|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 0-4 | -5.5 | 0-4 | 0-2 | 12.5 | 10.0 | 243.7 | (3.7) | 2.0 | 23.2 | 7.0 | 388.0 | (5.8) | 0.7 | Road Games | 0-2 | -1 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 10.5 | 7.0 | 205.5 | (3.3) | 2.0 | 31.0 | 9.0 | 445.5 | (6.4) | 0.5 | Last 3 Games | 0-3 | -1 | 0-3 | 0-2 | 12.0 | 8.7 | 226.7 | (3.4) | 2.7 | 26.0 | 8.3 | 387.0 | (5.9) | 0.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 12.5 | 10.0 | 16.0 | 28:07 | 31-68 | (2.2) | 18-34 | 53.6% | 175 | (5.1) | 65-244 | (3.7) | (19.5) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 24.2 | 14.6 | 20.3 | 28:23 | 37-168 | (4.5) | 19-32 | 59.3% | 213 | (6.7) | 69-380 | (5.5) | (15.7) | Offense Road Games | 10.5 | 7.0 | 15.0 | 25:15 | 26-28 | (1.1) | 18-37 | 50.0% | 177 | (4.8) | 63-205 | (3.3) | (19.6) | Defense (All Games) | 23.2 | 7.0 | 17.7 | 31:53 | 36-133 | (3.7) | 19-31 | 61.0% | 255 | (8.3) | 66-388 | (5.8) | (16.7) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 21.3 | 9.8 | 19.2 | 32:37 | 37-156 | (4.2) | 17-30 | 56.1% | 206 | (6.9) | 68-363 | (5.4) | (17) | Defense Road Games | 31.0 | 9.0 | 20.5 | 34:44 | 42-173 | (4.1) | 15-27 | 54.5% | 272 | (9.9) | 69-445 | (6.4) | (14.4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 1-2 | 0 | 1-2 | 1-1 | 18.3 | 10.3 | 338.7 | (5) | 1.7 | 36.3 | 16.0 | 465.7 | (6.1) | 1.7 | Home Games | 1-1 | 0 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 22.5 | 12.0 | 384.0 | (5.6) | 1.5 | 22.0 | 10.0 | 413.0 | (5) | 2.0 | Last 3 Games | 1-2 | 0 | 1-2 | 2-1 | 18.3 | 10.3 | 338.7 | (5) | 1.7 | 36.3 | 16.0 | 465.7 | (6.1) | 1.7 | Turf Games | 1-1 | 0 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 22.5 | 12.0 | 384.0 | (5.6) | 1.5 | 22.0 | 10.0 | 413.0 | (5) | 2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Offense (All Games) | 18.3 | 10.3 | 17.3 | 27:11 | 33-100 | (3.1) | 19-35 | 53.8% | 238 | (6.7) | 68-339 | (5) | (18.5) | Opponents Defensive Avg. | 20.8 | 10 | 16.2 | 30:38 | 40-157 | (3.9) | 15-29 | 52.0% | 177 | (6.2) | 69-334 | (4.8) | (16) | Offense Home Games | 22.5 | 12.0 | 17.0 | 27:44 | 32-115 | (3.5) | 21-36 | 57.5% | 269 | (7.4) | 69-384 | (5.6) | (17.1) | Defense (All Games) | 36.3 | 16.0 | 24.3 | 32:49 | 46-246 | (5.3) | 18-31 | 59.8% | 220 | (7.2) | 77-466 | (6.1) | (12.8) | Opponents Offensive Avg. | 27.7 | 14.7 | 18.7 | 30:43 | 42-195 | (4.7) | 15-27 | 53.2% | 167 | (6.1) | 69-362 | (5.2) | (13.1) | Defense Home Games | 22.0 | 10.0 | 22.5 | 32:16 | 41-149 | (3.6) | 23-41 | 57.3% | 263 | (6.4) | 82-413 | (5) | (18.8) |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: UCF 29, TULANE 32 |
|
|
|
|
|
9/3/2015 | FLA INTERNATIONAL | 14-15 | L | -11 | L | 44.5 | U | 30-46 | 23-34-249 | 0 | 31-131 | 29-38-260 | 1 | 9/12/2015 | @ STANFORD | 7-31 | L | 20.5 | L | 46 | U | 29-30 | 14-36-151 | 2 | 41-130 | 18-30-361 | 0 | 9/19/2015 | FURMAN | 15-16 | L | -24.5 | L | | - | 42-171 | 14-30-98 | 4 | 28-54 | 16-30-216 | 1 | 9/26/2015 | @ S CAROLINA | 14-31 | L | 14 | L | 45 | P | 23-26 | 23-38-204 | 2 | 43-216 | 12-25-184 | 1 | 10/3/2015 | @ TULANE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/10/2015 | CONNECTICUT | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/17/2015 | @ TEMPLE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/24/2015 | HOUSTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/31/2015 | @ CINCINNATI | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/3/2015 | DUKE | 7-37 | L | 5.5 | L | 52 | U | 23-25 | 24-42-246 | 1 | 49-206 | 29-44-324 | 2 | 9/12/2015 | @ GEORGIA TECH | 10-65 | L | 33 | L | 59.5 | O | 33-71 | 15-33-177 | 2 | 56-439 | 8-10-132 | 1 | 9/19/2015 | MAINE | 38-7 | W | -10 | W | | - | 42-205 | 18-31-292 | 2 | 33-93 | 18-38-203 | 2 | 10/3/2015 | UCF | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/10/2015 | @ TEMPLE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/16/2015 | HOUSTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/24/2015 | @ NAVY | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10/31/2015 | @ MEMPHIS | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| UCF: The Knights' conference schedule is favorable with only one road game versus a team that finished above .500 in the AAC last year (at Cincinnati on Halloween). UCF should win at least four home games versus 4-8 Florida International, 3-9 FCS Furman, 2-10 UConn and 4-8 South Florida, but the road slate is difficult, especially the two non-conference games at Stanford and at South Carolina. UCF's projected win total is between five and seven victories. | | TULANE: There are too many offensive question marks to expect Tulane to make a huge jump from three wins. Sure, there are winnable home games versus FCS program Maine, 2-10 UConn and 2-10 Tulsa, but in-conference trips to Temple, Navy and Memphis could all spell major trouble for the Green Wave. Anything more than four wins in 2015 would be an overachievement for Tulane. |
|
|
Game Notes: |
|
Last Updated: 5/19/2024 12:37:45 PM EST. |
|
|