Wisconsin vs. Notre Dame: Final Score & Recap
Final score, recap & advanced stats
WISTeam statsND
- Q4 1:51NDNolan James Jr. 28 Yd pass from CJ Carr (Spencer Porath Kick)13–41
- Q4 10:48NDAneyas Williams 5 Yd Run (Spencer Porath Kick)13–34
- Q3 0:14WISGavin Lahm 36 Yd Field Goal 13–27
- Q3 8:52NDDJ McKinney 55 Yd Interception Return (Spencer Porath Kick)10–27
- Q3 10:23NDAneyas Williams 3 Yd Run (Spencer Porath Kick)10–20
- Q2 8:53NDSpencer Porath 26 Yd Field Goal 10–13
- Q2 12:36WISMalachi Coleman 28 Yd pass from Colton Joseph (Gavin Lahm Kick)10–10
- Q1 0:22NDJames Flanigan 3 Yd pass from CJ Carr (Spencer Porath Kick)3–10
- Q1 1:31NDSpencer Porath 52 Yd Field Goal 3–3
- Q1 6:32WISGavin Lahm 27 Yd Field Goal 3–0
How it was won
Early TD swing
Notre Dame’s 3‑yard touchdown pass from C.J. Carr to J. Flanigan with 22 seconds left in Q1 lifted its win chance by 8 points, seeding the lead.
Efficiency gap
Notre Dame stayed on schedule on 48.4% of plays versus Wisconsin’s 39.3%, while Wisconsin’s rushes were stopped 20.7% of the time.
Wisconsin’s 4th‑and‑10 punt from its own 36 cost the model 0.75 expected points, contributing to its stalled drives.
Turnover margin
Wisconsin committed two turnovers while Notre Dame had none, a key factor in the 28‑point margin.
How the model called it
What the numbers say
- WIS lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 13% explosive on a 39% success rate
Wisconsin brings back the settled starter and still gets three touchdowns, because the separation here was built last season and lives mostly on defense.
Wisconsin arrives with the settled quarterback and still gets 20.5 points. Colton Joseph has two FBS seasons and +0.282 EPA per play of record; CJ Carr, Notre Dame's projected starter, has not taken an FBS snap. That gap is worth 3.7 points toward Wisconsin inside a 20.4-point separation, and the 18.4 points carried by last season's body of work bury it.
- PassColton Joseph 19/30, 217 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
- RushAbu Sama III 15 CAR, 49 YDS
- RecMalachi Coleman 4 REC, 76 YDS, 1 TD
- PassCJ Carr 19/29, 239 YDS, 2 TD
- RushAneyas Williams 20 CAR, 90 YDS, 2 TD
- RecJordan Faison 4 REC, 81 YDS
This exact spot, historically
empirical, no ratingsND up 14 entering the 4th quarter. Across 1,012 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):
- Q2 12:36WIS +9%
Shotgun #1 C.Joseph pass complete deep right to #4 M.Coleman caught at UND00, for 28 yards to the UND00 TOUCHDOWN, 1ST DOWN
- Q3 10:23ND +9%
Shotgun #22 A.Williams rush middle for 3 yards gain to the Wis00 TOUCHDOWN
- Q1 0:22ND +8%
Shotgun #13 C.Carr pass complete short left to #88 J.Flanigan caught at Wis02, for 3 yards to the Wis00 TOUCHDOWN
- Q1 6:32WIS +6%
#97 G.Lahm field goal attempt from 27 yards GOOD
FAQ
What was the final score of Wisconsin vs. Notre Dame?
Wisconsin 13, Notre Dame 41.
Did Gridpex's model pick hit?
Yes — the model's pick (ND) was correct.
| WIS | ND | |
|---|---|---|
| 284 | Total yards | 350 |
| 217 | Passing yards | 239 |
| 67 | Rushing yards | 111 |
| 16 | First downs | 20 |
| 5-13 | 3rd down | 3-9 |
| 1-1 | 4th down | 1-1 |
| 19/30 | Comp/Att | 19/29 |
| 7.2 | Yards per pass | 8.2 |
| 2.2 | Yards per rush | 3.5 |
| 2 | Turnovers | 0 |
| 6-43 | Penalties | 4-41 |
| 28:24 | Possession | 31:36 |
Costliest call
Q2 4:55 WIS punt on 4th & 10 at ND 36. The model preferred field goal, a gap of 0.75 points.
Drive chart
every possession, start to finish- Q4 1:51NDNolan James Jr. 28 Yd pass from CJ Carr (Spencer Porath Kick)13–41
- Q4 10:48NDAneyas Williams 5 Yd Run (Spencer Porath Kick)13–34
- Q3 0:14WISGavin Lahm 36 Yd Field Goal 13–27
- Q3 8:52NDDJ McKinney 55 Yd Interception Return (Spencer Porath Kick)10–27
- Q3 10:23NDAneyas Williams 3 Yd Run (Spencer Porath Kick)10–20
- Q2 8:53NDSpencer Porath 26 Yd Field Goal 10–13
- Q2 12:36WISMalachi Coleman 28 Yd pass from Colton Joseph (Gavin Lahm Kick)10–10
- Q1 0:22NDJames Flanigan 3 Yd pass from CJ Carr (Spencer Porath Kick)3–10
- Q1 1:31NDSpencer Porath 52 Yd Field Goal 3–3
- Q1 6:32WISGavin Lahm 27 Yd Field Goal 3–0
Model prediction
how the number is builtOur model simulates the game drive by drive from each side's opponent-adjusted efficiency (ND Elo 1995, WIS Elo 1501 for reference), on a neutral field. That projects ND -20.1 (91% 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 profilesNotre Dame leads 9–6–2 · Notre Dame has won 2 straight · 18% have been one-possession games
| WIS | ND | |
|---|---|---|
| +0.6 (#67) | CORE overall | +26.4 (#6) |
| -4 / -5 | offense / defense | +14 / -13 |
| 0.67 | points / drive | 3.78 |
| 3.78 | allowed / drive | 0.67 |
| 22% | three-and-outs | 33% |
| -11 | pass over expected | +14 |
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.
Notre Dame's 20.5 isn't about the quarterbacks
Wisconsin brings back the settled starter and still gets three touchdowns, because the separation here was built last season and lives mostly on defense.
Wisconsin 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 Notre Dame, the more likely Notre Dame wins.
Carr inherits a working offense; Joseph inherits a rebuild
Notre Dame's #10 passing offense returns 64% of its production, including Jordan Faison, whose +0.59 EPA per play on an 18% target share is starter-quality separation. Ohio State transfer Mylan Graham lines up beside him. Carr has to run a functioning operation, not invent one. Faison projects for 27 to 87 receiving yards and a 30% touchdown chance, modest volume in a game script that will not require much.
Joseph's situation inverts that. Wisconsin's passing game ranked #130 last season and returns 17% of it, with receiver Eugene Hilton Jr. among the departures, so the experience advantage sits on top of almost nothing. The projection follows: Danny O'Neil's band runs 58 to 121 yards with a 51% touchdown chance. Against the country's #7 pass defense, a 1.3-standard-deviation mismatch, quarterback experience is the smallest problem on that side of the ball.
Each ingredient of our projection and the side it favors — bars toward Notre Dame are why it's the pick (home field is counted separately).
The entire Notre Dame secondary is back, and it takes the ball away
Notre Dame intercepted 21 passes last season, most in the country, and the players who did it did not leave. Leonard Moore (5 interceptions, 7 pass breakups), Tae Johnson (4 interceptions) and Christian Gray (10 breakups) all return, with Colorado corner DJ McKinney added. Wisconsin's defense managed 5 interceptions, #113 nationally, and lost corner Omillio Agard to Virginia.
That asymmetry is the cover mechanism. Notre Dame wins the giveaway battle by two or more in 28% of projected games, and those are the outcomes where 20.5 stops being a question. Wisconsin's own disruption is narrower: 32 sacks ranked #23, with Mason Posa (4 sacks, 58 tackles), Sebastian Cheeks and Cooper Catalano back at linebacker. The edge who helped generate it, Ernest Willor Jr., is at James Madison.
Notre Dame's run game is a rebuild nobody is flagging
The #9 rushing offense returns 12% of last season's production, which makes that rank a description of players who are gone rather than a forecast. Aneyas Williams projects for 25 to 71 rushing yards with a 66% touchdown chance: heavy in the red zone, light on volume. Wisconsin's rush defense ranked #42, comfortably its best unit, and the matchup edge there is only 0.6 standard deviations.
Wisconsin's answer is thinner than the schematic opening suggests. Darrion Dupree carried a 24% rush share at -0.11 EPA per play, below-average production on that volume, and he projects for 16 to 46 yards with Carter Smith at 11 to 26 behind him. A team that scored 12.8 points per game last season needs sustained drives to stay in this, and neither back's projected band supports one.
Wisconsin won the portal and Notre Dame did not need to
Wisconsin took 33 transfers against 25 losses for a position-weighted gain of +49, worth 4.4 points its way, the largest single factor pointing anywhere but Notre Dame. Louisville quarterback Deuce Adams, Buffalo lineman Junior Poyser and edge Liam Danitz address the roster's actual holes. Notre Dame ran a net loss of 24 stars, but losing Kenny Minchey and Junior Tuihalamaka off a #2 recruiting class with 24 blue-chips is churn, not attrition.
Talent still splits 7.6 points toward Notre Dame, and Wisconsin's #97 class with a single blue-chip means this year's additions are the ceiling rather than a first installment. The portal haul is why Wisconsin's floor is higher than a 4-8 season implies. It is not why the gap on this field closes.
Wisconsin's path is a low-event afternoon it never trails by two scores
The number covers in only 49% of projected games. The reason is the script Wisconsin can actually build: neither team wins the turnover battle by two, which happens in 62% of projected games, and the total lands under 47.5, which the under takes 59% of the time. Posa and Cheeks winning early downs and a clean afternoon from Joseph get Wisconsin to the number without ever leading.
That path does not get Wisconsin the game. A one-score finish is roughly a 1-in-5 proposition here, and the outright upset sits at 8%. Wisconsin's version of a win is keeping the ball, holding the possession count down, and making Notre Dame grind out a rebuilt run game against the #42 rush defense.
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 →