2012 Fiesta Bowl Stanford vs. Oklahoma State: 5 Key Stats from the First Half
The 2012 Fiesta Bowl has not disappointed as the Stanford Cardinal take on the Oklahoma State Cowboys under the lights in Glendale.
Can the Cowboys keep feeding the Nation's top WR and crush the Stanford's bowl dreams?
We're definitely in for a crazy finish, but first let's take a quick look at five key stats that have told the story of the first half.
8:21: Time of Possession for OK State
Stanford as totally controlled the time of possession in the first half. Although the Cowboys love to run a rapid-paced attack, they need to step up on D and stop the Cardinal's long, methodical drives.
11: Total rushing yards for the Cowboys
RB Joseph Randle have been extremely inefficient throughout this game. Although the Cowboys' flashy passing attack gets most of the hype, much of OK State's success this season has been due to their ability to produce on the ground. Look for them to try to establish a more balanced attack in the second half.
4/139: Four receptions totaling 139 yards for Cowboys' WR Justin Blackmon
After visibly displaying frustration with his lack of targets in the first half, star WR Justin Blackmon broke off two crucial TD passes midway through the second quarter. The Cowboys need to keep looking towards Blackmon in the second half because the Cardinal can't seem to keep him contained.
144: Rushing yards for Stanford
The Cowboys have been dominated on the ground in the first half of this game. Stanford's four-headed rushing attack has already been able to break off a number of long gains, spurred by poor OK State tackling.
1-5: OK State's third down efficiency
The Cowboys have struggled converting on third downs tonight, as they have been consistently left in third-and-long situations. Although they did manage to punch in a critical third-and-goal run, they need to consistently keep their third downs at a reasonable distance.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?