Central Michigan Composite Control — 2022

Central Michigan Composite Control — 2022 | Punt & Rally

2022 Composite Control — Game Control + Momentum Control

Composite Score

31.9

Composite Rank: #101 • 3–8 (FBS games)

GC Score

30.4

#102 in FBS

GC Net

-39.6

Raw GC Net

GC Off

9.6

SOS-Adj Offense

GC Allowed

49.2

Avg Allowed ↓

MC Score

33.4

#100 in FBS

MC Net

-1.14

Raw MC Net

MC Off

0.79

Adj. Sequences

MC Win%

100%

When winning MC

Game Control Game-by-Game Win Probability Log

Wk	Opponent	Result	GC Scores			Avg WP%	Ctrl%	Never Trailed
Wk	Opponent	Result	GC Off	GC Allowed	GC Net	Avg WP%	Ctrl%	Never Trailed
1	Oklahoma State A	L 44–58	1.4	94.7	-93.2	3.6%	0%	—
2	South Alabama H	L 24–38	6.7	80.1	-73.5	13.9%	0%	—
3	Bucknell H	—	90.7	0.4	+90.3	99.1%	100%	✓
4	Penn State A	L 14–33	1	95.5	-94.5	2.5%	0%	—
5	Toledo A	L 17–38	5.6	79.8	-74.2	11.3%	0%	—
6	Ball State H	L 16–17	58.1	23.3	+34.9	64.6%	59.3%	—
7	Akron A	W 28–21	67.6	14.3	+53.3	77%	75%	—
8	Bowling Green H	L 18–34	11.4	72.1	-60.7	28.5%	0%	—
10	Northern Illinois A	W 35–22	87.6	7.2	+80.3	83.5%	86.3%	✓
11	Buffalo H	W 31–27	22.6	49.8	-27.2	39.3%	10.8%	—
12	Western Michigan H	L 10–12	59.4	14.3	+45.1	68.1%	65.5%	—
13	Eastern Michigan A	L 19–38	24.5	59	-34.5	44.2%	19.4%	—
3W / 11G			—	—	—	—	—	—

Momentum Control Game-by-Game Scoring Sequences Log

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opponent-Adjusted			Raw		Edge	Opp Wt
Wk	Opponent	Result	MC Off	MC Def ↓	MC Net	Off	Def ↓	Edge	Opp Wt
1	Oklahoma State A	L 44–58	1.9	7.58	-5.68	1	4	✗ 1	1
2	South Alabama H	L 24–38	1.85	3.7	-1.85	1	2	✗ 1	1
4	Penn State A	L 14–33	3.05	3.05	+0	1	1	Tied	1
5	Toledo A	L 17–38	0	2.31	-2.31	0	3	✗ 0	0.77
6	Ball State H	L 16–17	0	0	+0	0	0	Tied	0.25
7	Akron A	W 28–21	0	0	+0	0	0	Tied	0.05
8	Bowling Green H	L 18–34	0	0	+0	0	0	Tied	0.16
10	Northern Illinois A	W 35–22	0.14	0	+0.14	1	0	✓ +1	0.14
11	Buffalo H	W 31–27	0.48	0.96	-0.48	1	2	✗ 1	0.48
12	Western Michigan H	L 10–12	0	0	+0	0	0	Tied	0.18
13	Eastern Michigan A	L 19–38	0	0.58	-0.58	0	1	✗ 0	0.58
3W / 11G			—	—	—	5	13	—	—