Get app

Michigan vs. MinnesotaFinal score and model picks, graded

FinalHuntington Bank Stadium
Michigan3–1
14–20Final
Minnesota3–1
Score by period
Team1234T
MICH0140014
MINN7031020

Top model pick, graded

Won

Minnesota Golden Gophers spread +5.5 47¢

CFB HeaterUp 8% return this season · 367 picks
Get the next picks first

How the picks did

Models went 8-9 on this game · −2% return

  1. Minnesota Golden Gophers spread +62 models agree
    +100%Won

    Taken at 50¢ on ProphetX

    2 modelsDrift, ProphetX Pairs
    Why 2 models like it
    Drift
    • Power-rating cover estimate is 53.0%: four-game EPA composite favors Michigan, but its defensive edge is offset by Minnesota's stronger offense and home field.
    • Current-season averages: Michigan +0.127 offensive EPA/play and -0.058 defensive EPA allowed; Minnesota +0.166 and +0.085, with success rates .480/.491 and explosive rates .112/.131.
    • Michigan's -0.058 defensive EPA allowed over four games can create a short-field or turnover margin that turns a close game into a cover.
    ProphetX Pairs
    • FBS-only 2026 averages show Minnesota offense +0.086 EPA/play against Michigan defense -0.059, versus Michigan offense +0.127 against Minnesota defense +0.083; the matchup profile supports the home underdog.
    • Minnesota's FBS-only success rate is 46.9% with a 12.4% explosive-play rate; Michigan is 47.6% and 11.2%, a modest efficiency/explosiveness gap rather than a six-point mismatch.
    • Michigan's offense averages +0.127 EPA/play and can punish Minnesota's +0.083 defensive EPA allowed; a clean Wolverines performance covers.
  2. Michigan Wolverines spread −62 models agree
    0%Push

    Taken at 51¢ on ProphetX

    2 modelsProphetX CFB Lines, Saturday Board Pairs
    Why 2 models like it
    ProphetX CFB Lines
    • Pinnacle exact -6: Michigan -110 versus Minnesota +6 -102; devigged Michigan probability is 50.9%.
    • Michigan efficiency gap: +0.127 offensive EPA/play versus Minnesota's +0.085 defensive EPA/play allowed; defense matchup also favors Michigan.
    • Four current-season games per team create a thin sample; Michigan and Minnesota each have a 35-point win contaminating EPA and PPD.
    Saturday Board Pairs
    • Michigan’s 4-game offense averages +0.127 EPA/play and 47.6% success.
    • Michigan’s PFF defense grades 92.2 versus Minnesota’s 79.8; pass rush is 86.3 versus 68.1.
    • Most likely loss: Minnesota’s offense averages +0.166 EPA/play and 49.1% success over four games, keeping the margin inside six.
  3. Michigan Wolverines to winFavorite2 models agree
    −100%Lost

    Taken at 68¢ on ProphetX

    2 modelsSaturday Board Pairs, Picks With Pink Grading System
    Why 2 models like it
    Saturday Board Pairs
    • Michigan's 2026 four-game defense allowed -0.0588 EPA/play versus Minnesota's +0.0852 allowed; the matchup supports a Michigan win even if the margin stays modest.
    • PFF's latest 2026 team card gives Michigan a 92.2 defense grade versus Minnesota's 79.8, including 86.3 versus 68.1 in pass rush.
    • Most likely loss: Minnesota's stronger 2026 offense (0.166 EPA/play, 0.131 explosive rate) creates enough home-field scoring to win outright.
    Picks With Pink Grading System
    • Michigan is 7-3 over its last 10; Minnesota is 6-4, with Michigan's 92.2 defensive grade advantage.
    • Michigan has allowed 14.75 points per game across its four 2026 contests.
    • Michigan lost 20-19 to Iowa last week and has no active three-game winning streak.
  4. Minnesota Golden Gophers spread +5.5
    +113%Won

    Taken at 47¢ on Polymarket US

    CFB HeaterUp 16% last 7 days
  5. Over 42 total
    −100%Lost

    Taken at 50¢ on ProphetX

    ProphetX CFB LinesDown 1% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • Possession case: 63.8 and 66.5 plays per game, 28.9/30.7-second pace, roughly 10, 11 drives each.
    • Efficiency supports chances: current points per drive 2.37 Michigan, 2.60 Minnesota; explosive rates 11.2% and 13.1%.
    • Michigan's defense held Oklahoma to 10 points; a low-possession defensive script can keep this below 43.
  6. Michigan Wolverines first-half spread over 3.5
    +117%Won

    Taken at 46¢ on Kalshi

    Early CoverUp 1% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • Pinnacle full-game Michigan -6 scales to a roughly +3.1 first-half mean after a modest first-half adjustment.
    • 2026 CFB sample: 596 margins, empirical SD 18.13; square-root half-possession scaling gives 12.82, weather haircut approximately 12.5.
    • DERIVED REFERENCE at the exact 3.5 rung: P(Michigan leads by more than 3.5) approximately 48.7%, versus Kalshi 46%.
    • Only four games inform each team’s current pace, EPA, explosive-rate, and points-per-drive inputs.
Show all 15 picks
  1. Game total over 43.5
    −100%Lost

    Taken at −108 on FanDuel

    Picks With Pink Grading SystemUp 11% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • The teams' current-season games average 60.3 combined points, 16.8 above the posted 43.5 total.
    • Minnesota cleared 43.5 in four of four 2026 games; its last-10 total hit rate is 7 of 10.
    • Michigan and Minnesota average 0.0778 and 0.1111 offensive EPA per play over the latest five-game windows.
    • Michigan's last-10 total hit rate is only 5 of 10 and its current-season defense allows 14.75 points per game.
  2. Minnesota Golden Gophers wins 1st HalfLong shot
    −100%Lost

    Taken at 34¢ on Kalshi

    Kickoff ScriptUp 2% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • Minnesota adjusted script EPA is +0.2245/play versus Michigan's +0.0421/play, a +0.1824 edge.
    • Minnesota averages .1825 PROE, .4906 success rate, and 2.60 points/drive across four games.
    • Model estimates Minnesota's 1H win probability near 43% versus a 34.0% Kalshi three-way devig reference.
    • Michigan's devigged full-game market remains a substantial favorite, with Underwood capable of a decisive scripted start.
  3. Minnesota Golden Gophers moneyline +205Long shot
    +203%Won

    Taken at 33¢ on ProphetX

    Resting MoneyDown 24% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • Book_levels are Minnesota 3 versus Michigan 3: neutral corroboration; the thin/deep pairing supplies two agreeing measures.
    • Directional coherence: backing Minnesota +205, which is the side read as thin-at-quote/deep-behind-it, leg matches.
    • Equal 3-versus-3 book_levels provide no third-measure confirmation; this remains a venue-self-reference hypothesis.
  4. Minnesota Golden Gophers spread +6.5 (six-point loss wins; no push; exact-six mass 2.79%)
    +100%Won

    Taken at 50¢ on ProphetX

    House RulesDown 7% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • ProphetX prices Minnesota +6.5 at 50.25c versus Minnesota +6 at 48.31c: only a 1.94-point uplift for the six-point win mass.
    • Minnesota +6.5 still loses at a margin of seven or more; no projection edge is claimed.
  5. Game total under 44.5
    +69%Won

    Taken at 59¢ on ProphetX

    Key Number CFBUp 13% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • Under 44 is 56.90¢; the current under 44-to-44.5 step is 2.12 points.
    • Pinnacle and DraftKings reference totals are 42/42.5, corroborating a lower scoring center than this 44.5 rung.
    • Minnesota's 2026 offense averages 0.1657 EPA/play, 13.1% explosive plays and 18.3% PROE; a few explosive drives can clear 44.5.
  6. Michigan Wolverines spread −7
    −100%Lost

    Taken at 47¢ on ProphetX

    Key Number CFBUp 13% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • Key-number density: exact 7-point margins are 859 of 10,967 FBS regular/postseason games (7.8%); the ladder moves only 2.8 probability points from -6.5 (50.0%) to -7 (47.2%).
    • Michigan's 2026 defense allows -0.0588 EPA/play versus Minnesota's +0.0852; PFF defense grades are 92.2 versus 79.8.
    • PFF matchup: Michigan pass rush 86.3 against Minnesota pass block 66.7, while Michigan pass block is 88.2 against Minnesota pass rush 68.1.
    • A Michigan win by 1-6 loses; exactly 7 pushes, and the 7-point mass is an aggregate rather than matchup-specific.
  7. Game total under 45
    +69%Won

    Taken at 59¢ on ProphetX

    Tempo BoardDown 18% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • The under-45 alternate provides 1.5 points above the main rung for a low-40s game script.
    • Tempo sample (4 games/team): Michigan 28.91 sec/play and Minnesota 30.74; this is not an extreme pace pairing.
    • Michigan's defense allowed -0.0588 EPA/play across four 2026 games; Minnesota's 49.0% success and 13.1% explosiveness face the stronger unit.
    • Most likely loss: Minnesota's +18.2% PROE and 13.1% explosive rate produce multiple chunk scores.
  8. Game total over 42
    −100%Lost

    Taken at 50¢ on ProphetX

    ProphetX PairsDown 9% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • a transparent FBS scoring/defense blend projects about 45 total points, above 42.
    • Michigan averaged 25.3 points and Minnesota 27.0 against FBS opponents this season.
    • Quarter-Kelly from a 53% projection is 1.5% before the desk's 0.5%-of-bankroll cap.
    • 15, 16 mph winds with gusts near 30 mph, plus rising rain chances, can suppress passing efficiency.
  9. 1st-quarter total over 10.5 pointsLong shot
    −100%Lost

    Taken at 32¢ on Kalshi

    Kickoff ScriptUp 2% last 7 days
    Why it likes it
    • Four-game averages project roughly 63.8 Michigan plays and 66.5 Minnesota plays, with Minnesota's 30.74-second pace still supporting about five drives each in a half.
    • At roughly five first-half drives per team, combined points per drive implies about 24.9 first-half points; a 45, 50% opening-quarter share projects 11.2, 12.4.
    • Both offenses show positive early-script indicators: Minnesota .1825 PROE and Michigan .0314, with combined success rates near 49%.
    • Minnesota's slower pace can reduce the opening-quarter possession count below the five-drive assumption.

Questions

Who won Michigan vs. Minnesota?

The Minnesota won 20–14 on Saturday, Oct 3, 2026.

App Store is a service mark of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Apple and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc. Google Play and the Google Play logo are trademarks of Google LLC.