SB Nation - Jack Crawford

Preview: Michigan State vs. Penn State

LVS — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:20:02 -0000

about 1 month ago: Michigan State's Keshawn Martin (82) scores a touchdown on a 48-yard pass reception during the second quarter of an NCAA college football game against Western Michigan, Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009, in East Lansing, Mich. Michigan State won 49-14. (AP Photo/Al Goldis)

Browse more photos »

Your MICHIGAN STATE SPARTANS vs. the PENN STATE NITTANY LIONS

SPARTAN STADIUM, EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN

3:30 (ET), ABC (coverage map)

WEATHER: 52 DEGREES AT KICKOFF, TEMPERATURE FALLING AFTER DUSK.

Hey, a game that's not the most important of the season! Your Spartans obviously did the heavy lifting last week against Purdue; in all likelihood, this game is not about whether MSU will make a bowl, but rather, about whether we're going to San Antonio or Orlando or, of course, rollin' down Woodward to Ford Field (!). Penn State, after a season that has to be characterized as quite disappointing, amazingly still has a shot at a BCS berth. You know the backstory: last season, PSU absolutely demolished us; the season before, however, was good times:

It appears that the play-by-play guy attended the Joe Buck school of announcing excitement. Also, I miss Devin Thomas.

So, here cometh TEH GREATEST RIVALRY GAME IN ALL TEH LAND, and the opportunity to beat a team with a pulse for the first time this season. (Says the guy whose team's best win is against Temple. w00t.) The 8-million member PSU blogosphere and commentariat seems surprisingly reticent about this game. But, after last week's defensive fiasco I'm simply not comfortable picking us to win against teams with competent offenses. Penn State is such a team. I'd love to be proven wrong.

More, after the jump.

Big game plz, Colin.

WHEN MICHIGAN STATE IS ON DEFENSE: At this point, I think the secondary is probably going to suck no matter what we do, so we might as well stack the box to try to stop the run and get as much pressure on Darryl Clark as possible. Indeed, as RUTS told us, this is what you want to do with Clark:

He's like about any other good, but not great, quarterback. If he has a clean pocket and can set his feet, he's as good as anyone in the country. If he gets hit too much, he gets rattled and starts making bad decisions with the ball. In that sense, he can be knocked back into looking like a talented quarterback in his second or third start -- he thinks he can make throws that he can't actually pull off.

Clark struggled mightily in the Iowa and Ohio State games--and even in the Illinois game--because he was under pressure (ding ding ding da da ding ding). Pressuring him may allow Clark some opportunities to scramble (as Brian said earlier this year, he's "not Michael Vick but isn't John Navarre, either."), but it's probably the best chance to contain the PSU offense. PSU partisans seem to think that our defensive line will have success against their offensive line, and pressure Clark heavily; I'm not so certain. Many anticipated that Penn State's offensive line was going to be the downfall of the team this year, as it was the most inexperienced group in the conference. PSU has allowed only 12 sacks on the season, although it looked overmatched against Adrian Clayborn and Cameron Heyward, among others. But, uh, we don't have Clayborn or Heyward; we've got a defensive line which failed to pressure Joey Elliott (until the last play, of course), and hasn't proven the ability to apply pressure on its own. My suspicion is that, if PSU is content to throw from three-step drops, they'll have a lot of success: we won't have the ability to get to Clark that quickly, and our secondary is obviously vulnerable. Bottom line: stack the box, try to get pressure, hope for the best.

And, about those guys Clark will be throwing to: RUTS sez . . .

Starting WR Chaz Powell is out for the game with a shoulder injury. In his place, you'll see a rotating group including the very tall Brett Brackett and the very quick Curtis Drake. Maybe true freshman Justin Brown gets in the game, but I doubt it. Graham Zug had a nightmare game against Indiana last week, but that was mostly due to fumbling punts. He runs good routes and gets open against passive zone coverages. Really, that goes for the whole group -- if you can press and bump them, they become ineffective quickly. [ . . . ]

Derek Moye is probably our best receiver, but he was totally shut out by Ohio State's press coverage and only had two catches for 28 yards against Indiana. Because of that, I suspect PSU will make an effort to get him involved quickly.

Moye is indeed good: 41 catches for 676 yards and 5 touchdowns this season. He's 6'5", 195 pounds . . . and if you're thinking, "holy hell, he's Mike Floyd in disguise," well, yeah, me too. He's not quite there, talent-wise, but, erm, I wouldn't want to be fighting for a jump ball against him. I suspect that our cornerbacks wouldn't want to be, either. And, yeah, about that Quarless guy: he reminds me a lot of Kellen Davis in that he's ludicrous athletically, but the results don't quite meet the expectations. But, the same could be said of Garrett Graham, and that didn't end so well for us earlier this year.

This is probably Evan Royster's last regular season game for Penn State, as most expect him to jump to the NFL.
Last year, he only carried the ball 12 times against MSU, but those carries were relatively successful, as he averaged 6.6 yards per game. This season, he's been a bit up-and-down: he had big games against Northwestern and Minnesota, but not-so-good efforts against Iowa and Ohio State. MSU's rush defense has been mostly a positive this season, although last week was a bit of a regression. I suspect that Royster will approach 100 yards but not be the deciding factor in this game. His backup, Stephfon Green, has intermittently battled injuries and hasn't played much or well since the Illinois game much earlier this season.

Safe to say at this point: one of my all-time favorite Spartan football players.

WHEN MICHIGAN STATE IS ON OFFENSE: . . . we need for Kirk Cousins to have the best game of his career. As a preliminary matter, let's stipulate that we're going to get basically nothing against Penn State on the ground: the Lions are 8th nationally against the run, and our rushing offense is not good. The goal in this game should be to do just enough to semi-effectively set up play action.

Ah, so the main event: MSU's passing offense vs. Penn State's pass defense. It starts wtih the offensive line, obviously. Penn State doesn't have Tamba Hali or Courtney Brown or anyone of similar fear-producing ability, but the stats are certainly there: they lead the conference in sacks, and while Brian noted that:

[t]he numbers are impressive—PSU is 11th nationally with three sacks per game—but there is the whole schedule thing to take into account. Jack Crawford has four sacks, all of which come against the Akrons and Temples on the schedule. In Penn State's three real-ish games, they acquired one sack (Odrick) against Minnesota, three (Crawford, Latimore, Stanley) against Illinois, and two (Hull and Crawford/Lynn) against Iowa.

. . . Penn State sacked Forcier/Robinson 5 times, and then, the next week, sacked Mike Kafka 6 times. Since then, things have cooled down a bit: they weren't able to sack Terrelle Pryor (although Pryor is surely one of the most difficult sacks in the country), and were only able to get to Ben Chappell twice last week. Nonetheless, this is an impressive line; they're led by scary beast Jared Odrick, who has 6 sacks, and the aforementioned Jack Crawford, who now has 5.5. RUTS says that:

Penn State loves to just send the defensive line if they can get away with it. The defensive scheme actually depends on it, but PSU's defensive ends have been several notches below their predecessors. There's no Aaron Maybin, Maurice Evans, or Tamba Hali on this defensive line, so they'll send linebackers on occasion, and maybe mix in a corner blitz once or twice per game, but that's it.

We can't let them get tons of pressure from the front four alone. I know it's tempting disaster to say that I *want* Navorro Bowman, Sean Lee, and the corners to blitz, but Penn State blitzing and leaving the secondary exposed is how Cousins will be able to throw for lots of yards.

Penn State's defense is statistically impressive against the pass: 16th nationally in pass efficiency defense, and 17th nationally in pass defense. Once again, I'll let RUTS write my preview for me:

Penn State can be thrown on, but they do their best to protect any obvious liabilities in the secondary. Free Safety Nick Sukay has steadily improved throughout the year. Drew Astorino (#28) plays the other safety position, and it's no secret that he's trying to fight through a shoulder injury. CB A.J. Wallace sustained a concussion last week, he's listed as "possible" for Sparty. So there may be opportunities for you in the passing game.

So, PSU is good, but they're not scary in the way that Iowa is: this season, the Lions have allowed 252 yards passing to Northwestern, 263 to Illinois (!), and 298 last week to Indiana. (Note that they won all three of those games, however.) Quite frankly, our passing offense is better than any of those teams'. I think Cousins has a big day, and throws for at least 250 yards; look for B.J. Cunningham to play the Devin Thomas role this time around. If he's able to deliver, Cousins stands in line for first team all-conference honors, so there should be some personal motivation, too.

FINAL PREDICTION: Cut and paste, for starters:

Clark picked our defense apart last year, and while you don't have Derrick Williams anymore, our pass defense is even worse this time around. Also, I have distressing visions of Jared Odrick pwning whoever's blocking him and not giving Cousins enough time to be comfortable.

More generally, Dantonio has done a lot of good things during his time at MSU, but beating teams with appreciably more talent certainly hasn't been one of those things. So, I'll remain skeptical until we finally win one of these games. It's at home, which is good, and I could definitely see the special teams stats ending up very lopsided in our favor. But PSU is the better team, and you're playing for more: a win for us would upgrade our bowl game slightly, but a win for PSU might send you guys to the BCS. So, an upset isn't out of the possibility, but I'm not particularly optimistic.

I wrote that yesterday morning, and honestly, I'm a bit more optimistic now. Penn State fans seem quite worried about this game, and one columnist even questions whether Penn State's players even have their hearts into the game anymore. Which, like, what? Even if that's true, you're playing for the BCS! I'd dismiss it out of hand if the sentiment didn't seem to be a common one across the PSU internets.

One thing that doesn't fit into my normal preview format: if you've been reading previews of this game anywhere else, you'll know that PSU's special teams have been an unmitigated disaster this year, and ours have been very good. I'm normally skeptical that special teams play has any predictive value, but here the discrepancy between the teams seems so great that it may indeed be relevant this week. Keshawn Martin, Brett Swenson, Aaron Bates: keep on doing what you do so well. kthx.

Nonetheless, this is a pretty talented football team we're playing. PSU is excellent on defense, and the offense -- with many of the same players -- ripped us apart last year. It seems that I'm saying this every week now, but truly, our defense will determine whether we win this game. If they show up, we have a chance. If they play like they did last week, we don't. It's awfully tempting to say that MSU wins this game on the strength of the passing game and special teams play. But, visions of Quarless and Zug running rampant across the middle of the field prevent me from tempting fate, for now. Penn State 31, Michigan State 27.

Your thoughts welcome, of course.

Disruption Percentage: The Saga Continues

KJ@theonlycolors — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:00:38 -0000

More photos » by Tom Strattman - AP

A nondisruptive play by the MSU defense.

Browse more photos »

OR "Statistics That Will Help Bring You Down from the Post-Bowl-Game-Clinching-Win High"

Premise:

Boiled down to its basics, playing offense successfully in the sport of football is pretty simple:

Gain 10 yards in 3 tries.

Repeat until you reach the the end zone.

. . . At the hypothetical extreme, a team that could gain exactly 3.5 yards on every play could achieve that goal. Alternately, two rushing plays of 5 yards each or a single pass completion in three attempts for 10 yards does the trick.

The goal of any football defense, then, has to be to disrupt the opposing offense's rhythm, with the goal of creating a situation where picking up 3-5 yards per play isn't enough to keep a drive going.

In an attempt to quantify the success (or lack thereof) of the Michigan State defense in disrupting opposing offenses, we here at TOC have developed a new-fangled metric we call "disruption percentage." The percentage is calculated by summing the five defensive statistics below (presented in ascending order of disruptiveness) and dividing the total by the number of offensive plays run by the opposition:

Quarterback hurries: Increasing the odds the offense will throw an incomplete pass and lose an opportunity to gain yardage toward a first down
Pass break-ups: Ending an attempted pass play and reducing the number of downs the opposition has to pick up a first down
Tackles for loss: Increasing the yardage the offense has to gain to achieve a first down by sacking the quarterback or stopping a running play for a loss
Forced fumbles: Creating the opportunity to recover a fumble and end the opponent's offensive possession
Interceptions: Definitively ending the opponent's offensive possession

(Notes: (a) If specific stats on penalties by the opposing offense--holding, etc.--were readily available, we'd include those, as well. (b) We define "forced fumble" liberally, counting any fumble by the offense, even if it's not directly attributable to a defensive player. (c) Initially, we didn't include pass break-ups, but we've added them. That helps eliminate a bias toward blitzing; if you can rush 3 and drop 8 effectively, that should show up in pass break-ups. (d) There's some double-counting going on, as a QB hurry can lead to an interception, etc.)

Here are the updated game-by-game numbers for MSU:

Opponent	QBH	PBR	TFL	FF	INT	TOTAL	Plays	Disrupt%
Montana St	5	2	4	0	0	11	54	20.4
Central Mich	0	4	6	0	1	11	76	14.5
Notre Dame	1	3	4	1	1	10	71	14.1
Wisconsin	4	2	3	1	0	10	81	12.3
Michigan	1	3	10	3	1	18	60	30.0
Illinois	6	3	8	0	1	18	60	30.0
Northwestern	2	2	6	3	0	13	76	17.1
Iowa	0	4	5	0	0	9	66	13.6
Minnesota	0	1	5	1	1	8	72	11.1
Western	5	4	4	1	0	14	55	25.5
Purdue	0	3	5	2	0	10	92	10.9
TOTAL	24	31	60	12	5	132	763	17.3

The first time we went through this exercise was after the Northwestern game. At that point, we were hopeful that the back-to-back 30% performances, followed by the decent 17.1% against Northwestern's short-pass-based offense portended good things for the defense. It looked like maybe the new starters were gelling in the base 4-3 defense and our remaining opponents would suffer because of it.

Then we played two more games. Neither of which turned out very well.

LVS, during the week after the Minnesota game:

It probably comes as very little surprise to MSU fans that two of the three least disruptive defensive performances have come in the past two weeks. Iowa was somewhat predictable, as that's a team that will, ideally, play a conservative offensive game because their defense is so good. Of course, that's not exactly how things have worked out this season for them: one or two of the third quarter STANZIBALLS against Indiana would have been, uh, enormously useful in our game. Our complete failure to hurry the quarterback against Iowa probably cost us our chance at one or two easy interceptions. And the Minnesota game . . . well, we all knew that Saturday night was our worst defensive performance of the season, and these statistics certainly buttress that feeling.

Now we've played two more games. The defense's performance against Western was certainly acceptable (particularly given that the game had basically been decided before halftime).

The performance against Purdue? Not so much. While the disruption percentage was fractionally better than the season-low showing against Minnesota, I'm going to say the defensive performance against the Boilermakers was the worst of the season. Two reasons:

The Gophers made several spectacular passes/receptions against us on their way to 42 points. Purdue, on the other hand, just seemed to take the easy yards available to them all afternoon, without having to doing anything of particular offensive brilliance. (In the words of Mark Dantonio: "Today was a day of big plays for us. We made a play at the beginning of the game on defense, one at the end of the game on defense, and somewhere in there, there were 90 other plays.")
Four of the five tackles for loss MSU posted against Purdue were on running plays. So in terms of the pass defense, which has been the major concern all year long, the defense made only 4 disruptive plays on 55 Purdue passing attempts.

(We'll be able to say more about the exact nature of the miserable defensive performance against the Boilermakers when DrDetroit finishes his MSUFR later this week.)

The good news is that MSU got its first win of the season with a sub-15 disruption percentage. The bad news is that, going into the two remaining games against Penn State and a yet-to-be-determined bowl opponent that will probably have a decent offense, the Spartan defense appears to be getting less-and-less disruptive. The performances against Michigan and Illinois--two teams now at the bottom of the conference standings--clearly have to be classified as outliers. And the idea that sticking with your base defense in 90% of situations so that the players become a well-oiled machine as the season progresses doesn't carry much water any more.

Instead, predictable defensive schemes have lead to quotes like the ones below from opposing players/coaches.

Adam Weber:

We were just hoping that they were lined up in that same defense, and sure enough, first play walking up to the line, they’re in the defense we want them to be.

Danny Hope:

We had a great game plan. They have a very vanilla defensive formation. We knew what were up against and what we had to do. We just had to execute and I felt like we really did.

(HTs: Con-T, LVS)

Just to make sure that I'm not mixcontextualizing (word?) the MSU disruption percentage data, I went ahead and ran the numbers for the other ten Big Ten teams.

Team	QBH	PBR	TFL	FF	INT	TOTAL	Plays	Disrupt%	Yds/G	Yds/G Rk
Iowa	18	56	61	17	19	171	716	23.9	294.5	3
Wisconsin	18	29	73	13	13	146	612	23.9	307.4	4
Penn State	6	43	91	9	11	160	704	22.7	272.0	2
Ohio State	10	30	65	20	19	144	701	20.5	258.3	1
Illinois	15	40	56	16	4	131	685	19.1	400.3	10
Northwestern	19	22	56	22	14	133	705	18.9	345.2	5
Minnesota	4	49	61	23	9	146	784	18.6	381.8	8
Michigan	7	31	77	13	10	138	768	18.0	400.2	9
Purdue	3	32	73	20	10	138	769	17.9	368.8	7
Michigan St	24	31	60	12	5	132	763	17.3	350.9	6
Indiana	6	25	63	22	16	132	774	17.1	407.5	11
TOTAL	130	388	736	187	130	1,571	7,981	19.7

These are full-season numbers. Ideally, we'd work with conference-only numbers to get a flatter playing field, but those aren't readily available.

I've ranked the teams from best to worst in terms of disruption percentage and included total defense (yards/game) figures and ranks for comparison. My working hypothesis is that disruption percentage may have some predictive value, as it helps separate out the degree to which a defense is forcing bad plays versus the degree to which an offense is just executive really well.

(That's not a perfect distinction. Good pass blocking, for example, is obviously a function of good execution. But, as a pro-predictive example, disruption percentage gives a defense credit for a good pass rush that results in a quarterback hurry, even if the offense nevertheless throws a really good pass to a well-covered receiver that goes for a long gain. And it doesn't give credit for a pass an opposing quarterback just flat underthrows even though he's under no particular durress.)

The disruption percentage and total defense ranks show a high degree of correlation. Illinois and MSU are the exceptions. Based on my theory, that would mean Illinois has been somewhat unlucky and MSU has been somewhat lucky in terms of how their fundamental defensive performances have translated into yardage gained by their opponents. It could also mean Illinois plays an aggressive defense that gets burnt by long plays quite a bit--and vice versa for MSU.

Regardless, the numbers demonstrate that the Michigan State defense has been among the least disruptive in the conference this season--just two-tenths of a percentage point ahead of last-place Indiana. The best defense in the league come close to doing something disruptive on 1 out of every 4 plays. MSU, meanwhile, is doing it on only 1 of 6 plays. In their worst performances, that ratio drops to 1 out of every 9 plays.

Most BCS-conference-level offenses are going to find ways to pick up first downs when the defense doesn't do anything to force them out of their rhythm on 8 out of 9 plays. Fixing that big-picture problem is the key factor if this football team is to have any success in the two games that remain this season and, perhaps more importantly, in the new season that begins less than 10 months from now.

Bonus conference-wide observations, since we're here:

The league-leading number of quarterback hurries (24) for MSU is somewhat puzzling, given that 5 teams in the conference only register a QB hurry figure in the single digits. I initially thought this might be a function of inconsistent statistical scoring. But the number of hurries per game for MSU isn't any different at home than it is on the road; I'm assuming the same person scores the game for both sides in each game. Perhaps that's not the case for individual defensive stats, though. If that's the case and MSU QB-hurry numbers are inflated, their disruption numbers would become downright abysmal compared to the rest of the league. Alternately, the high number of QB hurries could be a function of blitzes that are only semi-effective; pass rushers are getting to the quarterback with a high frequency, but not in time to register a sack. (Although MSU does still rank 2nd in the league in sacks--so this whole thing has me puzzled.)
The Iowa secondary is as good as advertised. Totaling pass break-ups and interceptions, you get 75 disruptive plays in pass coverage for the Hawkeyes. That's 17 more than the second best subtotal in the league (Minnesota's 58).
Given Michigan's disappointing season, Brandon Graham won't win the Big Ten defensive player of the year award. But he may well be the single most effective defensive player in the league. On a team with only the 8th highest disruption percentage in the league, he's registered 26 individual disruptive plays (21.0 TFLs, 2 FFs, 2 PBRs, 1 QBH), which represents nearly 1 out 5 (18.8%) of his team's total disruptive plays.
Those numbers do trail O'Brien Schofield's (29.5 disruptive plays; 19.5 TFLs, 7 QBHs, 2 FFs, 1 PBR; 20.2% of his team's total), but Schofield is presumably getting more help from his comrades on the Wisconsin defense so that opposing offenses can't focus on double-teaming him quite as much.
Other top performers: Adrian Clayborn (Iowa) has 27.5 disruptive plays. Ryan Kerrigan (Purdue) has 23.5. Jamie Kirlew (Indiana) also has 23.5. Somewhat frighteningly, Penn State has three players with at least 16: Jack Crawford (17.5), Navorro Bowman (17.0), and Sean Lee (16.5).
The individual numbers are obviously skewed toward defensive linemen, since tackles for losses make up almost half of disruptive plays.
Greg Jones has 20.0 disruptive plays (11.0 TFLs, 7 QBHs,1 FF, 1 PBR). That's a very good total for a linebacker and equal to 15.2% of MSU's total.
Returning to the frightening-Penn-State-stat category, the Nittany Lions' 91 tackles for loss are 14 better than the #2 team in the league (Michigan). Kirk Cousins is going to need to get the ball out to his receivers quickly on Saturday and, even more than usual, shouldn't count on any help from the running game.
Ohio State leads the league in the percentage of plays on which a potential turnover (forced fumbles plus interceptions) is created: 5.6%. In the other three categories, they're actually pretty unremarkable.
Michigan State, meanwhile, ranks dead last in that category at just 2.3%.
Let's go ahead and end there, for empahsis.

Even slower, my friends!

Sam @ WWAHT — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:00:43 -0000

More photos » by Charlie Neibergall - AP

about 1 month ago: Iowa quarterback James Vandenberg walks off the field after his team's 17-10 loss to Northwestern in an NCAA college football game, Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009, in Iowa City, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

Browse more photos »

StoopsMyAss over at BHGP recently did an excellent piece comparing the offenses of Ohio State and Iowa. The gist: both offenses may look bad, but Iowa's offense has come away looking slightly better against defenses whose average rank is a full 15 spots above the average rank of defenses Ohio State has faced. It's a completely fair assessment, and rather straightforward.

I figured I'd write a companion piece, since BHGP was just bitching (and rightfully so) yesterday that no one really seems to be willing to talk about the actual game. So, all credit for the overall layout of this post goes out to SMA. Now, let's take a look at the proverbial strengths of both teams - the defenses - and see how they stack up using a similar metric.

When SMA ranked the defenses, he apparently did so using this set of standards:

"Good": National Top 40

"Bad" : 41st-90th nationally

"Awful": Below 90th, or not ranked

While I don't necessarily agree with the terminology, I'll use it anyway to keep this fairly compatible with his post.

Ohio State has played the following good offenses: USC (40th), Toledo (18th),

Ohio State has played the following bad offenses: Penn State (41st), Navy (77th), Illinois (66th), Indiana (76th), Purdue (58th), Wisconsin (45th),

Ohio State has played the following awful offenses: New Mexico State (120th), Minnesota (106th)

The average rankings of those offensive units is 64.7.

Now let's look at the teams that SMA would deem "good" offensively, one is USC, the other is admittedly a MACrifice:

USC: 118 rushing yards allowed, 195 passing yards allowed, on 72 plays

Toledo: 13 yards rushing allowed, 197 passing yards allowed, on 58 plays

Against the two best offenses the Buckeyes have faced all year, the defense surrendered on average : 196 yards through the air, and 104 yards on the ground

Now, I want to take this a step further: against "bad offenses", Ohio State has surrendered 93.3 yards on the ground, and 185 passing. This is inclusive of the debacle against Purdue and Wisconsin's day of long, grinding, surprisingly effective drives, both of which Iowa will attempt to recreate this week.

Now, let's take a look at the Iowa defense, using the same metric as was applied to Ohio State:

Iowa has played the following good offenses: Arizona (13th), Michigan State (28th)

Iowa has played the following bad offenses: Iowa State (69th), Penn State (41st), Michigan (44th), Wisconsin (45th), Indiana (76th), Northwestern 60th

Iowa has played the following awful offenses: Arkansas State (94th), Northern Iowa (NR)

The average rank of the offenses Iowa has faced is 52.1.

Against "good" offenses, Iowa's defense gave up an average of 186.5 yards through the air, and 95 on the ground. These numbers are roughly ten yards better than Ohio State's against "good" offensive teams, and they come against two attacks that are statistically more potent on average than the ones Ohio State played.

But let's move onto the "bad" offensive comparison for the Hawkeyes, where things are a bit more nuanced: against those six teams, Iowa gave up an average of 130 yards on the ground, to go with 152.3 through the air. That still averages out roughly on par with Ohio State's numbers against "bad" teams, in terms of total yards allowed: 284.3 to Ohio State's 278.3. That, however, comes with a 40-yard uptick in rushing yards allowed over the aforementioned "good" teams (one of which - MSU - features an anemic 71st-ranked rushing attack). Fortunately for us, running the ball is our forté, and Iowa is at least a tad susceptible on the ground.

A couple of other notes: I think Iowa's game against Arkansas State - they surrendered 296 yards of total offense to the country's 94th-best offensive attack - was a bit of an aberration defensively. I think it's analogous to Ohio State's game against Minnesota, in which the Buckeyes surrendered 286 yards to the country's 104th-best. That said, the end results were vastly different: Iowa beat ASU 24-21, while Ohio State trumped Minnesota 38-7.

So what does it all mean?

I took away from it this: Iowa's defense is probably better than even "14th in total defense" would indicate, and simply cannot be faulted for the Northwestern game. Regardless, after having considered all the mitigating factors, I think it's a stretch to issue any declarative statements about them actually being better than Ohio State, which, to my knowledge, no one has actually done yet. They have faced a better set of offenses, and it wouldn't be a stretch to infer that their total D ranking has suffered as a result.

This is why I'm so hesitant to predict any sort of blowout. I know Iowa is starting the guy from Varsity Blues, and he was horrible against a terrible Northwestern defense, but that doesn't mean Ohio State will win going away. It has to score points, and them don't come easy against the Hawkeyes. You want a ray of hope? Statistically, Penn State's defense is still better than Iowa's, and Ohio State was just fine cobbling together a passing game and mowing down the PSU front with the running game. Where Iowa is strong - at DE - is a concern, but if this line can limit Jared Odrick and Jack Crawford, I think it'll do alright against Adrian Clayborn and Karl Klug. In the end, these teams are far more even than most on our side are willing to admit. Yes, maybe Iowa will score just one offensive touchdown, and perhaps their quarterback will throw three picks and no touchdowns. How can we be so sure that that negates the possibility of a victory, when the Hawks won in Happy Valley with that exact same stat line?

BSD Staff Predictions: Ohio State

Run Up The Score — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:58:48 -0000

More photos » by Carolyn Kaster - AP

Browse more photos »

Alas, all hate things must come to an end. Here's how we see tomorrow's game shaking out.

BSD Mike:

Honestly, I can see this game going either way. Both defenses should dominate, and the score should be low. Really low. A big special teams play, or a key turnover could swing the balance.

But having said that, I like Penn State's chances in this game. I've watched a lot of Ohio State football this year, and I just don't see any cohesion on offense. Do they run the spread or a pro-style offense? Is Terrelle Pryor a pocket passer or a spread option quarterback? I can't tell. But I can tell you he's far from being a polished quarterback. And the players around him at running back and offensive line don't exactly make his life any easier. But his receivers are capable of bailing him out when he punts on third down.

When Penn State gets the ball, I'm expecting a lot of frustration. They're not going to move the ball easily, but they won't get dominated. They'll win some battles, but the Ohio State defense will win their share as well.

Both teams are going to struggle offensively. Barring a bunch of turnovers, this game is going to come down to which team can put together one or two good drives and come away with points. Though Penn State will go through a lot of frustration, I think their offense is better suited to put together one or two drives, and I think that will be the difference.

Prediction: Penn State 17, Ohio State 10

Kevin HD:

Why isn’t this game going to play out exactly like last year’s?

The only difference I can come up with is that Pryor lacks a Robiskie to bring down the jump balls. Add in some downgrades on both offensive lines, maybe compensate for the fact that the Buckeyes haven’t really found a true replacement for Wells….and, honestly, most of that seems a wash.

The wildcard is Daryll Clark and the offense. While we like to boast about the Penn State defense around here, Ohio State’s is at least as good. They may lack some of the real standouts up front and at linebacker, but they make up for it with balance.

The offense is going to be kept on a very short leash, which is something you can’t really blame Paterno for considering the situation. Can Clark, with the über-safe playbook, move down the field three or four times? I'll say just barely. Add in a couple of missed Ohio State field goals, and the defense rides this one home.

Penn State 13, Ohio State 6

Run Up The Score:

I expect to see a very similar Penn State offense to what we watched last week at Northwestern, with lots of quick, safe throws to the wide receivers. The Nittany Lion offensive line has slowly improved throughout the season, but Ohio State is too good and too fast at the front of their defense to try repeated five and seven-step drops. If Penn State is going to go deep, expect them to do it like they did against Northwestern -- play-action and rolling Clark away from the rush. If they can get the team around 100-125 rushing yards, that should keep the Buckeye defense sufficiently honest.

Defensively, you're likely to see a repeat of last year's scheme in Columbus. Basically, they'll try to keep Pryor in front of them and force him to win with his brain and arm. In that sense, losing Aaron Maybin to the NFL isn't as big of a deal against Ohio State compared to other opponents. Jack Crawford and the other defensive ends will most often be asked to contain the quarterback, not attack him. And don't forget about the biggest difference between this year's PSU defense and the 2008 version -- Sean Lee is back, which gives the coaching staff additional flexibility. Should be interesting to see if Navorro Bowman acts as a QB spy, like he did at times against Tate Forcier. The place to beat Penn State is between the safeties. If that means Terrelle Pryor is going to throw the ball across the middle, I'm all for it.

Amazingly, this may be a rare 2009 instance in which Penn State has an advantage on special teams. Collin Wagner has settled in quite nicely. No, he'll never give you a legitimate shot at a 52 yard field goal, but how likely would Joe Paterno be to attempt such a kick in what is going to be a field position battle, anyway? Ohio State is dealing with the loss of their kicker to a knee injury. The replacement, Devin Barclay, is a former MLS player who went 1-for-3 last week with misses from 36 and 47 yards -- and that's in a no-pressure game at home against New Mexico State.

There's a path to victory for Ohio State that includes forcing turnovers from Clark and a big play in the kicking game. In reality, the game should be decided by only two or three big, big plays, so it's not like there's a ton of room for error on either side. Still, in this type of game, give me the better and more mature QB at home, every time. Ohio State doesn't have enough playmakers on offense to take the pressure off Terrelle Pryor, and he's just not good enough -- not yet, hopefully -- to win this kind of game on his own. A fourth quarter touchdown after a Buckeye turnover ices it for the good guys.

Penn State 20, Ohio State 7

Grading The Penn State Defense Against Northwestern

BSD — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:30:23 -0000

More photos » by Nam Y. Huh - AP

about 1 month ago: Penn State's Eric Latimore, right, looks down at sacked Northwestern quarterback Dan Persa during the fourth quarter of an NCAA college football game in Evanston, Ill., Saturday, Oct. 31, 2009. Penn State won 34-13. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh)

Browse more photos »

It was a rocky start, but the defense clamped down and did the job holding the Northwestern Wildcat offense down until the Penn State offense could come to life. Let's grade them out and discuss their performance.

Defensive Line

It's a little disappointing to me that Penn State gave up 119 yards rushing to Northwestern after I said they have a pretty sad running game. But 84 of those yards were gained by the quarterbacks, which should be no surprise considering Mike Kafka came into the game as Northwestern's leading rusher. The Wildcats were running a lot of short crossing and hitch routes which didn't give the defensive line much time to get to the quarterback, but they still managed to record six sacks as a unit.

Jack Crawford had an okay game. He had a sack and recovered Kafka's unforced fumble, but there were a few times where he got sucked inside on a fake handoff and gave up a big gain to the quarterback. I could see his inexperience there. No matter how much it looks like he's handing it off to the running back, you gotta stay home and drill that quarterback, big guy. He made some nice adjustments and played a few option plays really well where he would force the quarterback to make the pitch and then he would slide outside to make the tackle.

Odrick had a slow first half but really turned it on in the second half. He just had to stop being cute and go to the bull rush. He had a sack to go with five tackles, and he blocked a field goal.

I was really impressed with Jerome Hayes and Eric Latimore in this game. Each of them got a sack, but I thought he looked really good in defending the run. The few times Northwestern tried to run the ball to the outside, these guys did a good job of getting up field and forcing the ball carrier to bounce outside. This allowed the pursuit to get there and usually drop the play for a loss.

Final Grade: A

Linebackers

I was not impressed with the linebackers in the early going, but in their defense this had a lot to do with the playcalling. More on that later.

Bowman looked slow to me. He just wasn't jumping the passing routes, and he whiffed terribly on several blocks. This was just not his best game, but he did still manage to record nine tackles.

Sean Lee saw his most extensive action since tweaking his knee against Temple. He led the team with 12 tackles (10 solo). I thought he looked great in playing against the run, but like Bowman I thought he looked just a step slow in covering the Northwestern short passing game. Much more so in the first half than the second half.

Did Josh Hull even play? He was out there in the early going and didn't look good in either defending the crossing routes or in stopping Kafka why he tried to tuck and run. After Northwestern's long scoring drive it looked to me like Penn State switched exclusively to the nickel defense, and Hull was the odd linebacker out.

Final Grade: B

Secondary

Kafka and Persa did most of their damage in attacking the linebackers over the middle. I thought the secondary held up well against Northwestern's highly ranked passing offense.

D'Anton Lynn was fantastic in breaking up the screen passes. He was really aggressive and shed the blocks to either stop the play for no gain or only gave up a few yards.

The rest of the secondary was pretty unmemorable, and frankly, I'm happy with this performance. I'd rather not notice Astorino and Sukay are on the field than to see them trailing the wide receiver on a 50 yard bomb than to see them helpless chasing their man downfield. Much of the credit for the six sacks by the defensive line has to go to the defensive secondary. The Northwestern quarterbacks couldn't find anyone open.

Final Grade: A

Defensive Coaching

I thought Penn State came out with a poor game plan. They tried to sit in their Cover-3 with three linebackers on the field. But the coverage was too soft, and three linebackers trying to cover four or five wide receivers is a mismatch in Northwestern's favor every time. Mike Kafka picked them apart with short crossing routes and hitch patterns designed to attack the linebackers. It was a lot like watching the Michigan game last year. You could tell the Wildcats weren't doing anything special. It was just a matter of making some changes and manning up. Penn State adjusted by going almost exclusively with the nickel defense and bringing the corners up a little tighter.

I also noticed some delayed blitzes by Odrick and Bowman. These worked really well because it gave the defender time to see what's going on and react to it. We saw this against Illinois and Michigan, and I suspect you will see it next week against Terrelle Pryor too.

Final Grade: B

Special Teams

It's like a broken record every week, but the special teams are not very special. Unless you mean "special" like the kid who wears head gear all the time to protect him from punching himself. In that case, yeah, the Penn State special teams are special.

Before I rip into them, let's acknowledge the blocked field goal by Odrick. That was a good play.

What's up with 12 men on the field on the Northwestern punt? This is the third or fourth substitution issue in the past two weeks. We're in week 9 now. This stuff shouldn't be happening.

Last year I called Nate Stupar our special teams MVP. Not so much this year. He had the Northwestern punter dead to rights after he fumbled the snap. But he overran the play, and the punter did a chest heave to a short fat guy with stubby legs who ran for a first down. It was a play that could have given Penn State tremendous field position, but instead it allowed the Wildcats to move the ball further. Eventually, they would have to punt again on that drive, but Graham Zug made a fair catch on the six yard line. What the hell is up with that?

Chaz Powell had a big kick return. It's his second big return in two games. Oddly, on both plays he gained his yards by completely disregarding his blockers and going the opposity direction on his own. That should tell you something.

But let's end on a positive note. Collin Wagner had some nice kickoffs where the ball landed around the five yard line, but more importantly the kick was angled to the corner allowing the coverage to use the sideline to stop the play for a short gain.

Final Grade: C

Gettin' Familiar With: Penn State.

Rodger Sherman — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:52:47 -0000

Alternate title: Gettin' Familiar With: The people about to murder us and ransack our houses and probably also hurt our friends.

At some point in your life, you've probably wondered, "what exactly a nittany lion, anyway?" Well, it's like a regular lion, but it doesn't have a mane, enjoys thrusting, and wears boots.

So far this year: The only blemish on PSU's schedule is a 21-10 loss to Iowa in week four, other than that, they've been dominant. In their seven wins, they're outscoring their opponents 232-50, including a current three-week stretch in which they've beaten Eastern Illinois 52-3, Minnesota 20-0, and Michigan 35-10. They've only allowed double digits three times: Iowa, Michigan, and a 35-17 win over Illinois, while putting up at least 20 every game except Iowa. Yup.

Us and them: Our history with PSU is short, and sweet, well, for them. We're 3-9 against the team that made the Big Ten the Big Eleven. As you've probably noticed, we haven't played them in three years. The last meeting was a 33-7 beatdown in Happy Valley that was Pat Fitzgerald's first Big Ten game, and featured a memorable performance by rookie QB, uh, Andrew Brewer in which he went 14-30 for 157 yards and a pick, as well as leading the team with 41 rushing yards in his first start. Brew didn't remain our QB for much longer, as evidenced by the fact that he had 8 catches for 135 yards and a touchdown last week. Also in the game, a freshman QB named Daryll Clark took his first Big Ten snaps, going 1-2 for seven yards. He's still around at PSU.

Offense: Daryll Clark is a monster of some sort. He's a dual-threat quarterback, but with an arm that makes you kind of forget that, as he's got 1884 yards passing with 17 TD's and only seven picks. He's probably the best offensive player in the Big Ten this year, and he could kill any given player on Northwestern's defense in 13 different ways at any given point in the course of play. And with interchangeable wide receiving droids Graham Zug (KNEEL BEFORE ZUG), Derek Moye, Andrew Quarless and Chaz Powell, he has targets. He leads the Big Ten in passer efficiency, and because Penn State also has a great offensive line, and he's a great runner, he has been sacked less than any other Big Ten quarterback. Oh, and they also have the highest third-down conversion percentage.

Be worried.

Penn State's running game often goes unheralded, because Daryll Clark could probably throw a football hard enough to disembowel you while running 15 miles an hour in the opposite direction, but it's pretty good, in part thanks to that o-line, in part because they have great running backs: Evan Royster, who you may remember from his 1236 yards on 6.3 per carry last season, is back at it, with 741 yards on 5.7 per carry. He's had four games of over 100 yards, and four games of under 90 yards. If you enjoy watching safeties make tackles on running backs, saturday's your game. PSU averages 5.0 yards per carry as a team, which puts them 15th in the nation.

So, yeah, be worried.

Defense: Done being worried about the offense? Get worried about the defense!

PSU leads the Big Ten in passing defense (160 yards per game) rushing defense (79.8 yards per game) total defense (do the math) scoring defense (8.9 points per game) opponents third-down conversion percentage (the one they lead offensively, remember that) and sacks (26, putting them fourth in the nation, with DE Jack Crawford and DT Jared Odrick leading the way with 5.5 and 5, respectively.) Yeah.

They have ten picks (AJ Wallace and Josh Hull have two each, a bunch of people have one) and have only allowed three passing touchdowns. They've recovered five fumbles and allowed three rushing touchdowns. They're preposterous.

Basically, don't get too excited for Saturday.

Anyway, fear. I'll get at y'all tomorrow.

Grading the Penn State Defense Against Michigan

BSD — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:15:22 -0000

More photos » by Carlos Osorio - AP

about 1 month ago: Penn State linebacker Josh Hull (43) sacks Michigan quarterback Tate Forcier (5) during the second quarter of an NCAA college football game in Ann Arbor, Mich., Saturday, Oct. 24, 2009. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)

Browse more photos »

Oh, we heard a lot of talk about the Penn State defense before the game. Who had they played? They hadn't seen a rushing offense like Michigan. I think one of our resident BSD Wolverine fans predicted Minor and Brown BOTH going over 100 yards with Forcier getting another 60. So much for that, huh?

Defensive Line

Outside of that first series, they absolutely dominated the Wolverines who only gained 110 yards on the ground. This is the team that led the Big Ten averaging 235 yards per game

. Jared Odrick's 2 tackles and 0.5 TFL don't accurately illustrate how dominating he was. Eating up two blockers on pretty much every play, he disrupted everything Michigan wanted to do. And he should have had a safety but he overran the tackles and let Forcier get it away. On the next play he had the center so nervous the kid snapped the ball right out the back of the endzone.

Jack Crawford had perhaps his best day yet. After getting sucked inside on a few fake handoffs, he settled into his assignment and finished with 3 tackles, all for a loss, and a sack. He also forced the fumble on Robinson late in the game. In all the line finished with 13 tackles, 6.5 TFL, and 3 sacks. Devon Still and true freshman Jordan Hill recorded the other two sacks which makes me feel good about next year after Odrick is gone.

Final Grade: A

Linebackers

What can be said about Lavorro at this point? Not much, really, so I'll just point at the scoreboard: 11 tackles (6 solo), 1 fumble recovery, 1 INT, and 1 sack. As I predicted, Penn State held him back as a spy in passing situations and it worked to perfection. Every time Forcier tried to get out of the pocket to improvise, Bowman was there to drop him or make him get rid of it. By the end of the first quarter Forcier looked like a deer in the headlights. Welcome to the Big Ten, kid.

The Hull-stache had another great day with 10 tackles (6 solo), 2.5 TFL, and a sack. It must be the mustache, because this is not the same player we saw Brandon Minor dragging for 8 yard gains last year.

Bani Gbadyu and Sean Lee split time and combined for 8 tackles. Chris Colasanti got in the game briefly, and Forcier made him look silly by faking him out of his jock on a QB keeper.

Final Grade: A

Secondary

I'll say this: When the coaches let them man up and play, they did well. More on that later. Forcier only managed 140 yards on less than 50% passing. He threw the pick to Astorino, and was sacked five times. Many of the sacks on Forcier were coverage sacks where he couldn't find a man open. There were very few mistakes by the group other than a missed tackle or two.

Final Grade: A

Special Teams

Another so-so performance. Jeremy Boone has to shorten his windup for his punts. That's two he has had blocked this year, and you can bet every team from here on out will be gunning for him.

Collin Wagner hit his two short field goal attempts. Two of his seven kickoffs went for touchbacks. So it was a good day for him. The kickoff coverage team seems to get it now and they are holding down the big returns. At least I don't remember my heart skipping a beat as they make a shoe string tackle to prevent six points this week.

But our own kick returns were much improved highlighted by Chaz Powell's 54 yard return to open the second half.

The punt return game...seriously guys. Absolutely terrible. I shouldn't complain because they are catching the ball, but what was up with Zug catching the ball and starting to run only to find out Drew Astorino called for a fair catch? It's like the Keystone Cops out there. Let's put the dual return man thing to bed. There is absolutely nothing dynamic about our punt return game right now. Something tells me Joe Paterno likes it that way.

Final Grade: C

Defensive Coaching

Okay, so what happened on that first drive? For starters, Michigan had obviously been scripting those plays and practicing them for the past two weeks. They ran with no huddle and everyone obviously knew what they were supposed to do. Penn State had no time to make adjustments or switch personnel. That was a big factor in the drive.

As far as I can tell, the uncertainty surrounding the no huddle forced Penn State to go into some very simple base defensive sets. You know what means, right? Good ol' Cover-3. Forcier took advantage of the soft coverage three times for passes of 7, 7, and 20 yards. The big pass came when Sukay missed a tackle on a short screen. Crawford got sucked into a fake handoff allowing Forcier to gain 8 yards on one play. The rest of the drive was a lot of Carlos Brown and Minor RAGE for decent carries in the 6-8 yard range. But there were also some short 1 and 2 yard gains won by the defense.

Give credit to Michigan on that drive. They came out and hit Penn State in the mouth. I see a lot of Michigan blogs and fans asking why they got away from the running game after that drive, but truthfully, two out of Michigan's first three plays were good sized passing gains. Penn State tightened up the coverage after that and Michigan couldn't answer.

Checking the stats today, it is a beautiful sight. Penn State leads the conference in every single defensive statistic. Awesome.

Final Grade: A

BSD Staff Predictions: Michigan Wolverines

BSD — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:17:31 -0000

More photos » by TONY DING - AP

3 months ago: Michigan offensive lineman Mark Ortmann (71) watches as quarterback Tate Forcier (5) is hit by Eastern Michigan linebacker Neal Howey (40) and defensive tackle Javon Reese (90) during the second half of an NCAA college football game, Saturday, Sept. 19, 2009, in Ann Arbor, Mich. Forcier was helped off the field but returned to the game in No. 25 Michigan's 45-17 win. (AP Photo/Tony Ding)

Browse more photos »

It's Michigan week. It's your BSD staff predictions. You know the drill.

RUTS Says...

Brain says Penn State, heart says Michigan. Looking at the Wolverines, their defense seems poorly equipped to handle Penn State's attack. You know, other than the fact that Brandon Graham is lining up against our 3rd team offensive right tackle. There's that. Still, their linebackers are prone to jumping on play-action fakes and the secondary isn't great. If Penn State can move the ball on the ground with any sort of competence, Clark could conceivably turn that into a big day (in fact, both teams have significant issues at both safety positions). It'll be up to the interior group of Eliades, Wisniewski, and Troutman to open up holes. Eliades looked downright menacing pulling around the line and leading Royster against Minnesota.

Defensively for Penn State, there's bad news. Tate Forcier may be a mistake-prone freshman, but he's still not Nick Sheridan. He played poorly against Iowa and became rather skittish under pressure. If Penn State can get to him, he'll turn it over. Odrick and Ogbu will be their usual disruptive selves, but what will PSU get from the edge? Denard Robinson is a concern, naturally, but Penn State tends to be rather disciplined on defense. Dynamic and surprising? No, but disciplined.

But it's Michigan, and Michigan Means Puckering from the coaching staff. Even when Penn State has a clearly superior team, like last year, it's a horrific struggle. This is not a clearly superior Penn State team, but it's good enough to be a 4 1/2 point favorite on the road. They're a bad matchup for Michigan, save the obvious Graham v. Poti battle. Insert kicking game caveat (I'll be shocked if Michigan doesn't score or set up an easy touchdown on a kick return) and crackpot officiating conspiracy theory here (however, if I see Dave Witvoet's face, all bets really are off and I'll spend Saturday afternoon in the fetal position if Penn State leads by any less than 20 points).

Like it or not, this game goes down to the wire. I will not be remotely surprised if Penn State loses.

Prediction: Penn State 21, Michigan 20

BSD Mike Says...

If you've been paying attention around the interwebs, this preview shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

On paper, I don't see any reason why Penn State should lose this game. They have better talent, more depth, more experience, and I would even say better coaching. But, it's Michigan, where officials don't seem to give us any calls. It's Ann Arbor, where Nittany Lion dreams go to die. So that has me scared.

I think the Penn State front seven should be able to contain the Michigan running game. On his podcast, Brian asked me how confident I was in this and I mentioned this isn't the first zone read option team Penn State has played and I pointed to Illinois as an example. Brian, perhaps rightfully so, kind of scoffed at the remark suggesting Illinois is not a true test. This is true since I think Michigan has more athleticism at running back and Forcier is a better passer than Juice Williams. But I should have expanded my statement to say this is a very experienced front seven for Penn State. Guys like Navorro Bowman, Josh Hull, Sean Lee, Jared Odrick, and Ollie Ogbu have been the anchor of the defense for three years now. These guys have been around the block. They know the drill by now. They will not be fooled.

But the defensive ends are another story. Jack Crawford, Jerome Hayes, and Eric Latimore do not have a lot of experience. How well they keep up with Rich Rodriguez's cat-and-mouse game will determine how well Penn State contains the Michigan offense.

When Penn State is on offense I believe they have the balance to take advantage of what Michigan gives them. I think the Wolverines will try to take away the running game by stacking the box and hope they can force Daryll Clark into making some turnovers. This could open up some big plays to Chaz Powell and Derek Moye off of play action. And after our discussion with Maize-n-Brew this week where he mentioned their weakness in covering tight ends, I'm interested to see if Andrew Quarless can have a big day.

The wildcard in all of this will be Joe Paterno. Will he allow the offense to open up the playbook? Will he let the Tom Bradley defense attack the freshman quarterback? Or will he pucker up at the first sign of trouble and hope to hang on for a 13-10 win like he did in 2007? I have a good feeling about this game, but I think it will be closer than we all care for it to be.

Prediction: Penn State 27, Michigan 24

KevinHD Says...

The general feeling is uneasiness, and I’ve been trying to figure out all week if that is the reality of the situation or just the annual lead up to the Michigan game. The 2002 and 2005 games will die hard.

But it’s important to be levelheaded here. The defense has been playing lights out, seven games in and not a single first half touchdown. Yeah? Well Rittenberg has your Debbie Downer right here:

We've seen Penn State rise to No. 2 nationally in scoring defense (8.7 ppg) despite facing no FBS offense ranked higher than 79th.

Michigan, on the other hand, is second in both rushing and passing yards per attempt in the Big Ten, although helped by 700-something total yards against one of the worst teams they are eligible to play against. But it wasn’t just Delaware State that showed up to play Michigan with a sub-part defense. The average rank of the D1-A defenses they’ve faced is 68; that includes two teams at 100+.

Basically, something has to give. Either Penn State can’t continue to dominate on defense or Michigan’s two thousand percent year over year increase (rounding) in offense will come to a halt. Vegas (47.5 o/u, PSU -4.5) is effectively predicting Michigan to hit around 21 points, which would be a season low for them.

So to run with this scientifically questionable analysis: can Penn State score more than 21 points? I suspect a slow start but persistent ground game will get them there. Super-soft cover-3 keeps Michigan in it in the 4th, but I remain cautiously optimistic.

Prediction: Penn State 34, Michigan 24

Joe Paterno Press Conference Notes

BSD — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:15:09 -0000

More photos » by Pat Little - AP

Browse more photos »

Here are the bullet points from Joe Paterno's weekly press conference.

Joe wasn't ready to say the running game has turned the corner yet. He says it takes more than one game. Illinois was more concerned about the pass which opened some things up, but they did a better job of holding their blocks this week. Joe expects more blitzing from Eastern Illinois so we'll see what happens.
Not surprisingly, Joe did not want to discuss the Bobby Bowden situation.
Joe has been pleased with the performance of Jack Crawford and Eric Latimore. Overall, he thinks the defense played well against Illinois.
There was a somewhat heated discussion about scheduling. You can hear the unedited version here.
Joe gave a rambling answer in reference to the defensive tackle rotation. Basically he has been pleased with the depth at defensive tackle and defensive end. He's still worried about depth at linebacker, and he would like to see the secondary get a little quicker at reacting to the ball.
Joe is very pleased with Jeremy Boone. Says Boone has made things a lot easier on the defense by giving them good field position.
Injury Update: Devon Smith is probably out. Nerraw McCormack is doubtful with a bum ankle. Brent Carter, Stephfon Green, and Chris Colasanti are all "banged up", and DeOn'tae Pannell "has an ankle". Most likely they will all play except for McCormack and Smith. Also, Sean Lee is out.
Chaz Powell will play. There were rumors he had the flu or something last week.
Quarless and Shuler have been doing a good job. They have been blocking well, and they felt they were going to be able to get them involved in the passing game against Illinois.
Not surprisingly, Joe calls Eastern Illinois a "good solid football team."
Joe was really impressed with Stephfon Green. Says he's come a long way and credits Galen Hall for coaching him up.
Joe isn't thrilled with running Clark as much as they did against Illinois, but he feels that some of the younger quarterbacks are coming along, so they can take some chances with Clark. Illinois opened up some things that lended themself to running Clark more. Going forward they may not do that.
Joe wishes they could have found more time for Newsome to play. But they want to put him in situations where he can succeed, because if they put him in there and he struggles they worry it may set him back.
Lou Eliades is coming along. He's learning how to play hurt and getting better.
Stephon Morris is playing cornerback in the nickle package and D'Anton Lynn is moving over to the nickle back. He's playing well and the staff is pleased

Grading the Penn State Defense Against Illinois

BSD — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:15:09 -0000

More photos » by Seth Perlman - AP

2 months ago: Illinois' Daniel Dufrene (22) goes against Penn State's D'Anton Lynn during the first half of the NCAA college football game in Champaign, Ill., Saturday, Oct. 3, 2009. (AP Photo/Seth Perlman)

Browse more photos »

Well it sure feels good to be back to winning games again. Even though Illinois is a pretty downtrodden team this season, it's a game a lot of people picked us to lose when the year began, and any win on the road in the Big Ten is a good win. It's a little disappointing that the defense gave up 17 points after Ohio State shut out the Illini last week, but Illinois two touchdowns came in the fourth quarter when the game was well in hand and Joe Paterno had called off the dogs. So overall I'm pleased with the performance. Let's grade out the defense.

Defensive Line

When you play a team like Illinois the challenge for the defensive line is to stick with their assignments. The Illini try to trick you and fake you with counters and fake handoffs and zone read options. I thought the defensive line did a fantastic job. Illinois only managed 130 yards and averaged 3.7 yards per carry. Juice was the leading rusher with 81 yards, so every time Dufrene got the ball he didn't get far.

The defensive ends were outstanding. Jack Crawford and Eric Latimore did a fantastic job of containing the outside runs and forcing Juice to keep the ball on the zone reads where he got gobbled up by the defensive tackles and linebackers. Crawford and Latimore each got a sack in the game, and when they got pulled late in the second half the true freshman Sean Stanley came in and made a fantastic play swatting the ball out of Juice's hand for a Penn State fumble recovery. The defensive ends are coming along quite nicely.

The defensive tackles were unnoticeable, but they ate up blockers and allowed the linebackers to roam free and make plays.

Final Grade: A

Linebackers

Navorro Bowman and Josh Hull played well. It looked to me like Illinois didn't want anything to do with Bowman and was running away from his direction most of the day. But he still managed to get seven tackles and a TFL. Josh Hull was great in the running game as usual. But I still think he's a liability in the passing game. Bradley sent him on a lot of blitzes. He got there once or twice, but for the most part they were ineffective and he either got gobbled up by a guard or cut down by a running back. Illinois had success attacking the medium-deep middle over the linebackers and under the safeties just like everyone else has. This part of the defense has to tighten up. But Hull and Bowman were monsters in defending Illinois' wide receiver screen plays.

Both guys did a good job of containing Juice when he decided to run, which was often. It looked like Bowman was assigned as a spy when Illinois was in long distance situations where they had to pass. There were a few times when Juice got flushed out of the pocket and Bowman made a nice open field tackle to bring him down short of the sticks.

The third linebacker spot was a platoon of Bani Gbadyu and Nate Stupar. Neither one played particularly well. In the first quarter Gbadyu was getting shoved out of the way by Arrelious Benn which allowed Illinois to get some nice running plays. So he got pulled in favor of Stupar who did slightly better. But neither guy was great. We're really missing Sean Lee.

Grade: B

Secondary

For the most part the secondary did a good job. Juice managed 263 yards passing and a touchdown, but a lot of that came in garbage time. Benn was relatively contained to 96 yards on five catches.

D'Anton Lynn and Stephon Morris continue to impress me at cornerback. Lynn was fantastic in fighting through blocks to stop a few wide receiver screens. Morris was challenged a few times and came up big each time. He also had the interception just before the half that he nearly ran back 100 yards. Again, Illinois had their success in the passing game by attacking the linebackers and safeties. The corners are doing just fine.

The safeties definitely have to tighten up. Sukay was slow to rotate on Juice's touchdown pass, and then he finished it off by drawing a personal foul for a helmet to helmet hit. The Big Ten is really frowning on these this year, so we'll see if there is a suspension coming later in the week. Given the opponent next weekend, I bet the conference tries to make a statement while not really hurting Penn State that badly. It was a vicious hit, and I can understand if the conference penalizes him, but I hope they'll also look at the hit Daryll Clark took earlier in the game. After a scramble Clark went down and an Illinois defender came flying in after Clark was on the ground and speared him in the back with his helmet. It was clearly a play designed to injure the opponent. Clark got up in visible pain in either his back or shoulder. If Sukay gets suspended, I hope the Big Ten will look at that play too.</commentary>

Final Grade: B

Special Teams

Some good, some bad this week. The kickoff returns continue to look anemic. A.J. Wallce got a look today with Devon Smith recovering from a concussion. On two kickoff returns he got a total of 21 yards. Neither return got past the 15 yard line. One return was just a boneheaded decision by Wallace who ran it out of the endzone. The other looked to me like the wedge set up and took off way too early allowing the Illinois gunners to run in untouched to make the play.

Jeremy Boone was amazing...again. Average of 49.5 yards with a long of 66 and two kicks pinned inside the 20. Ho hum. There was one close call though where another punt was almost blocked. Boone rushed to get it away and Illinois got a touchback out of it. This has to get fixed. Every team going forward is going to be coming after us considering the past two games.

Wagner didn't get any field goal attempts, but it looks to me like he has changed something on the kickoffs. He just looked like he's getting more hangtime this week and it helped the coverage team tremendously. Benn had one nice return for 33 yards, but four of the other five returns were held under 20 yards.

Nothing special in the punt return game as usual. We're just fair catching everything this year, and Royster almost blew that with a muffed catch that he was fortunate to recover.

Final Grade: B-

Defensive Coaching

It's hard to complain about much here. The Illinois offense was pretty ineffective, but not as ineffective as when they played Ohio State. Like I said before, defending an option team like Illinois is about knowing your assignments, and in that regard the players were very well prepared. Illinois couldn't find any big holes to exploit in the running game.

But in the passing game I will continue to rail against the Cover 3 until things change. I hate it with the passion of a thousand suns. It's not that it's a bad defense, it's just that I get sick of seeing it on every 2nd and 10 or 3rd and 7. I've never played a down of organized football in my life, but I can sit on my couch and see they are in Cover 3 before the snap, so I'm sure the quarterback sees it too, and I'm sure the offensive coordinator has already called a play to exploit it. Illinois did so all day connecting on multiple medium range throws underneath the safeties. Ricky Stanzi picked us apart last week picking up eight or nine yards on every second and long situation.

For the love of God, please mix it up. I understand the bend-don't-break-defense. Make your opponent use eight or nine plays to march down the field. The more plays you can force, the more likely they are to make a mistake. And the more time they consume in moving the ball is less time they have to score. But come on, do we have to just GIVE THEM YARDS?

Like I said last week, Paterno needs to be commended for changing the offense in 2005 into the dynamic Spread HD we see today. He realized that four yards and a cloud of dust just doesn't cut it anymore if you hope to be a champion. But he still hasn't figured out that defenses have changed too. It's no longer about sitting back and reacting to what your opponent does. The nasty defenses today are the ones that attack and force the offense out of what they want to do. I see signs of it here and there with a corner blitz or an occassional man-to-man, but we need more of it. Keep the offense guessing just like our offense does to their opposing defense.

I won't be satisfied until we beat ever opponent 65-0.

Final Grade: B

Poll

Who was the defensive MVP?

Josh Hull - 11 tkl (4 solo), 1 TFL

174 votes

Navorro Bowman - 7 tkl (4 solo), 1 TFL

35 votes

Jack Crawford - 4 tkl, 1 sack, 1.5 TFL

44 votes

Sean Stanley - 2 tkl, 1 sack, 1 FF

14 votes

Eric Latimore - 5 tkl, 1 sack, 2 TFL

92 votes

Stephon Morris - 2 tkl, 1 INT

21 votes

380 votes | Poll has closed