Temple vs. Rutgers: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
TEMTeam statsRUTG
- Q4 2:34RUTGAl-Shadee Salaam 5 Yd Run (Jai Patel Kick)7–36
- Q4 5:37RUTGSamuel Brown V 1 Yd Run (Jai Patel Kick)7–29
- Q4 9:57RUTGJai Patel 23 Yd Field Goal 7–22
- Q4 11:48RUTGKyle Monangai 1 Yd Run (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)7–19
- Q4 14:51TEMDante Wright 9 Yd pass from E.J. Warner (Camden Price Kick)7–13
- Q2 7:22RUTGJai Patel 43 Yd Field Goal 0–13
- Q2 13:31RUTGJai Patel 51 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 3:47RUTGJa'shon Benjamin 33 Yd pass from Gavin Wimsatt (Jai Patel Kick)0–7
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- TEM played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and RUTG did not face the same ones. 3rd & 8.8 vs 3rd & 6.0
- TEM lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 12% explosive on a 36% success rate
- PassE.J. Warner 20/47, 230 YDS, 1 TD, 2 INT
- RushJoquez Smith 9 CAR, 45 YDS
- RecDante Wright 6 REC, 67 YDS, 1 TD
- PassGavin Wimsatt 10/21, 198 YDS, 1 TD
- RushKyle Monangai 28 CAR, 165 YDS, 1 TD
- RecJaQuae Jackson 4 REC, 95 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsRUTG up 13 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,178 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q4 14:51TEM +17%
E.J. Warner pass complete to Dante Wright for 9 yds for a TD (Camden Price KICK)
- Q1 3:47RUTG +17%
Gavin Wimsatt pass complete to Ja'shon Benjamin for 33 yds for a TD (Jai Patel KICK)
- Q4 11:48RUTG +10%
Kyle Monangai 1 Yd Run (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)
- Q4 14:48RUTG +8%
Gavin Wimsatt pass complete to JaQuae Jackson for 18 yds to the RUTG 43 for a 1ST down
- Q2 13:31RUTG +6%
Jai Patel 51 yd FG GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Temple vs. Rutgers?
Temple 7, Rutgers 36.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (RUTG) was correct.
| TEM | RUTG | |
|---|---|---|
| 298 | Total yards | 452 |
| 230 | Passing yards | 198 |
| 68 | Rushing yards | 254 |
| 20 | First downs | 20 |
| 5-16 | 3rd down | 8-15 |
| 2-4 | 4th down | 0-0 |
| 20/47 | Comp/Att | 10/21 |
| 4.9 | Yards per pass | 9.4 |
| 2.8 | Yards per rush | 4.9 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 1 |
| 7-51 | Penalties | 5-56 |
| 25:01 | Possession | 34:59 |
Costliest call
Q4 14:51 TEM go for it on 4th & 5 at RUTG 9. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.30 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 2:34RUTGAl-Shadee Salaam 5 Yd Run (Jai Patel Kick)7–36
- Q4 5:37RUTGSamuel Brown V 1 Yd Run (Jai Patel Kick)7–29
- Q4 9:57RUTGJai Patel 23 Yd Field Goal 7–22
- Q4 11:48RUTGKyle Monangai 1 Yd Run (Two-Point Pass Conversion Failed)7–19
- Q4 14:51TEMDante Wright 9 Yd pass from E.J. Warner (Camden Price Kick)7–13
- Q2 7:22RUTGJai Patel 43 Yd Field Goal 0–13
- Q2 13:31RUTGJai Patel 51 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 3:47RUTGJa'shon Benjamin 33 Yd pass from Gavin Wimsatt (Jai Patel Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (RUTG Elo 1330, TEM Elo 1263 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects RUTG -5.1 (64% to win) — 2.4 points clear of TEM's market line of -7.5. 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 — 2023
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profilesRutgers leads 23–16 · Rutgers has won 7 straight · 44% have been one-possession games
| TEM | RUTG | |
|---|---|---|
| -24.0 (#130) | CORE overall | -2.1 (#73) |
| -14 / +10 | offense / defense | -5 / -3 |
| 1.54 | points / drive | 1.68 |
| 3.40 | allowed / drive | 1.89 |
| 32% | three-and-outs | 32% |
| +10 | pass over expected | -10 |
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 →