Cincinnati Bearcats 7 · Arizona Wildcats 34
2026-10-03 · Casino Del Sol Stadium
Casino Del Sol Stadium · 2026-10-03
The final score was Cincinnati Bearcats 7 · Arizona Wildcats 34. The breakdown below uses this game’s figures, separate from season averages.
Cincinnati Bearcats
Arizona WildcatsThe scoring path
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cincinnati Bearcats | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| Arizona Wildcats | 7 | 3 | 14 | 10 | 34 |
| Measure | Cincinnati Bearcats | Arizona Wildcats |
|---|---|---|
| First downs | 12 | 30 |
| Total yards | 227 | 522 |
| Passing yards | 153 | 284 |
| Rushing yards | 74 | 238 |
| Third-down conversions | 7-16 | 9-14 |
| Giveaways | 0 | 1 |
| Possession time | 24:21 | 35:39 |
Third-down conversion is shown as its own measure. It is not a substitute for overall play success rate. A dash means the source did not supply that field.
The Lab’s result test
Arizona Wildcats won by 27 points. Q3 supplied the largest scoring swing in the winner’s favor, a +14-points period. The chart shows the result’s path; the box score helps explain what created it.
Cincinnati Bearcats produced 227 total yards; Arizona Wildcats produced 522. Yardage describes how much ground was gained, not whether the most valuable drives were finished.
Arizona Wildcats committed 1 giveaways against the opponent’s 0. The winner still had to overcome a worse giveaway count.
The next test is repeatability. Separate staying on schedule from long gains, then examine field position and drive finishing. A large yardage total can coexist with missed scoring chances; a short field can make a modest drive valuable.
Our game coverage
A matching published game video is not available in the verified archive yet.