|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
177 | UTEP | +15.5 | Over 39 | 178 | UTSA | -3.5 | Under 51 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 0-4 | -2 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 13.5 | 7.5 | 295.0 | (4.5) | 2.2 | 33.2 | 20.5 | 418.5 | (6.6) | 1.0 | Road Games | 0-2 | 0 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 12.0 | 5.0 | 261.0 | (4.5) | 1.5 | 38.0 | 24.0 | 522.5 | (7.5) | 1.0 | Last 3 Games | 0-3 | -1 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 14.7 | 6.7 | 317.0 | (4.8) | 2.0 | 34.3 | 21.7 | 452.0 | (7.1) | 1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 13.5 | 7.5 | 16.2 | 36:26 | 41-174 | (4.2) | 11-25 | 45.5% | 121 | (4.9) | 66-295 | (4.5) | (21.9) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 25 | 13.3 | 17.5 | 33:31 | 39-174 | (4.5) | 15-28 | 51.3% | 170 | (6) | 68-345 | (5.1) | (13.8) | Offense Road Games | 12.0 | 5.0 | 13.0 | 35:08 | 32-180 | (5.5) | 10-26 | 38.5% | 81 | (3.1) | 58-261 | (4.5) | (21.7) | Defense (All Games) | 33.2 | 20.5 | 20.5 | 27:18 | 44-255 | (5.8) | 12-19 | 61.0% | 163 | (8.5) | 63-418 | (6.6) | (12.6) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 27.7 | 16.4 | 18.2 | 28:20 | 41-183 | (4.4) | 15-26 | 57.4% | 172 | (6.5) | 68-355 | (5.2) | (12.8) | Defense Road Games | 38.0 | 24.0 | 26.5 | 32:21 | 53-379 | (7.2) | 9-16 | 57.6% | 143 | (8.7) | 69-522 | (7.5) | (13.7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 1-3 | -2 | 0-4 | 3-1 | 17.2 | 9.2 | 261.7 | (3.7) | 1.5 | 37.0 | 20.5 | 423.5 | (6.8) | 1.5 | Home Games | 1-1 | 0 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 22.5 | 15.0 | 263.5 | (3.9) | 1.0 | 29.0 | 13.5 | 371.0 | (5.9) | 2.0 | Last 3 Games | 1-2 | -1 | 0-3 | 2-1 | 20.7 | 12.3 | 275.7 | (4) | 1.0 | 33.0 | 18.0 | 397.0 | (6.3) | 2.0 | Dome Games | 1-1 | 0 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 22.5 | 15.0 | 263.5 | (3.9) | 1.0 | 29.0 | 13.5 | 371.0 | (5.9) | 2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 17.2 | 9.2 | 16.5 | 31:04 | 35-97 | (2.8) | 19-36 | 51.7% | 165 | (4.5) | 71-262 | (3.7) | (15.2) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 24.8 | 13.3 | 19.4 | 29:24 | 34-152 | (4.5) | 19-34 | 56.3% | 214 | (6.2) | 68-367 | (5.4) | (14.8) | Offense Home Games | 22.5 | 15.0 | 15.5 | 29:49 | 33-121 | (3.6) | 18-34 | 54.4% | 142 | (4.2) | 67-263 | (3.9) | (11.7) | Defense (All Games) | 37.0 | 20.5 | 20.5 | 28:56 | 34-137 | (4) | 18-28 | 66.1% | 287 | (10.2) | 62-423 | (6.8) | (11.4) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 26.9 | 13.9 | 20.3 | 31:36 | 37-150 | (4.1) | 19-31 | 60.2% | 240 | (7.8) | 68-390 | (5.8) | (14.5) | Defense Home Games | 29.0 | 13.5 | 20.5 | 30:11 | 28-58 | (2.1) | 22-34 | 63.8% | 312 | (9.1) | 62-371 | (5.9) | (12.8) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: UTEP 16.2, UTSA 31 |
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2018 | N ARIZONA | 10-30 | L | 7 | L | | - | 36-102 | 15-31-127 | 3 | 36-107 | 19-26-211 | 1 | 9/8/2018 | @ UNLV | 24-52 | L | 22.5 | L | 55 | O | 37-265 | 11-29-123 | 3 | 56-414 | 6-14-119 | 0 | 9/15/2018 | @ TENNESSEE | 0-24 | L | 33.5 | W | 52.5 | U | 28-95 | 9-23-39 | 0 | 50-345 | 13-19-167 | 2 | 9/22/2018 | NEW MEXICO ST | 20-27 | L | 5.5 | L | 51.5 | U | 64-235 | 10-16-194 | 3 | 34-155 | 9-18-156 | 1 | 9/29/2018 | @ UTSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | NORTH TEXAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/20/2018 | @ LOUISIANA TECH | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/27/2018 | UAB | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2018 | @ ARIZONA ST | 7-49 | L | 17.5 | L | 52 | O | 34-2 | 19-43-218 | 3 | 36-266 | 16-24-237 | 0 | 9/8/2018 | BAYLOR | 20-37 | L | 16.5 | L | 54.5 | O | 26-98 | 18-33-157 | 1 | 31-91 | 27-41-403 | 1 | 9/15/2018 | @ KANSAS ST | 17-41 | L | 20 | L | 46.5 | O | 39-143 | 19-34-157 | 1 | 44-164 | 14-19-285 | 2 | 9/22/2018 | TEXAS ST | 25-21 | W | -7.5 | L | 48.5 | U | 41-145 | 19-35-127 | 1 | 25-26 | 17-28-222 | 3 | 9/29/2018 | UTEP | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | @ RICE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2018 | LOUISIANA TECH | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/20/2018 | @ SOUTHERN MISS | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| UTEP: UTEP averaged an FBS-worst 11.8 PPG last season, and new head coach Dana Dimel'who worked with Kansas State's offense since 2009'will now implement his own system in order help the firepower improve drastically. That change won't happen right away, though. The Miners just don't have enough talent on that side of the ball yet. Defensively, UTEP has a good secondary. But a weak defensive line will handicap its ability to slow down opposing offenses. Overall, this is probably the worst team in its division. | | UTSA: UTSA's offense is its biggest question mark heading into this season. The Roadrunners aren't very good on the line, and quarterback Bryce Rivers is unproven. That will make life on running back Jalen Rhodes really tough. But UTSA just might have the best defense in the conference, led by edge rusher Eric Banks. Defensive end Marcus Davenport might be gone, but this lethal Roadrunners pass rush isn't going anywhere. If the offense can play significantly better than expected, then UTSA will compete for its division, but it's hard to see that happening. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 6/17/2024 3:28:34 AM EST. |
|
|