Defensive line, New Mexico, 2015–18
Jermane Conyers
- Number
- No. 92
- Height
- 6′2″
- Weight
- 326 lb
- Class (2018)
- Senior
- Hometown
- Rossville, GA
Jermane Conyers played defensive line at New Mexico (2015–18).
Defense
| Season | Team | Tkl | Solo | TFL | Sacks | PD | Hur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | New Mexico | 17 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 2018 | New Mexico | 7 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Career | 24 | 13 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
Season lines from CollegeFootballData, regular season and bowls.
On the roster
| Season | Team | No. | Pos | Class | Ht | Wt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | New Mexico | 92 | DL | Fr. | ||
| 2016 | New Mexico | 92 | DL | So. | ||
| 2017 | New Mexico | 92 | DL | Jr. | ||
| 2018 | New Mexico | 92 | DL | Sr. | 6′2″ | 326 |
As each season’s roster listed the player (CollegeFootballData). Classes before the latest listing are counted back from it; “Yr 1” is the year on file where that count can’t place a season he played (a redshirt, transfer or 2020 year); height and weight as last listed.
Game by game
2018 New Mexico 4 games, 7 tackles
| Date | Opponent | Result | Tkl | Solo | TFL | Sacks | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 29 | vs. | L 43–52 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 13 | at | L 18–20 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 20 | vs. | L 7–38 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 27 | at | L 19–61 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
2017 New Mexico 9 games, 17 tackles
| Date | Opponent | Result | Tkl | Solo | TFL | Sacks | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 9 | vs. | L 28–30 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 14 | at | L 14–28 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 23 | at | W 16–13 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 30 | vs. | W 56–38 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 14 | at | L 0–38 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Oct 20 | vs. | L 24–27 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 4 | vs. | L 10–24 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 11 | at | L 14–55 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 17 | vs. | L 35–38 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Box scores from CollegeFootballData, 2004 on. ✦ postseason; ★ a career high on file.
Is this you, or do you know of something wrong or missing here? Suggest a correction. We check each one against a source before changing the page.
