This week's picks

Washington vs. Nebraska Prediction and Pick, Week 9 2026

Big Al's CFB Lab
Data updated
Site
Picks two teams at random. Any FBS team can come up.

How we picked it

How we picked it

Three ratings look at a team in three different ways. The numbers' pick is the team at least two of them favor. On the toss-ups and the biggest games, Big Al makes the call himself and says why.

Where the game is won

Where the game is won

Each row puts one team's unit against the unit it faces, by national rank out of all FBS teams. An edge is a gap of 25 spots or more.

Ratings: SP+ via CFB Update; PRIME via primecfb.com. Box and play stats computed from CollegeFootballData.com play data (via the public cfbfastR files), FBS games only for scoring. Rushing yards here exclude sacks, so they run higher than official totals. Ranks are out of 138 FBS teams.

Share as an image

Image style

Leave a field empty to drop it from the image. A blank line in the description starts a new paragraph.

Washington at Nebraska

Week 9, Sat, Oct 31, 8:00 PM ET, Memorial Stadium (Lincoln, NE).

Big Al's pick: Nebraska, 76% to win.

The game

KickoffSat, Oct 31, 8:00 PM ET
TVBTN
WhereMemorial Stadium (Lincoln, NE)
Weather63°, wind 6 mph
LineNebraska −7.5, total 49.5
Line movementOpened Nebraska −9.5; moved 2 points toward Washington.
SeriesNebraska leads 5–4–1
Last meetingNebraska 51–38 in 2011

The ratings and the line

MarginWin chanceTotal
SP+Nebraska by 8.473%47
PRIMENebraska by 15.787%
EloNebraska66%
The lineNebraska −7.5, opened −9.549.5

Margins include home field. SP+ is Bill Connelly's rating; Sources has PRIME and Elo. Line and total from DraftKings, as of Wed, Oct 28, 2:21 PM ET.

Who wins, Washington or Nebraska?

Big Al's pick: Nebraska. 75% to win

Which matchups decide Washington vs. Nebraska?

All three ratings favor Nebraska, by 8.4 to 15.7 points. Nebraska's best matchup is its 3rd down defense, 1st in 3rd downs allowed, against Washington's 3rd down offense at 85th. Washington's way back in is its defense, 27th in yards per play allowed, against Nebraska's offense at 63rd.

Washington with the ball

Nebraska with the ball

Who's out for Washington and Nebraska?

Washington

Nebraska

How Washington and Nebraska compare, in charts

Which team is better on offense and on defense?

Which team is better on offense and on defense? Both land in the complete teams corner: better than the FBS average on offense and on defense. Nebraska is ahead on offense, 32.2 (34th) to Washington's 29.7 (49th) in SP+ offense, and ahead on defense, 16.7 (16th) to Washington's 20.2 (30th) in SP+ defense.1020304010152025303540SP+ offense: better →SP+ defense: better →Defense firstComplete teamsStrugglingOffense first
Both land in the complete teams corner: better than the FBS average on offense and on defense. Nebraska is ahead on offense, 32.2 (34th) to Washington's 29.7 (49th) in SP+ offense, and ahead on defense, 16.7 (16th) to Washington's 20.2 (30th) in SP+ defense.
SP+ offenseSP+ defense
Washington29.7 (49th)20.2 (30th)
Nebraska32.2 (34th)16.7 (16th)

Who wins on early downs?

Who wins on early downs? Washington lands in the good on both sides corner (better than the FBS average on offense and on defense); Nebraska in the defense carries it corner (better than average on defense, below it on offense). Washington is better on offense, 59.6% (39th) to Nebraska's 55.2% (77th) in SUPLEX. Nebraska is slightly better on defense, 51.0% (49th) to Washington's 52.5% (58th) in SUPLEX allowed.40%50%60%70%80%40%45%50%55%60%65%70%75%SUPLEX on offense: better →SUPLEX allowed on defense: better →Defense carries itGood on both sidesStrugglingOffense carries it
Washington lands in the good on both sides corner (better than the FBS average on offense and on defense); Nebraska in the defense carries it corner (better than average on defense, below it on offense). Washington is better on offense, 59.6% (39th) to Nebraska's 55.2% (77th) in SUPLEX. Nebraska is slightly better on defense, 51.0% (49th) to Washington's 52.5% (58th) in SUPLEX allowed.
SUPLEXSUPLEX allowed
Washington59.6% (39th)52.5% (58th)
Nebraska55.2% (77th)51.0% (49th)

How do the two offenses move the ball?

How do the two offenses move the ball? Washington lands in the efficient and explosive corner (better than the FBS average at staying on schedule and at hitting big plays); Nebraska in the boom or bust corner (better than average at hitting big plays, below it at staying on schedule). Washington is ahead at staying on schedule, 45.1% (58th) to Nebraska's 43.6% (70th) in success rate, and ahead at hitting big plays, 14.6% (24th) to Nebraska's 12.7% (55th) in explosive play rate.8%10%13%15%18%35%40%45%50%55%Success rate: stays on schedule more →Explosive play rate: more big plays →Boom or bustEfficient and explosiveStrugglingGrind it out
Washington lands in the efficient and explosive corner (better than the FBS average at staying on schedule and at hitting big plays); Nebraska in the boom or bust corner (better than average at hitting big plays, below it at staying on schedule). Washington is ahead at staying on schedule, 45.1% (58th) to Nebraska's 43.6% (70th) in success rate, and ahead at hitting big plays, 14.6% (24th) to Nebraska's 12.7% (55th) in explosive play rate.
Success rateExplosive play rate
Washington45.1% (58th)14.6% (24th)
Nebraska43.6% (70th)12.7% (55th)

Which defense is harder to move on?

Which defense is harder to move on? Both land in the lockdown defenses corner: better than the FBS average at keeping offenses behind schedule and at limiting big plays. Nebraska is better at keeping offenses behind schedule, 35.1% (14th) to Washington's 37.7% (37th) in success rate allowed. Washington is slightly better at limiting big plays, 9.3% (20th) to Nebraska's 9.4% (25th) in explosive plays allowed.5%10%15%20%30%35%40%45%50%55%Success rate allowed: fewer →Explosive plays allowed: fewer →Bend, don't breakLockdown defensesLeakyStingy but gives up big plays
Both land in the lockdown defenses corner: better than the FBS average at keeping offenses behind schedule and at limiting big plays. Nebraska is better at keeping offenses behind schedule, 35.1% (14th) to Washington's 37.7% (37th) in success rate allowed. Washington is slightly better at limiting big plays, 9.3% (20th) to Nebraska's 9.4% (25th) in explosive plays allowed.
Success rate allowedExplosive plays allowed
Washington37.7% (37th)9.3% (20th)
Nebraska35.1% (14th)9.4% (25th)

Who runs it and throws it better?

Who runs it and throws it better? Washington lands in the air it out corner (better than average throwing it, below it running it); Nebraska in the ground and pound corner (better than average running it, below it throwing it). Nebraska is better running it, 5.7 (34th) to Washington's 4.7 (99th) in yards per carry. Washington is better throwing it, 8.7 (28th) to Nebraska's 7.0 (92nd) in yards per attempt.46810124567Yards per carry: better →Yards per pass attempt: better →Air it outBalanced and goodStuckGround and pound
Washington lands in the air it out corner (better than average throwing it, below it running it); Nebraska in the ground and pound corner (better than average running it, below it throwing it). Nebraska is better running it, 5.70 (34th) to Washington's 4.77 (99th) in yards per carry. Washington is better throwing it, 8.78 (28th) to Nebraska's 7.04 (92nd) in yards per attempt.
Yards per carryYards per attempt
Washington4.77 (99th)8.78 (28th)
Nebraska5.70 (34th)7.04 (92nd)

Who wins on third down?

Who wins on third down? Washington lands in the gets off the field corner (better than average at getting off the field on third down, below it at converting third downs); Nebraska in the wins third down corner (better than the FBS average at converting third downs and at getting off the field on third down). Nebraska is ahead at converting third downs, 47.6% (21st) to Washington's 37.7% (85th) in 3rd down conversion, and ahead at getting off the field on third down, 20.7% (1st) to Washington's 29.6% (14th) in 3rd downs allowed.20%30%40%50%30%35%40%45%50%55%60%3rd down conversion, offense: better →3rd downs allowed, defense: better →Gets off the fieldWins third downLoses third downStays on the field
Washington lands in the gets off the field corner (better than average at getting off the field on third down, below it at converting third downs); Nebraska in the wins third down corner (better than the FBS average at converting third downs and at getting off the field on third down). Nebraska is ahead at converting third downs, 47.6% (21st) to Washington's 37.7% (85th) in 3rd down conversion, and ahead at getting off the field on third down, 20.7% (1st) to Washington's 29.6% (14th) in 3rd downs allowed.
3rd down conversion3rd downs allowed
Washington37.7% (85th)29.6% (14th)
Nebraska47.6% (21st)20.7% (1st)

Each chart puts all 138 FBS teams on two stats; Washington and Nebraska are lit. Dashed lines are the FBS averages, and up and right is better. Ranks in parentheses. Games through Oct 24, 2026.

How Washington's and Nebraska's players compare

How do the quarterbacks compare?

How do the quarterbacks compare? Washington's Demond Williams Jr. is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 42.9% passing success rate (81st of 171 quarterbacks) and 1,398 passing yards (74th). Nebraska's Anthony Colandrea is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 44.2% passing success rate (66th of 171 quarterbacks) and 1,627 passing yards (37th). Colandrea has the edge on both.35%40%45%50%55%60%65%1,2501,5001,7502,0002,2502,5002,750Efficient on low volumeVolume and efficiencyStrugglingVolume over efficiencyPassing yards →Passing success rate (per dropback) ↑ColandreaWilliams Jr.
Washington's Demond Williams Jr. is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 42.9% passing success rate (81st of 171 quarterbacks) and 1,398 passing yards (74th). Nebraska's Anthony Colandrea is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 44.2% passing success rate (66th of 171 quarterbacks) and 1,627 passing yards (37th). Colandrea has the edge on both.
PlayerPassing success rate (per dropback)Passing yards
Demond Williams Jr., Washington42.9% (81st)1,398 (74th)
Anthony Colandrea, Nebraska44.2% (66th)1,627 (37th)

How do the lead running backs compare?

How do the lead running backs compare? Washington's Brian Bonner Jr. is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 4.7 yards per carry (202nd of 360 running backs) and 36.5% rushing success rate (282nd). Nebraska's Mekhi Nelson is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 4.4 yards per carry (251st of 360 running backs) and 36.6% rushing success rate (280th). Bonner has the edge in yards per carry, Nelson in rushing success rate.4681030%40%50%60%70%80%Boom or bustEfficient and explosiveStrugglingMoves the chainsRushing success rate →Yards per carry ↑NelsonBonner Jr.
Washington's Brian Bonner Jr. is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 4.7 yards per carry (202nd of 360 running backs) and 36.5% rushing success rate (282nd). Nebraska's Mekhi Nelson is in the struggling corner, below average in both: 4.4 yards per carry (251st of 360 running backs) and 36.6% rushing success rate (280th). Bonner has the edge in yards per carry, Nelson in rushing success rate.
PlayerYards per carryRushing success rate
Brian Bonner Jr., Washington4.7 (202nd)36.5% (282nd)
Mekhi Nelson, Nebraska4.4 (251st)36.6% (280th)

How do the top receivers compare?

How do the top receivers compare? Washington's Chris Lawson is in the role players corner, below average in both: 12 explosive catches (51st of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 493 receiving yards (57th). Washington's Dezmen Roebuck is in the role players corner, below average in both: 9 explosive catches (111th of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 474 receiving yards (59th). Nebraska's Kwazi Gilmer is in the role players corner, below average in both: 11 explosive catches (64th of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 492 receiving yards (58th). Nebraska's Jacory Barney Jr. is in the role players corner, below average in both: 9 explosive catches (101st of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 397 receiving yards (102nd).5101520252004006008001,0001,200Big plays on low volumeGo-to deep threatsRole playersYards without the big playsReceiving yards →Explosive catches (16+ yards) ↑Barney Jr.GilmerLawsonRoebuck
Washington's Chris Lawson is in the role players corner, below average in both: 12 explosive catches (51st of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 493 receiving yards (57th). Washington's Dezmen Roebuck is in the role players corner, below average in both: 9 explosive catches (111th of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 474 receiving yards (59th). Nebraska's Kwazi Gilmer is in the role players corner, below average in both: 11 explosive catches (64th of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 492 receiving yards (58th). Nebraska's Jacory Barney Jr. is in the role players corner, below average in both: 9 explosive catches (101st of 669 receivers and tight ends) and 397 receiving yards (102nd).
PlayerExplosive catches (16+ yards)Receiving yards
Chris Lawson, Washington12 (51st)493 (57th)
Dezmen Roebuck, Washington9 (111th)474 (59th)
Kwazi Gilmer, Nebraska11 (64th)492 (58th)
Jacory Barney Jr., Nebraska9 (101st)397 (102nd)

Who makes the plays on defense?

Who makes the plays on defense? Washington's top playmaker is Alex McLaughlin (2 sacks, 2 INTs), 94th of 1571 FBS defenders in sacks plus takeaways. Nebraska's top playmaker is Donovan Jones (1 sack, 1 INT, 1 fumble recovery), 183rd of 1571 FBS defenders in sacks plus takeaways.Alex McLaughlin, Washington2 sacks, 2 INTsRylon Dillard-Allen, Washington1 sack, 2 INTsDonovan Jones, Nebraska1 sack, 1 INT, 1 fumble recoveryJahsear Whittington, Nebraska2 sacks, 1 fumble recoveryJeron Jones, Washington2 INTsDawson Merritt, Nebraska2 sacks
Washington's top playmaker is Alex McLaughlin (2 sacks, 2 INTs), 94th of 1571 FBS defenders in sacks plus takeaways. Nebraska's top playmaker is Donovan Jones (1 sack, 1 INT, 1 fumble recovery), 183rd of 1571 FBS defenders in sacks plus takeaways.
PlayerSacksINTsFumble recoveriesFBS rank
Alex McLaughlin, Washington22094th
Rylon Dillard-Allen, Washington120252nd
Donovan Jones, Nebraska111183rd
Jahsear Whittington, Nebraska201184th
Jeron Jones, Washington020576th
Dawson Merritt, Nebraska200433rd

The scatter charts show the top 40 FBS players at the position by both stats combined, plus the players lit here. Dashed lines are the averages; up and right is better. Ranks are among every FBS player at the position with enough snaps. Takeaways are interceptions plus fumble recoveries. Games through Oct 24, 2026.

How do SP+, PRIME and Elo rate Washington and Nebraska?

On a neutral field, SP+ has Nebraska 5.9 points better (15th to 35th). PRIME also has Nebraska ahead, by 13.2. Elo, which only sees results, also has Nebraska ahead (19th to 33rd).

WashingtonNebraska
SP+ overall9.5 (35th)15.4 (15th)
SP+ offense29.7 (49th)32.2 (34th)
SP+ defense20.2 (30th)16.7 (16th)
SP+ special teams0.0 (68th)-0.1 (80th)
PRIME net3.1 (53rd)16.3 (12th)
PRIME offense0.65 (58th)7.89 (24th)
PRIME defense2.52 (49th)8.81 (13th)
PRIME SOS-2.3 (67th)-2.6 (71st)
PRIME SOR0.1 (66th)1.1 (37th)
Elo1704 (33rd)1767 (19th)

Opponent-adjusted power ratings. These drive the projection.

Who's better once you adjust for the schedule?

Washington's offense ranks 76th in adjusted EPA per play, and the Nebraska defense it faces ranks 29th in EPA per play allowed. Nebraska's offense ranks 22nd against Washington's 51st-ranked defense. The matchup that decides it is Nebraska's offense against Washington's defense. The biggest edge on the board is Nebraska's backs in the open field: 21st in adjusted open-field yards per carry, against Washington's 88th-ranked defense. That's a mismatch. Adjust for opponents and Washington's defense falls from 23rd to 51st in EPA per play allowed: a lot of that came against soft offenses.

WashingtonNebraska
EPA per play (adjusted)+0.10 (76th)+0.19 (22nd)
EPA per pass (adjusted)+0.23 (37th)+0.21 (52nd)
EPA per rush (adjusted)+0.02 (113th)+0.16 (4th)
Success rate (adjusted)41.9% (60th)45.4% (31st)
Success rate, standard downs (adjusted)47.8% (48th)47.7% (49th)
Success rate, passing downs (adjusted)28.4% (112th)35.1% (9th)
Explosiveness (adjusted)0.92 (97th)1.00 (3rd)
Line yards per carry (adjusted)2.85 (107th)3.04 (41st)
Open-field yards per carry (adjusted)1.18 (53rd)1.31 (21st)
EPA per play allowed (adjusted)+0.07 (51st)+0.04 (29th)
EPA per pass allowed (adjusted)+0.18 (66th)+0.08 (8th)
EPA per rush allowed (adjusted)+0.04 (49th)+0.07 (75th)
Success rate allowed (adjusted)41.2% (59th)36.9% (17th)
Explosiveness allowed (adjusted)0.94 (68th)0.94 (85th)
Line yards allowed per carry (adjusted)2.85 (35th)2.94 (65th)
Open-field yards allowed per carry (adjusted)1.19 (88th)1.01 (38th)

The same efficiency numbers, adjusted for the offenses and defenses each team has faced (CollegeFootballData.com). A good number against a soft schedule shrinks; one against a hard schedule grows.

Who's more efficient, Washington or Nebraska?

Washington is better throwing (38th in EPA per pass) than running (115th). Nebraska's pass defense ranks 2nd, so the defense has the better of it. Nebraska is better running (8th in EPA per rush) than throwing (58th). Washington's run defense ranks 18th, so that's strength on strength.

WashingtonNebraska
EPA per play+0.14 (67th)+0.24 (25th)
EPA per pass+0.34 (38th)+0.25 (58th)
EPA per rush0.00 (115th)+0.25 (8th)
EPA per 3rd-down play+0.22 (122nd)+0.85 (4th)
EPA per play allowed0.00 (23rd)−0.06 (9th)
EPA per pass allowed+0.15 (63rd)−0.11 (2nd)
EPA per rush allowed−0.07 (18th)−0.03 (32nd)
EPA per 3rd-down play allowed+0.09 (6th)−0.40 (1st)

Expected points added per play, from CollegeFootballData.com. EPA measures how much each play changes the points a team can expect from the drive. Zero is break-even; +0.20 is very good. Not adjusted for opponents.

Who scores more, Washington or Nebraska?

Washington outscores FBS opponents by 5.2 a game, and Nebraska by 20.2. Washington's offense ranks 76th in scoring, and the Nebraska defense it faces ranks 14th in points allowed. Nebraska's offense ranks 29th against Washington's 56th-ranked defense. The matchup that decides it is Nebraska's offense against Washington's defense.

WashingtonNebraska
Points scored27.9 (76th)35.6 (29th)
Points allowed22.7 (56th)15.4 (14th)

Per game, FBS opponents only.

Which offense has the edge?

Washington has no clear edge here. Its best is SUPLEX, 39th, against a defense ranked 49th in SUPLEX allowed. Nebraska has no clear edge here. Its best is yards per carry, 34th, against a defense ranked 28th in yards per carry allowed.

WashingtonNebraska
Pass yards / game284.7 (19th)244.3 (53rd)
Rush yards / game120.7 (125th)203.7 (29th)
Yards per play6.69 (30th)6.22 (63rd)
Yards per carry4.77 (99th)5.70 (34th)
Yards per attempt8.78 (28th)7.04 (92nd)
Completion %74.0% (13th)60.1% (85th)
Success rate45.1% (58th)43.6% (70th)
Explosive play rate14.6% (24th)12.7% (55th)
3rd down conversion37.7% (85th)47.6% (21st)
Sack rate (taken)8.1% (113th)4.3% (38th)
INT rate (thrown)2.6% (84th)1.7% (39th)
SUPLEX59.6% (39th)55.2% (77th)

Per game and per play, from play-by-play.

Which defense has the edge?

Washington's defense is best placed to limit big plays: it ranks 20th in explosive plays allowed, and Nebraska's offense is middle of the pack in explosive play rate (55th). Nebraska's defense is best placed to get off the field on third down: it ranks 1st in 3rd down conversions allowed, and Washington's offense is middle of the pack in 3rd down conversion rate (85th). That's a mismatch.

WashingtonNebraska
Pass yards allowed / game209.0 (67th)176.6 (19th)
Rush yards allowed / game130.0 (40th)118.7 (25th)
Yards per play allowed5.23 (27th)5.14 (23rd)
Yards per carry allowed4.17 (28th)4.24 (34th)
Yards per attempt allowed6.53 (46th)6.51 (45th)
Success rate allowed37.7% (37th)35.1% (14th)
Explosive plays allowed9.3% (20th)9.4% (25th)
3rd downs allowed29.6% (14th)20.7% (1st)
Sack rate (generated)5.1% (94th)7.8% (32nd)
INT rate (generated)4.0% (17th)3.7% (24th)
SUPLEX allowed52.5% (58th)51.0% (49th)

What opponents managed against them.

Who wins the turnover battle?

Nebraska is +0.9 in turnover margin a game and Washington is +0.3. At about five points a turnover, that's roughly a 3-point edge for Nebraska. Turnover margin rarely holds from one month to the next, so don't count on it.

WashingtonNebraska
Interceptions thrown / game0.86 (84th)0.57 (40th)
Fumbles lost / game0.43 (53rd)0.00 (1st)
Giveaways / game1.29 (71st)0.57 (7th)
Interceptions / game1.29 (10th)1.00 (22nd)
Fumbles recovered / game0.29 (94th)0.43 (68th)
Takeaways / game1.57 (27th)1.43 (39th)
Turnover margin / game+0.3 (50th)+0.9 (13th)

Per game, from play-by-play.

Which team has more talent?

Nebraska has the more talented roster (22nd in the 247Sports talent composite; Washington is 24th). Nebraska also plays further above its talent: +7.6 points of SP+ beyond what its roster predicts, to Washington's +2.3.

WashingtonNebraska
Talent composite777.6 (24th)787.5 (22nd)
Blue-chip ratio30.8% (27th)31.1% (26th)
Players on roster101 (129th)116 (34th)
Rated by 247Sports91 (19th)90 (23rd)
5-star players1 (24th)1 (24th)
4-star players27 (24th)27 (24th)
3-star players59 (82nd)60 (74th)
Below 3-star4 (38th)2 (68th)
2026 transfers in14 (118th)17 (103rd)
Transfer share15.4% (123rd)18.9% (114th)
SP+ vs. talent+2.3 (54th)+7.6 (26th)
Returning production54.4% (50th)46.3% (59th)
Returning passing production94.2% (34th)5.2% (95th)
Returning rushing production51.9% (64th)29.5% (82nd)
Returning receiving production34.2% (72nd)74.1% (15th)
2026 recruiting class (national rank)13 (13th)88 (88th)
Recruiting rank, last four classes27.2 (22nd)38.2 (32nd)

247Sports team talent composite and 2026 transfer portal class. Star counts cover only the players 247Sports rates, not walk-ons, so they add up to less than the full roster. Ranks are out of all 138 FBS teams.

Which roster costs more?

Nebraska's roster is valued at $23.3M, Washington's at $22.4M. Nebraska also plays better per dollar: +6.8 points of SP+ above what its payroll predicts, to +1.8 for Washington.

WashingtonNebraska
Roster value$22.4M (32nd)$23.3M (29th)
Roster cost per win$5.6M (40th)$4.7M (25th)
Projected wins per $1M0.32 (25th)0.36 (15th)
SP+ vs. payroll+1.8 (31st)+6.8 (12th)

NIL roster value from The NIL Standard (power-conference teams plus Boise State and Oregon State). Ranks are out of 70 teams with a valuation.

Where did each team's wins come from?

Washington is +0.5 wins against a .500 team; the biggest piece is luck (−1.1). Nebraska is +1.5 wins against a .500 team; the biggest piece is coaching (+0.9). Washington's record is 1.1 wins worse than its play on bad luck, so it's better than the record says.

WashingtonNebraska
BAWA (total)+0.5 (57th)+1.5 (30th)
Schedule BAWA+0.5 (68th)+0.4 (73rd)
Roster BAWA+0.7 (25th)+0.7 (29th)
Coach BAWA+0.4 (51st)+0.9 (34th)
Luck BAWA-1.1 (124th)-0.4 (93rd)

Big Al Wins Added: where the wins came from. Every team starts as a .500 team. Then each win (or loss) goes to the schedule, the roster, the coaching or luck, and the four add up to the real record. Wins above or below a .500 team.

Washington at Nebraska: questions people ask

Who will win Washington at Nebraska?

Big Al picks Nebraska, 75% to win. All three ratings favor the same team. Nebraska's best matchup is its 3rd down defense, 1st in 3rd downs allowed, against Washington's 3rd down offense at 85th.

When and where is Washington at Nebraska?

Sat, Oct 31, 8:00 PM ET at Memorial Stadium (Lincoln, NE), on BTN.

What's the line for Washington at Nebraska?

DraftKings has Nebraska −7.5, total 49.5. Big Al picks winners, not bets.

What's the Washington–Nebraska series record?

Nebraska leads 5–4–1. Last meeting: Nebraska won 51–38 in 2011.

Who are the quarterbacks in Washington at Nebraska?

Washington's is Demond Williams Jr. (1,398 passing yards this season); Nebraska's is Anthony Colandrea (1,627 passing yards this season).

More on this game

Numbers through the games of Oct 24, 2026. SP+ as of Oct 27, 2026. Updated every week.

Washington and Nebraska: team pages with every stat and national rank. Compare any two teams.