NEW MEXICO BOWL

VS
Wyoming (6-6) Breakdown:
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Mountain West
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
86 |
128.00 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
6 |
Air Force |
273.58 |
| Passing Offense |
103 |
170.67 |
Houston |
450.00 |
8 |
BYU |
288.92 |
| Total Offense |
112 |
298.67 |
Houston |
581.23 |
9 |
TCU |
469.08 |
| Scoring Offense |
111 |
16.92 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
8 |
TCU |
40.67 |
| Rushing Defense |
91 |
170.50 |
Texas |
62.15 |
8 |
TCU |
80.50 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
69 |
130.91 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
6 |
TCU |
90.28 |
| Total Defense |
83 |
395.58 |
TCU |
233.25 |
7 |
TCU |
233.25 |
| Scoring Defense |
75 |
27.25 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
5 |
TCU |
12.42 |
| Net Punting |
13 |
38.24 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
2 |
Air Force |
39.40 |
| Punt Returns |
12 |
13.88 |
LSU |
18.64 |
1 |
Wyoming |
13.88 |
| Kickoff Returns |
T-46 |
22.55 |
TCU |
30.62 |
4 |
TCU |
30.62 |
| Turnover Margin |
20 |
.58 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
2 |
Air Force |
1.42 |
| Pass Defense |
73 |
225.08 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
6 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
| Passing Efficiency |
112 |
104.35 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
9 |
TCU |
162.16 |
| Sacks |
78 |
1.67 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
7 |
TCU |
2.67 |
| Tackles For Loss |
73 |
5.42 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
4 |
Utah |
7.00 |
| Sacks Allowed |
107 |
2.92 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
8 |
TCU |
.83 |
Fresno State (8-4) Breakdown
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Western Athletic
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
7 |
231.58 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
2 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
| Passing Offense |
79 |
204.33 |
Houston |
450.00 |
6 |
Hawaii |
337.00 |
| Total Offense |
19 |
435.92 |
Houston |
581.23 |
6 |
Nevada |
521.58 |
| Scoring Offense |
14 |
34.33 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
3 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
| Rushing Defense |
111 |
212.42 |
Texas |
62.15 |
7 |
Nevada |
114.67 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
74 |
132.22 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
4 |
Boise St. |
103.53 |
| Total Defense |
97 |
411.67 |
TCU |
233.25 |
5 |
Boise St. |
299.62 |
| Scoring Defense |
81 |
27.83 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
4 |
Boise St. |
17.69 |
| Net Punting |
11 |
38.71 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
2 |
Boise St. |
38.82 |
| Punt Returns |
40 |
10.78 |
LSU |
18.64 |
4 |
Louisiana Tech |
12.33 |
| Kickoff Returns |
70 |
21.41 |
TCU |
30.62 |
5 |
Boise St. |
27.27 |
| Turnover Margin |
T-105 |
-.75 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
6 |
Boise St. |
1.46 |
| Pass Defense |
32 |
199.25 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
3 |
Boise St. |
172.77 |
| Passing Efficiency |
28 |
141.75 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
3 |
Boise St. |
164.23 |
| Sacks |
120 |
.75 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
9 |
Nevada |
2.33 |
| Tackles For Loss |
82 |
5.25 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
3 |
Boise St. |
7.46 |
| Sacks Allowed |
39 |
1.50 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
3 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
Preview by Coach Duncan
Kicking off the bowl season for 2009-2010 is the
New Mexico Bowl coming to us from the campus of Albuquerque's own New
Mexico Lobos. The 6-6 Wyoming Cowboys of the MWC take on the 8-4 Fresno State
Bulldogs out of the WAC. This is the first time these two teams have played
since their WAC days and the 1999 creation of the Mountain West Conference. The
Bulldogs won the last meeting in 1997 by a score of 24-7 and the overall series
is tied 3-3.
This game could actually look worse then the last
time the teams played due to the presence of Fresno's star running back Ryan
Matthews. He has the career school record for touchdowns at 36, he is second
all-time in rushing yards, and he also has a school record 10 100 yard rushing
games in a season this year. Obviously after putting up stats like this, the
junior running back is considering a jump to the NFL. A great performance in
this game could certainly catapult him closer to the top of the RB
chart.
Fresno will also be looking for great performances
from QB Ryan Colburn who has 2333 passing yards, 18 TD's, and 11 INT's this
season. Look for kicker Kevin Goessling to have another good game as well. He
has hit his last 15 straight field goals after missing his first FG try. He
is 22-24 going back to last season. Coming off of a big last second victory over
Big 10 Illinois look for the Bulldogs to continue pounding the
ball.
Wyoming will be led by true freshman QB Austyn
Carta-Samuels. He has 1752 passing yards with 7 TD's and 4 INT's this season.
Another true freshman, RB Alvester Alexander, is the teams leading rusher this
season with 503 yards and 6 TD's. Junior David Leonard is the teams leading
receiver with 70 receptions, 645 yards, and 1 TD.
ILB Brian Hendricks will get the job of leading the
defense in trying to stop Matthews. Hendricks, the teams leading tackler,
looks to rebound and have a great end to the season after missing several games
this year due to injuries.
Look for Fresno to have a huge advantage in this
game due to the presence of Matthews. If you have not had a chance to see this
young man play then don't miss it here because it could very well be the
last time you see him in a Bulldogs uniform as he attempts to run all over this
low-rated rushing defense. Wyoming must take advantage of its plus-7 turnover
ratio if they hope to have a chance; that is certainly better then Fresno's
minus-9 ratio. If the Cowboys can generate some turnovers, consistently move the
ball, and keep Fresno's defense on the field, they could pull out the upset
victory.
I expect to see Fresno State win this ball game by
a good margin, but I hope to see Wyoming keep it close. First year coach Dave
Christensen has done a great job getting Wyoming to a bowl considering the youth
he has playing, but his first bowl victory will most likely not come at the
expense of long time coach Pat Hill.
Final score: Fresno State 35
Wyoming
17
Sheraton Hawaii Bowl

VS
Southern Methodist (7-5) Breakdown
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Conference USA
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
100 |
112.75 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
10 |
UAB |
229.92 |
| Passing Offense |
28 |
267.17 |
Houston |
450.00 |
3 |
Houston |
450.00 |
| Total Offense |
61 |
379.92 |
Houston |
581.23 |
6 |
Houston |
581.23 |
| Scoring Offense |
54 |
27.92 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
5 |
Houston |
43.92 |
| Rushing Defense |
88 |
169.17 |
Texas |
62.15 |
7 |
UCF |
82.50 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
46 |
122.07 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
1 |
SMU |
122.07 |
| Total Defense |
92 |
404.00 |
TCU |
233.25 |
6 |
UCF |
348.08 |
| Scoring Defense |
90 |
29.08 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
7 |
UCF |
20.67 |
| Net Punting |
71 |
35.01 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
9 |
East Carolina |
39.35 |
| Punt Returns |
8 |
14.53 |
LSU |
18.64 |
1 |
SMU |
14.53 |
| Kickoff Returns |
53 |
22.21 |
TCU |
30.62 |
6 |
Southern Miss. |
26.09 |
| Turnover Margin |
57 |
.08 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
6 |
East Carolina |
1.00 |
| Pass Defense |
82 |
234.83 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
3 |
Tulane |
218.00 |
| Passing Efficiency |
55 |
130.20 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
6 |
Houston |
159.56 |
| Sacks |
78 |
1.67 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
8 |
UCF |
3.08 |
| Tackles For Loss |
89 |
5.08 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
9 |
UCF |
7.58 |
| Sacks Allowed |
104 |
2.83 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
11 |
East Carolina |
.85 |
Nevada (8-4) Breakdown
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Western Athletic
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
1 |
362.25 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
1 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
| Passing Offense |
107 |
159.33 |
Houston |
450.00 |
8 |
Hawaii |
337.00 |
| Total Offense |
2 |
521.58 |
Houston |
581.23 |
1 |
Nevada |
521.58 |
| Scoring Offense |
5 |
40.58 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
2 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
| Rushing Defense |
26 |
114.67 |
Texas |
62.15 |
1 |
Nevada |
114.67 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
114 |
155.30 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
8 |
Boise St. |
103.53 |
| Total Defense |
88 |
398.92 |
TCU |
233.25 |
3 |
Boise St. |
299.62 |
| Scoring Defense |
74 |
27.17 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
3 |
Boise St. |
17.69 |
| Net Punting |
34 |
37.08 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
4 |
Boise St. |
38.82 |
| Punt Returns |
115 |
3.63 |
LSU |
18.64 |
8 |
Louisiana Tech |
12.33 |
| Kickoff Returns |
33 |
23.34 |
TCU |
30.62 |
2 |
Boise St. |
27.27 |
| Turnover Margin |
70 |
-.17 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
4 |
Boise St. |
1.46 |
| Pass Defense |
119 |
284.25 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
9 |
Boise St. |
172.77 |
| Passing Efficiency |
32 |
140.75 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
4 |
Boise St. |
164.23 |
| Sacks |
36 |
2.33 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
1 |
Nevada |
2.33 |
| Tackles For Loss |
22 |
6.92 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
2 |
Boise St. |
7.46 |
| Sacks Allowed |
4 |
.75 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
2 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
By GoldenEagles98
Key Players:
Nevada
Colin Kaepernick (QB) 1875
yds passing (19 TD, 5 Int) 1160 yds rushing (16 TD)
Luke Lippincott
(RB) 1034 yds rushing (7.7 ypc), 9 TD,
2 rec. TD
Vai Taua
(RB) 1345
yds rushing (7.8 ypc), 10 TD, 2 rec. TD
Southern Methodist
Shawnbrey McNeal (RB) 1125 yds rushing
(5.0 ypc), 9 TD
Emmanuel Sanders (WR) 91 rec. 1215 yds, 6 TD. 15.4
yds per punt return (1 TD)
Chase Kennemer (LB)
126 tackles (11 tfl), 1 sack, 2 Int, 4 fumble rec.
The Hawaii Bowl pits one of the
most potent offensive attacks in the country in the Nevada Wolfpack against an
up and coming SMU squad, led by offensive guru June Jones. The
Wolfpack boast the country's leading rushing offense, gaining over 360
yards per contest on the ground. The attack is led by QB Colin Kaepernick,
who is one of the nations leaders in total offense and total touchdowns.
Going up against the one of the weaker run defenses in the country, Kaepernick,
Vai Taua, and Luke Lippincott should find plenty of running room. If the
Mustangs have any success slowing down the Wolfpack rushing attack, tight end
Virgil Green and wideout Brandon Wimberly are talented enough to stretch the
defense and get into the end zone.
For the SMU Mustangs, big play
wideout/punt returner Emmanuel Sanders is one of the most dangerous threats in
the country, catching almost 8 passes per contest and scoring 10
touchdowns. However, if the Mustangs look to pull off the upset, Shawnbrey
McNeal and the SMU offensive line must control the line of scrimmage and eat up
clock against the Wolfpack defense, which only gives up 114 yards per game on
the ground. If the Mustangs can hold the football for long stretches then
they have a chance to be successful by keeping the rushing attack of the
Wolfpack on the sidelines.
SMU has been in many close games
this year, and that experience could help if this game goes down to the
wire. Don't look for that to be the case though. While the Mustangs
should be able to find some success moving the ball, Nevada's offense is
too talented and too powerful for the SMU defense to slow them down.
While SMU's turnaround is one of the great stories of the college football
season, the task at hand is simply too daunting despite the homecoming for June
Jones back to the islands.
Nevada 47, SMU
28
Roady's Humanitarian Bowl

VS
Bowling Green (7-5) Breakdown
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Mid-American
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
114 |
81.25 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
12 |
Northern Ill. |
202.42 |
| Passing Offense |
8 |
310.17 |
Houston |
450.00 |
1 |
Bowling Green |
310.17 |
| Total Offense |
52 |
391.42 |
Houston |
581.23 |
4 |
Toledo |
438.25 |
| Scoring Offense |
62 |
27.33 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
5 |
Central Mich. |
33.15 |
| Rushing Defense |
103 |
192.75 |
Texas |
62.15 |
12 |
Temple |
108.83 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
50 |
122.64 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
5 |
Ohio |
107.90 |
| Total Defense |
82 |
393.75 |
TCU |
233.25 |
10 |
Northern Ill. |
324.00 |
| Scoring Defense |
65 |
26.17 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
7 |
Central Mich. |
17.23 |
| Net Punting |
94 |
33.82 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
4 |
Ball St. |
35.93 |
| Punt Returns |
58 |
8.88 |
LSU |
18.64 |
6 |
Central Mich. |
13.50 |
| Kickoff Returns |
104 |
19.47 |
TCU |
30.62 |
11 |
Temple |
23.90 |
| Turnover Margin |
T-31 |
.42 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
3 |
Ohio |
1.08 |
| Pass Defense |
34 |
201.00 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
4 |
Eastern Mich. |
150.50 |
| Passing Efficiency |
50 |
132.01 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
4 |
Central Mich. |
150.47 |
| Sacks |
89 |
1.58 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
8 |
Temple |
2.75 |
| Tackles For Loss |
113 |
4.17 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
13 |
Kent St. |
8.42 |
| Sacks Allowed |
82 |
2.33 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
11 |
Central Mich. |
1.15 |
Idaho (7-5) Breakdown
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Western Athletic
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
49 |
160.75 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
6 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
| Passing Offense |
11 |
290.58 |
Houston |
450.00 |
2 |
Hawaii |
337.00 |
| Total Offense |
10 |
451.33 |
Houston |
581.23 |
3 |
Nevada |
521.58 |
| Scoring Offense |
25 |
31.83 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
4 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
| Rushing Defense |
77 |
155.58 |
Texas |
62.15 |
3 |
Nevada |
114.67 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
117 |
156.71 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
9 |
Boise St. |
103.53 |
| Total Defense |
105 |
424.50 |
TCU |
233.25 |
7 |
Boise St. |
299.62 |
| Scoring Defense |
112 |
35.50 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
9 |
Boise St. |
17.69 |
| Net Punting |
90 |
33.97 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
8 |
Boise St. |
38.82 |
| Punt Returns |
38 |
10.93 |
LSU |
18.64 |
3 |
Louisiana Tech |
12.33 |
| Kickoff Returns |
97 |
19.89 |
TCU |
30.62 |
8 |
Boise St. |
27.27 |
| Turnover Margin |
T-105 |
-.75 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
6 |
Boise St. |
1.46 |
| Pass Defense |
114 |
268.92 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
8 |
Boise St. |
172.77 |
| Passing Efficiency |
10 |
154.06 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
2 |
Boise St. |
164.23 |
| Sacks |
112 |
1.17 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
8 |
Nevada |
2.33 |
| Tackles For Loss |
117 |
3.92 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
9 |
Boise St. |
7.46 |
| Sacks Allowed |
62 |
2.00 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
5 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
Tostito's Fiesta Bowl

VS
TCU (12-0) Breakdown
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Mountain West
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
5 |
256.50 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
2 |
Air Force |
273.58 |
| Passing Offense |
67 |
212.58 |
Houston |
450.00 |
6 |
BYU |
288.92 |
| Total Offense |
4 |
469.08 |
Houston |
581.23 |
1 |
TCU |
469.08 |
| Scoring Offense |
4 |
40.67 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
1 |
TCU |
40.67 |
| Rushing Defense |
3 |
80.50 |
Texas |
62.15 |
1 |
TCU |
80.50 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
2 |
90.28 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
1 |
TCU |
90.28 |
| Total Defense |
1 |
233.25 |
TCU |
233.25 |
1 |
TCU |
233.25 |
| Scoring Defense |
6 |
12.42 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
1 |
TCU |
12.42 |
| Net Punting |
101 |
33.46 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
8 |
Air Force |
39.40 |
| Punt Returns |
20 |
12.93 |
LSU |
18.64 |
3 |
Wyoming |
13.88 |
| Kickoff Returns |
1 |
30.62 |
TCU |
30.62 |
1 |
TCU |
30.62 |
| Turnover Margin |
41 |
.33 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
3 |
Air Force |
1.42 |
| Pass Defense |
4 |
152.75 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
2 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
| Passing Efficiency |
3 |
162.16 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
1 |
TCU |
162.16 |
| Sacks |
21 |
2.67 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
1 |
TCU |
2.67 |
| Tackles For Loss |
55 |
5.75 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
3 |
Utah |
7.00 |
| Sacks Allowed |
T-5 |
.83 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
1 |
TCU |
.83 |
Boise State (12-0) Breakdown
| Category |
National
Rank |
Actual |
National
Leader |
Actual |
Conf
Rank |
Western Athletic
Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense |
20 |
194.46 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
3 |
Nevada |
362.25 |
| Passing Offense |
30 |
266.00 |
Houston |
450.00 |
3 |
Hawaii |
337.00 |
| Total Offense |
8 |
460.46 |
Houston |
581.23 |
2 |
Nevada |
521.58 |
| Scoring Offense |
1 |
44.15 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
1 |
Boise St. |
44.15 |
| Rushing Defense |
40 |
126.85 |
Texas |
62.15 |
2 |
Nevada |
114.67 |
| Pass Efficiency Defense |
12 |
103.53 |
Alabama |
88.81 |
1 |
Boise St. |
103.53 |
| Total Defense |
13 |
299.62 |
TCU |
233.25 |
1 |
Boise St. |
299.62 |
| Scoring Defense |
16 |
17.69 |
Alabama |
11.00 |
1 |
Boise St. |
17.69 |
| Net Punting |
10 |
38.82 |
Georgia |
42.84 |
1 |
Boise St. |
38.82 |
| Punt Returns |
37 |
10.97 |
LSU |
18.64 |
2 |
Louisiana Tech |
12.33 |
| Kickoff Returns |
5 |
27.27 |
TCU |
30.62 |
1 |
Boise St. |
27.27 |
| Turnover Margin |
2 |
1.46 |
Rutgers |
1.67 |
1 |
Boise St. |
1.46 |
| Pass Defense |
13 |
172.77 |
Air Force |
148.67 |
1 |
Boise St. |
172.77 |
| Passing Efficiency |
2 |
164.23 |
Cincinnati |
166.19 |
1 |
Boise St. |
164.23 |
| Sacks |
72 |
1.77 |
Pittsburgh |
3.75 |
3 |
Nevada |
2.33 |
| Tackles For Loss |
13 |
7.46 |
Middle Tenn. |
8.83 |
1 |
Boise St. |
7.46 |
| Sacks Allowed |
1 |
.38 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
1 |
Boise St. |
.38 |
Preview by CoachDuncan
The 2010 Fiesta Bowl will forever be known as the
BCS Buster Bowl as it is the first BCS bowl game ever to feature two non-BCS
schools in the Boise State Broncos and the TCU Horned Frogs. This may be a
rematch of last year's Poinsettia Bowl game won by TCU 17-16, but these are not
the same two teams. Both teams have drastically improved on both sides of the
ball and are undefeated to this point so expect a fantastic ball game for the
chance to finish #2 in the rankings.
The game will see two of the nations best as Boise
State is ranked #8 in total offense and #13 in total defense while
TCU is ranked #4 in total offense and #1 in total defense. The Horned Frogs
have given the Broncos their only loss in the last two seasons and the Broncos
are itching to show that last year's game is not a representation of who they
really are.
TCU is led by QB Andy Dalton who has 2484 passing
yards, 22 TD's, 5 INT''s along with 432 rushing yards and 8 TD's. He is the key
to the offense and this junior QB has done nothing but get stronger as they
season has gone on. He leads RB's Joseph Turner (732 yards, 11 TD's) and Matthew
Turner (667 yards, 8 TD's) out of the backfield and with his ability to
run or throw the ball, it is difficult to know exactly where the
ball is at any given moment.
WR Jeremy Kerley is the electrifying kick returner
that you may have seen in some highlight videos this season. He is the best
return man in the MWC and averages 121.8 all-purpose yards per game and has
scored a TD as a wide receiver, running back, and punt returner. This guy
is all over the field so look for him to make an impact in this game at
some point.
The defense is led by consensus first
team All-American DE Jerry Hughes. He had 11.5 sacks this season for 7th in the
NCAA after leading the NCAA with 15 last season. He is the MWC defensive player
of the year, the Lott Trophy winner, and the Ted Hendricks Award winner. This
young man should make an easy transition to the NFL level and have a
very nice game here to end his college career. LB Daryl Washington is the teams
leading tackler with 99 tackles as well as 3 INT's. This team relies a lot on
its defense, but with the potent offense it has found this season, they are
a formidable opponent.
The Boise State Broncos are led by first team
All-American QB Kellen Moore. Only a sophomore this young man has a name you had
better learn and remember because you will be hearing a lot about this young man
in the years to come. Already being considered one of the Heisman hopefuls next
season, he has 3325 passing yards, 39 TD's, and 3 INT's. He is the national
leader in passing efficiency and is one of the best QB's in all of college
football.
RB Jeremy Avery is the first place you want to look
if Moore doesn't have the ball. This junior has 1131 yards on 197 carries this
season to go along with 6 TD's. He also has 1 receiving TD, so he is a solid
dual threat back. Look for TB Doug Martin to play a large roll in this game. In
the last three games after returning from injury he has rushed for 37 carries,
332 yards, and 8 TD's. Obviously this team is stronger when they can spread the
ball around with both of these back healthy.
WR's Titus Young and Austin Pettis are integral to
Moore's success as they have both had great seasons. Young has 71 catches for
969 yards and 10 TD's. Pettis meanwhile has 62 catches for 850 yards and 14
TD's. However, Pettis was hurt in the Nevada game and his return for the Fiesta
Bowl is questionable. This could be a critical injury as they need him in order
to have solid play over the middle while taking pressure off
Young.
The defense is led by another strong DE in Ryan
Winterswyk. He has 8.5 sacks this season and 16.5 tackles for loss. The Frogs
need to keep him out of the backfield and away from the ball carriers so they
can have a chance at consistent positive yardage.
The only thing more scary than how good these two
teams are this season is the fact that both teams return most of their
respective lineups for next season. This is a rematch we could see again
next year potentially for the whole ball of wax in the national championship. It
may seem like a long shot, but stranger things have happened in college
football.
We should expect a fantastic game between these two
teams, but it is hard to say if it is going to be a low scoring defensive game
or a shootout given the two teams rankings on both sides of the ball. I would
aim for somewhere in the middle as both teams work hard to keep the other
contained. TCU is the stronger team overall and I see them pulling away in
the end for the much closer then it looks 14 point win.
TCU 35
Boise State 21