Week 6 2025 · October 4, 2025
Part of this game's play-by-play is missing from the source: the plays on file account for 27 of the 48 points, so the replay rests on the plays there are.
UTSA at Temple, Week 6 2025: who deserved to win?
Temple beat UTSA 27–21, and the replays lean its way: with the same day's form, it wins 8 of 10.
An off day for UTSA: it played far below what the matchup promised. In a fresh game against Temple it would win 63% of the time; with this day’s form, 25%. The numbers
Before kickoff UTSA was a 66% favorite. The biggest swing (Q4, 8:07 left): Temple converted 3rd & 9, worth 12 points of win probability to Temple.
Final
 UTSA Roadrunners | 21 |
|---|---|
 Temple Owls | 27 |
Replay with same day's form
Luck index +25 Temple about even · −25 UTSA
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. UTSA wins 2, Temple wins 8.
- 1 UTSA 28 TEM 17
- 2 UTSA 17 TEM 14
- 3 UTSA 0 TEM 3
- 4 UTSA 3 TEM 7
- 5 UTSA 10 TEM 17
- 6 UTSA 0 TEM 10
- 7 UTSA 3 TEM 16
- 8 UTSA 3 TEM 17
- 9 UTSA 0 TEM 17
- 10 UTSA 0 TEM 24
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.
An off day for UTSA
It played far below what the matchup promised. In a fresh game against Temple it would win 63% of the time; with this day’s form, 25%.
Same teams, fresh game
Replay with same day's form
39 points apart for UTSA: the gap is how differently this game went from what the two teams usually are.
| Unit | This game | Usual level | Better or worse than usual |
|---|---|---|---|
| UTSA offenseEPA per play gained | +0.02 | +0.04 | worse by 0.02 |
| UTSA defenseEPA per play allowed | +0.06 | +0.04 | worse by 0.02 |
| Temple offenseEPA per play gained | +0.06 | +0.05 | better by 0.01 |
| Temple defenseEPA per play allowed | +0.02 | +0.09 | better by 0.07 |
EPA (expected points added) per play on competitive snaps, turnovers left out because they are valued as luck. Usual level: the team’s earlier games this season plus half of last season, pulled toward the league average. One team’s defense and the other team’s offense are the same snaps, so one game can’t fully say whose day it was; it shows how far this one was from both teams’ norms.
How 4,000 replays ended
UTSA wins 24% of them, Temple 76%, counting the 6% still level after regulation as half each. The line is what actually happened: Temple by 6.
Show as a table
| Final margin in the replays | Share of replays |
|---|---|
| UTSA by 17+ | 1.6% |
| UTSA by 9–16 | 5.5% |
| UTSA by 1–8 | 13.9% |
| Level after regulation | 5.5% |
| Temple by 1–8 | 28.2% |
| Temple by 9–16 | 24.5% |
| Temple by 17+ | 20.8% |
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.
- C. Hardin, 31 yds made · 86% expected
- C. Hardin, 36 yds made · 79% expected
Penalties: UTSA 6 for 53 yards, Temple 3 for 20 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 12:24 | False Start on UTSA, 5 yards · pre-snap | +2% TEM +1.3 pts |
| Q1 8:04 | Pass Interference on UTSA, 15 yards | +3% TEM +1.6 pts |
| Q1 4:22 | Offside on UTSA, 5 yards · pre-snap | +2% TEM +1.0 pts |
| Q2 5:56 | Offside on UTSA, 4 yards · pre-snap | +1% TEM +1.1 pts |
| Q2 1:05 | False Start on Temple, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% UTSA +0.3 pts |
| Q2 0:14 | Holding on UTSA, 10 yards, wiping out the play | +1% TEM +0.8 pts |
| Q3 12:31 | Holding on Temple, 10 yards | +3% UTSA +1.9 pts |
| Q4 5:41 | False Start on Temple, 5 yards · pre-snap | +3% UTSA +0.7 pts |
| Q4 1:42 | Pass Interference on UTSA, 14 yards | +3% TEM +0.7 pts |
When it happened
Temple’s chance of winning
As low as 11% and as high as 100%. Numbers mark the biggest luck moments, listed below.
| # | When | What happened | Win probability for | Next drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Q1 2:53 | Temple converted 3rd & 83rd & 4th downs · 28% expected | +5% TEM | TEM: Punt |
| 2 | Q2 12:27 | UTSA was stopped on 3rd & 13rd & 4th downs · 77% expected | +3% TEM | UTSA: Touchdown |
| 3 | Q3 12:31 | Holding on Temple, 10 yardsJudgment calls | +3% UTSA | UTSA: Turnover |
| 4 | Q3 11:59 | Temple converted 3rd & 123rd & 4th downs · 20% expected | +6% TEM | TEM: Punt |
| 5 | Q4 11:09 | UTSA converted 3rd & 53rd & 4th downs · 42% expected | +9% UTSA | UTSA: Turnover |
| 6 | Q4 8:07 | Temple converted 3rd & 93rd & 4th downs · 26% expected | +12% TEM | TEM: Punt |
| 7 | Q4 5:14 | Temple was stopped on 3rd & 103rd & 4th downs · 24% expected | +5% UTSA | TEM: Punt |
| 8 | Q4 3:53 | UTSA was stopped on 3rd & 83rd & 4th downs · 32% expected | +3% TEM | UTSA: Turnover on downs |
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
UTSA 79% · Temple 21%
- Final margin
- Temple by 6
- Luck in points
- 10.2 for Temple
- Luck-adjusted margin
- UTSA by 4.2
- Replay with same day's form
- UTSA 24% · Temple 76% 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. Part of this game's play-by-play is missing from the source: the plays on file account for 27 of the 48 points, so the replay rests on the plays there are.
Methodology and validation · All Week 6 2025 games · 
UTSA · 
Temple
More from Week 6 2025
- Florida Atlantic at Rice FAU 27–21 · replay 38% for the winner
- Army at UAB ARMY 31–13 · replay 51% for the winner
- Air Force at Navy NAVY 34–31 · replay 74% for the winner
- Tulsa at Memphis MEM 45–7 · replay 97% for the winner
- Charlotte at South Florida USF 54–26 · replay 100% for the winner
- Virginia at Louisville UVA 30–27 · replay 19% for the winner
- Oregon State at App State APP 27–23 · replay 20% for the winner
- Western Kentucky at Delaware WKU 27–24 · replay 23% for the winner
- UNLV at Wyoming UNLV 31–17 · replay 25% for the winner
- Ohio at Ball State BALL 20–14 · replay 38% for the winner
- Colorado at TCU TCU 35–21 · replay 41% for the winner
- Texas Tech at Houston TTU 35–11 · replay 45% for the winner