College Football: Nevada Wolf Pack Defeat New Mexico State, 48-34
Ethan Miller/Getty Images
It was a wild game to say the least. With over 1,100 yards of combined total offense, the Nevada Wolf Pack prevailed over the New Mexico State Aggies on Saturday in a game that was the college football version of the Ali-Frazier "Thrilla in Manila".
The first half saw two evenly matched teams answering each other score for score. The Aggies had a 27-20 half time lead. Nevada had no answer for the Aggies prolific air attack in the first half. But the second half saw the Wolf Pack make adjustments on defense that held the Aggies to only one score while the Wolf Pack scored four times in the second half.
Ponder these stats. Nevada had 683 yards of total offense to New Mexico's 514. The Aggies had an amazing 466 yards passing to the Wolf Pack's 309. Nevada rushed for 374 yards while holding the Aggies to 48 rushing yards.
New Mexico had 11 penalties for 85 yards while Nevada had seven for 58 yards. The Aggies also turned the ball over three times on interceptions while Nevada had one fumble lost.
Nevada Freshman QB Cody Fajardo was 19 for 29 through the air for 283 yards and rushed 13 times for 60 yards and four TD's. Lampford Mark only had eight carries but made the most of them rushing for 185 yards and one TD. Mike Ball had 19 carries for 93 yards and re-injured his left ankle. Stephon Jefferson had 4 rushes for 31 yards and two TD's.
DL Jack Reynoso appeared to suffer a significant leg injury, possibly a fracture as he was carted off the field and was seen in a splint later.
5-3 Nevada is the only undefeated team in the WAC and their 3-0 in-conference record places them alone at the top of the WAC standings. They have come a long way since Week 1. They face Idaho, Hawaii, LA Tech and Utah State in remaining games and if they continue to improve may earn their second consecutive WAC Championship. Most importantly, Nevada has a phenomenal freshman QB in Fajardo.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?