Prairie View A&M vs. Houston Christian: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
Prairie View A&M0-1
Houston Christian0-1
▸Final
Husky Stadium
PRAITeam statsHOUS
110Total yards445
90Pass199
20Rush246
6First downs30
1-103rd down5-16
2Turnovers2
21:33Possession38:27
- Q4 14:00HOUSDillon Fedor 26 Yd Field Goal 0–30
- Q3 3:15HOUSDillon Fedor 21 Yd Field Goal 0–27
- Q2 5:35HOUSRJ Smith 22 Yd Run (Dillon Fedor Kick)0–24
- Q2 9:20HOUSJesse Valenzuela 5 Yd Run (Dillon Fedor Kick)0–17
- Q1 5:56HOUSIsmael Fuller 49 Yd pass from Colby Suits (Dillon Fedor Kick)0–10
- Q1 9:08HOUSDillon Fedor 19 Yd Field Goal 0–3
How the model called it
Market line
PRAI −2
Against the number
HOUS covered
line PRAI −2
What the numbers say
- PRAI played behind the sticks — third downs that long convert rarely, and HOUS did not face the same ones. 3rd & 9.1 vs 3rd & 6.4
- HOUS lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 14% explosive on a 38% success rate
Kickoff142 plays →Final
Tap or hover on the chart to see play details
HOUS (top)PRAI (bottom)· colored dots = scoresFinal: HOUS 100%
Closing line
PRAI −2
Closing total
56.0
Model line
—
Actual result
PRAI 0 – 30 HOUS
Prairie View A&M
- PassTrazon Connley 12/19, 90 YDS, 1 INT
- RushJamarious Brooks 3 CAR, 14 YDS
- RecChristiful Herron 4 REC, 34 YDS
Houston Christian
- PassColby Suits 19/28, 166 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushRJ Smith 14 CAR, 108 YDS, 1 TD
- RecIsmael Fuller 1 REC, 49 YDS, 1 TD
29.2sper snap · slower the national 24.5s
fastnational avgslow
Snaps run
123
Points / snap
0.24
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsHOUS up 27 entering the 4th quarter. Across 530 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
99%
HOUS went on to win
A near-lock historically
FAQ
What was the final score of Prairie View A&M vs. Houston Christian?
Prairie View A&M 0, Houston Christian 30.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (HOUS) was correct.
PRAI
HOUS
26%
Success rate
38%
-0.29
EPA / pass
0.02
-0.33
EPA / rush
0.18
31%
Early-down success
38%
21%
Pass success
34%
32%
Rush success
41%
2%
Explosive play rate (15+ yds)
14%
32%
Stuffed rush rate
26%
56%
Pass rate
48%
9.1
Avg 3rd-down distance
6.4
PRAI
9.1 yards to go on 3rd down
43 scrimmage snaps
HOUS
6.4 yards to go on 3rd down
80 scrimmage snaps
| PRAI | HOUS | |
|---|---|---|
| 110 | Total yards | 445 |
| 90 | Passing yards | 199 |
| 20 | Rushing yards | 246 |
| 6 | First downs | 30 |
| 1-10 | 3rd down | 5-16 |
| 0-1 | 4th down | 1-2 |
| 12/19 | Comp/Att | 24/34 |
| 4.7 | Yards per pass | 5.9 |
| 0.9 | Yards per rush | 5.6 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 2 |
| 10-100 | Penalties | 6-45 |
| 21:33 | Possession | 38:27 |
PRAI
7/8 with the model
−0.6 pts · −0.0% win prob
HOUS
4/6 with the model
−1.7 pts · −0.0% win prob
Costliest call
Q1 9:08 HOUS field goal on 4th & 2 at PRAI 2. The model preferred go for it, a gap of 1.39 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finishPRAI 0/10 scoring drives← own end zone →HOUS 5/12 scoring drives
PRAIUncateg5 pl, 12 yds· own 25Q1
HOUSFG8 pl, 43 yds· opp 45Q1
PRAIPUNT3 pl, 6 yds· own 25Q1
HOUSTD3 pl, 85 yds· own 15Q1
PRAIPUNT3 pl, 9 yds· own 25Q1
HOUSUncateg4 pl, 1 yds· own 47Q1
PRAIPUNT5 pl, 23 yds· own 22Q1
HOUSPUNT5 pl, 14 yds· own 22Q2
HOUSTD5 pl, 36 yds· opp 36Q2
PRAIPUNT4 pl, 6 yds· own 30Q2
HOUSTD7 pl, 74 yds· own 26Q2
PRAIDOWNS5 pl, 20 yds· own 26Q2
HOUSINT9 pl, 35 yds· opp 46Q2
HOUSFUM9 pl, 27 yds· own 35Q3
PRAIPUNT4 pl, -1 yds· own 42Q3
HOUSFG13 pl, 74 yds· own 22Q3
PRAIINT5 pl, 35 yds· own 25Q3
HOUSFG8 pl, 44 yds· own 47Q3
PRAIPUNT3 pl, 2 yds· own 28Q4
HOUSUncateg13 pl, 30 yds· own 11Q4
PRAIPUNT6 pl, 11 yds· own 3Q4
HOUSUncateg1 pl, 0 yds· own 35Q4
- Q4 14:00HOUSDillon Fedor 26 Yd Field Goal 0–30
- Q3 3:15HOUSDillon Fedor 21 Yd Field Goal 0–27
- Q2 5:35HOUSRJ Smith 22 Yd Run (Dillon Fedor Kick)0–24
- Q2 9:20HOUSJesse Valenzuela 5 Yd Run (Dillon Fedor Kick)0–17
- Q1 5:56HOUSIsmael Fuller 49 Yd pass from Colby Suits (Dillon Fedor Kick)0–10
- Q1 9:08HOUSDillon Fedor 19 Yd Field Goal 0–3
Model prediction
how the number is builtOne 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 →