VMI vs. Georgia Tech: Final Score & Recap

ReplayCommandBoxAnalyticsMatchup

VMI

07

Georgia Tech2-1

▸0059

Final

Bobby Dodd Stadium

	1	2	3	4	T
VMI	0	0	0	7	7
GT	17	21	14	7	59

VMITeam statsGT

104Total yards572

92Pass382

12Rush190

5First downs30

1-133rd down3-8

1Turnovers0

30:16Possession24:44

Scoring plays

• Q4 4:29GTAnthony Carrie 2 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)7–59
• Q4 6:37VMIEthen Horne 2 Yd pass from Brady Hammonds (Caden Beck Kick)7–52
• Q3 1:32GTLeo Blackburn 24 Yd pass from Zach Pyron (Aidan Birr Kick)0–52
• Q3 7:38GTTrelain Maddox 3 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)0–45
• Q2 0:30GTAvery Boyd 33 Yd pass from Haynes King (Aidan Birr Kick)0–38
• Q2 1:49GTEric Singleton Jr. 14 Yd pass from Haynes King (Aidan Birr Kick)0–31
• Q2 11:04GTZach Pyron 1 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)0–24
• Q1 0:08GTZach Pyron 1 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)0–17
• Q1 4:52GTMalik Rutherford 35 Yd pass from Haynes King (Aidan Birr Kick)0–10
• Q1 7:39GTAidan Birr 28 Yd Field Goal 0–3

How the model called it

Market line

GT −42.5

Against the number

GT covered

line GT −42.5

What the numbers say

• VMI played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and GT did not face the same ones. 3rd & 10.4 vs 3rd & 7.3

Win probability

ours solid · ESPN dashed

GT 100%50%VMI 100%

Kickoff136 plays →Final

Tap or hover on the chart to see play details

GT (top)VMI (bottom)· colored dots = scoresFinal: GT 100%

How the line closed

model vs market

Closing line

GT −42.5

Closing total

53.5

Model line

—

Actual result

VMI 7 – 59 GT

Leaders

VMI

• PassChandler Wilson 10/15, 51 YDS
• RushJoJo Crump 5 CAR, 16 YDS
• RecOwen Sweeney 1 REC, 34 YDS

Georgia Tech

• PassHaynes King 17/22, 275 YDS, 3 TD
• RushTrelain Maddox 9 CAR, 53 YDS, 1 TD
• RecEric Singleton Jr. 5 REC, 102 YDS, 1 TD

Tempo

what this pace leaves on the clock

31.6sper snap · slower the national 24.5s

fastnational avgslow

Snaps run

114

Points / snap

0.58

This exact spot, historically

empirical, no ratings

GT up 52 entering the 4th quarter. Across 40 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):

100%

GT went on to win

A near-lock historically

Most comparable games

WNorth Dakota State vs Western Illinois52-7WPresbyterian vs Virginia University Of Lynchburg52-0WMontana vs Morehead State59-2WUC Davis vs Northern Colorado59-7WUT Martin vs Houston Christian66-7

Fourth downs

16 calls

VMI gave up 0.8 points to the model on fourth down.VMI 9/10 · GT 4/5 agreed

FAQ

What was the final score of VMI vs. Georgia Tech?

VMI 7, Georgia Tech 59.

Did Gridpex's model pick hit?

Yes — the model's pick (GT) was correct.

Situational splits

what the averages hide

VMI

GT

18%

Success rate

62%

-0.10

EPA / pass

0.66

-0.24

EPA / rush

0.33

20%

Early-down success

64%

23%

Pass success

59%

15%

Rush success

64%

6%

Explosive play rate (15+ yds)

19%

44%

Stuffed rush rate

12%

45%

Pass rate

49%

10.4

Avg 3rd-down distance

7.3

VMI

10.4 yards to go on 3rd down

49 scrimmage snaps

GT

7.3 yards to go on 3rd down

65 scrimmage snaps

Team stats

the basics, from ESPN

VMI		GT
104	Total yards	572
92	Passing yards	382
12	Rushing yards	190
5	First downs	30
1-13	3rd down	3-8
1-1	4th down	1-1
13/19	Comp/Att	23/32
4.8	Yards per pass	11.9
0.4	Yards per rush	5.6
1	Turnovers	0
5-50	Penalties	6-47
30:16	Possession	24:44

Fourth downs

16 calls

VMI

9/10 with the model

−0.8 pts · −0.0% win prob

GT

4/5 with the model

nothing given up

Costliest call

Q2 2:59 VMI punt on 4th & 1 at VMI 25. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.84 points.

Every call, priced (16)

Drive chart

every possession, start to finish

VMI 1/13 scoring drives← own end zone →GT 9/13 scoring drives

VMIPUNT3 pl, 7 yds· own 25Q1

GTPUNT3 pl, -5 yds· own 12Q1

VMIFUM3 pl, 9 yds· opp 48Q1

GTFG8 pl, 50 yds· own 39Q1

VMIPUNT3 pl, -12 yds· own 25Q1

GTTD2 pl, 50 yds· midfieldQ1

VMIPUNT3 pl, 7 yds· own 25Q1

GTTD7 pl, 73 yds· own 27Q1

VMIPUNT3 pl, 0 yds· own 25Q1

GTTD6 pl, 55 yds· own 45Q2

VMIPUNT5 pl, 12 yds· own 15Q2

GTPUNT7 pl, 25 yds· own 23Q2

VMIPUNT3 pl, 9 yds· own 16Q2

GTTD4 pl, 42 yds· opp 42Q2

VMIPUNT3 pl, -2 yds· own 25Q2

GTTD5 pl, 73 yds· own 27Q2

VMIEND2 pl, -10 yds· own 25Q2

GTTD5 pl, 60 yds· own 40Q3

VMIPUNT3 pl, 2 yds· own 25Q3

GTPUNT4 pl, 21 yds· own 35Q3

VMIPUNT3 pl, 6 yds· own 5Q3

GTTD3 pl, 40 yds· opp 40Q3

VMITD10 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q3

GTTD7 pl, 65 yds· own 35Q4

VMIPUNT3 pl, 8 yds· own 25Q4

GTEND6 pl, 33 yds· own 35Q4

Scoring plays

• Q4 4:29GTAnthony Carrie 2 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)7–59
• Q4 6:37VMIEthen Horne 2 Yd pass from Brady Hammonds (Caden Beck Kick)7–52
• Q3 1:32GTLeo Blackburn 24 Yd pass from Zach Pyron (Aidan Birr Kick)0–52
• Q3 7:38GTTrelain Maddox 3 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)0–45
• Q2 0:30GTAvery Boyd 33 Yd pass from Haynes King (Aidan Birr Kick)0–38
• Q2 1:49GTEric Singleton Jr. 14 Yd pass from Haynes King (Aidan Birr Kick)0–31
• Q2 11:04GTZach Pyron 1 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)0–24
• Q1 0:08GTZach Pyron 1 Yd Run (Aidan Birr Kick)0–17
• Q1 4:52GTMalik Rutherford 35 Yd pass from Haynes King (Aidan Birr Kick)0–10
• Q1 7:39GTAidan Birr 28 Yd Field Goal 0–3

Model prediction

how the number is built

One or both teams lack a power rating (often an FCS opponent), so the model prediction is low-confidence for this game.

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 →