Duke vs. UConn: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
DUKETeam statsCONN
- Q4 0:12CONNTa'Quan Roberson 2 Yd Run (Noe Ruelas Kick)41–7
- Q3 3:01DUKEJordan Moore 22 Yd pass from Riley Leonard (Todd Pelino Kick)41–0
- Q3 7:13DUKEDeWayne Carter 26 Yd Fumble Return (Todd Pelino Kick)34–0
- Q2 0:00DUKETodd Pelino 40 Yd Field Goal 27–0
- Q2 4:55DUKERiley Leonard 3 Yd Run (Todd Pelino Kick)24–0
- Q2 12:25DUKEJordan Waters 10 Yd Run (Todd Pelino Kick)17–0
- Q2 12:42DUKETodd Pelino 50 Yd Field Goal 10–0
- Q1 6:16DUKEJordan Waters 1 Yd Run (Todd Pelino Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassRiley Leonard 23/34, 248 YDS, 1 TD
- RushRiley Leonard 4 CAR, 30 YDS, 1 TD
- RecJordan Moore 8 REC, 86 YDS, 1 TD
- PassTa'Quan Roberson 13/28, 114 YDS
- RushVictor Rosa 14 CAR, 68 YDS
- RecBrett Buckman 2 REC, 31 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsDUKE up 41 entering the 4th quarter. Across 196 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 6:16DUKE +10%
Jordan Waters 1 Yd Run (Todd Pelino Kick)
- Q2 12:25DUKE +5%
Jordan Waters run for 10 yds for a TD (Todd Pelino KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Duke vs. UConn?
Duke 41, UConn 7.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (DUKE) was correct.
| DUKE | CONN | |
|---|---|---|
| 328 | Total yards | 203 |
| 248 | Passing yards | 114 |
| 80 | Rushing yards | 89 |
| 20 | First downs | 14 |
| 5-13 | 3rd down | 5-15 |
| 1-2 | 4th down | 0-2 |
| 23/34 | Comp/Att | 13/28 |
| 7.3 | Yards per pass | 4.1 |
| 3.0 | Yards per rush | 2.3 |
| 0 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 8-59 | Penalties | 4-49 |
| 29:50 | Possession | 30:10 |
Costliest call
Q2 0:34 CONN punt on 4th & 2 at CONN 30. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.48 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 0:12CONNTa'Quan Roberson 2 Yd Run (Noe Ruelas Kick)41–7
- Q3 3:01DUKEJordan Moore 22 Yd pass from Riley Leonard (Todd Pelino Kick)41–0
- Q3 7:13DUKEDeWayne Carter 26 Yd Fumble Return (Todd Pelino Kick)34–0
- Q2 0:00DUKETodd Pelino 40 Yd Field Goal 27–0
- Q2 4:55DUKERiley Leonard 3 Yd Run (Todd Pelino Kick)24–0
- Q2 12:25DUKEJordan Waters 10 Yd Run (Todd Pelino Kick)17–0
- Q2 12:42DUKETodd Pelino 50 Yd Field Goal 10–0
- Q1 6:16DUKEJordan Waters 1 Yd Run (Todd Pelino Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (CONN Elo 1213, DUKE Elo 1630 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects CONN +14.3 (18% to win) — 7.7 points clear of CONN's market line of +22. 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 — 2023
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| DUKE | CONN | |
|---|---|---|
| +3.5 (#48) | CORE overall | -17.9 (#119) |
| +3 / -1 | offense / defense | -11 / +7 |
| 2.21 | points / drive | 1.24 |
| 1.73 | allowed / drive | 2.49 |
| 34% | three-and-outs | 30% |
| -1 | pass over expected | -2 |
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 →