|
|
S ALABAMA MEMPHIS |
|
| 66 | 35 Final 52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
389 | S ALABAMA | 69 | 67 | 390 | MEMPHIS | -26 | -31.5 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 1-2 | 0 | 1-1 | 3-0 | 26.7 | 12.0 | 301.3 | (4.6) | 2.7 | 38.7 | 25.0 | 476.3 | (5.8) | 3.0 | Road Games | 0-1 | 0 | 0-1 | 1-0 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 214.0 | (3) | 1.0 | 55.0 | 31.0 | 617.0 | (7.2) | 3.0 | Last 3 Games | 1-2 | 0 | 1-1 | 3-0 | 26.7 | 12.0 | 301.3 | (4.6) | 2.7 | 38.7 | 25.0 | 476.3 | (5.8) | 3.0 | Turf Games | 1-2 | 0 | 1-1 | 3-0 | 26.7 | 12.0 | 301.3 | (4.6) | 2.7 | 38.7 | 25.0 | 476.3 | (5.8) | 3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 26.7 | 12.0 | 14.3 | 25:14 | 36-137 | (3.8) | 17-30 | 57.8% | 164 | (5.5) | 66-301 | (4.6) | (11.3) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 23.5 | 10.6 | 16.6 | 29:13 | 36-114 | (3.2) | 20-32 | 60.1% | 212 | (6.5) | 68-326 | (4.8) | (13.9) | Offense Road Games | 13.0 | 13.0 | 15.0 | 29:11 | 37-78 | (2.1) | 17-34 | 50.0% | 136 | (4) | 71-214 | (3) | (16.5) | Defense (All Games) | 38.7 | 25.0 | 24.7 | 35:45 | 48-184 | (3.8) | 21-34 | 60.2% | 292 | (8.5) | 82-476 | (5.8) | (12.3) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 39.7 | 21.7 | 24.9 | 31:06 | 44-215 | (4.9) | 20-33 | 60.5% | 278 | (8.4) | 77-493 | (6.4) | (12.4) | Defense Road Games | 55.0 | 31.0 | 32.0 | 33:45 | 44-164 | (3.7) | 26-42 | 61.9% | 453 | (10.8) | 86-617 | (7.2) | (11.2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 2-1 | -2.7 | 2-1 | 1-1 | 48.7 | 33.7 | 603.0 | (9.2) | 2.0 | 19.3 | 6.3 | 267.3 | (3.9) | 1.3 | Home Games | 2-0 | 0 | 2-0 | 1-0 | 62.5 | 47.0 | 715.5 | (9.7) | 1.0 | 18.0 | 5.0 | 243.0 | (3.8) | 1.5 | Last 3 Games | 2-1 | -2.7 | 2-1 | 1-1 | 48.7 | 33.7 | 603.0 | (9.2) | 2.0 | 19.3 | 6.3 | 267.3 | (3.9) | 1.3 | Turf Games | 2-1 | -2.7 | 2-1 | 1-1 | 48.7 | 33.7 | 603.0 | (9.2) | 2.0 | 19.3 | 6.3 | 267.3 | (3.9) | 1.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 48.7 | 33.7 | 24.3 | 24:43 | 35-322 | (9.1) | 21-30 | 68.1% | 281 | (9.3) | 66-603 | (9.2) | (12.4) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 46.6 | 32.4 | 24.6 | 28:29 | 37-240 | (6.4) | 24-34 | 69.6% | 326 | (9.5) | 72-566 | (7.9) | (12.2) | Offense Home Games | 62.5 | 47.0 | 29.5 | 28:28 | 41-367 | (9) | 23-33 | 71.2% | 348 | (10.6) | 74-715 | (9.7) | (11.4) | Defense (All Games) | 19.3 | 6.3 | 16.7 | 35:17 | 47-166 | (3.5) | 12-22 | 55.2% | 102 | (4.6) | 69-267 | (3.9) | (13.8) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 23.2 | 9.8 | 16.7 | 32:31 | 41-185 | (4.5) | 13-23 | 55.2% | 132 | (5.7) | 64-317 | (4.9) | (13.7) | Defense Home Games | 18.0 | 5.0 | 15.0 | 31:32 | 33-116 | (3.5) | 16-30 | 54.1% | 126 | (4.1) | 64-243 | (3.8) | (13.5) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: S ALABAMA 32.3, MEMPHIS 17.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2018 | LOUISIANA TECH | 26-30 | L | 11 | W | 52.5 | O | 43-217 | 11-23-91 | 4 | 48-231 | 19-29-209 | 3 | 9/8/2018 | @ OKLAHOMA ST | 13-55 | L | 30 | L | 64.5 | O | 37-78 | 17-34-136 | 1 | 44-164 | 26-42-453 | 3 | 9/15/2018 | TEXAS ST | 41-31 | W | -10 | T | 48.5 | O | 27-116 | 24-33-266 | 3 | 52-158 | 17-32-214 | 3 | 9/22/2018 | @ MEMPHIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/29/2018 | @ APPALACHIAN ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | @ GA SOUTHERN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2018 | ALABAMA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2018 | MERCER | 66-14 | W | -31 | W | | - | 47-324 | 28-39-428 | 1 | 24-60 | 14-27-114 | 2 | 9/8/2018 | @ NAVY | 21-22 | L | -6.5 | L | 67 | U | 24-233 | 15-25-145 | 4 | 73-264 | 4-6-52 | 1 | 9/14/2018 | GEORGIA ST | 59-22 | W | -29 | W | 63.5 | O | 35-410 | 19-27-269 | 1 | 43-173 | 19-34-139 | 1 | 9/22/2018 | S ALABAMA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/28/2018 | @ TULANE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | CONNECTICUT | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2018 | UCF | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/20/2018 | @ MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| S ALABAMA: If you thought Georgia State's 2017 rushing offense was bad, get a load of what South Alabama managed on the ground: 3.1 yards per carry and 97.3 yards per game, each fifth-worst in FBS. Livening up that attack'and a passing game that wasn't great, either'will be Steve Campbell's biggest task in his first year as head coach. The defense will be anchored by a tenacious secondary, but there are plenty of questions up front. | | MEMPHIS: Riley Ferguson and Anthony Miller are no longer around, but it's pretty clear that head coach Mike Norvell's spread offense can adapt to any player who's running the show. The Tigers are going to put up points, especially considering talented running backs Darrell Henderson and Patrick Taylor return to make plays behind what could be the conference's best O-line. On the other side of the ball, Memphis has some talent in its secondary. The Tigers aren't going to shut anybody out, but they can create turnovers and aren't going to completely let their offense down. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 4/20/2024 12:01:53 AM EST. |
|
|