Return (Garrett Owens Kick)31–13
- Q3 5:31TTUNic Shimonek 2 Yd Run (Michael Barden Kick)24–13
- Q2 0:26ISUMatthew Eaton 3 Yd pass from Kyle Kempt (Garrett Owens Kick)24–6
- Q2 10:40ISUMatthew Eaton 4 Yd pass from Kyle Kempt (Garrett Owens Kick)17–6
- Q2 12:22ISUGarrett Owens 22 Yd Field Goal 10–6
- Q1 6:26ISUAllen Lazard 13 Yd pass from Kyle Kempt (Garrett Owens Kick)7–6
- Q1 12:36TTUDesmond Nisby 4 Yd Run (Michael Ewton PAT failed)0–6
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (TTU Elo 1571, ISU Elo 1666 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects TTU +1.4 (47% to win) — 7.9 points clear of ISU's market line of -6.5. 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 — 2017
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#44 of 107 in 2017 by biggest miss · #62 of 126 in 2017 by longest odds.
The 2017 upset archive →Texas Tech leads 14–8 · Texas Tech has won 3 straight · 27% have been one-possession games
| ISU | TTU | |
|---|---|---|
| +10.6 (#31) | CORE overall | +4.0 (#55) |
| +4 / -7 | offense / defense | +5 / +1 |
| 2.40 | points / drive | 2.23 |
| 1.65 | allowed / drive | 2.55 |
| 31% | three-and-outs | 27% |
| +9 | pass over expected | +10 |
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 →