|
|
C MICHIGAN First Half Results N ILLINOIS |
|
| 24 | 3 Final 14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
157 | C MICHIGAN | 23.5 | 158 | N ILLINOIS | -7.5 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 0-2 | -2.6 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 13.5 | 10.0 | 267.5 | (4.2) | 3.0 | 33.0 | 14.0 | 394.0 | (5.5) | 2.0 | Road Games | 0-1 | -1 | 1-0 | 1-0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 255.0 | (3.9) | 0.0 | 35.0 | 21.0 | 427.0 | (6.1) | 4.0 | Last 3 Games | 0-2 | -2.6 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 13.5 | 10.0 | 267.5 | (4.2) | 3.0 | 33.0 | 14.0 | 394.0 | (5.5) | 2.0 | Turf Games | 0-2 | -2.6 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 13.5 | 10.0 | 267.5 | (4.2) | 3.0 | 33.0 | 14.0 | 394.0 | (5.5) | 2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 13.5 | 10.0 | 11.5 | 27:48 | 33-110 | (3.3) | 17-29 | 59.3% | 157 | (5.3) | 63-267 | (4.2) | (19.8) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 17.2 | 10 | 16 | 29:59 | 36-134 | (3.7) | 16-30 | 52.9% | 172 | (5.7) | 67-306 | (4.6) | (17.7) | Offense Road Games | 20.0 | 20.0 | 11.0 | 31:52 | 39-118 | (3) | 17-27 | 63.0% | 137 | (5.1) | 66-255 | (3.9) | (12.7) | Defense (All Games) | 33.0 | 14.0 | 23.5 | 32:12 | 44-257 | (5.9) | 16-27 | 61.1% | 136 | (5.1) | 71-394 | (5.5) | (11.9) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 29 | 11.2 | 20.2 | 31:01 | 40-218 | (5.4) | 16-27 | 60.2% | 156 | (5.8) | 67-374 | (5.6) | (12.9) | Defense Road Games | 35.0 | 21.0 | 27.0 | 28:08 | 43-299 | (7) | 15-27 | 55.6% | 128 | (4.7) | 70-427 | (6.1) | (12.2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 0-2 | -2 | 1-1 | 0-2 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 219.5 | (3.2) | 2.0 | 25.0 | 1.5 | 353.0 | (4.9) | 1.5 | Home Games | 0-1 | -1 | 1-0 | 0-1 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 228.0 | (3) | 2.0 | 17.0 | 0.0 | 354.0 | (5.1) | 2.0 | Last 3 Games | 0-2 | -2 | 1-1 | 0-2 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 219.5 | (3.2) | 2.0 | 25.0 | 1.5 | 353.0 | (4.9) | 1.5 | Turf Games | 0-2 | -2 | 1-1 | 0-2 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 219.5 | (3.2) | 2.0 | 25.0 | 1.5 | 353.0 | (4.9) | 1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 6.5 | 1.5 | 15.0 | 28:23 | 39-109 | (2.8) | 16-29 | 55.9% | 110 | (3.7) | 69-219 | (3.2) | (33.8) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 6.5 | 4 | 11 | 28:30 | 34-71 | (2.1) | 14-28 | 50.9% | 101 | (3.6) | 62-172 | (2.8) | (26.5) | Offense Home Games | 6.0 | 3.0 | 15.0 | 31:32 | 43-117 | (2.7) | 18-33 | 54.5% | 111 | (3.4) | 76-228 | (3) | (38) | Defense (All Games) | 25.0 | 1.5 | 18.5 | 31:36 | 43-138 | (3.2) | 16-28 | 58.9% | 214 | (7.7) | 71-353 | (4.9) | (14.1) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 26 | 5.8 | 19 | 32:00 | 40-174 | (4.4) | 19-31 | 60.0% | 222 | (7.1) | 71-396 | (5.6) | (15.2) | Defense Home Games | 17.0 | 0.0 | 19.0 | 28:28 | 39-68 | (1.7) | 20-31 | 64.5% | 286 | (9.2) | 70-354 | (5.1) | (20.8) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: C MICHIGAN 28, N ILLINOIS 46.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2018 | @ KENTUCKY | 20-35 | L | 17 | W | 50.5 | O | 39-118 | 17-27-137 | 0 | 43-299 | 15-27-128 | 4 | 9/8/2018 | KANSAS | 7-31 | L | -3 | L | 48 | U | 28-103 | 18-32-177 | 6 | 45-216 | 18-27-145 | 0 | 9/15/2018 | @ N ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/22/2018 | MAINE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/29/2018 | @ MICHIGAN ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | BUFFALO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2018 | BALL ST | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2018 | @ IOWA | 7-33 | L | 10 | L | 46.5 | U | 36-101 | 15-26-110 | 2 | 48-209 | 13-25-143 | 1 | 9/8/2018 | UTAH | 6-17 | L | 13 | W | 46.5 | U | 43-117 | 18-33-111 | 2 | 39-68 | 20-31-286 | 2 | 9/15/2018 | C MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/22/2018 | @ FLORIDA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/29/2018 | @ E MICHIGAN | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/6/2018 | @ BALL ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/13/2018 | OHIO U | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| C MICHIGAN: Running back Jonathan Ward racked up 1,489 yards from scrimmage last season, and he'll once again be the go-to guy for the Chippewas this year. The issue is that he could be facing some stacked boxes, as Central Michigan is inexperienced at both quarterback and wide receiver. But on defense, this team should be among the best in the division. It has a good group of linebackers and a solid defensive line. If a spotty secondary can play better than expected, then this Central Michigan team might finish above expectations. | | N ILLINOIS: The Huskies are going to be incredibly tough to beat this year, as they have playmakers all over the field on both sides of the ball. 2017 MAC Defensive Player of the Year Sutton Smith is back to anchor a defense that led the nation with 8.8 tackles for loss per game, and was second in sacks per game with 3.3. He's the archetypical end for their 4-3 scheme. On the other side, QB Marcus Childers is back after winning the 2017 MAC Freshman of the Year award. He's going to be operating behind the conference's best offensive line, so expect this unit to put up a lot of points. They're the team to beat in the MAC. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 5/2/2024 6:24:08 PM EST. |
|
|