Michigan Tech Huskies vs. St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas: 2022 Week 2 Recap

Quick answer

St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas defeated Michigan Tech Huskies 32–6 in Week 2, 2022. Final score: Michigan Tech Huskies 6, St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas 32.

Game summary

Line score

Final score and points by quarter.

Team	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Final
Michigan Tech Huskies	3	6	0	3	6
St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas	6	12	6	0	32

Stars of the game

Top passers, rushers, and receivers from cfbfastR play-by-play.

Passing

• Steele Fortress (Michigan Tech) — -5.0 yds · -0.41 EPA/play -0.81 EPA
• incomplete (St. Thomas (MN)) — 10.0 yds · -0.60 EPA/play -2.99 EPA
• incomplete (Michigan Tech) — 0.0 yds · -0.29 EPA/play -4.01 EPA

Rushing

• Shawn Shipman (St. Thomas (MN)) — 151.0 yds · 2 TD +0.02 EPA
• William Marano (Michigan Tech) — 46.0 yds -0.31 EPA
• Gabriel Abel (St. Thomas (MN)) — 38.0 yds -0.33 EPA

Receiving

• Darius Willis (Michigan Tech) — 4 rec · 23.0 yds -0.15 EPA
• Ethan Champney (Michigan Tech) — 3 rec · 15.0 yds -0.33 EPA
• Andrew McElroy (St. Thomas (MN)) — 4 rec · 75.0 yds +0.70 EPA

Quarterback report card

Attempts, efficiency, and EPA.

Player	Team	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	EPA/play	Total EPA
Steele Fortress	Michigan Tech	2	50.0%	-5	0	-0.41	-0.81
incomplete	St. Thomas (MN)	5	0.0%	10	0	-0.60	-2.99
incomplete	Michigan Tech	14	0.0%	0	0	-0.29	-4.01
Cade Sexauer	St. Thomas (MN)	16	56.2%	92	1	-0.29	-4.70
Will Ark	Michigan Tech	18	44.4%	45	0	-0.53	-9.55

Team EPA comparison

Stat	Michigan Tech	St. Thomas (MN)
Plays	62	63
EPA / play	-0.331	-0.096
Total EPA	-20.54	-6.03
Success rate	19.4%	49.2%
Pass EPA / play	-0.423	-0.366
Rush EPA / play	-0.220	+0.039
Yards	149	321

Drive chart

Key possessions and results.

Qtr	Offense	Plays	Yards	EPA	Result
Q1	St. Thomas (MN)	3	71	+4.78	Ended
Q1	Michigan Tech	9	57	-0.63	Ended
Q1	St. Thomas (MN)	7	36	-0.19	Ended
Q1	Michigan Tech	2	-1	-1.73	Ended
Q1	St. Thomas (MN)	1	1	+1.26	Rush TD
Q1	Michigan Tech	5	0	-5.22	Field goal
Q1	St. Thomas (MN)	2	12	0.00	Punt
Q2	Michigan Tech	6	-1	0.00	Ended
Q2	St. Thomas (MN)	18	69	0.00	Ended
Q2	Michigan Tech	2	8	+1.96	Punt
Q2	St. Thomas (MN)	1	0	-4.33	Interception
Q2	Michigan Tech	2	0	-2.71	Punt
Q2	Michigan Tech	3	6	-1.11	Punt
Q2	St. Thomas (MN)	1	33	+3.45	Pass TD
Q2	Michigan Tech	3	2	-2.64	Punt
Q2	St. Thomas (MN)	1	1	+1.61	Rush TD

Biggest EPA swings

1. Q2 · Michigan Tech Huskies · Punt return touchdown (-8.14 EPA)
2. Q3 · Michigan Tech Huskies · Will Ark pass intercepted (-5.74 EPA)
3. Q3 · St. Thomas (MN) · Fumble (-5.39 EPA)
4. Q2 · St. Thomas (MN) · Cade Sexauer pass intercepted (-4.33 EPA)
5. Q1 · Michigan Tech Huskies · Kickoff (+4.27 EPA)
6. Q3 · St. Thomas (MN) · Kolby Gartner rushes 11 yards for a touchdown (+4.17 EPA)
7. Q1 · St. Thomas (MN) · Kickoff (+3.96 EPA)
8. Q3 · Michigan Tech Huskies · Kickoff (+3.89 EPA)

Key takeaways

• St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas controlled the final (32–6) in Week 2.
• Passing edge: Steele Fortress (Michigan Tech) — -5.0 yds.
• EPA edge: St. Thomas (MN) at -0.096 EPA/play.
• Full EPA, scoring map, and play-by-play live in CFB Analytics Box & Scores.

Frequently asked questions

What was the final score of Michigan Tech Huskies vs St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas?

Michigan Tech Huskies 6, St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas 32 in Week 2 of the 2022 college football season.

Who won Michigan Tech Huskies vs St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas?

St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas won with a final score of 6–32.

Where can I find the Michigan Tech Huskies vs St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas box score?

See EPA, scoring timeline, and full play-by-play on FantasyHQ CFB Analytics: /cfb-analytics?game=401428484.

Who led Michigan Tech Huskies vs St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas in passing?

Steele Fortress (Michigan Tech) led passers with -5.0 yards.

Full analytics box score

Explore every snap, drive chart, and the interactive scoring map for Michigan Tech Huskies at St. Joseph's (IN) Pumas in FantasyHQ CFB Analytics Box & Scores.