|
|
W MICHIGAN MIAMI OHIO |
|
| 53 | 40 Final 39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
157 | W MICHIGAN | -155 | 158 | MIAMI OHIO | +135 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 2-2 | 0 | 2-2 | 1-2 | 36.7 | 13.7 | 471.0 | (6.7) | 0.7 | 29.7 | 19.5 | 369.2 | (5.9) | 1.5 | Road Games | 1-1 | +1 | 1-1 | 0-2 | 18.5 | 10.0 | 368.0 | (5.1) | 0.5 | 32.0 | 22.0 | 397.0 | (7.1) | 1.5 | Last 3 Games | 2-1 | +1 | 2-1 | 0-2 | 35.0 | 16.0 | 421.0 | (5.8) | 0.3 | 21.3 | 14.7 | 305.7 | (5.7) | 1.7 | Turf Games | 2-2 | 0 | 2-2 | 1-2 | 36.7 | 13.7 | 471.0 | (6.7) | 0.7 | 29.7 | 19.5 | 369.2 | (5.9) | 1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 36.7 | 13.7 | 24.2 | 32:02 | 38-225 | (5.8) | 19-32 | 60.9% | 246 | (7.7) | 70-471 | (6.7) | (12.8) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 32.7 | 17 | 21 | 30:57 | 37-170 | (4.6) | 19-30 | 62.1% | 230 | (7.6) | 68-400 | (5.9) | (12.2) | Offense Road Games | 18.5 | 10.0 | 21.0 | 34:14 | 42-208 | (4.9) | 18-29 | 61.0% | 159 | (5.4) | 72-368 | (5.1) | (19.9) | Defense (All Games) | 29.7 | 19.5 | 17.2 | 27:58 | 41-204 | (4.9) | 12-21 | 54.7% | 165 | (7.7) | 63-369 | (5.9) | (12.4) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 28.3 | 16.7 | 19.4 | 30:03 | 43-191 | (4.4) | 15-26 | 59.2% | 177 | (6.9) | 69-368 | (5.3) | (13) | Defense Road Games | 32.0 | 22.0 | 19.0 | 25:46 | 32-183 | (5.6) | 16-23 | 68.1% | 214 | (9.1) | 56-397 | (7.1) | (12.4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 1-3 | -2.3 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 17.2 | 8.5 | 312.2 | (4.9) | 1.0 | 26.2 | 12.5 | 339.0 | (4.7) | 0.7 | Home Games | 0-1 | -1.2 | 0-1 | 1-0 | 28.0 | 7.0 | 444.0 | (6.1) | 0.0 | 35.0 | 21.0 | 443.0 | (5.9) | 0.0 | Last 3 Games | 1-2 | -1.2 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 13.7 | 9.0 | 268.3 | (4.4) | 1.3 | 23.3 | 9.7 | 304.3 | (4.2) | 1.0 | Turf Games | 1-3 | -2.3 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 17.2 | 8.5 | 312.2 | (4.9) | 1.0 | 26.2 | 12.5 | 339.0 | (4.7) | 0.7 | Conference Games | 1-0 | +1 | 1-0 | 1-0 | 38.0 | 24.0 | 408.0 | (6.1) | 0.0 | 23.0 | 3.0 | 385.0 | (4.6) | 1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 17.2 | 8.5 | 15.2 | 28:03 | 32-131 | (4.1) | 17-31 | 54.4% | 181 | (5.8) | 63-312 | (4.9) | (18.1) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 25.4 | 13 | 17.4 | 28:28 | 36-176 | (4.8) | 16-30 | 52.8% | 185 | (6.2) | 66-362 | (5.5) | (14.2) | Offense Home Games | 28.0 | 7.0 | 23.0 | 28:12 | 27-87 | (3.2) | 25-46 | 54.3% | 357 | (7.8) | 73-444 | (6.1) | (15.9) | Defense (All Games) | 26.2 | 12.5 | 22.0 | 31:57 | 42-140 | (3.4) | 19-31 | 62.1% | 198 | (6.4) | 73-339 | (4.7) | (12.9) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 29.4 | 17.1 | 21.5 | 31:28 | 40-148 | (3.7) | 20-33 | 59.4% | 222 | (6.8) | 73-370 | (5.1) | (12.6) | Defense Home Games | 35.0 | 21.0 | 24.0 | 31:48 | 38-171 | (4.5) | 24-37 | 64.9% | 272 | (7.4) | 75-443 | (5.9) | (12.7) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: W MICHIGAN 26.5, MIAMI OHIO 26.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
8/31/2018 | SYRACUSE | 42-55 | L | 4.5 | L | 65 | O | 28-242 | 19-36-379 | 2 | 62-334 | 11-28-226 | 1 | 9/8/2018 | @ MICHIGAN | 3-49 | L | 27.5 | L | 56 | U | 40-123 | 16-34-85 | 1 | 35-308 | 13-18-143 | 0 | 9/15/2018 | DELAWARE ST | 68-0 | W | -46.5 | W | | - | 41-241 | 23-33-286 | 0 | 38-115 | 4-11-8 | 2 | 9/22/2018 | @ GEORGIA ST | 34-15 | W | -9.5 | W | 61 | U | 45-294 | 20-25-234 | 0 | 30-58 | 19-29-285 | 3 | 9/29/2018 | @ MIAMI OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | E MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2018 | @ BOWLING GREEN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/20/2018 | @ C MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/25/2018 | TOLEDO | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2018 | MARSHALL | 28-35 | L | -1.5 | L | 51.5 | O | 27-87 | 25-46-357 | 0 | 38-171 | 24-37-272 | 0 | 9/8/2018 | *CINCINNATI | 0-21 | L | -1 | L | 45 | U | 19-59 | 22-41-139 | 1 | 51-188 | 6-11-45 | 0 | 9/15/2018 | @ MINNESOTA | 3-26 | L | 13.5 | L | 47.5 | U | 31-91 | 11-23-108 | 3 | 44-118 | 14-26-177 | 2 | 9/22/2018 | @ BOWLING GREEN | 38-23 | W | -6.5 | W | 55 | O | 52-289 | 10-15-119 | 0 | 34-85 | 33-50-300 | 1 | 9/29/2018 | W MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | @ AKRON | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2018 | KENT ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/20/2018 | @ ARMY | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| W MICHIGAN: The Broncos have to replace their entire linebacking corps and two studs in the secondary, but there is still optimism coming from the team about the defense as a whole'even if its defensive line isn't exactly great, either. And if the unit can find a way to be average on that side of the ball then the team could contend in the conference. That's because the offense is going to be nearly impossible to stop, if healthy. Quarterback Jon Wassink should be in for a big year under center, and he'll be handing off to one of the best groups of rushers in the conference, including the slippery Jamauri Bogan. There's some value to be had in backing the Broncos as a bettor and hoping they figure it out defensively. | | MIAMI OHIO: Quarterback Gus Ragland and first-team All-MAC wide receiver James Gardner form the foundation of one of the conference's best passing attacks. With the two of them feeding off of one another, the RedHawks will be explosive offensively. They'll just need a bit of help from the running game, which should be more than doable with 2017 leading rushers Kenny Young and Alonzo Smith both returning.. Defensively, Miami returns eight starters. The problem is that the secondary is a bit depleted, which could be an issue. The RedHawks lost a lot of close games last year, and mistakes on the backend could similarly doom them in 2018. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 5/5/2024 11:06:14 PM EST. |
|
|