Arizona State vs. Cincinnati: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
ASUTeam statsCIN
- Q3 2:23ASUCam Skattebo 1 Yd Run (Ian Hershey Kick)14–24
- Q2 1:55CINBrendan Sorsby 1 Yd Run (Nathan Hawks Kick)7–24
- Q2 11:38CINEvan Pryor 55 Yd Run (Nathan Hawks Kick)7–17
- Q1 2:18CINNathan Hawks 46 Yd Field Goal 7–10
- Q1 7:26CINBrendan Sorsby 14 Yd Run (Nathan Hawks Kick)7–7
- Q1 10:35ASUCam Skattebo 2 Yd Run (Ian Hershey Kick)7–0
How the model called it
- PassJeff Sims 12/23, 155 YDS
- RushCam Skattebo 17 CAR, 75 YDS, 2 TD
- RecJordyn Tyson 6 REC, 108 YDS
- PassBrendan Sorsby 23/31, 206 YDS, 1 INT
- RushCorey Kiner 22 CAR, 102 YDS
- RecXzavier Henderson 8 REC, 67 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsCIN up 10 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,137 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q2 11:38CIN +19%
Evan Pryor run for 55 yds for a TD (Nathan Hawks KICK)
- Q1 7:26CIN +18%
Brendan Sorsby run for 14 yds for a TD (Nathan Hawks KICK)
- Q1 10:35ASU +18%
Cam Skattebo run for 2 yds for a TD (Ian Hershey KICK)
- Q2 1:55CIN +13%
Brendan Sorsby run for 1 yd for a TD (Nathan Hawks KICK)
- Q3 2:23ASU +10%
Cam Skattebo run for 1 yd for a TD (Ian Hershey KICK)
- Q1 2:18CIN +8%
Nathan Hawks 46 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Arizona State vs. Cincinnati?
Arizona State 14, Cincinnati 24.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (CIN) was correct.
| ASU | CIN | |
|---|---|---|
| 346 | Total yards | 397 |
| 155 | Passing yards | 206 |
| 191 | Rushing yards | 191 |
| 18 | First downs | 23 |
| 4-12 | 3rd down | 3-12 |
| 0-2 | 4th down | 1-2 |
| 12/23 | Comp/Att | 23/31 |
| 6.7 | Yards per pass | 6.6 |
| 4.8 | Yards per rush | 5.0 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 2-20 | Penalties | 4-55 |
| 25:20 | Possession | 34:40 |
Costliest call
Q4 6:01 ASU field goal on 4th & 2 at CIN 30. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.75 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q3 2:23ASUCam Skattebo 1 Yd Run (Ian Hershey Kick)14–24
- Q2 1:55CINBrendan Sorsby 1 Yd Run (Nathan Hawks Kick)7–24
- Q2 11:38CINEvan Pryor 55 Yd Run (Nathan Hawks Kick)7–17
- Q1 2:18CINNathan Hawks 46 Yd Field Goal 7–10
- Q1 7:26CINBrendan Sorsby 14 Yd Run (Nathan Hawks Kick)7–7
- Q1 10:35ASUCam Skattebo 2 Yd Run (Ian Hershey Kick)7–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (CIN Elo 1538, ASU Elo 1529 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects CIN -2.8 (59% to win) — 2.2 points clear of ASU's market line of -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 — 2024
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| ASU | CIN | |
|---|---|---|
| +16.5 (#19) | CORE overall | +3.7 (#53) |
| +11 / -6 | offense / defense | +3 / -1 |
| 3.03 | points / drive | 2.13 |
| 1.92 | allowed / drive | 2.16 |
| 17% | three-and-outs | 18% |
| -4 | pass over expected | -0 |
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 →