Georgia Southern vs. UL Monroe: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
GASOTeam statsULM
- Q4 4:16ULMCraig Ford 32 Yd Field Goal 25–44
- Q4 10:37GASOBenz Josue 5 Yd Return of Blocked Punt (Tyler Bass Kick)25–41
- Q3 0:14ULMCaleb Evans 2 Yd Run (Craig Ford Kick)18–41
- Q3 3:15GASOJessie Liptrot 57 Yd Interception Return (Wesley Fields Run for Two-Point Conversion)18–34
- Q3 8:31ULMDerrick Gore 1 Yd Run (Craig Ford Kick)10–34
- Q2 1:02GASOMark Michaud 22 Yd pass from Shai Werts (Tyler Bass Kick)10–27
- Q2 2:49ULMJosh Johnson 1 Yd Run (Craig Ford Kick)3–27
- Q2 5:40GASOTyler Bass 38 Yd Field Goal 3–20
- Q2 13:58ULMMarcus Green 69 Yd pass from Caleb Evans (Craig Ford Kick)0–20
- Q1 6:43ULMMarcus Green 80 Yd pass from Caleb Evans (Craig Ford Kick)0–13
- Q1 12:26ULMCaleb Evans 5 Yd Run (Craig Ford PAT failed)0–6
How the model called it
- PassShai Werts 8/15, 78 YDS, 1 TD
- RushWesley Fields 17 CAR, 73 YDS
- RecDavarius Bargnare 3 REC, 23 YDS
- PassCaleb Evans 13/22, 337 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT
- RushDerrick Gore 19 CAR, 114 YDS, 1 TD
- RecMarcus Green 2 REC, 149 YDS, 2 TD
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsULM up 23 entering the 4th quarter. Across 836 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q1 6:43ULM +22%
Caleb Evans pass complete to Marcus Green for 80 yds for a TD (Craig Ford KICK)
- Q2 13:58ULM +18%
Caleb Evans pass complete to Marcus Green for 69 yds for a TD (Craig Ford KICK)
- Q2 1:02GASO +15%
Shai Werts pass complete to Mark Michaud for 22 yds for a TD (Tyler Bass KICK) UL MONROE Penalty, Defensive offside ( Yards) declined
- Q2 2:49ULM +15%
Josh Johnson run for 1 yd for a TD (Craig Ford KICK)
- Q1 12:26ULM +13%
Caleb Evans run for 5 yds for a TD (Craig Ford PAT MISSED)
- Q3 8:31ULM +12%
Derrick Gore run for 1 yd for a TD (Craig Ford KICK)
FAQ
What was the final score of Georgia Southern vs. UL Monroe?
Georgia Southern 25, UL Monroe 44.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked GASO, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| GASO | ULM | |
|---|---|---|
| 216 | Total yards | 573 |
| 78 | Passing yards | 337 |
| 138 | Rushing yards | 236 |
| 17 | First downs | 21 |
| 5-15 | 3rd down | 3-10 |
| 1-1 | 4th down | 2-3 |
| 8/15 | Comp/Att | 13/22 |
| 5.2 | Yards per pass | 15.3 |
| 3.0 | Yards per rush | 5.6 |
| 1 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 6-52 | Penalties | 8-75 |
| 33:24 | Possession | 26:36 |
Costliest call
Q2 5:40 GASO field goal on 4th & 1 at ULM 21. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 0.86 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 4:16ULMCraig Ford 32 Yd Field Goal 25–44
- Q4 10:37GASOBenz Josue 5 Yd Return of Blocked Punt (Tyler Bass Kick)25–41
- Q3 0:14ULMCaleb Evans 2 Yd Run (Craig Ford Kick)18–41
- Q3 3:15GASOJessie Liptrot 57 Yd Interception Return (Wesley Fields Run for Two-Point Conversion)18–34
- Q3 8:31ULMDerrick Gore 1 Yd Run (Craig Ford Kick)10–34
- Q2 1:02GASOMark Michaud 22 Yd pass from Shai Werts (Tyler Bass Kick)10–27
- Q2 2:49ULMJosh Johnson 1 Yd Run (Craig Ford Kick)3–27
- Q2 5:40GASOTyler Bass 38 Yd Field Goal 3–20
- Q2 13:58ULMMarcus Green 69 Yd pass from Caleb Evans (Craig Ford Kick)0–20
- Q1 6:43ULMMarcus Green 80 Yd pass from Caleb Evans (Craig Ford Kick)0–13
- Q1 12:26ULMCaleb Evans 5 Yd Run (Craig Ford PAT failed)0–6
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (ULM Elo 1139, GASO Elo 1533 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects ULM +13.4 (20% to win) — 6.4 points clear of GASO's market line of +7. 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#48 of 109 in 2018 by biggest miss · #63 of 122 in 2018 by longest odds.
The 2018 upset archive →| GASO | ULM | |
|---|---|---|
| +0.1 (#63) | CORE overall | -2.2 (#78) |
| +0 / +0 | offense / defense | +3 / +5 |
| 2.56 | points / drive | 1.99 |
| 1.90 | allowed / drive | 2.50 |
| 29% | three-and-outs | 29% |
| -30 | 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 →