:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/67986513/1229685327.0.jpg)
So if ever there was a game that could have been midweek MACtion, it would have been Buffalo vs Kent. The two teams offenses are the best in the conference.
One is built on a solid and explosive running game, and the other on the best passing game in the conference. And the offensive stats bear out that way.
| Opponents | Buffalo | Kent State | Opponents | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | 44.3 | Scoring: Points/Game | 52.7 | 27.3 |
| 3 - 57 | 3 - 133 | Scoring: Games - Points | 3 - 158 | 3 - 82 |
| 61 | 59 | First Downs: Total | 99 | 57 |
| 29 - 27 - 5 | 34 - 21 - 4 | First Downs: Rushing - Passing - By Penalty | 49 - 44 - 6 | 26 - 23 - 8 |
| 3.89 | 6.26 | Rushing: Yards / Attempt | 5.79 | 4.59 |
| 122 - 475 - 5 | 125 - 783 - 11 | Rushing: Attempts - Yards - TD | 155 - 897 - 11 | 116 - 533 - 9 |
| 108.42 | 178.7 | Passing: Rating | 200.21 | 112.29 |
| 579 | 602 | Passing: Yards | 951 | 500 |
| 86 - 44 - 3 - 2 | 56 - 35 - 1 - 5 | Passing: Attempts - Completions - Interceptions - TD | 91 - 68 - 1 - 11 | 70 - 36 - 3 - 2 |
| 5.07 | 7.65 | Total Offense: Yards / Play | 7.51 | 5.55 |
| 208 - 1054 | 181 - 1385 | Total Offense: Plays - Yards | 246 - 1848 | 186 - 1033 |
| 0 | 13.5 | Punt Returns: Yards / Return | 5 | -1 |
| 1 - 0 - 0 | 2 - 27 - 0 | Punt Returns: Returns - Yards - TD | 2 - 10 - 0 | 1 - -1 - 0 |
| 24.18 | 13 | Kickoff Returns: Yards / Return | 13.83 | 24.93 |
| 11 - 266 - 0 | 5 - 65 - 0 | Kickoff Returns: Returns - Yards - TD | 6 - 83 - 0 | 14 - 349 - 0 |
| 42.92 | 33.73 | Punting: Yards / Punt | 38.83 | 36.82 |
| 13 - 558 | 11 - 371 | Punting: Punts - Yards | 6 - 233 | 11 - 405 |
| 1 - 0 - 0 | 3 - 65 - 1 | Interceptions: Returns - Yards - TD | 3 - 2 - 0 | 1 - 43 - 0 |
| 5 - 4 | 2 - 1 | Fumbles: Number - Lost | 8 - 2 | 4 - 2 |
| 15 - 125 | 18 - 150 | Penalties: Number - Yards | 26 - 228 | 19 - 146 |
| 30:50.00 | 29:10.00 | Time of Possession / Game | 31:16.67 | 28:43.33 |
| 30% | 43.33% | 3rd Down Conversions: Conversion % | 61.90% | 33.33% |
| 40 - 12 | 30 - 13 | 3rd Down Conversions: Attempts - Conversions | 42 - 26 | 36 - 12 |
| 50% | 60% | 4th Down Conversions: Conversion % | 100% | 42.86% |
| 8 - 4 | 5 - 3 | 4th Down Conversions: Attempts - Conversions | 5 - 5 | 7 - 3 |
| 70% | 91.67% | Red Zone: Success % | 85% | 90.91% |
| 10 - 7 | 12 - 11 | Red Zone: Attempts - Scores | 20 - 17 | 11 - 10 |
| 60% | - | Field Goals: Success % | 66.70% | 66.70% |
| 5 - 3 | 0 - 0 | Field Goals: Attempts - Made | 3 - 2 | 3 - 2 |
| 100% | 100% | PAT Kicking: Success % | 95.20% | 88.90% |
| 4 - 4 | 19 - 19 | PAT Kicking: Attempts - Made | 21 - 20 | 9 - 8 |
| 33.33% | - | 2-Point Conversions: Success % | 0% | 50% |
| 3 - 1 | 0 - 0 | 2-Point Conversions: Attempts - Made | 1 - 0 | 2 - 1 |
Kent leads in: scoring, rushing yards, passing yards, total plays, third down conversions, plays, first downs and third down conversion rates.
Buffalo leads in: yards per play, rushing yards per play, total yards per play, and red zone efficiency.
Kent has run the ball 30 more times, and thrown the ball 35 more times than the Bulls. Most of the offensive disparity can be chalked up to that, and a lot of that is owed to the UB defense scoring three touchdowns in week one.
Speaking of defense, this is where the Bulls will win or lose the game.
Stopping Kent is probably a lost cause, but.... can you slow them down enough to win a shootout? Kent’s defense has faced 0-3 EMU, 0-3 Akron, and 0-3 Bowling Green. And we’ve seen what Bowling Greens defense looks like.
On the year the Buffalo defense is the more solid unit on every front versus what Kent has seen thus far. They should be able to put more pressure on Dustin Crum, but the Kent QB has proven time and time again he’s just as dangerous when a play breaks down at the line.
If both teams play to character you’re going to see big games from Crum and Buffalo’s Jaret Patterson. Whoever has the bigger game is probably going to lead their team to victory.