|
|
RUTGERS MICHIGAN ST |
|
| 37.5 | 10 Final 14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
153 | RUTGERS | 38 | 37.5 | 154 | MICHIGAN ST | -28 | -24 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 1-10 | -4.2 | 6-5 | 4-7 | 13.8 | 7.4 | 270.7 | (4.1) | 2.4 | 33.0 | 20.4 | 409.8 | (5.9) | 1.2 | Road Games | 0-4 | -1.2 | 1-3 | 1-3 | 10.2 | 3.5 | 230.0 | (3.7) | 3.2 | 43.0 | 25.0 | 492.7 | (7.2) | 0.7 | Last 3 Games | 0-3 | 0 | 3-0 | 1-2 | 10.3 | 2.3 | 273.0 | (4.3) | 1.7 | 31.0 | 14.7 | 416.0 | (5.9) | 1.3 | Conference Games | 0-8 | -3 | 5-3 | 2-6 | 11.2 | 5.0 | 249.6 | (4) | 2.0 | 32.4 | 19.7 | 418.7 | (5.9) | 1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 13.8 | 7.4 | 15.6 | 28:56 | 35-136 | (3.9) | 15-30 | 48.8% | 134 | (4.4) | 65-271 | (4.1) | (19.6) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 25.9 | 12.8 | 19.8 | 30:59 | 38-169 | (4.4) | 17-31 | 56.9% | 211 | (6.9) | 69-380 | (5.5) | (14.7) | Offense Road Games | 10.2 | 3.5 | 13.2 | 27:34 | 34-115 | (3.4) | 12-29 | 40.2% | 114 | (3.9) | 63-230 | (3.7) | (22.4) | Defense (All Games) | 33.0 | 20.4 | 20.9 | 31:04 | 41-221 | (5.4) | 16-28 | 57.4% | 188 | (6.7) | 69-410 | (5.9) | (12.4) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 30.1 | 14.6 | 21 | 30:15 | 40-194 | (4.9) | 18-30 | 59.7% | 213 | (7) | 70-406 | (5.8) | (13.5) | Defense Road Games | 43.0 | 25.0 | 24.0 | 32:26 | 43-308 | (7.1) | 16-25 | 65.3% | 185 | (7.3) | 69-493 | (7.2) | (11.5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 6-5 | -2 | 4-7 | 4-7 | 20.3 | 9.4 | 346.0 | (4.8) | 1.7 | 18.7 | 6.8 | 320.1 | (4.7) | 1.8 | Home Games | 3-3 | -5.2 | 1-5 | 3-3 | 20.7 | 9.8 | 336.0 | (4.7) | 1.5 | 23.3 | 8.5 | 341.8 | (4.9) | 2.0 | Last 3 Games | 1-2 | -1 | 1-2 | 0-3 | 12.0 | 5.3 | 306.3 | (4.3) | 2.3 | 12.7 | 3.3 | 231.7 | (3.4) | 1.7 | Grass Games | 4-4 | -2.9 | 2-6 | 3-5 | 19.7 | 8.6 | 351.4 | (4.8) | 1.4 | 21.6 | 8.1 | 359.0 | (5.1) | 1.7 | Conference Games | 4-4 | +0.1 | 4-4 | 2-6 | 17.6 | 7.9 | 329.0 | (4.5) | 1.9 | 17.4 | 7.2 | 313.5 | (4.5) | 1.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 20.3 | 9.4 | 20.1 | 32:33 | 35-121 | (3.5) | 19-38 | 51.8% | 225 | (6) | 72-346 | (4.8) | (17.1) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 24.9 | 12.2 | 20.5 | 31:43 | 39-165 | (4.2) | 18-32 | 56.4% | 214 | (6.7) | 71-378 | (5.3) | (15.2) | Offense Home Games | 20.7 | 9.8 | 19.5 | 31:27 | 32-100 | (3.1) | 20-39 | 52.2% | 236 | (6.1) | 71-336 | (4.7) | (16.3) | Defense (All Games) | 18.7 | 6.8 | 17.5 | 27:27 | 30-79 | (2.6) | 23-39 | 59.2% | 241 | (6.2) | 69-320 | (4.7) | (17.1) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 31.7 | 16.4 | 21.7 | 30:30 | 39-180 | (4.7) | 20-33 | 62.0% | 240 | (7.3) | 71-420 | (5.9) | (13.2) | Defense Home Games | 23.3 | 8.5 | 18.3 | 28:32 | 30-77 | (2.6) | 24-40 | 61.5% | 265 | (6.7) | 69-342 | (4.9) | (14.6) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: RUTGERS 38.2, MICHIGAN ST 41.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
9/29/2018 | INDIANA | 17-24 | L | 14.5 | W | 51.5 | U | 23-98 | 19-36-193 | 1 | 42-163 | 27-40-288 | 2 | 10/6/2018 | ILLINOIS | 17-38 | L | 4.5 | L | 51 | O | 30-119 | 29-46-267 | 3 | 43-330 | 10-19-89 | 0 | 10/13/2018 | @ MARYLAND | 7-34 | L | 23.5 | L | 50.5 | U | 45-171 | 2-17-8 | 5 | 40-290 | 9-20-85 | 1 | 10/20/2018 | NORTHWESTERN | 15-18 | L | 20 | W | 49.5 | U | 26-107 | 15-31-81 | 0 | 47-128 | 17-34-150 | 1 | 11/3/2018 | @ WISCONSIN | 17-31 | L | 29 | W | 52.5 | U | 26-72 | 20-39-261 | 0 | 46-317 | 12-23-156 | 2 | 11/10/2018 | MICHIGAN | 7-42 | L | 37 | W | 45 | O | 33-193 | 9-20-59 | 2 | 40-193 | 18-27-260 | 0 | 11/17/2018 | PENN ST | 7-20 | L | 28 | W | 53 | U | 55-188 | 5-16-46 | 3 | 39-139 | 17-37-183 | 2 | 11/24/2018 | @ MICHIGAN ST | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/29/2018 | C MICHIGAN | 31-20 | W | -27.5 | L | 45.5 | O | 47-160 | 16-25-185 | 1 | 22-63 | 20-35-182 | 2 | 10/6/2018 | NORTHWESTERN | 19-29 | L | -10.5 | L | 44 | O | 24-96 | 31-52-329 | 1 | 20-8 | 31-47-373 | 2 | 10/13/2018 | @ PENN ST | 21-17 | W | 13.5 | W | 54 | U | 36-123 | 25-53-295 | 1 | 32-205 | 19-32-192 | 1 | 10/20/2018 | MICHIGAN | 7-21 | L | 7 | L | 38.5 | U | 23-15 | 7-28-79 | 1 | 53-183 | 14-25-212 | 2 | 10/27/2018 | PURDUE | 23-13 | W | 2 | W | 49 | U | 40-108 | 26-46-318 | 1 | 13-62 | 29-49-277 | 3 | 11/3/2018 | @ MARYLAND | 24-3 | W | -3.5 | W | 43.5 | U | 46-269 | 11-22-87 | 2 | 29-26 | 8-24-74 | 2 | 11/10/2018 | OHIO ST | 6-26 | L | 3 | L | 52 | U | 18-54 | 18-48-220 | 3 | 45-120 | 24-39-227 | 1 | 11/17/2018 | @ NEBRASKA | 6-9 | L | 1 | L | 48 | U | 38-143 | 15-41-146 | 2 | 30-103 | 16-37-145 | 2 | 11/24/2018 | RUTGERS | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| RUTGERS: Rutgers had the Power Five's worst offense a year ago, which led to the team hiring its ninth offensive coordinator in as many years. The Scarlet Knights are now hoping that they can take advantage of what is actually a pretty good stable of running backs. Help, however, needs to come from the quarterback position. There have been some positive vibes coming out of New Jersey surrounding freshman Artur Sitkowski, but it might be another year or two before he hits his stride. Defensively, the best that can be said for Rutgers is its secondary is decent. Of course, that's not enough to prevent this team from being the worst in the East yet again. | | MICHIGAN ST: This program has quietly been one of the best in the country since 2010, winning 10 or more games in six of the past eight seasons. This year, quarterback Brian Lewerke is back under center for the Spartans. Lewerke is a solid passer from the pocket, but he also has the speed to make plays with his legs. That keeps defenses off balance, and it also creates more room for running back LJ Scott to work with. It's highly likely that Scott turns in a career year for Michigan State, which returns nine total starters on offense. As for the Spartans defense, this should be an elite run-stuffing group up front. But if MSU is going to contend for the conference title, then it will need to do a better job of getting after the quarterback. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 5/19/2024 11:36:39 AM EST. |
|
|