|
|
SMU First Half Results CONNECTICUT |
|
| 33 | 31 Final 10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
147 | SMU | -11 | 148 | CONNECTICUT | 33 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 4-5 | +8 | 5-4 | 4-5 | 29.0 | 13.2 | 367.3 | (5.2) | 1.1 | 35.3 | 14.3 | 415.0 | (5.4) | 2.0 | Road Games | 1-3 | +1.9 | 2-2 | 1-3 | 22.5 | 6.0 | 305.5 | (4.7) | 1.0 | 40.5 | 19.2 | 456.2 | (6) | 1.2 | Last 3 Games | 2-1 | +6.9 | 3-0 | 1-2 | 30.7 | 15.0 | 397.3 | (5.3) | 1.0 | 26.7 | 10.0 | 387.7 | (5.1) | 2.7 | Grass Games | 0-1 | 0 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 20.0 | 10.0 | 320.0 | (4) | 1.0 | 48.0 | 27.0 | 541.0 | (6.8) | 1.0 | Conference Games | 3-2 | +9 | 4-1 | 2-3 | 28.6 | 13.0 | 367.2 | (4.9) | 1.0 | 31.6 | 12.8 | 415.6 | (5.3) | 2.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 29.0 | 13.2 | 18.6 | 27:14 | 34-109 | (3.2) | 21-37 | 57.3% | 258 | (6.9) | 71-367 | (5.2) | (12.7) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 27.6 | 14.7 | 21.1 | 30:52 | 39-153 | (3.9) | 19-34 | 57.2% | 246 | (7.3) | 73-399 | (5.5) | (14.5) | Offense Road Games | 22.5 | 6.0 | 17.2 | 25:33 | 30-58 | (1.9) | 19-35 | 54.3% | 247 | (7.1) | 65-305 | (4.7) | (13.6) | Defense (All Games) | 35.3 | 14.3 | 22.9 | 32:46 | 45-184 | (4.1) | 20-32 | 62.0% | 231 | (7.3) | 77-415 | (5.4) | (11.7) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 34.2 | 17.3 | 22.5 | 30:06 | 42-203 | (4.8) | 18-31 | 58.9% | 227 | (7.4) | 73-430 | (5.9) | (12.6) | Defense Road Games | 40.5 | 19.2 | 24.5 | 34:27 | 43-172 | (4) | 22-32 | 68.2% | 284 | (8.8) | 75-456 | (6) | (11.3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 1-8 | -2 | 2-7 | 4-4 | 20.9 | 12.7 | 383.0 | (5.6) | 2.2 | 47.9 | 25.3 | 626.9 | (8.9) | 1.1 | Home Games | 1-3 | -1 | 0-4 | 1-2 | 24.2 | 16.5 | 397.5 | (5.6) | 2.0 | 44.0 | 20.0 | 576.2 | (8.2) | 1.2 | Last 3 Games | 0-3 | -2 | 1-2 | 2-1 | 22.0 | 9.0 | 402.3 | (6) | 1.7 | 36.3 | 12.7 | 564.3 | (8.3) | 2.0 | Grass Games | 1-4 | -1 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 25.4 | 14.6 | 409.0 | (5.8) | 1.8 | 42.8 | 17.4 | 583.2 | (8.4) | 1.6 | Conference Games | 0-5 | -2 | 1-4 | 3-2 | 17.4 | 10.2 | 404.2 | (5.4) | 2.4 | 49.4 | 25.0 | 638.8 | (9.2) | 1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 20.9 | 12.7 | 20.0 | 31:13 | 41-201 | (4.9) | 16-28 | 56.7% | 182 | (6.5) | 69-383 | (5.6) | (18.3) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 30.3 | 16.7 | 22 | 31:22 | 43-197 | (4.6) | 18-30 | 58.7% | 226 | (7.5) | 73-423 | (5.8) | (14) | Offense Home Games | 24.2 | 16.5 | 22.2 | 31:06 | 43-205 | (4.8) | 16-27 | 59.1% | 192 | (7) | 70-397 | (5.6) | (16.4) | Defense (All Games) | 47.9 | 25.3 | 27.7 | 28:47 | 44-333 | (7.6) | 19-26 | 72.7% | 294 | (11.1) | 70-627 | (8.9) | (13.1) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 38.5 | 20.5 | 24.4 | 28:29 | 41-214 | (5.2) | 20-33 | 61.8% | 272 | (8.3) | 73-486 | (6.6) | (12.6) | Defense Home Games | 44.0 | 20.0 | 27.5 | 28:52 | 42-265 | (6.2) | 20-28 | 71.4% | 311 | (11.1) | 70-576 | (8.2) | (13.1) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: SMU 36.2, CONNECTICUT 31.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
9/15/2018 | @ MICHIGAN | 20-45 | L | 36.5 | W | 55 | O | 31-110 | 19-34-209 | 1 | 41-197 | 14-18-237 | 1 | 9/22/2018 | NAVY | 31-30 | W | 6.5 | W | 58 | O | 37-158 | 24-32-166 | 1 | 78-349 | 1-4-25 | 3 | 9/29/2018 | HOUSTN BAPTIST | 63-27 | W | -44.5 | L | 69.5 | O | 50-244 | 24-37-409 | 2 | 27-60 | 28-51-241 | 3 | 10/6/2018 | @ UCF | 20-48 | L | 26 | L | 74 | U | 39-83 | 24-42-237 | 1 | 43-256 | 19-37-285 | 1 | 10/20/2018 | @ TULANE | 27-23 | W | 9.5 | W | 55 | U | 32-36 | 21-40-291 | 1 | 46-168 | 14-23-153 | 3 | 10/27/2018 | CINCINNATI | 20-26 | L | 8.5 | W | 52 | U | 24-23 | 22-43-328 | 1 | 39-125 | 33-50-352 | 3 | 11/3/2018 | HOUSTON | 45-31 | W | 14 | W | 71.5 | O | 40-196 | 28-44-318 | 1 | 47-190 | 11-22-175 | 2 | 11/10/2018 | @ CONNECTICUT | | | | | | | | | | | | | 11/16/2018 | MEMPHIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | 11/24/2018 | @ TULSA | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/15/2018 | RHODE ISLAND | 56-49 | W | -9 | L | | - | 54-265 | 20-27-308 | 3 | 28-199 | 23-34-351 | 2 | 9/22/2018 | @ SYRACUSE | 21-51 | L | 31 | W | 75.5 | U | 39-178 | 19-29-217 | 3 | 46-341 | 22-32-295 | 1 | 9/29/2018 | CINCINNATI | 7-49 | L | 16 | L | 62.5 | U | 28-85 | 14-36-181 | 1 | 53-320 | 23-29-339 | 1 | 10/6/2018 | @ MEMPHIS | 14-55 | L | 35.5 | L | 77.5 | U | 30-112 | 24-43-215 | 4 | 40-378 | 17-19-256 | 0 | 10/20/2018 | @ S FLORIDA | 30-38 | L | 33.5 | W | 67.5 | O | 51-322 | 10-21-133 | 1 | 37-346 | 20-28-265 | 3 | 10/27/2018 | MASSACHUSETTS | 17-22 | L | 3.5 | L | 64.5 | U | 44-250 | 4-6-15 | 1 | 53-247 | 8-15-197 | 2 | 11/3/2018 | @ TULSA | 19-49 | L | 19.5 | L | 59.5 | O | 50-255 | 14-28-232 | 3 | 57-470 | 9-14-168 | 1 | 11/10/2018 | SMU | | | | | | | | | | | | | 11/17/2018 | @ E CAROLINA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 11/24/2018 | TEMPLE | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| SMU: Quarterback Ben Hicks and new head coach Sonny Dykes's Air Raid offense are a match made in heaven. The SMU wideouts might not be familiar faces, but this passing game is going to be successful. Meanwhile, running back Xavier Jones should do his part in a strong rushing attack. The Mustangs' problem is their defense. New coordinator Kevin Kane did a great job in the same role with Northern Illinois, but it's going to take some time to get the right kind of talent in. Until then, SMU will strictly be playing shootouts. It's not ready to contend just yet. | | CONNECTICUT: Much like Cincinnati, the Huskies will be able to put up some points but they won't be able to prevent anybody from scoring them. The Huskies lost most of the talent off of their porous defense from a year ago, and it's hard to imagine them finding a way to slow down some of these potent AAC offenses. But with a good quarterback in David Pindell and some solid pass-catching weapons, they should be able to at least excite some of their fans in shootout losses. That just means very little when trying to justify backing them to actually win games. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 5/6/2024 12:21:53 AM EST. |
|
|