Week 2 2026 · September 12, 2026
UNLV at North Texas, Week 2 2026: who deserved to win?
North Texas beat UNLV 44–6, and the replays back it up: with the way both teams actually played, North Texas wins 10 of 10.
An off day for UNLV: its offense and defense both played far below their usual level. In a fresh game against North Texas it would win 43% of the time; with this day’s form, 1%. The numbers
Before kickoff UNLV was a 58% favorite.
Final
| 6 | |
| 44 |
Replay with same day's form
Luck index +1 North Texas about even · −1 UNLV
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. UNLV wins 0, North Texas wins 10.
- 1 UNLV 24 UNT 31
- 2 UNLV 17 UNT 31
- 3 UNLV 14 UNT 34
- 4 UNLV 14 UNT 38
- 5 UNLV 0 UNT 27
- 6 UNLV 0 UNT 30
- 7 UNLV 0 UNT 34
- 8 UNLV 7 UNT 45
- 9 UNLV 21 UNT 65
- 10 UNLV 7 UNT 58
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 UNLV
Its offense and defense both played far below their usual level. In a fresh game against North Texas it would win 43% of the time; with this day’s form, 1%.
Same teams, fresh game
Replay with same day's form
43 points apart for UNLV: 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| UNLV offenseEPA per play gained | −0.02 | +0.11 | worse by 0.13 |
| UNLV defenseEPA per play allowed | +0.26 | +0.11 | worse by 0.15 |
| North Texas offenseEPA per play gained | +0.26 | +0.16 | better by 0.10 |
| North Texas defenseEPA per play allowed | −0.02 | +0.12 | better by 0.14 |
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
UNLV wins 1% of them, North Texas 99%. The line is what actually happened: North Texas by 38.
Show as a table
| Final margin in the replays | Share of replays |
|---|---|
| UNLV by 17+ | 0.1% |
| UNLV by 9–16 | 0.1% |
| UNLV by 1–8 | 0.4% |
| Level after regulation | 0.2% |
| North Texas by 1–8 | 2.1% |
| North Texas by 9–16 | 5.1% |
| North Texas by 17+ | 92.1% |
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.
- D. De Freitas, 35 yds made · 81% expected
- D. De Freitas, 27 yds made · 90% expected
- R. Villela, 39 yds made · 73% expected
- R. Villela, 37 yds made · 77% expected
- D. De Freitas, 41 yds made · 71% expected
Penalties: UNLV 8 for 71 yards, North Texas 10 for 73 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 13:34 | Delay of Game on UNLV, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% UNT +0.3 pts |
| Q1 12:23 | Holding on North Texas, 10 yards | +1% UNLV +0.8 pts |
| Q1 6:31 | Delay of Game on North Texas, 5 yards · pre-snap | +1% UNLV +0.3 pts |
| Q1 5:05 | Holding on North Texas, 9 yards, wiping out the play | +5% UNLV +2.4 pts |
| Q1 1:43 | Holding on UNLV, 10 yards, wiping out the play | +5% UNT +2.4 pts |
| Q1 0:38 | Illegal Block on North Texas, 10 yards | +1% UNLV +0.6 pts |
| Q2 12:05 | Holding on UNLV, 10 yards | +2% UNT +1.2 pts |
| Q2 10:30 | False Start on North Texas, 4 yards · pre-snap | +1% UNT +0.2 pts |
| Q2 7:09 | Holding on UNLV, 10 yards, wiping out the play | +6% UNT +2.8 pts |
| Q2 3:40 | False Start on North Texas, 5 yards · pre-snap | +2% UNLV +1.0 pts |
| Q2 2:22 | Illegal Formation on North Texas, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% UNLV +1.2 pts |
| Q3 11:39 | Pass Interference on North Texas, 15 yards | +1% UNLV +1.3 pts |
| Q3 10:55 | Intentional Grounding on UNLV, 7 yards | 0% UNT +0.4 pts |
| Q3 7:51 | Pass Interference on UNLV, 15 yards | +1% UNT +2.0 pts |
| Q3 5:49 | Illegal Shift on North Texas, 5 yards, wiping out the play · pre-snap | +1% UNLV +2.5 pts |
| Q4 12:11 | False Start on North Texas, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% UNLV +0.4 pts |
| Q4 8:33 | Pass Interference on UNLV, 9 yards | 0% UNT +1.7 pts |
| Q4 1:12 | False Start on UNLV, 5 yards · pre-snap | 0% UNT +0.4 pts |
When it happened
North Texas’s chance of winning
As low as 41% and as high as 100%. Numbers mark the biggest luck moments, listed below.
| # | When | What happened | Win probability for | Next drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Q1 10:48 | D. De Freitas made a 35-yard field goalKicks · 81% expected for him | +5% UNT | UNT: Field goal |
| 2 | Q1 9:22 | UNLV converted 3rd & 73rd & 4th downs · 34% expected | +5% UNLV | UNLV: Turnover |
| 3 | Q1 9:02 | UNLV fumbled and North Texas recoveredFumble bounces · loose balls are close to 50/50 | +7% UNT | UNLV: Turnover |
| 4 | Q1 8:36 | North Texas converted 3rd & 103rd & 4th downs · 29% expected | +5% UNT | UNT: Field goal |
| 5 | Q1 5:10 | UNLV fumbled and North Texas recoveredFumble bounces · loose balls are close to 50/50 | +6% UNT | UNLV: Punt |
| 6 | Q1 5:05 | Holding on North Texas, 9 yards, wiping out the playJudgment calls | +5% UNLV | UNLV: Punt |
| 7 | Q2 8:08 | UNLV converted 3rd & 93rd & 4th downs · 29% expected | +6% UNLV | UNLV: Field goal |
| 8 | Q2 7:09 | Holding on UNLV, 10 yards, wiping out the playJudgment calls | +6% UNT | UNT: 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
UNLV 0% · North Texas 100%
- Final margin
- North Texas by 38
- Luck in points
- 2.5 for North Texas
- Luck-adjusted margin
- North Texas by 35.5
- Replay with same day's form
- UNLV 1% · North Texas 99% 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 2026 games ·
UNLV ·
North Texas
More from Week 2 2026
- Illinois State at Northern Illinois ILST 28–24 · replay 17% for the winner
- North Dakota State at Air Force NDSU 38–32 · replay 19% for the winner
- UTSA at Texas State UTSA 31–26 · replay 24% for the winner
- Tulsa at Sam Houston TLSA 23–17 · replay 27% for the winner
- App State at East Carolina APP 27–24 · replay 36% for the winner
- South Florida at Army USF 28–24 · replay 38% for the winner
- Northern Colorado at Wyoming WYO 21–13 · replay 42% for the winner
- New Mexico State at Hawai'i HAW 29–19 · replay 44% for the winner
- Montana State at Nevada MTST 20–7 · replay 46% for the winner
- Memphis at Boise State BOIS 38–20 · replay 50% for the winner
- Penn State at Temple PSU 27–9 · replay 53% for the winner
- South Alabama at Tulane TULN 28–24 · replay 56% for the winner