Week 2 2025 · September 6, 2025
UCLA at UNLV, Week 2 2025: who deserved to win?
UNLV beat UCLA 30–23, and the replays lean its way: with the same day's form, it wins 6 of 10.
Before kickoff UCLA was a 56% favorite. The biggest swing (Q3, 0:14 left): Pass Interference on UCLA, 15 yards, wiping out the play, worth 12 points of win probability to UNLV.
Final
 UCLA Bruins | 23 |
|---|---|
 UNLV Rebels | 30 |
Replay with same day's form
Luck index +36 UNLV lucky · −36 UCLA
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. UCLA wins 4, UNLV wins 6.
- 1 UCLA 31 UNLV 10
- 2 UCLA 28 UNLV 16
- 3 UCLA 26 UNLV 20
- 4 UCLA 24 UNLV 21
- 5 UCLA 13 UNLV 16
- 6 UCLA 21 UNLV 27
- 7 UCLA 10 UNLV 17
- 8 UCLA 17 UNLV 28
- 9 UCLA 0 UNLV 17
- 10 UCLA 13 UNLV 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
UCLA wins 36% of them, UNLV 64%, counting the 5% still level after regulation as half each. The line is what actually happened: UNLV by 7.
Show as a table
| Final margin in the replays | Share of replays |
|---|---|
| UCLA by 17+ | 6.5% |
| UCLA by 9–16 | 9.3% |
| UCLA by 1–8 | 16.8% |
| Level after regulation | 5.1% |
| UNLV by 1–8 | 22.6% |
| UNLV by 9–16 | 19.8% |
| UNLV by 17+ | 20.1% |
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.
- R. Villela, 50 yds made · 52% expected
- M. Bhaghani, 33 yds made · 85% expected
- M. Bhaghani, 35 yds made · 83% expected
- M. Bhaghani, 33 yds made · 86% expected
Penalties: UCLA 13 for 119 yards, UNLV 12 for 122 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 13:37 | Pass Interference on UCLA, 10 yards | +5% UNLV +2.7 pts |
| Q1 11:14 | Personal Foul on UNLV, 15 yards | +3% UCLA +1.3 pts |
| Q1 10:56 | Holding on UNLV, 10 yards | +2% UNLV +0.8 pts |
| Q1 10:24 | Illegal Shift on UNLV, 5 yards, wiping out the play · pre-snap | +2% UCLA +1.1 pts |
| Q1 7:55 | Offside on UNLV, 12 yards · pre-snap | +2% UCLA +0.7 pts |
| Q1 7:48 | Holding on UCLA, 3 yards, wiping out the play | +3% UNLV +1.2 pts |
| Q1 4:35 | Offside on UCLA, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% UNLV +0.5 pts |
| Q1 0:45 | Face Mask on UCLA, 15 yards, wiping out the play | +3% UNLV +1.1 pts |
| Q1 0:18 | Pass Interference on UCLA, 15 yards | +1% UNLV +0.6 pts |
| Q2 11:08 | Holding on UNLV, 10 yards | +2% UNLV +0.9 pts |
| Q2 10:52 | False Start on UNLV, 5 yards · pre-snap | +2% UCLA +0.9 pts |
| Q2 1:55 | Offside on UCLA, 5 yards · pre-snap | +2% UCLA +1.6 pts |
| Q2 1:49 | Unsportsmanlike Conduct on UNLV, 15 yards | +2% UNLV +1.9 pts |
| Q2 1:44 | Offside on UNLV, 5 yards · pre-snap | +5% UNLV +2.0 pts |
| Q2 1:30 | Holding on UCLA, 10 yards | 0% UNLV +0.5 pts |
| Q2 1:30 | Unsportsmanlike Conduct on UNLV, 15 yards | 0% UCLA +0.6 pts |
| Q3 15:00 | Holding on UCLA, 6 yards | +2% UNLV +1.4 pts |
| Q3 15:00 | Unsportsmanlike Conduct on UCLA, 13 yards | +2% UNLV +1.6 pts |
| Q3 11:40 | False Start on UCLA, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% UNLV +0.7 pts |
| Q3 9:29 | False Start on UCLA, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% UNLV +0.6 pts |
| Q3 8:51 | Pass Interference on UNLV, 12 yards, wiping out the play | +5% UCLA +4.3 pts |
| Q3 0:14 | Pass Interference on UCLA, 15 yards, wiping out the play | +12% UNLV +4.1 pts |
| Q4 7:09 | Illegal Substitution on UNLV, 3 yards · pre-snap | 0% UCLA +0.1 pts |
| Q4 5:44 | Pass Interference on UNLV, 15 yards | +2% UCLA +0.7 pts |
| Q4 2:10 | Personal Foul on UCLA, 12 yards | 0% UCLA +0.2 pts |
When it happened
UNLV’s chance of winning
As low as 42% and as high as 100%. Numbers mark the biggest luck moments, listed below.
| # | When | What happened | Win probability for | Next drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Q1 13:37 | Pass Interference on UCLA, 10 yardsJudgment calls | +5% UNLV | UNLV: Field goal |
| 2 | Q1 2:00 | UNLV converted 3rd & 53rd & 4th downs · 47% expected | +4% UNLV | UNLV: Touchdown |
| 3 | Q2 9:24 | UNLV converted 3rd & 93rd & 4th downs · 34% expected | +5% UNLV | UNLV: Touchdown |
| 4 | Q2 1:44 | Offside on UNLV, 5 yardsPre-snap flags | +5% UNLV | UCLA: Field goal |
| 5 | Q3 10:24 | UCLA converted 4th & 93rd & 4th downs · 28% expected | +5% UCLA | UCLA: Touchdown |
| 6 | Q3 8:51 | Pass Interference on UNLV, 12 yards, wiping out the playJudgment calls | +5% UCLA | UCLA: Touchdown |
| 7 | Q3 2:46 | UCLA was stopped on 3rd & 23rd & 4th downs · 63% expected | +4% UNLV | UCLA: Field goal |
| 8 | Q3 0:14 | Pass Interference on UCLA, 15 yards, wiping out the playJudgment calls | +12% UNLV | UNLV: Touchdown |
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
UCLA 9% · UNLV 91%
- Final margin
- UNLV by 7
- Luck in points
- 2.3 for UCLA
- Luck-adjusted margin
- UNLV by 9.3
- Replay with same day's form
- UCLA 36% · UNLV 64% 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 2 2025 games · 
UCLA · 
UNLV
More from Week 2 2025
- Boston College at Michigan State MSU 42–40 · replay 8% for the winner
- San Diego State at Washington State WSU 36–13 · replay 44% for the winner
- Fresno State at Oregon State FRES 36–27 · replay 46% for the winner
- Miami (OH) at Rutgers RUTG 45–17 · replay 46% for the winner
- Illinois at Duke ILL 45–19 · replay 47% for the winner
- Iowa at Iowa State ISU 16–13 · replay 52% for the winner
- Sacramento State at Nevada NEV 20–17 · replay 68% for the winner
- Western Illinois at Northwestern NU 42–7 · replay 80% for the winner
- Idaho State at New Mexico UNM 32–22 · replay 84% for the winner
- Michigan at Oklahoma OU 24–13 · replay 84% for the winner
- San José State at Texas TEX 38–7 · replay 86% for the winner
- Sam Houston at Hawai'i HAW 37–20 · replay 89% for the winner