Week 8 2025 · October 16, 2025
Tulsa at East Carolina, Week 8 2025: who deserved to win?
East Carolina beat Tulsa 41–27, and the replays back it up: with the way both teams actually played, East Carolina wins 9 of 10.
Before kickoff East Carolina was an 86% favorite.
Final
| 27 | |
| 41 |
Replay with same day's form
Luck index +6 East Carolina about even · −6 Tulsa
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. Tulsa wins 1, East Carolina wins 9.
- 1 TLSA 31 ECU 23
- 2 TLSA 16 ECU 20
- 3 TLSA 33 ECU 42
- 4 TLSA 13 ECU 28
- 5 TLSA 34 ECU 52
- 6 TLSA 14 ECU 37
- 7 TLSA 20 ECU 48
- 8 TLSA 10 ECU 42
- 9 TLSA 13 ECU 52
- 10 TLSA 10 ECU 57
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
Tulsa wins 6% of them, East Carolina 94%, counting the 1% still level after regulation as half each. The line is what actually happened: East Carolina by 14.
Show as a table
| Final margin in the replays | Share of replays |
|---|---|
| Tulsa by 17+ | 0.4% |
| Tulsa by 9–16 | 1.6% |
| Tulsa by 1–8 | 2.9% |
| Level after regulation | 1.1% |
| East Carolina by 1–8 | 9.0% |
| East Carolina by 9–16 | 11.6% |
| East Carolina by 17+ | 73.4% |
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.
- N. Mazzie, 37 yds made · 77% expected
- S. Morgan, 46 yds made · 60% expected
- N. Mazzie, 32 yds made · 84% expected
- S. Morgan, 26 yds made · 90% expected
Penalties: Tulsa 3 for 35 yards, East Carolina 6 for 50 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 10:56 | False Start on East Carolina, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% TLSA +0.2 pts |
| Q1 9:11 | Face Mask on Tulsa, 15 yards | +2% ECU +1.6 pts |
| Q1 7:55 | Illegal Formation on East Carolina, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% TLSA +1.4 pts |
| Q1 3:22 | Holding on Tulsa, 10 yards | +1% ECU +0.6 pts |
| Q2 5:00 | Holding on East Carolina, 10 yards | 0% TLSA +0.6 pts |
| Q3 14:50 | Holding on East Carolina, 10 yards, wiping out the play | +2% TLSA +2.2 pts |
| Q3 13:45 | Holding on Tulsa, 10 yards | +1% ECU +1.6 pts |
| Q4 10:51 | Offside on East Carolina, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% TLSA +0.3 pts |
| Q4 10:37 | Pass Interference on East Carolina, 15 yards | +2% TLSA +2.0 pts |
When it happened
East Carolina’s chance of winning
Numbers mark the biggest luck moments, listed below.
| # | When | What happened | Win probability for | Next drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Q1 7:44 | Tulsa fumbled and recovered itFumble bounces · loose balls are close to 50/50 | +2% TLSA | TLSA: Punt |
| 2 | Q1 6:58 | Tulsa converted 4th & 13rd & 4th downs · 74% expected | +2% TLSA | TLSA: Punt |
| 3 | Q3 14:50 | Holding on East Carolina, 10 yards, wiping out the playJudgment calls | +2% TLSA | TLSA: Turnover on downs |
| 4 | Q3 13:18 | Tulsa was stopped on 4th & 23rd & 4th downs · 61% expected | +2% ECU | TLSA: Punt |
| 5 | Q3 2:20 | East Carolina was stopped on 4th & 13rd & 4th downs · 82% expected | +2% TLSA | ECU: Field goal |
| 6 | Q3 1:44 | Tulsa converted 4th & 43rd & 4th downs · 44% expected | +2% TLSA | TLSA: Touchdown |
| 7 | Q4 10:55 | East Carolina was stopped on 3rd & 43rd & 4th downs · 54% expected | +2% TLSA | ECU: Field goal |
| 8 | Q4 10:37 | Pass Interference on East Carolina, 15 yardsJudgment calls | +2% TLSA | TLSA: 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
Tulsa 0% · East Carolina 100%
- Final margin
- East Carolina by 14
- Luck in points
- 8.7 for Tulsa
- Luck-adjusted margin
- East Carolina by 22.7
- Replay with same day's form
- Tulsa 6% · East Carolina 94% 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 8 2025 games ·
Tulsa ·
East Carolina
More from Week 8 2025
- Memphis at UAB UAB 31–24 · replay 64% for the winner
- Army at Tulane TULN 24–17 · replay 92% for the winner
- UTSA at North Texas UNT 55–17 · replay 94% for the winner
- Temple at Charlotte TEM 49–14 · replay 96% for the winner
- Florida Atlantic at South Florida USF 48–13 · replay 98% for the winner
- Texas at Kentucky TEX 16–13 · replay 7% for the winner
- Wyoming at Air Force AF 24–21 · replay 13% for the winner
- Louisville at Miami LOU 24–21 · replay 24% for the winner
- Washington State at Virginia UVA 22–20 · replay 29% for the winner
- Missouri at Auburn MIZ 23–17 · replay 32% for the winner
- Florida International at Western Kentucky FIU 25–6 · replay 33% for the winner
- Southern Miss at Louisiana USM 22–10 · replay 34% for the winner