Oklahoma vs. Michigan: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
OUTeam statsMICH
- Q4 7:53MICHJordan Marshall 1 Yd Run (Trey Butkowski Kick)10–17
- Q4 11:49OUTate Sandell 34 Yd Field Goal 10–10
- Q3 8:30OUMackenzie Alleyne 22 Yd pass from John Mateer (Tate Sandell Kick)7–10
- Q2 2:28MICHTrey Butkowski 40 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 0:47MICHBryce Underwood 38 Yd Run (Trey Butkowski Kick)0–7
How the model called it
Michigan needed all 13 points to beat Western Michigan, and the short-yardage running that got it there is precisely what Oklahoma's defense takes away.
Oklahoma is favored by six in a game with a 43.2 total, and the reason has little to do with hanging 51 on UTEP. Michigan has to convert in short yardage and power situations to survive a low-scoring night, and that is the widest unit gap on the board: 1.95 standard deviations in Oklahoma's favor. Michigan scored 13 points last week and won anyway. That trick does not repeat here.
Cumulative margin after each quarter. Above the line = OU ahead, below = MICH ahead.
Play-by-play win probability isn't available for this game — scoreboard margin by quarter shown instead.
- PassJohn Mateer 17/33, 189 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushJohn Mateer 13 CAR, 45 YDS
- RecRocky Beers 6 REC, 94 YDS
- PassBryce Underwood 9/17, 111 YDS
- RushBryce Underwood 18 CAR, 87 YDS, 1 TD
- RecJJ Buchanan 2 REC, 48 YDS
FAQ
What was the final score of Oklahoma vs. Michigan?
Oklahoma 10, Michigan 17.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
No — the model picked OU, which didn't hit. We report the misses too.
| OU | MICH | |
|---|---|---|
| 289 | Total yards | 263 |
| 189 | Passing yards | 111 |
| 100 | Rushing yards | 152 |
| 17 | First downs | 14 |
| 3-13 | 3rd down | 4-13 |
| 0-1 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 17/33 | Comp/Att | 9/17 |
| 5.7 | Yards per pass | 6.5 |
| 3.4 | Yards per rush | 3.7 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 0 |
| 9-76 | Penalties | 11-90 |
| 26:43 | Possession | 33:17 |
- Q4 7:53MICHJordan Marshall 1 Yd Run (Trey Butkowski Kick)10–17
- Q4 11:49OUTate Sandell 34 Yd Field Goal 10–10
- Q3 8:30OUMackenzie Alleyne 22 Yd pass from John Mateer (Tate Sandell Kick)7–10
- Q2 2:28MICHTrey Butkowski 40 Yd Field Goal 0–10
- Q1 0:47MICHBryce Underwood 38 Yd Run (Trey Butkowski Kick)0–7
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (MICH Elo 1686, OU Elo 1799 for reference), with home-field advantage. That projects MICH +5.4 (37% to win), essentially in line with the market.
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 — 2026
nationally rankedThe matchup, in context
series history + adjusted profiles| OU | MICH | |
|---|---|---|
| +16.4 (#21) | CORE overall | +17.0 (#19) |
| +6 / -10 | offense / defense | +8 / -9 |
| 4.00 | points / drive | 0.78 |
| -0.64 | allowed / drive | 0.90 |
| 18% | three-and-outs | 56% |
| -4 | pass over expected | +3 |
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.
Michigan's power run game meets its worst matchup
Michigan needed all 13 points to beat Western Michigan, and the short-yardage running that got it there is precisely what Oklahoma's defense takes away.
Oklahoma wins
The range of outcomes for this game. Each bar is how often the final margin lands in that range — the more it leans toward Oklahoma, the more likely Oklahoma wins.
Two drives out of ten, against a defense that just pitched a shutout
Michigan beat Western Michigan 13-12 six days ago and scored on 20% of its ten possessions, going three-and-out on half of them at 26.1 yards a drive. Oklahoma's 51-0 produced points on 72.7% of eleven drives at 35.5 yards each, with three-and-outs on 36.4%. The drive-quality gap points exactly where the preseason baseline pointed: one offense finishes, the other stalls before third down arrives.
Michigan has already played this game once, and lost it
Oklahoma won last season's meeting 24-13, and 13 is precisely what Michigan managed against a MAC opponent last Saturday. The 26-14 projection is close to a rerun of that scoreline, which is the strongest reason to take the low total seriously rather than the six points.
Michigan's power running meets the wrong front
Jordan Marshall projects for 33 to 94 rushing yards against a run defense ranked 16th of 185 in what it gives up, with a 49% chance of reaching the end zone; Bryson Kuzdzal adds 18 to 52 behind him. The bottom of both bands is what a stalled afternoon looks like. Michigan's short-yardage edge sits at -1.95, the exact situation a team going three-and-out half the time cannot afford to lose.
Bryce Underwood projects for 97 to 195 passing yards with a 48% touchdown chance against a secondary ranked 29th of 185. Michigan's overall efficiency edge is -1.27 and its passing edge -1.17, which is not the profile of an offense that throws on its own terms. It throws on second-and-8 because the first-down run gave it nothing better, and long-yardage passing against that secondary is where Oklahoma's defense makes its money.
The escape hatch would be chunk plays, and that door is shut hardest of all: Michigan's big-play edge is -1.76 overall and -0.91 through the air. Andrew Marsh, at 27 to 86 receiving yards, is the likeliest source of one, with Zack Marshall at 9 to 30 and Channing Goodwin at 7 to 22 projecting as complementary volume rather than field-flippers. The 43.2 total assumes the long ones never arrive.
Each unit matchup this season, sorted by how decisive it is — the top bar is what most tilts the game. Bars toward Oklahoma are battles it should win; toward Michigan are ones Michigan wins.
Every mismatch in this game sits on one side of the ball
The five widest unit gaps here are all the same pairing: Michigan's offense against Oklahoma's defense. Michigan's defense appears in none of them, and that absence is the most encouraging fact on the underdog's page. The projected margin is built on what Michigan cannot do with the ball, not on what it surrenders without it, which is why a team that scored 13 last week is a six-point dog rather than a two-touchdown one.
Points allowed per drive across all FBS defenses (lower is better). Oklahoma's defense is one of the best in the country — better than 100% of FBS defenses.
That defense is good, not airtight. It held a MAC offense to 12 points rather than zero, and Saturday it faces a scoring level the projection puts at 26. Its assignment is keeping the game inside the number long enough for an offense that scored twice in ten drives to find a third and a fourth score. The path is narrow, and it runs through the defense being the best unit on the field.
Mateer gets the softer of the two secondaries
John Mateer projects for 162 to 295 passing yards with a 67% chance of a touchdown, and he works against a Michigan pass defense ranked 63rd of 185, measurably more generous than the one Underwood sees. Oklahoma does not need his ceiling to reach 26 points. It needs the middle of that band plus a couple of short fields, which an opponent forcing three-and-outs at Michigan's current rate tends to hand over for free.
Each ingredient of our projection and the side it favors — bars toward Oklahoma are why it's the pick (home field is counted separately).
Behind him the backfield is a committee. Xavier Robinson projects for 22 to 60 rushing yards with a 32% touchdown chance, Tory Blaylock for 21 to 58 at 28%, and Jer'Michael Carter for 11 to 37 receiving. Nobody in that group projects to carry a game by himself, so Oklahoma's scoring comes from converting the drives it starts — 72.7% of them last week — rather than from one back breaking the night open.
The underdog Case rests on an offense that hasn't shown up
Michigan went 9-4 last season and Oklahoma 10-3, and the scoring averages cut against the favorite: Michigan put up 27.5 points a game to Oklahoma's 26.2. That version of the Michigan offense has not appeared this fall. The underdog argument is a wager that it turns up Saturday and that last week was the outlier.
The cover case is a slog, and it holds. Michigan is +6 with a 43.2 total and a 70% under probability; it does not need to be the better team, only to stay within six while the game stays in the 20s. Marshall cashing his 49% touchdown chance off a short field, one Marsh explosive, and a repeat of last week's 12 points allowed gets there. A one-score finish carries a 33% chance in this matchup.
What Saturday comes down to
Oklahoma's assignment is narrow: make Michigan's first-down runs unprofitable, live on the long-yardage throws that follow, and let Mateer take what the softer secondary gives. Michigan's is harder. Finish more than two drives in ten against a defense built to take away the run it leans on. A 20-plus-point margin carries a 34% chance, and that risk belongs almost entirely to the offense that needed all 13 points last week.
Our coverage of 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 →