Utah vs. Stanford: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
UTAHTeam statsSTAN
- Q4 3:34UTAHMatt Gay 37 Yd Field Goal 40–21
- Q4 7:12UTAHSamson Nacua 57 Yd pass from Tyler Huntley (Matt Gay Kick)37–21
- Q4 12:33UTAHMatt Gay 34 Yd Field Goal 30–21
- Q3 1:44STANMichael Wilson 26 Yd pass from K.J. Costello (Jet Toner Kick)27–21
- Q3 5:02STANCameron Scarlett 1 Yd Run (Jet Toner Kick)27–14
- Q3 9:40UTAHMatt Gay 49 Yd Field Goal 27–7
- Q2 0:00UTAHMatt Gay 48 Yd Field Goal 24–7
- Q2 0:24STANTrevor Speights 2 Yd Run (Jet Toner Kick)21–7
- Q2 2:56UTAHZack Moss 35 Yd Run (Matt Gay Kick)21–0
- Q2 10:50UTAHJaylon Johnson 100 Yd Interception Return (Matt Gay Kick)14–0
- Q1 0:47UTAHZack Moss 7 Yd Run (Matt Gay Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassTyler Huntley 17/21, 199 YDS, 1 TD
- RushZack Moss 20 CAR, 160 YDS, 2 TD
- RecSamson Nacua 2 REC, 70 YDS, 1 TD
- PassKJ Costello 26/41, 381 YDS, 1 TD, 2 INT
- RushTrevor Speights 17 CAR, 56 YDS, 1 TD
- RecKaden Smith 8 REC, 120 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsUTAH up 6 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,662 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q3 1:44STAN +28%
Michael Wilson 26 Yd pass from K.J. Costello (Jet Toner Kick)
- Q1 0:47UTAH +21%
Zack Moss 7 Yd Run (Matt Gay Kick)
- Q2 10:50UTAH +20%
Jaylon Johnson 100 Yd Interception Return (Matt Gay Kick)
- Q4 12:33UTAH +15%
Matt Gay 34 yd FG GOOD
- Q2 2:56UTAH +14%
Zack Moss run for 35 yds for a TD, (Matt Gay KICK)
- Q4 15:00UTAH +13%
Armand Shyne run for 8 yds to the Stanf 24 for a 1ST down
FAQ
What was the final score of Utah vs. Stanford?
Utah 40, Stanford 21.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked STAN, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| UTAH | STAN | |
|---|---|---|
| 421 | Total yards | 423 |
| 199 | Passing yards | 381 |
| 222 | Rushing yards | 42 |
| 22 | First downs | 26 |
| 6-13 | 3rd down | 3-11 |
| 1-1 | 4th down | 3-3 |
| 17/21 | Comp/Att | 26/42 |
| 9.5 | Yards per pass | 9.1 |
| 5.2 | Yards per rush | 1.5 |
| 0 | Turnovers | 4 |
| 7-65 | Penalties | 2-20 |
| 31:20 | Possession | 28:40 |
Costliest call
Q1 3:30 UTAH punt on 4th & 2 at STAN 40. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.40 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 3:34UTAHMatt Gay 37 Yd Field Goal 40–21
- Q4 7:12UTAHSamson Nacua 57 Yd pass from Tyler Huntley (Matt Gay Kick)37–21
- Q4 12:33UTAHMatt Gay 34 Yd Field Goal 30–21
- Q3 1:44STANMichael Wilson 26 Yd pass from K.J. Costello (Jet Toner Kick)27–21
- Q3 5:02STANCameron Scarlett 1 Yd Run (Jet Toner Kick)27–14
- Q3 9:40UTAHMatt Gay 49 Yd Field Goal 27–7
- Q2 0:00UTAHMatt Gay 48 Yd Field Goal 24–7
- Q2 0:24STANTrevor Speights 2 Yd Run (Jet Toner Kick)21–7
- Q2 2:56UTAHZack Moss 35 Yd Run (Matt Gay Kick)21–0
- Q2 10:50UTAHJaylon Johnson 100 Yd Interception Return (Matt Gay Kick)14–0
- Q1 0:47UTAHZack Moss 7 Yd Run (Matt Gay Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (STAN Elo 1758, UTAH Elo 1617 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects STAN -8 (71% to win) — 4.5 points clear of STAN's market line of -3.5. 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 — 2018
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#58 of 109 in 2018 by biggest miss · #88 of 122 in 2018 by longest odds · #17 of 64 in 2018 by biggest poll gap.
The 2018 upset archive →Utah leads 7–3 · Utah has won 3 straight · 60% have been one-possession games
| UTAH | STAN | |
|---|---|---|
| +14.0 (#21) | CORE overall | +5.5 (#40) |
| +1 / -13 | offense / defense | +8 / +2 |
| 2.13 | points / drive | 2.35 |
| 1.40 | allowed / drive | 2.01 |
| 30% | three-and-outs | 33% |
| -2 | 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 →