Week 5 report · Sat, Oct 3 · 2026 Week 5
Michigan State
2–6 · Ours #58 enteringOur rank going into this game, from the rankings page. The board's line comes from the betting model, which sees more than this one number.
3–31FinalWe had MSU 18 – WIS 27
Wisconsin
5–3 · Ours #30 enteringOur rank going into this game, from the rankings page. The board's line comes from the betting model, which sees more than this one number.
Win chanceOur odds before kickoff: how often each team won outright when we played the game out thousands of times from our line.WIS 71%WIS won
WIS 71%WIS wonSpreadOur last pregame odds pull, usually inside the hour before kickoff. A median of the books we track, not a sharp close. First seen at WIS −10.WIS −8.5oursOur computer's point spread for this game, built from team stats, not from the betting odds. Read it like a betting line: −7 means we have that team winning by 7. −9 · WIS covered by 19.5
TotalOur last pregame odds pull, usually inside the hour before kickoff. A median of the books we track, not a sharp close. Our total was 44.7.43.5final 34 · under by 9.5
Our callThe side our number took at the early-week line, graded at that line. Line value is how far the market moved toward it by the last capture before kickoff.MSU +10Lbeat the close by 1.5
MSU +10Lbeat the close by 1.5Quarterbacksthis game
Alessio Milivojevic14/31 · 97 yards
- EPA / dropbackExpected points added per dropback (passes and sacks) in this game. The percentile is among every 2026 FBS quarterback game with 10+ dropbacks.
- −0.399th pct
- Comp %
- 45.2
- TD
- 0
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 1
Colton Joseph9/20 · 145 yards
- EPA / dropbackExpected points added per dropback (passes and sacks) in this game. The percentile is among every 2026 FBS quarterback game with 10+ dropbacks.
- +0.3273rd pct
- Comp %
- 45.0
- TD
- 3
- Turnovers
- 00 INT · 0 fum
- Sacked
- 0
The matchupthis game · ▲▼ better or worse than the unit's usual · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Michigan Stateoffense | Played like WIS +19.1Fitted from non-garbage efficiency; describes how the game was played, not who deserved it. | defenseWisconsin | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29th | 36.4%▼5.9 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 36.4%▲0.8 | 71st |
| 7th | −0.31▼0.30 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | −0.31▲0.23 | 93rd |
| 9th | −0.46▼0.47 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | −0.46▲0.40 | 92nd |
| 23rd | −0.15▼0.14 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | −0.15▲0.05 | 77th |
| 79th | 0▲1.3 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼1.4 | 21st |
| Wisconsinoffense | defenseMichigan State | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20th | 32.8%▼8.2 | Success rateSuccessShare of plays that kept the offense on schedule, outside garbage time. | 32.8%▲10.9 | 80th |
| 62nd | +0.13▲0.10 | EPA / playEPA/playExpected points added per play, outside garbage time. | +0.13▼0.09 | 38th |
| 60th | +0.17▲0.25 | PassingPassingExpected points added per dropback, outside garbage time. | +0.17▼0.03 | 40th |
| 61st | +0.12▲0.02 | RushingRushingExpected points added per run, outside garbage time. | +0.12▼0.12 | 39th |
| 79th | 0▲1.0 | TurnoversTurnoversInterceptions and lost fumbles: giveaways for the offense, takeaways for the defense. | 0▼0.4 | 21st |
Team statsthis game · percentile vs every 2026 team game
| Michigan StateMSU | WisconsinWIS | |
|---|---|---|
| Special teams & field position | ||
| Average startWhere the team's drives started on average. | Own 2633rd | Own 2956th |
| Kicking vs expectedKickingPoints from field goals and extra points against what an average kicker makes from the same spots. | +0.4 pts59th | +0.4 pts58th |
| Drives & pace | ||
| PlaysOffensive plays outside garbage time. | 6672nd | 5848th |
| Drive pointsThe part of the final margin the offense moved the ball for (efficiency, success rate, big plays, finishing drives), in points. A margin over the opponent. | −21.18th | +21.193rd |
| Turnovers & hidden points | ||
| Penalty first downsPenalty 1st downsFirst downs the team was handed by the opponent's penalties. | 486th | 127th |
| 4th downsPoints from going for it on fourth down, against what the average team gets from the same spots. | −2.2 pts1st | +0.6 pts82nd |
| Hidden pointsPoints from outside the offense's drives: turnovers, field position, kicking, fourth downs, penalty first downs, return touchdowns and safeties. A margin over the opponent. WIS +2.5: field position +1.1, 4th downs +3.7, penalty first downs −2.3. | −2.537th | +2.563rd |
Season so far
Michigan State2–6 · 16th-hardest schedule
W
vs Toledo30–20push −10
vs Toledo30–20push −10W
vs Eastern Michigan35–7covered −17.5
vs Eastern Michigan35–7covered −17.5L
at Notre Dame10–27covered +29
at Notre Dame10–27covered +29L
vs Nebraska13–31missed +6
vs Nebraska13–31missed +6Lat Wisconsin3–31missed +8.5
at Wisconsin3–31missed +8.5L
vs Illinois37–38covered +2.5
vs Illinois37–38covered +2.5L
vs Northwestern21–24covered +7
vs Northwestern21–24covered +7L
at UCLA10–28missed +16
at UCLA10–28missed +16Wisconsin5–3 · 11th-hardest schedule
Lat Notre Dame13–41missed +21.5
at Notre Dame13–41missed +21.5Wvs Western Illinois36–9missed −43.5
Wvs Eastern Michigan54–10covered −23.5
vs Eastern Michigan54–10covered −23.5W
at Penn State24–20covered +10
at Penn State24–20covered +10Wvs Michigan State31–3covered −8.5
vs Michigan State31–3covered −8.5Lat UCLA7–17missed +1.5
at UCLA7–17missed +1.5W
vs USC24–7covered +2.5
vs USC24–7covered +2.5L
at Iowa0–30missed +2.5
at Iowa0–30missed +2.5Model cfb_scratch · uncertainty ±15.5 · run Oct 3, 7:15 AM EDT · froze at kickoff and graded as-is