Week 10 2025 · November 1, 2025
Pittsburgh at Stanford, Week 10 2025: who deserved to win?
Pittsburgh beat Stanford 35–20, and the replays back it up: with the way both teams actually played, Pittsburgh wins 8 of 10.
Before kickoff Pittsburgh was an 81% favorite.
Final
 Pittsburgh Panthers | 35 |
|---|---|
 Stanford Cardinal | 20 |
Replay with same day's form
Luck index +17 Pittsburgh about even · −17 Stanford
Each team’s own plays from this game, resampled into new drives 4,000 times: with the way both teams actually played, how often does this performance win? How the replay works
Ten replays. Pittsburgh wins 8, Stanford wins 2.
- 1 PITT 59 STAN 10
- 2 PITT 48 STAN 14
- 3 PITT 51 STAN 24
- 4 PITT 52 STAN 30
- 5 PITT 38 STAN 20
- 6 PITT 36 STAN 22
- 7 PITT 18 STAN 10
- 8 PITT 27 STAN 24
- 9 PITT 38 STAN 43
- 10 PITT 23 STAN 38
Three other ways to ask
Each answers a different question, so none of them replaces the replay above.
Before kickoff
The closing betting line, turned into a probability. What everyone knew before the game.
Same teams, fresh game
The line plus what this game showed, weighted by how much one game can tell. It stays close to the line because one game says little.
Only coin-flips re-rolled
Every kick, fumble bounce, conversion and judgment call redrawn; everything else fixed. The narrowest view of luck.
How 4,000 replays ended
Pittsburgh wins 83% of them, Stanford 17%, counting the 1% still level after regulation as half each. The line is what actually happened: Pittsburgh by 15.
Show as a table
| Final margin in the replays | Share of replays |
|---|---|
| Pittsburgh by 17+ | 52.9% |
| Pittsburgh by 9–16 | 16.6% |
| Pittsburgh by 1–8 | 13.8% |
| Level after regulation | 1.4% |
| Stanford by 1–8 | 8.4% |
| Stanford by 9–16 | 4.3% |
| Stanford by 17+ | 2.5% |
Where the luck was
What the luck was worth
Every lucky and unlucky play, weighted by the moment it happened: its swing in win probability, added up by kind. A missed kick in a decided game counts for nothing; the same kick at the end of a tie game can be most of a win.
The kicks
How likely each kicker was to make that kick (his own record, the distance), and what happened.
- E. Kenney, 39 yds made · 76% expected
- E. Kenney, 45 yds made · 65% expected
Penalties: Pittsburgh 9 for 78 yards, Stanford 6 for 84 yards
Every accepted flag, in order, and what it did to the helped team’s chance of winning at that moment, including any play it wiped out (points on the scoreboard in grey). A flag in a decided game is worth nothing; one at the turn of a close game can be worth most of a win. Judgment calls count toward luck, pre-snap fouls mostly don’t. How calls are valued
| When | Flag | Win probability for |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 11:04 | Offside on Pittsburgh, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% STAN +0.9 pts |
| Q1 9:31 | Pass Interference on Pittsburgh, 5 yards, wiping out the play | +2% STAN +1.7 pts |
| Q1 9:31 | Holding on Pittsburgh, 8 yards | +1% STAN +0.5 pts |
| Q1 7:01 | Holding on Stanford, 10 yards | +2% PITT +1.2 pts |
| Q1 0:32 | Holding on Pittsburgh, 10 yards | 0% STAN +0.6 pts |
| Q2 14:12 | Personal Foul on Pittsburgh, 15 yards | +1% STAN +0.9 pts |
| Q2 12:48 | Personal Foul on Stanford, 15 yards | +2% PITT +1.6 pts |
| Q2 9:39 | False Start on Pittsburgh, 5 yards · pre-snap | +5% PITT +0.2 pts |
| Q2 1:47 | False Start on Stanford, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% PITT +0.4 pts |
| Q3 15:00 | Delay of Game on Pittsburgh, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% STAN +0.6 pts |
| Q3 8:56 | Roughing the Passer on Stanford, 14 yards | +2% PITT +1.6 pts |
| Q3 3:24 | Holding on Pittsburgh, 10 yards, wiping out the play | 0% STAN +2.8 pts |
| Q3 2:53 | Pass Interference on Stanford, 15 yards | 0% PITT +0.2 pts |
| Q3 1:09 | Personal Foul on Pittsburgh, 15 yards | 0% STAN +1.9 pts |
| Q4 0:18 | Unsportsmanlike Conduct on Stanford, 25 yards | 0% PITT +0.5 pts |
When it happened
Stanford’s chance of winning
Numbers mark the biggest luck moments, listed below.
| # | When | What happened | Win probability for | Next drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Q1 12:49 | Stanford was stopped on 4th & 13rd & 4th downs · 72% expected | +4% PITT | STAN: Field goal |
| 2 | Q1 11:04 | Stanford converted 3rd & 53rd & 4th downs · 37% expectedStanford was stopped on 3rd & 63rd & 4th downs · 33% expectedOffside on Pittsburgh, 5 yardsPre-snap flags | +2% STAN | STAN: Field goal |
| 3 | Q1 9:35 | E. Kenney made a 39-yard field goalKicks · 76% expected for him | +3% STAN | STAN: Touchdown |
| 4 | Q1 3:19 | Pittsburgh converted 3rd & 83rd & 4th downs · 29% expected | +4% PITT | PITT: Touchdown |
| 5 | Q2 14:56 | Pittsburgh converted 4th & 23rd & 4th downs · 52% expected | +4% PITT | PITT: Punt |
| 6 | Q2 9:39 | Pittsburgh was stopped on 3rd & 93rd & 4th downs · 28% expectedFalse Start on Pittsburgh, 5 yardsPre-snap flags | +4% PITT | PITT: Punt |
| 7 | Q2 0:00 | Pittsburgh converted 3rd & 63rd & 4th downs · 36% expectedE. Kenney made a 45-yard field goalKicks · 65% expected for him, 4 of 7 from 45+ before | +4% PITT | PITT: Punt |
| 8 | Q3 8:56 | Pittsburgh was stopped on 3rd & 53rd & 4th downs · 40% expectedPittsburgh converted 4th & 13rd & 4th downs · 74% expectedRoughing the Passer on Stanford, 14 yardsJudgment calls | +2% PITT | PITT: End of half |
Adjust the assumptions
Disagree with how much of a fumble bounce or a pass interference call is luck? Change it and the coin-flip replay reruns in your browser.
Only coin-flips re-rolled
Pittsburgh 99% · Stanford 1%
- Final margin
- Pittsburgh by 15
- Luck in points
- 0.8 for Pittsburgh
- Luck-adjusted margin
- Pittsburgh by 14.2
- Replay with same day's form
- Pittsburgh 83% · Stanford 17% unchanged: why
About these numbers
Play-by-play and expected points from CollegeFootballData.com via cfbfastR; win probability from our own model of the score, the possession and the betting line; kicks valued against each kicker’s own record. College play-by-play has no charting of drops or interception-worthy throws and no injury reports, so those kinds of luck aren’t counted here.
Methodology and validation · All Week 10 2025 games · 
Pittsburgh · 
Stanford
More from Week 10 2025
- Duke at Clemson DUKE 46–45 · replay 22% for the winner
- Miami at SMU SMU 26–20 · replay 32% for the winner
- Georgia Tech at NC State NCSU 48–36 · replay 35% for the winner
- Virginia at California UVA 31–21 · replay 54% for the winner
- North Carolina at Syracuse UNC 27–10 · replay 94% for the winner
- Louisville at Virginia Tech LOU 28–16 · replay 95% for the winner
- Notre Dame at Boston College ND 25–10 · replay 96% for the winner
- Wake Forest at Florida State FSU 42–7 · replay 99% for the winner
- Oklahoma at Tennessee OU 33–27 · replay 17% for the winner
- Mississippi State at Arkansas MSST 38–35 · replay 23% for the winner
- Washington State at Oregon State ORST 10–7 · replay 27% for the winner
- Army at Air Force ARMY 20–17 · replay 34% for the winner