MAYBERRY INTELLIGENCEConference contextSchool insightsRankings · Predictions · Championship outlook
Mayberry AnalysisFootball

PSAC Football · September 19, 2026 · Postgame · Professional

Retrospective · Professional postgame coverage of every matchup in Week 3.

Mayberry Sports Intelligence
PSAC Football · Professional tier

Week 3 · September 19, 2026

Postgame report · Prepared September 22, 2026

Retrospective postgame report. Written September 22, 2026, about games completed September 19, 2026. Analysis is limited to results through this reporting window. Follow-up tests below are reconstructed after the fact; they were not predictions published before those subsequent games.

The assessment

Four conventional-football teams remain 3–0 in this coverage: IUP, Kutztown, Shepherd and Slippery Rock. Their evidence is different. SRU produced another large offensive total against Millersville; Shepherd stopped California after the opening drive; Kutztown established a large lead before late concessions; IUP survived another close finish. West Chester and Bloomsburg supplied useful offensive recoveries, while Clarion’s rebound included a major takeaway advantage. The upcoming Shepherd–Kutztown game compares two unbeaten teams, but the current records do not remove opponent and field-position differences. Mansfield’s dominant sprint-football opener is covered separately and excluded from conventional-football comparisons.

Verified final results

DateMatchupFinalCategory
2026-09-19Bloomsburg at GannonBloomsburg 33 · Gannon 27 (OT)Conventional football
2026-09-19California (PA) at ShepherdCalifornia (PA) 7 · Shepherd 28Conventional football
2026-09-19Clarion at LackawannaClarion 59 · Lackawanna 13Conventional football
2026-09-19Mansfield at CornellMansfield 43 · Cornell 6Sprint football
2026-09-19West Chester at EdinboroWest Chester 44 · Edinboro 24Conventional football
2026-09-19IUP at ShippensburgIUP 28 · Shippensburg 26Conventional football
2026-09-19Kutztown at Lock HavenKutztown 35 · Lock Haven 20Conventional football
2026-09-19Slippery Rock at MillersvilleSlippery Rock 70 · Millersville 10Conventional football

Conference context

Through this reporting window: overall records from the verified school schedules, listed alphabetically. These are not divisional standings or power rankings. Opponent quality is not adjusted. Mansfield sprint football is excluded from this comparison. Lackawanna is covered as an opponent, not counted among the 15 conventional-football member programs.

SchoolOverallGamesPoints/gameAllowed/gameYards/playAllowed/play
Bloomsburg2–1324.716.34.754.08
California (PA)2–1332.023.06.065.62
Clarion2–1341.724.07.205.48
East Stroudsburg2–1333.035.06.726.28
Edinboro2–1323.728.75.024.60
Gannon0–3325.036.75.336.82
IUP3–0329.723.75.454.93
Kutztown3–0345.323.06.945.86
Lock Haven1–2319.324.05.075.36
Millersville0–3316.044.74.507.58
Seton Hill1–2321.321.74.694.25
Shepherd3–0335.720.36.384.92
Shippensburg1–2322.022.05.364.27
Slippery Rock3–0358.029.37.926.19
West Chester2–1328.721.34.685.19

Yards/play divides total official offensive yards by total official offensive plays across the listed games; it is not an average of game rates. Team scoring includes return points and overtime. Small samples and different opponents limit comparisons.

Bloomsburg at Gannon

2026-09-19

Bloomsburg recovered its offensive footing and beat Gannon 33–27 in overtime.

The Huskies gained 398 yards after 171 against Edinboro and converted 11 of 18 third downs. That supports improved sustained movement, though the opponent changed. Gannon averaged essentially the same yards per play and passed for the same 240 yards, but ran 20 fewer plays and committed three giveaways to Bloomsburg’s one. The Huskies’ 18-play, 84-yard touchdown drive contrasted with Gannon’s immediate 77-yard touchdown answer. After regulation ended 27–27, Declan Clancy finished a five-play, 25-yard overtime possession with the winning three-yard run. Gannon’s passing remained productive, yet 50 net rushing yards and lost possessions narrowed its margin for error. The overtime result was not regulation dominance.

MeasureBloomsburgGannon
Total yards398290
Offensive plays7656
Yards per play (calculated)5.245.18
Net rushing yards15850
Passing yards240240
Passing: completions–attempts–INT20 - 37 - 019 - 26 - 2
Third downs11 of 184 of 8
Fourth downs0 of 00 of 1
Red-zone scores / chances6 - 63 - 4

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

Against Shippensburg, test Bloomsburg’s third-down improvement. Gannon’s Lock Haven matchup requires attention to giveaways and rushing first downs.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
BLO1stBLO2914:55FG11-5805:11
GAN1stBLO4009:36TD7-4004:06
BLO1stBLO1605:26PUNT4-1502:38
GAN1stGAN4102:48TD8-5905:06
BLO2ndBLO1612:34TD18-8408:44
GAN2ndGAN2303:44TD1-7700:12
BLO2ndBLO2603:26TD11-7402:11
GAN2ndGAN3001:10INT1-000:10
BLO2ndGAN4301:00FG6-2900:26
GAN2ndGAN2300:28HALF1-(-1)00:28
GAN3rdGAN1214:55INT3-001:18
BLO3rdGAN3013:37TD6-3003:10
GAN3rdGAN2010:24PUNT6-3804:25
BLO3rdBLO405:59PUNT5-1803:11
GAN3rdGAN4402:48TD9-5605:00
BLO4thBLO2512:48PUNT5-1803:28
GAN4thGAN2009:20PUNT7-2904:26
BLO4thBLO1704:54PUNT3-501:29
GAN4thGAN2403:25PUNT3-(-8)01:38
BLO4thGAN4401:47FGA4-801:04
GAN4thGAN3600:43FUMB5-1800:39
BLO4thBLO4600:04FUMB1-2900:04
GANOTBLO2500:00DOWNS5-(-9)00:00
BLOOTGAN2500:00TD5-2500:00

Official sources: Bloomsburg recap · Bloomsburg box score · Gannon box score · Gannon recap

California (PA) at Shepherd

2026-09-19

Shepherd held California scoreless after its opening possession and won 28–7.

California arrived after scoring 89 points in two games but managed 272 yards and three giveaways. Bobbie Boyd Jr.’s opening touchdown was answered immediately by a 45-yard Hardyway-to-Daryl Harper score; the game stayed 7–7 until Harper’s second touchdown late in the third. Corey Lawrence’s punt-return touchdown made it 21–7, so one quarter of Shepherd’s scoring came from special teams. The Rams nevertheless gained 349 yards on 51 plays to California’s 272 on 66, a clear efficiency edge. Neither offense consistently extended possessions on third down. Shepherd’s stronger evidence is preventing California’s passing scores and producing decisive gains, rather than constant offensive control.

MeasureCalifornia (PA)Shepherd
Total yards272349
Offensive plays6651
Yards per play (calculated)4.126.84
Net rushing yards107167
Passing yards165182
Passing: completions–attempts–INT25 - 38 - 214 - 25 - 1
Third downs2 conversions; 11/12 attempts disputed2 of 10
Fourth downs0 of 30 of 0
Red-zone scores / chances1 - 11 - 2

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

At Kutztown, assess Shepherd’s long-drive offense separately from return points. California against SRU needs a recovery in passing efficiency and fewer giveaways.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
CAL1stCAL3514:55TD4-651:56
SHEP1stSHEP2612:53TD2-740:52
CAL1stCAL2512:01PUNT9-355:33
SHEP1stSHEP0106:28PUNT7-305:20
CAL1stCAL2601:08INT4-271:14
SHEP2ndSHEP2014:54PUNT5-273:45
CAL2ndCAL1711:09PUNT3-(-1)1:35
SHEP2ndSHEP3809:34INT5-343:06
CAL2ndCAL2506:28INT11-434:40
SHEP2ndSHEP2001:48PUNT3-60:45
CAL2ndCAL3301:03PUNT3-51:03
SHEP2ndSHEP3400:00HALF0-00:00
SHEP3rdSHEP2414:55PUNT5-192:44
CAL3rdCAL0312:11DOWNS12-616:26
SHEP3rdSHEP3605:45PUNT3-61:44
CAL3rdCAL0404:01PUNT3-92:10
SHEP3rdCAL4401:51TD6-441:18
CAL3rdCAL2500:33PUNT3-21:36
SHEP4thSHEP2213:57PUNT5-111:37
CAL4thCAL1812:20PUNT5-102:44
SHEP4thCAL1109:36TD0-00:00
CAL4thCAL2509:29DOWNS8-282:39
SHEP4thSHEP4706:50TD6-534:36
CAL4thCAL3102:07FUMB1-100:08
SHEP4thCAL4101:59HALF4-251:59

Source qualification: California’s box score lists its third downs as 2-for-11; Shepherd’s lists 2-for-12. The denominator is unresolved, so no exact California third-down percentage is used.

Official sources: California (PA) recap · California (PA) box score · Shepherd box score · Shepherd recap

Clarion at Lackawanna

2026-09-19

Clarion rebounded with a 59–13 win, combining efficient offense with five takeaways.

The Golden Eagles gained 498 yards on 52 plays, compared with Lackawanna’s 386 on 79. Jase Ferguson threw for 298 yards without an interception, and the team added six rushing touchdowns. Two 72-yard touchdown drives in the second quarter broke open a 14–13 game, while second-half scoring drives of 85 and 80 yards showed it could move without short fields. Four interceptions and a lost fumble by Lackawanna still enlarged the opportunity gap. Clarion’s 17 penalties for 145 yards are a material qualification. The result restored evidence of offensive capability after Kutztown, but the different opponent and turnover advantage make direct score comparisons misleading.

MeasureClarionLackawanna
Total yards498386
Offensive plays5279
Yards per play (calculated)9.584.89
Net rushing yards200162
Passing yards298224
Passing: completions–attempts–INT16 - 22 - 020 - 35 - 4
Third downs5 of 85 of 14
Fourth downs0 of 02 of 7
Red-zone scores / chances6 - 61 - 4

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

Against Edinboro, track turnover-free drives, penalty yardage and yards per play before projecting another high score. Sustained drives are more useful than takeaway count alone.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
CLA1stCLA4115:00TD6-5901:30
LAC1stLAC2513:30TD16-7509:25
CLA1stCLA3103:38TD8-6903:35
LAC2ndLAC2615:00TD6-7402:56
CLA2ndCLA2811:58TD4-7201:48
CLA2ndCLA2808:16TD9-7204:00
LAC2ndLAC3004:08INT2-(-5)00:18
CLA2ndLAC4903:50PUNT3-100:54
LAC2ndLAC802:56FUMB4-(-3)01:09
CLA2ndLAC1501:47TD1-1500:00
LAC2ndLAC3600:28PUNT3-907:48
CLA2ndCLA600:24HALF1-(-1)00:24
LAC0INT6-6500:00
LAC3rdLAC2515:00DOWNS11-6504:35
CLA3rdCLA1010:25TD7-8503:43
LAC3rdLAC1006:34INT11-6507:23
CLA4thCLA2014:11TD6-8002:52
LAC4thLAC2511:19DOWNS8-3403:08
CLA4thCLA4108:11TD2-5900:44
LAC4thLAC2507:27INT1-000:09
CLA4thLAC2507:18FG4-001:32
LAC4thLAC2405:38DOWNS11-5704:44
CLA4thCLA1900:54HALF2-000:54

Official sources: Clarion recap · Clarion box score

Mansfield at Cornell

2026-09-19 · Sprint football — separate from PSAC conventional football

Mansfield opened its sprint-football season with a 43–6 win at Cornell.

The Mountaineers gained 528 yards and limited Cornell to 80, a broader advantage than finishing alone. Joseph Frye threw touchdown passes of 28, 37 and 64 yards and added rushing scores of 31 and 68 yards. Mansfield’s third-quarter touchdown drives covered 75, 88 and 80 yards, evidence of movement from ordinary field position. Cornell did not score until the fourth quarter. The caution is discipline: Mansfield was penalized 13 times for 185 yards, and two extra points were blocked. Those flaws were survivable here but could matter in a closer game. Sprint football is evaluated separately from PSAC conventional-football comparisons.

MeasureMansfieldCornell
Total yards52880
Offensive plays6248
Yards per play (calculated)8.521.67
Net rushing yards28242
Passing yards24638
Passing: completions–attempts–INT9 - 14 - 05 - 17 - 2
Third downs8 of 134 of 12
Fourth downs1 of 10 of 0
Red-zone scores / chances1 - 21 - 2

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

Against Molloy, track penalty yards, protection on extra points and production without assuming another sequence of long touchdowns.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
COR1stCOR2515:00POSS0-00:00
COR1stCOR2515:00PUNT4-01:54
MANSFB1stCOR4113:06TD3-411:17
COR1stCOR3511:46PUNT3-(-5)1:04
MANSFB1stMANSFB2510:42FUMB15-657:44
COR1stCOR1002:58PUNT3-92:07
MANSFB1stMANSFB4800:51PUNT3-91:43
COR2ndCOR2014:08PUNT3-82:23
MANSFB2ndMANSFB4311:45TD5-575:12
COR2ndCOR3008:52PUNT3-(-9)2:19
MANSFB2ndMANSFB4806:33PUNT3-31:06
COR2ndCOR2005:27PUNT5-53:34
MANSFB2ndMANSFB4701:53FG6-481:13
COR2ndCOR2500:40HALF1-(-2)0:40
MANSFB3rdMANSFB2514:54TD5-752:14
COR3rdCOR2512:40PUNT3-41:42
MANSFB3rdMANSFB1210:58TD8-884:49
COR3rdMANSFB4406:00PUNT3-(-6)1:24
MANSFB3rdMANSFB2004:36TD4-802:21
COR3rdMANSFB4102:15INT6-311:03
MANSFB3rdMANSFB1001:12PUNT3-12:03
COR4thCOR4214:09INT4-112:04
MANSFB4thCOR4712:05TD3-471:46
COR4thCOR3110:07TD10-696:41
MANSFB4thMANSFB4803:24HALF5-243:24

Official sources: Mansfield box score · Mansfield recap

West Chester at Edinboro

2026-09-19

West Chester’s 44–24 win supplied the offensive touchdowns absent in regulation against IUP.

The Golden Rams scored 30 unanswered points after trailing 17–14 at halftime. Colin O’Sullivan threw for 231 yards on 14 completions in 19 attempts. West Chester opened the second half with a seven-play, 78-yard touchdown drive; its first two first-half touchdowns had also come on 83-yard possessions. Later short fields accelerated separation, so not every second-half point represents the same task. Edinboro’s final 80-yard touchdown pass came after 44–17; removing that play leaves 36 passing yards on its other attempts. The result exposed a limited passing day beneath a respectable final score. West Chester’s sustained drives are the transferable positive, qualified by opponent and field position.

MeasureWest ChesterEdinboro
Total yards395244
Offensive plays6647
Yards per play (calculated)5.985.19
Net rushing yards164128
Passing yards231116
Passing: completions–attempts–INT14 - 19 - 010 - 16 - 0
Third downs7 of 132 of 10
Fourth downs3 of 31 of 2
Red-zone scores / chances5 - 53 - 3

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

Against Millersville, assess West Chester’s passing efficiency and long-drive scoring. Edinboro at Clarion needs earlier passing production and ball security rather than a late explosive gain.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
EDI1stEDI2414:55TD10-7605:45
WCU1stWCU1709:06TD14-8307:10
EDI1stEDI2601:50PUNT3-701:23
WCU1stWCU1700:27TD11-8305:43
EDI2ndEDI2509:44FG15-6807:52
WCU2ndWCU301:46FUMB1-500:06
EDI2ndWCU801:40TD4-801:40
WCU3rdWCU2214:54TD7-7804:09
EDI3rdEDI2510:45FUMB5-1002:38
WCU3rdEDI3508:07TD9-3504:10
EDI3rdEDI1803:51PUNT3-(-2)01:12
WCU3rdEDI3502:39FG5-3202:15
EDI3rdEDI2500:24DOWNS4-(-5)01:16
WCU4thEDI2014:08FG4-602:04
WCU4thEDI2412:00TD1-2400:05
EDI4thEDI2311:50PUNT3-201:10
WCU4thWCU2410:40FG12-4807:30
EDI4thEDI2003:03TD1-8000:11
WCU4thEDI4502:52HALF5-902:52

Official sources: Edinboro box score · Edinboro recap · West Chester box score · West Chester recap

IUP at Shippensburg

2026-09-19

IUP stayed unbeaten with a 28–26 win, but Shippensburg again tested its ability to protect a lead.

IUP gained fewer total yards, 333 to 407, while producing more per play. Leon Parson’s 57-yard touchdown run and Mason Maggs’ three touchdown passes supplied explosive scoring despite only eight completed passes. IUP led 21–7, but Shippensburg reduced the gap to one before D’Avay Johnson’s 25-yard touchdown catch completed a 53-yard drive with 3:27 left. The Raiders answered with a 14-play, 82-yard touchdown march and failed on the tying conversion with 27 seconds remaining. Their 79 offensive plays to IUP’s 52 show the possession burden. IUP’s explosive ability is established more clearly than its capacity to close comfortably.

MeasureIUPShippensburg
Total yards333407
Offensive plays5279
Yards per play (calculated)6.405.15
Net rushing yards206221
Passing yards127186
Passing: completions–attempts–INT8 - 23 - 023 - 40 - 0
Third downs6 of 137 of 17
Fourth downs0 of 01 of 1
Red-zone scores / chances1 - 24 - 5

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

Against Seton Hill, monitor IUP passing completion and second-half scoring while leading. Shippensburg at Bloomsburg needs touchdown finishes without another early multi-score deficit.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
IUP1stIUP1715:00TD8-8304:08
SHI1stSHI2510:52TD2-7500:39
IUP1stIUP3010:05PUNT6-603:14
SHI1stSHI1806:51FGA13-6806:20
IUP1stIUP2000:31PUNT4-1901:29
SHI2ndSHI2114:02PUNT3-(-4)01:29
IUP2ndSHI4012:33TD4-4001:39
SHI2ndSHI810:47PUNT5-2302:09
IUP2ndIUP4308:38TD2-5700:13
SHI2ndSHI2508:25PUNT3-601:52
IUP2ndIUP3206:33PUNT3-201:26
SHI2ndSHI3305:07FUMB7-4403:18
IUP2ndIUP2301:49FUMB3-(-8)00:12
SHI2ndIUP1501:37FG7-201:37
SHI3rdSHI4415:00PUNT4-1201:46
IUP3rdIUP1313:14PUNT3-(-5)01:56
SHI3rdIUP4811:18TD7-4803:02
IUP3rdIUP1608:12PUNT5-2302:38
SHI3rdSHI205:34PUNT5-2202:51
IUP3rdIUP1902:43PUNT6-3904:18
SHI4thSHI813:25PUNT7-3404:05
SHI4thIUP2709:20FG5-1502:34
IUP4thIUP4706:38TD7-5303:11
SHI4thSHI1803:22TD14-8202:55
IUP4thSHI1900:21HALF1-(-2)00:21

Official sources: IUP recap · IUP box score · Shippensburg recap · Shippensburg box score

Kutztown at Lock Haven

2026-09-19

Kutztown built a 35–7 lead before Lock Haven’s late touchdowns narrowed the final to 35–20.

The final yardage gap was 338–327, but timing changes its meaning. Judd Novak threw four touchdown passes, and Kutztown converted six of eight third downs. Scoring drives of 63 and 76 yards created an early lead; a 67-yard third-quarter drive made it 35–7. Lock Haven’s two fourth-quarter touchdown possessions then covered 80 and 76 yards. Those show a productive late response but cannot portray the earlier competitive phases as evenly balanced. Kutztown still committed three giveaways, including two interceptions. Lock Haven’s 39 net rushing yards left most of its advance dependent on passing volume. Both ball security and score state qualify the raw totals.

MeasureKutztownLock Haven
Total yards338327
Offensive plays4659
Yards per play (calculated)7.355.54
Net rushing yards9439
Passing yards244288
Passing: completions–attempts–INT15 - 20 - 233 - 38 - 2
Third downs6 of 85 of 11
Fourth downs0 of 00 of 1
Red-zone scores / chances4 - 43 - 4

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

Against Shepherd, test Kutztown’s passing efficiency and giveaway rate. Lock Haven at Gannon needs balanced production before the score forces heavy passing.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
KTZ1stKTZ3714:55TD7-6304:05
HAV1stHAV1710:46INT6-4903:28
KTZ1stKTZ2407:18TD5-7602:27
HAV1stHAV2504:45PUNT3-(-2)02:12
KTZ1stKTZ4202:33FUMB4-3202:07
HAV1stHAV2600:26PUNT5-1703:41
KTZ2ndKTZ1811:45INT2-800:41
HAV2ndKTZ2911:04INT4-2001:24
KTZ2ndKTZ2709:40PUNT3-(-3)02:38
HAV2ndHAV4407:02TD7-5604:56
KTZ2ndKTZ5001:56TD8-5001:25
HAV2ndHAV2700:27HALF1-000:27
HAV3rdHAV2014:53PUNT3-702:21
KTZ3rdHAV512:32TD3-501:15
HAV3rdHAV2511:17PUNT3-702:19
KTZ3rdKTZ3308:58TD3-6701:25
HAV3rdHAV2507:33DOWNS7-2504:30
KTZ3rdHAV5003:03INT1-000:07
HAV3rdHAV2002:56TD12-8007:25
KTZ4thKTZ2510:25PUNT8-2206:24
HAV4thHAV2404:01TD8-7602:43
KTZ4thHAV4301:18HALF2-(-2)01:18

Official sources: Kutztown box score · Kutztown recap · Lock Haven recap · Lock Haven box score

Slippery Rock at Millersville

2026-09-19

Slippery Rock’s 70–10 win was supported by 703 yards and a dominant rushing comparison.

The Rock rushed for 340 yards while allowing 19, and JayJay Jordan scored five rushing touchdowns. Six first-half touchdowns created a 41–0 lead before Millersville’s field goal. This was not merely short-field finishing: scoring drives included 75 and 80 yards before halftime and 75 and 79 afterward. DaOne Owens supplied three touchdown passes, including a 71-yard connection with Hamilton Gates early in the third. Millersville had already struggled to sustain rushing against California. This result magnifies that weakness rather than proving SRU can score similarly against every defense. Passing and rushing balance are encouraging; the next opponent offers a different test.

MeasureSlippery RockMillersville
Total yards703231
Offensive plays8050
Yards per play (calculated)8.794.62
Net rushing yards34019
Passing yards363212
Passing: completions–attempts–INT24 - 31 - 018 - 30 - 0
Third downs8 of 133 of 11
Fourth downs3 of 50 of 2
Red-zone scores / chances8 - 91 - 1

Red-zone scores include field goals and touchdowns; they are not a touchdown percentage. Official net rushing includes losses. Yards per play is calculated from the displayed totals.

Next evidence to test

At California, check SRU’s drive efficiency without assuming another massive rushing mismatch. Millersville at West Chester needs rushing first downs and earlier stops.

Supporting drive chart

Official chart entries, including return-only and end-of-half possessions where listed. This is not an adjusted offensive-drive denominator. Overtime possessions start under different field-position rules. Team abbreviations follow the source.

TeamPeriodStartClockOutcomePlays–yardsTime
MIL1stMIL3014:52PUNT3-801:25
SLI1stSLI3713:27TD9-6303:32
MIL1stMIL4109:45PUNT4-1703:07
SLI1stSLI2506:38TD9-7503:57
MIL1stMIL2402:36PUNT3-1502:43
SLI2ndSLI3714:53TD7-6302:28
MIL2ndMIL2512:25FUMB1-500:07
SLI2ndMIL3012:18TD3-3001:20
MIL2ndMIL4010:49PUNT6-1502:55
SLI2ndSLI2007:54TD9-8004:22
MIL2ndMIL1503:25PUNT3-301:31
SLI2ndMIL4601:54TD7-4600:53
MIL2ndMIL2501:01FG8-5601:01
SLI3rdSLI2514:57TD3-7500:54
MIL3rdMIL2213:56PUNT3-1101:56
SLI3rdSLI2112:00TD6-7902:00
MIL3rdMIL2309:52PUNT3-000:23
SLI3rdSLI4309:29TD5-5702:08
MIL3rdMIL2407:14DOWNS7-2803:39
SLI3rdSLI4803:35TD8-5204:33
MIL4thMIL3913:54DOWNS4-702:01
SLI4thMIL4611:53DOWNS5-2003:04
MIL4thMIL2608:49TD5-7402:19
SLI4thSLI3706:24DOWNS9-4306:02
MIL4thMIL2000:22HALF1-000:22

Official sources: Millersville box score · Millersville recap · Slippery Rock box score · Slippery Rock recap

Evidence and report boundaries

Free provides the verified slate, conference context and concise matchup summaries. Professional adds performance comparisons, interpretation, competing explanations and follow-up tests. Both editions remain accessible under the site’s existing public beta arrangement.

This is a conference edition covering every listed matchup once, including opponents outside the PSAC. Mansfield sprint football appears only where scheduled and remains separate from conventional-football comparisons. No halftime report is included. Official school schedules, box scores and recaps are linked beside the relevant game; evidence snapshots and calculations are retained for corrections.

No contemporaneous Mayberry forecast is asserted for these games, so this edition does not claim forecast accuracy. The analysis uses box-score and drive evidence; it does not infer unobserved coverages, assignments or coaching intent. Supporting drive entries are unadjusted; no points-per-drive, success-rate or win-probability model is claimed.

Browse every PSAC football edition · PSAC schools and sports