|
|
MIAMI OHIO First Half Results CINCINNATI |
|
| 29 | 14 Final 24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
323 | MIAMI OHIO | 29 | 324 | CINCINNATI | -11 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 3-2 | +2 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 27.0 | 15.0 | 397.6 | (5.7) | 1.0 | 34.8 | 14.8 | 517.2 | (6.6) | 1.6 | Road Games | 1-2 | +1 | 1-2 | 2-1 | 26.0 | 15.7 | 414.7 | (5.8) | 1.0 | 48.0 | 21.3 | 588.7 | (7.6) | 1.0 | Last 3 Games | 2-1 | +1 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 31.7 | 19.3 | 446.7 | (6.6) | 0.3 | 34.7 | 15.3 | 566.3 | (7.2) | 2.0 | Turf Games | 3-2 | +2 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 27.0 | 15.0 | 397.6 | (5.7) | 1.0 | 34.8 | 14.8 | 517.2 | (6.6) | 1.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 27.0 | 15.0 | 21.8 | 30:52 | 31-113 | (3.6) | 25-38 | 67.2% | 285 | (7.5) | 69-398 | (5.7) | (14.7) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 29.2 | 15 | 21.6 | 32:21 | 39-167 | (4.3) | 21-33 | 64.4% | 232 | (7) | 72-399 | (5.6) | (13.7) | Offense Road Games | 26.0 | 15.7 | 21.0 | 30:32 | 27-79 | (2.9) | 29-44 | 66.4% | 336 | (7.7) | 71-415 | (5.8) | (15.9) | Defense (All Games) | 34.8 | 14.8 | 26.6 | 28:59 | 42-237 | (5.6) | 23-36 | 62.4% | 280 | (7.7) | 78-517 | (6.6) | (14.9) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 24.5 | 12.7 | 21 | 28:57 | 36-158 | (4.3) | 21-36 | 59.0% | 236 | (6.6) | 72-393 | (5.5) | (16) | Defense Road Games | 48.0 | 21.3 | 29.3 | 29:28 | 41-257 | (6.2) | 25-36 | 70.1% | 331 | (9.3) | 77-589 | (7.6) | (12.3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 3-0 | +2.9 | 2-1 | 1-1 | 28.0 | 14.3 | 475.3 | (6.8) | 2.7 | 13.7 | 2.3 | 359.3 | (5.3) | 2.3 | Home Games | 2-0 | +1 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 28.5 | 18.5 | 465.5 | (6.9) | 3.0 | 8.5 | 0.0 | 338.0 | (4.8) | 2.0 | Last 3 Games | 3-0 | +2.9 | 2-1 | 1-1 | 28.0 | 14.3 | 475.3 | (6.8) | 2.7 | 13.7 | 2.3 | 359.3 | (5.3) | 2.3 | Turf Games | 2-0 | +1 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 28.5 | 18.5 | 465.5 | (6.9) | 3.0 | 8.5 | 0.0 | 338.0 | (4.8) | 2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 28.0 | 14.3 | 23.0 | 28:44 | 37-207 | (5.5) | 18-33 | 55.1% | 268 | (8.2) | 70-475 | (6.8) | (17) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 19.8 | 12.3 | 20.5 | 31:51 | 41-187 | (4.5) | 16-28 | 58.4% | 196 | (7) | 69-383 | (5.5) | (19.3) | Offense Home Games | 28.5 | 18.5 | 22.5 | 28:00 | 40-259 | (6.5) | 17-27 | 61.8% | 206 | (7.5) | 67-465 | (6.9) | (16.3) | Defense (All Games) | 13.7 | 2.3 | 17.3 | 31:16 | 34-136 | (4) | 20-34 | 57.3% | 224 | (6.5) | 68-359 | (5.3) | (26.3) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 20.3 | 8.5 | 17.9 | 29:09 | 34-138 | (4.1) | 19-33 | 57.2% | 226 | (6.9) | 66-364 | (5.5) | (17.9) | Defense Home Games | 8.5 | 0.0 | 18.0 | 31:59 | 34-123 | (3.6) | 21-36 | 57.5% | 214 | (5.9) | 70-338 | (4.8) | (39.8) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: MIAMI OHIO 23, CINCINNATI 27 |
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2012 | @ OHIO ST | 10-56 | L | 25.5 | L | 50.5 | O | 20--1 | 32-54-313 | 3 | 53-294 | 19-33-244 | 0 | 9/8/2012 | S ILLINOIS | 30-14 | W | -20 | L | | - | 33-110 | 28-36-226 | 1 | 37-154 | 19-34-195 | 2 | 9/15/2012 | @ BOISE ST | 12-39 | L | 21 | L | 54 | U | 23-49 | 21-28-178 | 0 | 45-295 | 24-31-304 | 2 | 9/22/2012 | MASSACHUSETTS | 27-16 | W | -24 | L | 50.5 | U | 42-216 | 12-22-192 | 1 | 50-258 | 19-40-213 | 3 | 9/29/2012 | @ AKRON | 56-49 | W | -1.5 | W | 57 | O | 39-189 | 34-49-516 | 0 | 26-183 | 32-43-446 | 1 | 10/6/2012 | @ CINCINNATI | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2012 | @ BOWLING GREEN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/27/2012 | OHIO U | | | | | | | | | | | | | 11/3/2012 | @ BUFFALO | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/6/2012 | PITTSBURGH | 34-10 | W | -4.5 | W | 50.5 | U | 31-259 | 14-28-205 | 0 | 42-137 | 24-37-278 | 2 | 9/15/2012 | DELAWARE ST | 23-7 | W | -44.5 | L | | - | 49-259 | 20-27-208 | 6 | 26-110 | 18-36-151 | 2 | 9/29/2012 | *VIRGINIA TECH | 27-24 | W | 6 | W | 47 | O | 32-103 | 20-43-392 | 2 | 34-160 | 17-30-242 | 3 | 10/6/2012 | MIAMI OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2012 | FORDHAM | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/20/2012 | @ TOLEDO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/26/2012 | @ LOUISVILLE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 11/3/2012 | SYRACUSE | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| MIAMI OHIO: The RedHawks are one of many MAC teams returning most of their starters and they'll need the extra year of experience these guys got last season. Miami Ohio showed signs of the team they can be this season with a nice streak of wins in the middle of the year, but they ultimately pick and choose when they'd give their best effort too often. The offensive line is spotty and they'll need it to improve as they have a very talented QB in Zac Dysert (3,513 pass yds, 23 TD), but absolutely no running game. The RedHawks were the worst rushing team in the country last season (74 rush YPG). On the defensive end, Miami was very average, but a lot of that has to do with the unit being on the field for too long. This defense has playmakers in CB Dayonne Nunley (58 tackles, 3 INT) and DL Jason Semmes (4.5 sacks), so an improved running game on offense could help the defense out a whole lot. | | CINCINNATI: The Bearcats QB position is a question mark, but it seems as though either Munchie Legaux (5 TD, 4 INT) will win the job outright, or Cincinnati will employ a two-QB system with senior Brendan Kay (8 career pass attempts). Legaux will need to improve his 47% completion rate if he's going to be successful. Junior WR Anthony McClung returns after a team-high 683 receiving yards and 6 TD in 2011. The task of replacing Isaiah Pead falls to senior RB George Winn, who had just 40 carries last year but scored on a 69-yard TD run in the Liberty Bowl. The Bearcats defensive line helped lead the nation in Tackles For Loss (8.6 per game) and finish second in sacks (3.5 per game). The linebackers are solid too, but the secondary could cause Butch Jones fits, as for years now, the team has struggled against the pass, allowing 261 passing YPG in 2011. |
|
|
Game Notes: |
|
Last Updated: 4/28/2024 9:12:44 AM EST. |
|
|