Pittsburgh vs. East Carolina: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
PITTTeam statsECU
- Q4 1:23PITTTrey Butkowski 21 Yd Field Goal 17–23
- Q4 6:41ECUNick Mazzie 28 Yd Field Goal 14–23
- Q4 14:18ECUNick Mazzie 33 Yd Field Goal 14–20
- Q3 3:58ECUAnthony Smith 72 Yd pass from Chaston Ditta (Nick Mazzie Kick)14–17
- Q3 4:33PITTRasheem Biles 23 Yd Fumble Return (Trey Butkowski Kick)14–10
- Q3 9:32ECUAnthony Smith 47 Yd pass from Chaston Ditta (Nick Mazzie Kick)7–10
- Q2 0:04PITTRaphael Williams Jr. 22 Yd pass from Mason Heintschel (Trey Butkowski Kick)7–3
- Q2 11:42ECUNick Mazzie 42 Yd Field Goal 0–3
How the model called it
Cumulative margin after each quarter. Above the line = PITT ahead, below = ECU ahead.
Play-by-play win probability isn't available for this game — scoreboard margin by quarter shown instead.
- PassMason Heintschel 25/40, 256 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushJa'Kyrian Turner 16 CAR, 93 YDS
- RecJustin Holmes 6 REC, 100 YDS
- PassChaston Ditta 8/17, 177 YDS, 2 TD
- RushMarlon Gunn Jr. 18 CAR, 50 YDS
- RecAnthony Smith 4 REC, 156 YDS, 2 TD
FAQ
What was the final score of Pittsburgh vs. East Carolina?
Pittsburgh 17, East Carolina 23.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked PITT, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| PITT | ECU | |
|---|---|---|
| 376 | Total yards | 249 |
| 256 | Passing yards | 177 |
| 120 | Rushing yards | 72 |
| 24 | First downs | 11 |
| 5-15 | 3rd down | 2-15 |
| 3-5 | 4th down | 2-3 |
| 25/40 | Comp/Att | 8/17 |
| 6.4 | Yards per pass | 10.4 |
| 3.0 | Yards per rush | 1.7 |
| 5 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 3-35 | Penalties | 5-40 |
| 33:05 | Possession | 26:55 |
- Q4 1:23PITTTrey Butkowski 21 Yd Field Goal 17–23
- Q4 6:41ECUNick Mazzie 28 Yd Field Goal 14–23
- Q4 14:18ECUNick Mazzie 33 Yd Field Goal 14–20
- Q3 3:58ECUAnthony Smith 72 Yd pass from Chaston Ditta (Nick Mazzie Kick)14–17
- Q3 4:33PITTRasheem Biles 23 Yd Fumble Return (Trey Butkowski Kick)14–10
- Q3 9:32ECUAnthony Smith 47 Yd pass from Chaston Ditta (Nick Mazzie Kick)7–10
- Q2 0:04PITTRaphael Williams Jr. 22 Yd pass from Mason Heintschel (Trey Butkowski Kick)7–3
- Q2 11:42ECUNick Mazzie 42 Yd Field Goal 0–3
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (ECU Elo 1576, PITT Elo 1631 for reference), on a neutral field. That projects ECU +2.2 (45% to win) — 8.3 points clear of ECU's market line of +10.5. 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 — 2025
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles#57 of 112 in 2025 by biggest miss · #27 of 129 in 2025 by longest odds.
The 2025 upset archive →| PITT | ECU | |
|---|---|---|
| +16.8 (#23) | CORE overall | +7.8 (#46) |
| +4 / -13 | offense / defense | +2 / -5 |
| 2.32 | points / drive | 2.48 |
| 1.96 | allowed / drive | 1.64 |
| 23% | three-and-outs | 19% |
| +9 | pass over expected | -1 |
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 →