Week 1 2026 · September 3, 2026
Akron at Wake Forest, Week 1 2026: who deserved to win?
Wake Forest beat Akron 38–16, and the replays back it up: with the way both teams actually played, Wake Forest wins 9 of 10.
Before kickoff Wake Forest was a 96% favorite.
Final
 Akron Zips | 16 |
|---|---|
 Wake Forest Demon Deacons | 38 |
Replay with same day's form
Luck index +8 Wake Forest about even · −8 Akron
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. Akron wins 1, Wake Forest wins 9.
- 1 AKR 23 WAKE 17
- 2 AKR 14 WAKE 17
- 3 AKR 10 WAKE 17
- 4 AKR 17 WAKE 27
- 5 AKR 3 WAKE 17
- 6 AKR 3 WAKE 21
- 7 AKR 24 WAKE 45
- 8 AKR 16 WAKE 42
- 9 AKR 10 WAKE 41
- 10 AKR 0 WAKE 41
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
Akron wins 8% of them, Wake Forest 92%. The line is what actually happened: Wake Forest by 22.
Show as a table
| Final margin in the replays | Share of replays |
|---|---|
| Akron by 17+ | 0.5% |
| Akron by 9–16 | 1.7% |
| Akron by 1–8 | 5.3% |
| Level after regulation | 0.4% |
| Wake Forest by 1–8 | 15.2% |
| Wake Forest by 9–16 | 20.0% |
| Wake Forest by 17+ | 57.0% |
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. Calvert, 25 yds made · 93% expected
- C. Calvert, 29 yds made · 89% expected
- M. Schramm, 28 yds made · 90% expected
- C. Calvert, 38 yds missed · 78% expected
- C. Calvert, 26 yds made · 91% expected
- Extra point missed · 98% expected
Penalties: Akron 5 for 35 yards, Wake Forest 9 for 105 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 13:52 | Offside on Akron, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% WAKE +0.2 pts |
| Q1 13:43 | Illegal Block on Wake Forest, 10 yards, wiping out the play | 0% AKR +0.7 pts |
| Q1 13:04 | Face Mask on Akron, 15 yards | 0% WAKE +1.6 pts |
| Q1 12:54 | False Start on Wake Forest, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% AKR +0.5 pts |
| Q1 6:03 | Illegal Substitution on Akron, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% WAKE +0.4 pts |
| Q1 5:43 | False Start on Wake Forest, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% AKR +0.4 pts |
| Q1 5:09 | False Start on Wake Forest, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% AKR +0.7 pts |
| Q1 1:56 | False Start on Akron, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% WAKE +1.1 pts |
| Q2 15:00 | Delay of Game on Akron, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% WAKE +0.3 pts |
| Q3 7:08 | Holding on Wake Forest, 10 yards | 0% AKR +1.1 pts |
| Q3 1:56 | Illegal Use of Hands on Wake Forest, 15 yards | 0% AKR +0.9 pts |
| Q3 0:26 | Illegal Block on Wake Forest, 10 yards | 0% AKR +1.3 pts |
| Q4 10:00 | Personal Foul on Wake Forest, 30 yards | 0% AKR +2.6 pts |
| Q4 0:43 | Pass Interference on Wake Forest, 15 yards | 0% AKR +1.2 pts |
When it happened
Wake Forest’s chance of winning
Numbers mark the biggest luck moments, listed below.
| # | When | What happened | Win probability for | Next drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Q1 13:43 | Illegal Block on Wake Forest, 10 yards, wiping out the playJudgment calls | +0% AKR | AKR: Punt |
| 2 | Q1 13:04 | Face Mask on Akron, 15 yardsJudgment calls | +0% WAKE | WAKE: Touchdown |
| 3 | Q1 7:23 | Wake Forest converted 3rd & 63rd & 4th downs · 41% expected | +0% WAKE | WAKE: Field goal |
| 4 | Q1 4:31 | Wake Forest was stopped on 3rd & 13rd & 4th downs · 79% expected | +0% AKR | WAKE: Field goal |
| 5 | Q1 1:38 | Akron converted 3rd & 73rd & 4th downs · 36% expected | +0% AKR | AKR: Punt |
| 6 | Q2 11:55 | Wake Forest converted 3rd & 113rd & 4th downs · 28% expected | +1% WAKE | WAKE: Touchdown |
| 7 | Q2 4:57 | Wake Forest’s two-point try was good3rd & 4th downs · 46% expected | +0% WAKE | WAKE: Missed field goal |
| 8 | Q4 0:29 | Akron missed an extra pointKicks · extra points are made about 98% of the time | +2% WAKE | – |
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
Akron 1% · Wake Forest 99%
- Final margin
- Wake Forest by 22
- Luck in points
- 8.0 for Wake Forest
- Luck-adjusted margin
- Wake Forest by 14.0
- Replay with same day's form
- Akron 8% · Wake Forest 92% 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 1 2026 games · 
Akron · 
Wake Forest
More from Week 1 2026
- Colorado at Georgia Tech COLO 14–13 · replay 19% for the winner
- Toledo at Michigan State MSU 30–20 · replay 49% for the winner
- Louisville vs Ole Miss MISS 41–38 · replay 57% for the winner
- San José State at Eastern Michigan SJSU 27–21 · replay 65% for the winner
- Massachusetts at Rutgers MASS 37–21 · replay 74% for the winner
- North Carolina vs TCU UNC 15–10 · replay 75% for the winner
- Tarleton State at Bowling Green TAR 20–13 · replay 77% for the winner
- New Mexico State at Florida State FSU 34–17 · replay 82% for the winner
- UAlbany at Buffalo BUF 21–17 · replay 82% for the winner
- Western Michigan at Michigan MICH 13–12 · replay 86% for the winner
- Boston College at Cincinnati CIN 34–15 · replay 89% for the winner
- Ohio at Nebraska NEB 49–21 · replay 93% for the winner