We believe that MSU will be adding 3 new commits in the next few days.

One of them should be Rayshaun Benny, but the other two are guys that aren't as expected.

And before anyone asks, no they are not named Andrel Anthony, Dillon Tatum, Keon Coleman, or Tyrell Henry.

We just ask that you don't post this update on Twitter/FB. Plus, there's no reason to ask TOS for if they have additional info on this, as they won't.

We don't have exact dates/times on these announcements, just that they should be soon. If everything goes smoothly, MSU should be adding 3 guys, including Benny, by mid-next week (or sooner).

And, most importantly, I leave you with this...

2nd commit of the day tells me it should be dropping any second now

Fickell at UM. Would be disastrous for MSU.

Ricky White qb that is at UT is looking around.

Parts 2 and 3 can be found below, and are also pinned atop The Underground Bunker message board.



The Pre-Snap Read: Michigan State v. Iowa (The Macro)
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.com


East Lansing, Mich. - We learned over the years that Mark Dantonio could get the Spartans up to fight, and often beat Michigan, and then reboot the following week to continue to play sound football.

Now, can Mel Tucker do the same?

Tucker orchestrated a phenomenal performance against Michigan, from the outset of practice week up through the bus ride to the stadium - and he had like-minded leaders helping at every turn. It’s largely up to those leaders to make sure the same level of competence, excellence and focus is used this week at Iowa. There’s no way Michigan State will travel with the same level of caged rage that they had last week. That’s impossible. Rivalry-week venom can’t be replicated week after week. But the physicality, precision, intelligence and avoidance of mistakes CAN travel to Iowa, and it must, in order for Michigan State to pass this tough test against a fairly good Iowa team.

Fairly good?

Iowa is 0-2. But the numbers that tell more of the story are the scores:

Northwestern 21, Iowa 20.
Purdue 24, Iowa 20.

Northwestern and Purdue are 2-0. Do you think they’re all that good? They’re okay.

Iowa is 0-2. Roughly the same type of team as those two opponents. And roughly the same as Michigan State … and Rutgers.

At least that’s the opinion on Michigan State for now from my seat, and the seats in Vegas, until Michigan State proves otherwise.

If Michigan State can beat Iowa worse than Northwestern and Purdue did, it won’t mean anything in terms of the transitive property, but it will mean that Michigan State is continuing to trend upward with a 2-1 record.

******

I didn’t think we would have a chance to learn so much about the future of Michigan State football as we might this week. And the same can obviously said about last week.

In early October, I didn’t think the future of the QB position could potentially look as good here on Nov. 6 as it does - if Lombardi can string together another fine performance. And the future of the WR position looks excellent. The future of the RB position is cloudy. Jordon Simmons looks promising, but Elijah Collins has struggled and Anthony Williams has yet to see the field, due to internal accountability missteps.

The offensive line is good in pass protection, but is behind schedule in run blocking. The latter was a bit better last week. It needs to take another step this week.

What might we learn this weekend? That Tucker can lead a team to carry on after a mammoth victory? That Lombardi is an every-week gamer? That the run game is finally coming around? That the Michigan State defensive front seven can contain a decent Iowa running attack?

I thought this fall could devolve into an exhibition season of practice and hopes for progress. Instead, if Michigan State can follow up last week with a road win at Iowa, we might begin to see tangible immediate progress from Tucker and company that I wasn’t expecting and no one was demanding. But here they are, with a chance to march on and continue to surprise.

Beating Iowa wouldn’t be a big surprise. Iowa isn’t great. But harnessing a level of week-to-week competence - especially after the bumbling opener against Rutgers - would help advance Michigan State toward the next chapters of what could become a more rapid rise for Tucker than any of us expected.

FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST

This is a slightly watered down Iowa team. They still look like Iowa, they still attempt Iowa things, and they still do a lot of Iowa things. But they don’t do all of them quite as well as the best Iowa teams, and not as well as last year’s 10-3 Iowa team.

Iowa is very shaky at QB. Talented arm strength, but inconsistent with reads and accuracy and visibly diminishing confidence.

Michigan State has the better QB in this game.

Iowa has two or three good RBs. They are quick, smallish strong guys who battle nicely for tough yards.

The o-line is good, not great. They’re tough with their inside and outside zones and occasional gap schemes - like they’ve been for 20 years. Pass protection is good, not great.

Iowa’s run blocking is better than MSU’s. MSU’s pass protection is a little better, and Michigan State has a QB who trusts pass protection and hangs in the pocket better than Iowa’s QB.

Neither QB is a great runner, but MSU’s Lombardi has a better pocket timer, better initial quickness and better instincts.

Iowa’s run game is better than MSU’s - the combination of better RBs and better run blocking.

Iowa’s tight ends are much better than MSU’s.

The defensive lines are about the same.

MSU’s linebackers are better in run defense than Iowa’s.

MSU’s safeties are better in run defense than Iowa’s.

Iowa’s linebackers and safeties aren’t the fast-flow hammers that they’ve been in the past. They’re late to the ball. Safety run support at Iowa is not as good as it used to be.

Both teams play good, intricate zone coverages. Iowa has had a couple of costly miscommunications in zone coverage this year, including a couple in the red zone. Michigan State has yet to have any major communication/coverage errors in the secondary. Edge Michigan State, for now.

Both teams’ kickers are good, Iowa’s a little better.

**

THE KEYS:

1. Michigan State must stop/contain the run and make shaky QB Spencer Petras beat them.

This is a cliché that can be applied to many games each week. But in this case, Iowa has a pretty good run game. If Iowa is able to lean on that run game, they will have taken a huge step toward victory and Michigan State will have let Petras off the hook.

2. Michigan State can drastically help itself by mustering its best running attack of the season. I’m not predicting that the Spartans will achieve this. But you don’t have to be great on the ground to move the ball against Iowa. Not this year. In past years, good running teams were grounded by Iowa. This year, merely decent run teams CAN run the ball against Iowa.

Is Michigan State ready to be merely decent in the run game?

Michigan State was horrible on the ground against Rutgers.

Michigan State was a bit better last week, rushing for 126 yards against Michigan.

Purdue’s tailback rushed for 129 yards on 21 carries (6.1 per try). He had a 33-yarder to the edge when the Iowa inside linebackers were caught on an inside blitz. Other than that, he was consistently productive. Not great, but productive.

Purdue is a pass-first team. Purdue etched out some work on the ground as an important complement to victory.

Purdue finished with just 104 net yards rushing after sacks were counted. Purdue had only 21 tailback runs in the game - all by Zander Horvath.

Michigan State will run attempt more than 21 tailback runs. If Michigan State can get something close to the 3.9 yards per carry average that Jordon Simmons had, on 28-plus carries, then Michigan State will be a good step toward victory.

Complement that with a couple of jet sweeps and a Lombardi QB draw or two, and just one creaser by a tailback, and you get up to about 160 yards rushing, and then it will be two giant steps toward victory - as long as you avoid turnovers.

3. It’s another time-honored cliché, but the team that can avoid mistakes in this game will win.

Iowa lost to Purdue because Iowa fumbled twice in the red zone and had two costly penalties in the red zone.

Iowa led Purdue 20-14 early in the fourth quarter, but could not finish.

Michigan State lost to Rutgers due to turnovers.

Iowa lost to Northwestern because Iowa tried inexplicably to rely on the pass too much, and QB Petras was terrible in the fourth quarter with two late interceptions and shaky body language.

Both teams have lost games due to mistakes.

Michigan State was a gem last week in terms of avoiding mistakes.

Which team is better at FORCING mistakes? Iowa has been very good at forcing turnovers and interceptions with its deceptive zone defenses over the years. But Iowa’s running backs have had a problem with fumbles, and Iowa’s quarterback has been far more prone to the interception than Lombardi.

Petras has a big arm, too big of an arm at times. Two of his INTs this season have been a case of throwing too hard (and off-target) through the hands of his receivers (too high, or behind them).

So I don’t know how to predict the mistake category. Michigan State was noticeably more mindful of ball security last week, with RBs and WRs having two hands over the ball more often than a week earlier.

THE MATCHUPS

* Michigan State run offense vs Iowa run defense

Michigan State was improved in this area last week, partly do to center Nick Samac playing better than Matt Allen. Allen missed last week with an undisclosed injury. Even if Allen is healthy, I would expect Samac to start and hold the job for the rest of the season.

Offensive guards Blake Bueter and Matt Carrick took their games up a level last week. Their confidence is on an uptick. Maybe they’re ready for another step.

MSU’s run blocking was terrible in week one, functional in week two. Anyone betting on better-than-functional in week three?

Iowa’s run defense is good on the d-line. But the linebackers and safeties have not been good at supporting the run thus far this year. Early in the season, something like that can be improved upon - especially with proven quality-control coaches like Iowa’s DC Phil Parker.

Which are will show more progress? Michigan State in run blocking, or Iowa in back-seven run support? You’ll find out when I do.

Iowa’s d-line is solid-to-good, but I don’t see the bash masters who can completely uproot your interior that Iowa has had at times in the past.

Here’s the weird thing: Northwestern stayed almost entirely on the ground against Iowa. Northwestern rushed the ball 60 times against Iowa. SIXTY! Only 18 pass attempts.

Yet Northwestern rushed for only 143 yards.

I don’t know how that’s possible, even though I watched the game twice.

Northwestern rushed the ball 60 times, for a mere average of 2.3 yards per carry.

Northwestern’s longest run of the day was a 21-yard scramble by QB Payton Ramsey when he caught Iowa in man-to-man (rare for the Hawkeyes).

Northwestern just kept chopping off gains of 4, 5, 1, 2, 0, 3 and moved the chains just enough on three TDs drives to get the win.

Purdue picked up a pair of crucial third-and-twos in the fourth quarter, leading to scoring drives. Ran it up the gut. Iowa wasn’t bad up the middle, but not good enough to get the stop. In Iowa’s better years, you wouldn’t think about running up the middle on a key third-and-two. You would have to find a better avenue.

Iowa doesn’t get creased and gashed for 15-yard run after 15-yard run. It’s an accumulation of 4- and 5-yard gains because the LBs and safeties aren’t up to the Iowa standard. Also, Iowa is playing with its slot LB a step further outside the box than in past years, with this “Cash” concept, which is basically just morphing from their old 4-3 into making the third LB a little more of a nickel back in terms of positioning against 3-WR sets, although he’s still a fairly sizable guy.

The slot LB is further from the box, Iowa's safeties don't support the run on time, and one of the LBs (49) kind of plays like Noah Harvey did against Rutgers. Not that foggy, but he's not an on-time hammer.

Again, you don’t have to be a great running team to move the ball on the ground against Iowa. But you’d better be pretty decent. Michigan State needs to be pretty decent with the ground game to win this game. Not sure if they’re there yet.

Michigan State can help itself with the type of rhythm and balance the Spartans showed last week. Michigan State stayed out of obvious pass situations with a fairly eclectic play selection, especially on the first play of its drives.

How Michigan State can arrive that an optimal level of rhythm and balance in play design and play selection? I don’t have any suggestions in that area, but we’ll know it if we see it. We saw it last week. It was pretty.


* Michigan State pass game vs Iowa pass defense

Iowa held Northwestern’s Payton Ramsey to 11 of 18 passing for 130 yards and one INT.

Purdue QB Aidan O’Connell, a former walk-on, was 31 of 50 for 282 with 3 TDs and 2 INTs.

Rocky Lombardi has thrown for more than 300 yards in the first two weeks.

Michigan State picked on matchup advantages at WR against Michigan CBs last week, especially in the speed department (which was a surprise to me), and also with quick, intricate release moves and double moves by Ricky White.

That stuff won’t be available this week. Not very often anyway.

Iowa will bail into its zone coverages, and disguise things while doing so, and protect over the top with safety help. They won’t bite on double-moves, their CBs aren’t left on an island to bite. Plus, they’ve seen the Ricky White film. They’ll have a better feel for his moves and strengths than Michigan had.

Still, if you catch Iowa in a cover-three blitz (which they will do three or four times a game), the bailing CB basically gets left in man-to-man if you run a deep go route at him. Usually, you want to run a comeback against bailing cover-three. But if Michigan State wants to take a deep shot, it’s do-able against cover-three blitz if you have time to throw a quickish deep fade. Purdue tried it twice last week, once for defensive pass interference, one for offensive pass interference.

But, for the most part, the deep shot won’t be something Michigan State will attempt 14 times like they did last week. Cue the talk show hosts to howl about “Why did Michigan State go away from what worked so great against Michigan???!!”

It’s a different opponent with different coverages.

**

So what’s open against Iowa? You have to be patient against the zone and find the openings such as the cover-two window to the sideline via the smash concept. You can do it a few times a game, but you can’t live on it every single down. The windows change and close, especially if and when Iowa surprises you by dropping eight. When they drop eight, basically no one is open. They do it well, and maybe should consider doing it more often.

There are the shallow crossers if you read man-to-man.

There are the digs and in routes, behind the linebackers and in front of the safeties, if you can stretch the safeties with complementary routes and have time to get to the in-route openings.

Of course Iowa knows that this is where the openings are too, and when Iowa is good, they are planting and leaning toward those openings as you are throwing there, and they arrive with force and/or a hand on the ball for maddening interceptions.

As for the Iowa pass rush, they have a nifty-footed DT in Daviyon Nixon, when he is allowed to disengage and attempt to cross-face and isn’t just two-gapping. For the most part, they get home on sacks via coverage sacks when the QB gets caught staring into the flashlight of Iowa’s deceptively difficult coverages.

* The intangible factor here is the backdrop of Rocky Lombardi returning to his home state for this game. I’m not sure if he grew up a Hawkeyes fan the way Brian Lewerke grew up a Sun Devils fan.

Lewerke and Lombardi came to Michigan State for the same reason - Michigan State was producing NFL quarterbacks at the time, and Mark Dantonio was a great person.

Lewerke doesn’t have great memories from his games against ASU. Lewerke was stronger mentally than you think, but Lombardi appears to be even stronger.

Lombardi has no hatred for Iowa. Iowa wanted him. His motivation won’t be a negative one. It’s a positive one. He’s thrilled to play in front of his parents and family for a change (his mother isn’t able to attend most games because he has other siblings who are active with other sports).

Lombardi is becoming a proven quarterback. He has been accepted as leader. He’s vocal. His disposition, and skill level, is entirely different than the Rocky Lombardi who had uneven performances in 2018 and ’19. He’s hot and he’s loving this gig.

Now he’s going home. You make the call. Does that bring out the best in him, or might it cause him to get off the tracks a bit? You’ll know when I know.

* MSU’s run defense vs Iowa’s run game.

I watched last week’s Iowa vs Northwestern game first. I was astounded by how pass-happy Iowa was. And it was WINDY at Kinnick Stadium that day. I wrote on The Bunker that Iowa had overshot its intentions of morphing into an offense for the 2000s.

Iowa had 51 pass attempts and only 17 tailback runs against Northwestern. And this was a game that Iowa led 17-0! It’s not like they got way behind and had to pass their way back into the game.

Iowa led 17-0 due to a short-field TD drive and a very-short field TD drive.

And they should have led 21-0 if Petras hadn’t hurried a bad throw to a wide open tight end on second-and-goal from the 4-yard line due to some pass rush heat. Easy for me to say, but take the hit, plant your foot a hair longer, and make that lollipop throw to a WIDE OPEN tight end, and it’s 21-0 in the second quarter, and probably game over.

I wrote that Iowa was overly pass-happy and predicted that Iowa would make corrections this week to get back to old school Kirk Ferentz ball.

Then I watched Iowa’s season-opening game against Purdue. Silly me. Iowa had ALREADY played old school Ferentz ball in week one.

Iowa came out at hammered the run with all the old favorites: inside zone, outside zone with two tight ends, fake outside zone counter boot pass to the tight end, and a few powers.

Iowa rushed for 195 yards against Purdue.

Tailback Tyler Goodson rushed for 77 yards on 16 carries and Tailback Mekhi Sargent rushed for 71 on 11 carries.

The third back rushed for 29 yards on four carries.

Solid, solid, solid.

Those little RBs run hard and quick and battle for tough yards and yards after contact.

Solid, solid, solid.

The problem is they fumbled at the 10 and the 30.

Petras threw the ball reasonably well against Purdue: 22 of 39 for 265.

The turnovers and red zone penalties prevented Iowa from generating more than 20 points. It kind of reminded me of some Michigan State losses in the last couple of years.

But the Iowa o-line is pretty good. Not great. The o-tackles aren’t as good as they are supposed to be. The center/right guard double teams on gap plays is above average. I noticed the left guard losing on a key second-and-one play late in the Northwestern game, which led to third-and-five, and an interception.

MSU’s run defense has been pretty good this year. Michigan expected to have a terrific running attack against Michigan State last week. Michigan State contained Michigan to 152 yards rushing (4.5 per carry).

That was a reasonably good day on the ground for Michigan.

In some ways, MSU’s ground defense will have a slightly easier test this week in that Iowa’s offense isn’t likely to be quite as challenging as Michigan’s in terms of variety of formations, changing tempos, the concern of letting speedy guys get loose in space, and a slightly better QB than Petras. Michigan’s pass game balance was better than Iowa’s

That’s why stopping Iowa’s run game is so important. They are going to want to hammer the run, like they almost did against Purdue, like they failed to even try against Northwestern.

Stop the run and make Iowa throw the ball 50 times like they did against Northwestern and Michigan State will be in very good position to win, barring turnovers.

* MSU’s pass defense vs Iowa passing game:

Petras and Milton are somewhat similar. They’re both big, at about 6-foot-5. They both have giant arm strength. They both have problems with accuracy.

Petras’ accuracy problems are worse than Milton’s. When he misses, he misses at 100 mph. Sometimes he’s accurate at 100 mph and his guy can’t catch it.

Neither QB is comfortable sitting in the pocket at making more than one read.

Milton is a much better runner.

Petras was painfully bad on third down in the second half against Purdue and for the entire Northwestern game.

Iowa is without one of its top WRs in Ihmir Smith-Marsette, who was arrested for suspicion of drunk driving. He might be their most explosive WR, their slender fast guy.

But Iowa has a good muscular WR in Brandon Smith, and their top pass catcher from a year ago in possession guy Nico Ragaini.

The tight end, Sam Laporta, is good on 15-yard corner routes, and the intermediate in-routes, and Iowa’s staple counter boot drag. He’s good. He’s an Iowa tight end.

Aside from one or two deep shot attempts to Brandon Smith, Iowa does lose a good bit of its explosiveness without Smith-Marsette.

Iowa’s pass protection was suspect last week at right tackle. MSU’s pass rush was better than expected last week. Petras leaves the pocket too early. He has happy feet, happy arm, happy brain, all that stuff. So a little bit of pass rush could go further against him than most QBs.

Michigan State did a great job of changing coverages last week, and mixing in some pressures. That stuff confounded Milton, but Milton had escapability to make things difficult for MSU’s pressure packages.

Michigan State had a chance of messing with Petras’ head enough to force interceptions, incompletions on third downs, and messy scrambles.


(THE MICRO COMING SOON)

This is Part 3 of 3:

IOWA DEFENSE, THE MICRO

* Iowa's ILBs and safeties don’t seem to be the instinctive hammers they’ve been in the past. They’re reasonably athletic, but have been late to arrive, play after play, on some of the long, sustained drives that Purdue and Northwestern have had against Iowa, especially with ground gainer after ground gainer of 3, 8, 4, 2, 7 yards.

* Coverages:
* They will mix it up with some press, into quarters bail. But you don’t know if it’s quarters or cover-two halves until you’re a few steps into your route. And sometimes they latch on and it becomes man-to-man. Very good at seeming simple but being complex in pass defense, and they’ve always been that way, with hard hitting just for good measure.
* They love to play with two deep, if they can stop the run with the standard 7 and pressure with a standard 4.
* They used a third CB in the slot against Purdue like a true nickel more than I can remember from them in past years. But they didn’t do it that way against Northwestern.
* Two DB assignment busts in first half vs Purdue, more than you usually see from Iowa.

* They play more zone inside the 15-yard line than most teams. Had a tip drill INT in the red zone vs Purdue by LB Barrington Wade.

* Not a heavy blitz team but they blitzed on consecutive plays vs Purdue when they had Purdue backed up inside their own 12-yard line.


IOWA PASS RUSH
* No scary guys, but they get you with coverage sacks and coverage pressures.


EXOTICS?

* Iowa is the least-exotic defense in the Big Ten. But even Iowa will mix things up a little - usually on third down. Almost never on first down, unless you are deep in your own territory.

On a third-and-7 in the 3Q vs Purdue, Iowa went with a five-man rush zone blitz with stand-up DE Golston dropping into coverage. Iowa was in cover-three behind him. That’s not terribly exotic, but Golston as a stand-up DE has some flexibility. The blitzing LBs didn’t get home in time at the Purdue QB connected on a 15-yard out route in front of a cover-three CB.

* Against Northwestern, they did some of the Narduzzi “chaos” stuff, which basically means no d-linemen are in a three-point stance. They’re standing up, milling around, and you don’t know who is going to come from which gap. But I never saw them do anything terribly creative out of this. It usually ended up being a standard four-man rush.

THE PERSONNEL

DEFENSIVE LINE
The Skinny: Firm inside with their usual assortment of two-gapping brawn. Not super disruptive. No ransackers. Just good, solid. They began losing the line of scrimmage to Purdue late in the game, possibly due to Purdue’s usage of occasional uptempo. Still, that was surprising to see. Purdue was dead last in rush offense in the Big Ten last year, but kind of took ownership of the line of scrimmage against this unit for key plays late in the game.

Interesting that three of the four starting d-linemen are transfers, including two Michiganders.

LDE 97 ZACH VANVALKENBURG (6-4, 270, Sr., Zeeland, Mich.)
* In February of 2019, he transferred from Hillsdale College to Iowa, also considered Michigan State.
* He won two state titles as a LB at Zeeland West.
* Was a no-star recruit when he went to Hillsdale.
* Had two tackles last season in 11 games.
* First-year starter.

* Huge for a 4-3 defensive end.
* Smart, squeeze his gap, then quick first two steps.
+ Caused fumble, and recovered it, in 1Q vs Northwestern.

(DE 92 John Waggoner, 6-5, 271, Soph., decent inside swipe move, but missed the tackle on the sack in the 3Q against Purdue).

(DE 13 Joe Evans, 6-2, 248, Soph., coverage sack vs NW).

DT 54 DAVIYON NIXON (6-3, 305, Jr., Kenosha, Wis.)
* Juco transfer from Iowa Western CC.
* 29 tackles as a second-stringer last year.

+ Good job staying low, disengaging and hunting with grappling-hook arms to make tackles.
+ Good rip move on the pass rush for a DT.
+ 99 Shannon and Nixon got home for a sack on third-and-medium in the 3q vs Purdue. Coverage sack, three man rush. First time they went with a three-man rush all day.
+ Coverage sack vs NW in the third quarter. Just kept chuggin’.
+ Good lateral quickness to cross face on pass rush, shown on half-sack with Golston in 4Q vs NW. Golston with a good counter move.

DT 96 JACK HEFLIN (6-4, 312, Sr., Prophetstown, Ill.)
- Transfer from Northern Illinois.
* Second-team All-MAC last year.
* Kind of a Mike Panasiuk type of guy. Sturdy.
- Facemask penalty negated a sack by Golston and gave Purdue first-and-10 in the red zone with 3:18 to play for the winning score.

DL 57 CHAUNCEY GOLSTON (6-5, 270, Sr., Detroit East English Village)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 16 in Michigan. Spring commitment. Michigan State had not offered.
* HM All-Big Ten by coaches last year.
* 47 tackles last year, 9.5 TFLs, three sacks.
* Will play a stand-up DE at times.
* Active motor, good size at DE, not necessarily a speed rush force, but a good all-around player.


LINEBACKERS:
The Skinny: Decent group, somewhat similar to Michigan State.

They don’t have the AJ Edds consummate big Iowa guy in the slot anymore. Edds was so good, and the poster child for old school football transitioning vs the new school. However there just aren’t many guys of his size that can smart-move all over the place like he did.

So Iowa is going more in the direction that Michigan State is headed, with a slot LB playing more towards the slot receiver and less in the tackle box. This leaves Iowa with less personnel in the box vs the run than used to be the case, only by a half step or so, but it makes a difference. Iowa is out-numbered in the box vs the run more often this year than in the past. Also, the safeties don’t support the run as well, and ILB Nick Niemann doesn’t seem to have great instincts and knack; he’s often a downstream type of guy, not hammering the ball carrier at the line of scrimmage and instead is latching on two or three yards downstream.

Djimon Colbert, who started last year, opted out due to COVID.


SLOT (CASH) LB 35 BARRINGTON WADE (6-1, 236, Sr., Skokie, Ill.)
* Sturdy strong. Sack vs Purdue as a blitzer, turned blocking back into a blocking sled and piled him back into the QB for a sack. That was impressive.
- Assignment error in zone allowed game-winning 6-yard TD pass to Purdue with 2:17 left.
* Although he’s technically a “cash” LB, kind of their version of a “star” or nickel, he still has linebacker size. But they position him out toward the slot WR a little further than past Iowa teams.


MLB 44 SETH BENSON (6-0, 231, Soph., Sioux Falls, SD)
* Did not play against Purdue.
* First-year starter. Maybe a Joe Bachie type, a little shorter.
* No strong opinion on him. Runs okay sideline to sideline. But Iowa just doesn't log-jam you up the middle like they used to, and I thought he might help with that when he returned to the lineup against Northwestern but it just didn't happen. Not yet anyway.


WLB 49 NICK NIEMANN (6-4, 233, Sr, Sycamore, Ill.)
* 13 career starts.
- Looked a little bit soft as a middle plugger in the fourth quarter against Purdue. Not of the usual Iowa quality. Became a downstream guy.
- Kind of plays like Noah Harvey did against Rutgers. Not an instinctive hammer like Iowa usually has as inside linebackers.

* Had a pick six in the Holiday Bowl against USC.


DEFENSIVE BACKFIELD
* The Skinny: The usual Iowa coverages. Northwestern didn’t throw a lot. Purdue had success with the usual zone beaters: little sit-down routes, the smash concept to the cover-two window, and intermediate routes.

No strong opinions on the CBs, other than No. 20 struggled as a tackler in the opener and then didn’t start against Northwestern.


CB 33 RILEY MOSS (6-1, 191, Jr., Akeny, Iowa)
* Started one game last year, started five games as a freshman in 2018.
* Good open-field tackler.
* No opinion on his coverage skills.


CB 8 MATT HANKINS (6-0, 180, Sr., Lewisville, Texas)
* Will play some slot LB/CB. Played slot CB/LB against Purdue because Benson was out and everyone slid over a position.
* 18 career starts.
* Dabbled at slot LB kind of like Michigan State is doing with Shakur Brown. Iowa doesn’t call it a LB, neither does Michigan State against some formations this guy ends up being the seventh man in the box, like a linebacker.

* When Iowa had him in the slot, Iowa did it with two deep safeties, leaving Iowa light in the box with five defenders. Michigan State doesn’t leave two deep safeties when putting the fifth DB in the slot.

* He had two INTs last year.
+ Nice, diving INT dropping back into coverage vs Purdue to stop a 12 yard dig route.

CB 20 Julius Brents (6-2, 204, Soph., Indianapolis)
- Started against Purdue but missed three tackles in 1H. Didn’t start the next week.


WHAT PURDUE DID

* Purdue fed the ball to its four-star sophomore WR David Bell. Combined with last year, he had 23 catches for 304 yards in his first six quarters of football against Iowa. They hit him with intermediate routes - square-outs into the cover-four window, and square-ins behind the linebackers. When they tried to go deep to him, they couldn’t quite connect this year.

WHEN PURDUE WENT DEEP
* Purdue didn’t go deep in the 1H against Iowa, but went deep three times in the 3Q.
* Purdue tested Brents (20) deep on the first play of the 2H. Purdue’s David Bell went deep vs Brents’ press coverage. Brents turned his hips pretty well and had him well-covered, but was flagged for interference for hand-fighting at the end of the route. Physically and athletically, Brents didn’t look like a coverage weakness on this play.
* On the third play of the 2H, Purdue went deep vs the other CB, Moss, on a deep post vs a two-deep coverage. I think it was zone, but Moss went with the WR on the route and didn’t pass him off to a safety, so it might have been two-man. Anyway, the Purdue QB ended up throwing deep into triple-coverage for an incompletion. The route drew CB Moss and the two safeties.

* Went with deep 20-yard fly route vs cover-three LB blitz. The Iowa CB was in cover-three bail, but on deep ball down the sideline, everything becomes man-to-man match, right/ On this play, CB Brents had it well-covered vs Purdue’s four-star WR David Bell. Bell made a circus catch but was flagged for offensive pass interference. Again, Brents had it well-covered.


SS 26 KAEVON MERRIWEATHER (6-2, 205, Soph., Belleville, Mich.)
* Was a 5.3 two-star, unranked in Michigan and a signing day commitment.
* First-year starter.
* Didn’t really notice him vs Purdue but made a mammoth hit in the red zone vs Northwestern vs the run.


S 4 DANE BELTON (6-1, 205, Soph., Tampa)
* Four starts last year.
+ Excellent hit out of 2-deep zone broke up a pass on a dig in 2Q vs Purdue.
* In the slot as the nickel back against Northwestern on third down.

FS 28 JACK KOERNER (6-0, 205, Jr., Des Moines, Iowa).
* Second-year starter.
+ INT in fourth quarter vs Northwestern, when QB Payton Ramsey was flushed from the pocket by good pressure from second-string DE Evans.

* Purdue 9-yard TD pass to slot WR (David Bell), open due to miscommunication between 8 Hankins and 4 (back-up safety) Dane Belton.

* Bell and Koerner with a communications bust left Purdue WR Bell wide open deep on a post but QB overthrew him. Should have been an 80 yard TD.


SPECIAL TEAMS

* 16 Jones: Decent punt returner, transfer from Buffalo.
24 yard punt return vs Purdue. 89 Ragaini has been good at it too.

* Iowa notoriously sets up for returns, making them susceptible to fakes. But they have tried to keep two safety edge monitors to prevent fakes while setting up for returns.

PK DUNCAN has hit on 84 percent of his field goals, No. 1 in school history.


ADD IT ALL UP

Iowa had a terrible off-season with accusations of racial bias levied against current and former coaches by former players. Eight former threatened a lawsuit and asked for $20 million in damages. The school rejected the demands.

There have been other transfers since then. Their strength coach stepped down at the outset of these troubles. And now they have gotten off to an 0-2 start.

Iowa is good, well-structured, established, proud program that is on its heels. If Ferentz is ever going to get a willful, physical performance out of this year’s team, it’s right now. They’re cornered. They NEED to win this game. Michigan State NEEDS to follow up last week’s victory with another good performance. Which team needs it more? Iowa.

Michigan State was far better last week than Iowa has been at any time this year. That by itself, you would think, would make Michigan State the favorite in this game. I was surprised to see Vegas list Iowa as an 8- or 9-point favorite at the beginning of the week. There is not much on paper of film to support that, other than a hunch that Iowa is going to fight hard off the ropes right now because they have to, and a hunch that Michigan State is going to have an adrenalin dump after last week’s victory over Michigan.

Michigan State needs to rise up and contain the run.

Iowa will likely contain MSU’s run game.

That puts it on the pass game. Both teams are solid in pass protection. Both teams are tricky in pass defense. Both teams are merely okay in pass rush.

That puts it on the QBs. Lombardi is more consistent and reliable than Petras at this point.

If special teams and turnovers are equal, I would expect that Lombardi has a great chance to be the difference in his homecoming game.

This is Part 2 of 3:

IOWA OFFENSE, THE MICRO


QB SPENCER PETRAS (6-5, 231, Soph., San Rafael, Cal.)
* Was a four-star recruit, ranked No. 40 in California.

* Has two career starts, with an 0-2 record.
* Misses high a lot. High and hard.
* Has a habit of not getting his feet set and rushing his throw a bit.
* Guitar playing, singer, Dead Head and Metallica fan (Metallica lead singer James Hetfield was his coach in middle school in the San Fran area).

Vs Northwestern
- Terrible on a third-and-goal counter boot in the first quarter. Had some pressure, but if he takes the hit to make the throw to a WIDE OPEN tight end, it’s 21-0 and possibly ball game. Didn’t finish. So far, he’s been just good enough to get beat as a QB.


* Got into a rhythm with a steady diet of short routes vs Purdue’s soft coverages. Michigan State won’t play soft. Does Petras have the accuracy and consistency to make intermediate throws? So far this year, he hasn’t shown proficiency in that area.

- Missed open Brandon Smith in the corner of the end zone from the 20-yard line early in the 4Q vs Purdue. Didn’t have his feet set, overthrew him, didn’t look good. Play was flagged for holding by the center anyway.

- Missed high on two passes on Iowa’s final ill-fated drive at Purdue. Drive never got going after an initial completion. Screen pass on third down was poorly thrown and timed.

- INT in third quarter vs NW. Had some heat due to right tackle Coy Cronk getting beat, upset Petras’ timing a bit, he was late on an in-route to TE, safety read it, stepped in front, INT.

INCONSISTENT. EXAMPLE:

+ Nice over route for about 25 yards against Northwestern.

- Very next play, forced a crossing route into triple coverage and luckily (or by design) missed high. He had plenty of time to look for a second read on that play.

FROM MY CHAIR:

* I zipped through the loss to Northwestern and then was watching the Purdue game when I started to realize that Petras was bad on third down. That’s when I started charting it.

He has been bad on third down, unsettled. Perhaps he will improve, perhaps this week. He’s just three starts into his career and he’s a sophomore. But I don’t bet on the rise, I go with the body of work.

This is kind of wordy, but this is what Petras has done on third downs in his last six quarters:

PETRAS ON THIRD DOWN

2H vs Purdue

+ 3-7 COMP out route, timing route to Brandon Smith for 8 vs off coverage.

- 3-9: INC to TE Beyer on square-in at 14 yards. Thrown behind him.

- 3-10: Uncomfortable vs zone, patted the ball, then hurried, threw it away.

- 3-8: five man rush, hurried his throw a little on a comeback at 4 yards to WR Tracy. Vs single-safety deep, off man-to-man, not a difficult coverage to read. Was happy to hurry and throw short of the sticks.

+ 4-4: WR out route to Ragani against off coverage, bad coverage. Gain of about 15. Well-thrown ball to the wide side of the field. One read, to the outside, thrown at about 6 yards. Purdue gave him an easy read, Purdue with a miscommunication, both DBs going with the inside WR. Ragani left open in the confusion.

- 3-10 screen on final drive, poor.

- 4-10 prayer into triple-coverage no chance, but Purdue got away with pass interference.

vs NW:

- 3-6: Slant to Raigani, gain of 5.

+ 3-6 Shallow crosser to Raigani, gain of 8.

- 3-2 INC counter boot, pressured, TE wide open in end zone. Settled for field goal.

- 3-6: INC. Pumped, unsure, one read, incomplete on a comeback route.

- 3-11: INC corner route thrown high.

- 3-6: COMP for only a gain of 3 on a shallow crosser.

- 3-13: Flushed, scramble, keep.

- 3-5: INT on crosser.

+ 3-10: COMP to tight end on out route.

- 3-5: Against a three man rush, he scrambled out of the pocket early and threw the ball in the stands.

- 4-5: INC to TE on a square-in.

It was hard to watch. He seems to lack confidence in his disposition. I don’t know what they have behind him at QB.

Petras, with that big arm, might be pretty good some day. But we haven’t seen it consistently, yet.

Alex Padilla, a redshirt freshman, is listed as the back-up. He was a three-star recruit, ranked No. 10 in Colorado with offers from CSU, CMU and Ivies.

NOTE: Petras CAN look good for a throw or two. And when he throws accurately, it’s impressive. The problem is that he will throw one nice pass and then come back on the next two throws and sail it high.

He compounds this with (for now) an inability to read coverages.

That’s not a winning combination.

RUNNING BACKS
* The Skinny: Three pretty good ones, tough little battlers.

RB 15 TYLER GOODSON (5-10, 200, Soph., Suwanee, Ga.)
* 5.6 three star, ranked No. 74 in Georgia.
* Tough little runner, gets hards after contact, runs hard.
* Rushed for 77 yards (16 carries) against Purdue, and 43 yards on 13 carries against Northwestern.

* First player to ever lead Iowa in rushing as a freshman.
* Rushed for 638 yards last year.
+ Quick-hitting wheel route to the short side against Purdue for 40 yards (30 after the catch).
* Good last year as a receiver in empty set formations.
- Fumbled at the 10-yard line in the 1Q vs Purdue. Those lost points would come back to haunt them.
* Deceptively hard to tackle.
* Seems like a little back but has good power. Breaks tackles, gets the extra yard through contact.
* They use him in the Wildcat inside the 10. They also tried it on third-and-2 against Purdue, but they were flagged for a false start.
* Good cutback vision on outside zone plays.


RB 10 Mekhi Sargent (5-9, 209, Sr. Key West, Fla.)
* Was a no-star junior college transfer from Iowa Western CC.
* 71 yards on 11 carries against Purdue, including a 21-yarder.
+ Gain of 8 on two-TE outside zone early in 1Q vs Purdue. Looked like an Iowa RB on that play.
* Shifty cutback quickness.
* Had four rushing TDs last year.
* Nice little cut back for a 1-yard TD against Purdue.

* FB 38 Monte Pottebaum (6-1, 244, Soph., Larchwood, Iowa.)
* Consummate Iowa hammerhead fullback.
* They use the I-formation quite a bit. He saw 26 snaps (out of 76) against Purdue.
* They’re good with the old fashioned zone lead. He’s the lead.


WIDE RECEIVERS:
The Skinny: Pretty good mix. They had depth here, but they will miss Smith-Marsette, and they don’t get a lot of help from the QB.

Smith-Marsette had 44 catches last year and was MVP of the Holiday Bowl.

This year, Smith-Marsette ranked second on the team in receiving yards and tied for second in catches with seven.

WR 12 BRANDON SMITH (6-2, 215, Sr, Lake Cormorant, Miss)
* Was a 5.5 three-star recruit, unranked in Mississippi. Had mid-major offers.
* 37 catches last year while missing four games with an injury. Five TDs.
* Good straight line speed. Went deep to him for an INC early in the Purdue game. Looked like former Michigan State draft pick Devin Thomas, fast and muscular, on that route.
+ Beautiful 9-yard TD catch, fade to the corner, going high vs good coverage, getting a foot down.
* Has six catches this year for 53 yards. His workload will likely increase.

WR 3 TYRONE TRACY (5-11, 203, Soph, Camby, Ind.)
* Was a 5.7 three-star, ranked No. 5 in Indiana.
* Had offers from Illinois, Indiana, Syracuse, Louisville, Northwestern.
* 36 catches last year for 589 yards and three TDs.
+ Nice over route for about 25 yards against Northwestern.

* Has four catches for 52 yards.


WR 89 Nico Ragaini (6-0, 193, Soph. East Haven, Conn.)
* Was a 5.5 three-star, with offers from BC, Yale.
* Started only two games last year but led the team in catches with 46. Ranked third in receiving yards at 439. That’s the epitome of a possession receiver. That’s him.
* All-Big Ten punt returner by Phil Steele.
* Has seven catches for 77 yards.

TE 84 SAM LAPORTA (6-4, 249, Soph., Highland, Ill.)
* Was a 5.5 three-star recruit, ranked No. 30 in Illinois.
* December commitment over MAC schools.

* Emerging as All-Big Ten type TE.
* Leads team with 11 catches and 117 yards.
* 15 catches last year, two starts.

* They feature him in the pass game as a primary receiver.
* Very good possession-plus TE. They like him on 15-yard out routes, and also the short post.
+ Throwback screen vs NW for 14 yards.
+ Good on the 15-yard out route, or the staple Iowa counter boot drag.

* They run a TON of two-TE sets, and always have.

The other guy is:

TE 82, Shaun Beyer (6-5, 248, Shellsburg, Iowa)
* 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 4 in Iowa.
* November commitment voer Nebraska, ISU.
* Has two catches this year.
* Started eight games last year, seven receptions.

* PFF had him as Iowa’s No. 1 run blocker in each of Iowa’s first two games at 79.6 and 80.5.

- Missed a block on an outside zone to his side on the first play of a drive after Purdue had cut the lead to 20-17 with 8:00 to play.

* Iowa uses the TEs together. Often on the same side of the formation. They are quick to get out to the LB or safety level as blockers, move well laterally to get defensive players hooked to the inside.

OFFENSIVE LINE

The Skinny: Good with inside and outside zone blocking, although I’ve seen their zone blocking get clogged up more this year than in the glory days. On gap plays, their C/RG double teams are good. LG is suspect. Expected the LT and RT to be better, due to all the experience and the hype of the LT.

Good group, not a great one. Maybe similar to Michigan, but not as varied with their blocking schemes. They do fewer things and usually do them very well. Not there yet, but they might get there.


LT ALARIC JACKSON (6-6, 315, Sr., Detroit Renaissance)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 33 in the state. Michigan State did not offer.
* Third-team All-Big Ten last year by coaches.
* Second-team All-Big Ten by coaches in 2018.
* Fourth-year starter.
* 40 career starts.
* Vegan.
- Allowed Purdue DE Karlaftis (good player) to cross his face and made he stop on a first-and-10 run late in the third quarter, which stalled a drive after Iowa had been getting chunks on the ground.
+ Graded out at 84.5 in pass pro against Northwestern. 64.3 in run blocking.

LG 61 COLE BANWART (6-4, 296, Sr., Ottosen, Iowa)
* Walk-on. 5.4 two-star recruit, unranked in Iowa.
* Had offers from Northern Iowa and South Dakota State.
* Has been mostly a reserve up until this season.
* he graded out at 78.8 in run blocking against NW, but the only I noticed him was when he didn’t get off his double-team soon enough to catch the MLB scraping over the top on an outside zone run. The play lost four yards and was critical in Iowa’s loss.

Iowa had just nabbed an INT at the Northwestern 30-yard line with 7:00 to play, down by a point. On second-and-one, that’s when Banward missed his block, turning a very favorable situation into third-and-five.

Then on third down, QB Petras threw an INT over the middle to the TE, thrown too hard and outside of his target, tip drill int.


C 65 TYLER LINDERBAUM (6-3, 289, Soph, Solon, Iowa)
* Was a 5.6 three star recruit, ranked No. 3 in Iowa.
* HM All-Big Ten by coaches last year.
++ Snap and pull cut block on the play side LB in the fourth quarter against Purdue was one of the best plays I’ve seen by a center all year. But RB Sargent fumbled on the play with 6 minutes to go at the end of a 12-yard run at the 28-yard line.
* I hadn’t seen him pin-and-pull all day, but he looked like an ace on that play, but the RB Sargent blew it.

RG 64 KYLER SCHOTT (6-2, 293, Jr., Coggon, Iowa).
* Walk-on, unranked recruit.
* Started six games last year.
* Noticed him as good with the center on double team blocks. But PFF had him ranked last on the team in run blocking against Northwestern. No. 1 on the team in pass pro against Purdue at 90.5, a championship level.

RT 51 COY CRONK (6-5, 272, Sr, Lafayette, Ind.)
* Graduate transfer from Indiana.
* Started four years at Indiana, but only played four games last year before being injured. Used that year as a redshirt and grad-transferred to Iowa.
* 41 career starts.
* Has shown feet in the run game to get out, log and seal, and then look for a second-level guy to seal, but has not been consistent.
- Might not be as good as he was at Indiana.
- Allowed a sack to Purdue’s DE Karlaftis, but Michigan State doesn’t have a pass rusher quite like Karlaftis. He’s pretty good.
- Struggled in 3Q allowing consecutive pressures, one on a bull rush, one on a long-arm outside move vs Northwestern sophomore d-end Eku Leota. You heard that name here first. Rising Big Ten defensive end. Eku Leota of Northwestern. PFF graded him at 10.6 in pass pro that day, out of 100 which is red bad.

I went lighter on X's and O's, and heavier on trends and reaction:

* Amazingly, Blake Bueter graded out the best of any offensive lineman for either team in pass protection at 79.0.

MSU's pass protection grades (for those with 12 snaps or more)

WINNING
1. Connor Heyward 84.6 (35 snaps)
2. Blake Bueter 79.5 (52 snaps)
3. Matt Dotson 75.8 (32 snaps)
4. Nick Samac 75.6 (75 snaps)

FUNCTIONAL
5. Adam Berghorst 63.9 (13 snaps)
6. Jordon Simmons 54.8 (36 snaps)

LOSING
7. AJ Arcuri (54.2)
8. Matt Carrick (49.7)
9. Kevin Jarvis (44.6)
10. JD Duplain (35.8) (44 snaps)

* Note that Arcuri and Jarvis are going to have lesser grades due to going against Paye and Hutchinson. Paye and Hutchinson never got home, but any time a pass rusher gets a half step advantage on a pass protector, it's a negative grade for the pass protector.

In the end, these grades likely don't reflect the way Michigan State coaches viewed the performances of MSU's offensive tackles.

Bottom line is Lombardi wasn't sacked and was hurried only eight times.

These grades are extremely hard on the o-tackles, considering Michigan State allowed zero sacks and few hurries or hits.

I'm sticking to my Dantonio-verbiage categories of Championship, Winning, Functional and Losing in translating PFF's grades. I am 100 percent sure MSU's coaches wouldn't view Arcuri's performance in pass pro last Saturday as a losing performance, but I'm sticking with those words to translate the numbers, for now. For conversation purposes. These numbers aren't scientific. Add your own plus-minus margin of error if you like.

I caught up with my friend Tom Kakert over at the Hawkeye Report for a Opponent Perspective Q&A. And Tom had some good insight on this weekend's game.

Any time Iowa has a couple of losses people start asking Ferentz if he's lost his team. Those questions probably aren't fair, and they are always too simplistic. Yes, Iowa has been rocked by off the field controversy. And there probably are some undercurrents simmering in the program given the social justice issues that have cast the program in a negative light.

Losing Holiday Bowl MVP due to a DUI doesn't help and having a first-year starter at QB makes it tough to navigate adversity that comes with an 0-2 start in Big Ten play.

I do agree with Tom that this seems to be precisely the spot where a cornered team fights the hardest. And I'd expect nothing less from Iowa this weekend.

If Spencer Petras is the guy for Iowa at QB, this is his time to take control of the offense. Iowa can help him by running the football effectively.

Here is my notebook from Tucker's press conference today.

Enjoy.
Login to view embedded media Login to view embedded media

Here is my notebook on the Michigan State defensive line. Some good stuff from Burton today.

One of the things I really appreciate about Ron Burton is how much he focuses on the next thing. What can we do better. Burton is never negative. He's upbeat positive, intsructive, and demanding. But he never lets guys rest on their laurels, which is critical. I don't see this as a group that is gonna get consistent four-man pressure, but accepting that is no way to get the job done. I can tell that Burton likes these guys.

Biggest developmental note from today is Burton confirming that Kyle King is working inside at d-tackle.

Burton said that Barrow is the closest of the young guys to getting on the travel roster.

Any Info?

Myself, Corey, and Sedrick Irvin Sr. broke down the demolition of the Michigan brand that took place yesterday in the delusional confines of Ann Arbor.

I had a lot of anger against Michigan that I had to get out, as you can see by the rant I go on in the beginning of the podcast. After that, we touch on the identity that MSU has crafted and why the Spartans won this game, along with a lengthy discussion on the effects of this W on recruiting.

This is most fun episode I've ever recorded, I'd highly recommend you check it out. Hopefully we channeled your thoughts as a fanbase and put them out there via our platform.
I know I've been fed up about a lot of the pro-UM talk in the media this summer and the mirage that is the Michigan Football program. I wish I would've touched on Scam Newton (Joe Milton) a little more, but there was too much to say about Jim Harbaugh and recruiting rankings instead.

Corey put out a lot of feelers after this game and he spoke on the overall recruiting momentum in a general sense in this episode. Sedrick also gave his insight on why there are specific elements of this gameplan that also make selling points for early-PT. Lots of great discussion.

As always, search SPARTAN SPOTLIGHT on the major streaming services. Here is the embedded link for those that would rather listen in-browser:
Login to view embedded media
---------

Also, if you missed the first episode we had with Swervin' Irvin, check that out here. He dove into the meaning of the rivalry and gave amazing insight from a player's perspective in the episode. For some reason, it was our least-streamed episode despite it being a highly-insightful one. So give it a shot lol.

Ron Burton is up right now.

He is asked about the guys behind Naquan and Jacob

Burton says that Camper is getting better. He says he is stronger, flashing on the field. Said that they are pleasantly surprised with what they are getting from him right now.

Burtons says that Mallory got 25 plays in this game. They were really pleased with how he played vs. Michigan.

Burton says that Jalen Hunt had a good game against Michigan and has a big upside

This is the unedited Part I.

I will get into the micro personnel and the "add it all up" in a few minutes:

The Pre-Snap Read: Michigan State vs. Michigan

By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.co


East Lansing, Mich. - It’s rare to see a team enter a game in crisis management mode from the opening seconds, but that will be the case for Michigan State in this game at Michigan on Saturday.

And there’s a path by which the Spartans can properly manage the crisis and keep this game competitive. I would say there’s less than 35 percent chance of this game remaining competitive, but that might be more of a chance than you might read or hear elsewhere. By competitive, I mean keeping the score within 14 points heading into the fourth quarter.

FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST:

* The Spartans have no shot of remaining competitive if their offensive line is as atrocious as it was last week. Might it be better this week? It would be hard to be worse. Meanwhile the defensive front is more talented this week, especially at defensive end.

* If the offensive line gets dominated and Michigan State has no run game, and problems with pass protection in passing situation after passing situation, don’t expect Rocky Lombardi to pull a David Copperfield. Magicians don’t play football.

Lombardi was quite good last week, better than I anticipated. You can win Big Ten games with him, especially if you can get a run game going and avoid last week’s count of turnovers. But he’s not going to rescue you to victory. But he’s better than I expected, which changes the face of the season and the future a bit, in my mind, for now. He can become the man, as a game-managing gamer.

But this game will be very difficult to manage if he doesn’t get help from teammates. Now, Michigan State needs to see OTHER Spartans play like we don’t know they can - which is something I say about this Michigan State-Michigan series all too often.

* Another thing I say all too often about this series is that Michigan State first of all merely needs to get first downs. Move the ball to midfield. Then punt. Then make Michigan go 80 yards. And try to prevent Michigan from popping off 70-yard plays in the run game like they did last week for a pair of TD drives (one early and one late).

Sounds simple. But first downs are the first step toward staying competitive. But it will be difficult if the offensive line doesn’t at least improve to a MAC level after the FCS-level problems we saw last week in the run game.

* The o-line’s pass protection was pretty good last week. Now, the pass rush personnel it will face on Saturday will be among the best in the nation.

MSU’s RB and TE “help” in pass protection was non-existent last week. Mel Tucker says communication will be a big factor in this game. Read: It was terrible last week, and needs to find a better frequency this week. But that’s the type of thing that is correctable from a bad first week to the second week.

* The benefit of playing this game early in the season, if there is one for Michigan State, is that the Spartans still believe. They’re still bushy-tailed.

"This might be the most intense week of Michigan prep I've had since I've been here,” senior defensive end Drew Beesley said last night on the Mel Tucker radio show. “And I've had some pretty intense Michigan Weeks over my 5 years here. Make what you want with that."

That means they’re still bushy-tailed. That’s nice, for now. They’re buying in, they have energy, they aren’t banged-up (although WR Tre Mosley’s condition is unknown after leaving last week’s game with a lower body injury).

They still believe. They’re in it to win it. That’ll count for something during the initial collisions. They won’t be as easily demoralized as might be the case if these teams meet in December.

* As for the short notes: Michigan’s offensive line was a big, surprising plus last week. They will match up against a fair-to-middling Michigan State defensive front.

MSU’s run defense was good last year, and held Michigan to 83 yards rushing.

MSU’s run defense seems pretty good this year, but lives more dangerously than in past years, with more use of single-safety deep coverages, and more eyeball attention given to slot receivers than the tackle box.

That was fine last week against Rutgers, holding the Scarlet Knights to 50 net yards and 1.3 per carry. But the eyeball test shows us that new defensive tackles Naquan Jones and Jacob Slade were just “guys.” They weren’t easily displaced but they weren’t playmakers. Michigan State will need Jones’ fuse to be better-lit.

Inside linebacker Antjuan Simmons is quality.

Middle linebacker Noah Harvey was functional last year at the end of the season. But there were two TD runs by Rutgers inside the 5-yard line last week when Harvey seemed to flat-out not know what to do, in terms of reading keys and fitting. That was a surprise. He’s a fourth-year junior who had 14 tackles in the Pinstripe Bowl. He can play football. But he was fogged out last week. It was clear that some players are still adapting to the schemes on both sides of the ball.

It looked like Green-White Game type of execution on the OL and at LB last week a few times, and essentially that’s where this team is right now in terms of installation. They are two scrimmages and one public outing into the Tucker era.

Harvey is better than that, and he demonstrated it in the fourth quarter when Michigan State went to more one-gapping schemes, similar to what they did last year.

If he improves, the front six will improve.

* That’s the next question. Will Michigan State play the 4-2-5 that it played last week? That’s the norm for new d-coordinator Scottie Hazelton.

Last week, the seventh man in the box for Michigan State was 210-pound safety Xavier Henderson. He was good and comfortable at the linebacker level when Michigan State went with a single safety deep, which was quite often.

Now, can he and Michigan State hang with that type of alignment against Michigan? Michigan has some hammers on offense. Their o-line is good, and varied, with nice use of traps and powers and pin-and-pull. They supplement that with Ben Mason, a part time blocking back and part time H-back. He’s a hammer, who saw action on roughly half of the snaps last week.

Michigan has had excellent WR talent in recent years (forever, really). But they are more unproven in that area than usual this year. They have talent, it’s just new talent.

For now, Michigan looks like it wants to be more of a power run game outfit. Last week, in the first half, in 27 offensive snaps (not counting the two-minute drill at the end of the half), Michigan went with a 3-WR personnel group on only seven of those 27 snaps. That means Michigan State went two-TE, or two-back, or heavier, on 20 of the 27 snaps.

Michigan had a beautiful lead trap for a 70-yard TD by RB Charbonnet early in the game. Later, Michigan had a 66-yarder by RB Haskins on a play that wasn’t well-blocked, but the RB bounced outside the pile.

Michigan deserves those yards, of course. In Michigan’s other 28 run attempts (not counting victory formation), the Wolverines averaged a more human 4.4 yards per carry (120 yards).

The first trick is to prevent Michigan from popping off big plays such as those 70 and 66-yard runs, and the strip-sack TD, and the 60-yard kickoff return or whatever it was off a failed squib, and don’t help them with a foiled fake punt in at your own 25-yard line.

Michigan’s pass rush dominated the fourth quarter. But Minnesota “won” quite a few plays on this night, churning out 326 yards of offense and 21 first downs.

Michigan’s run defense yielded 129 yards. Not a terrible number, but Michigan didn’t hold up physically at the point of attack on a number of off-tackle runs. Michigan isn’t strong (or physically big) in that category. However, Michigan State doesn’t seem to have the tools to do anything about it - from what we’ve seen so far.

* Getting back to the 4-2-5 question: With the way Michigan State plays with a single safety deep, and linebackers that are either attacking with run blitzes or getting fogged out, the Spartans operate on a highwire trapeze without a net more so than in the past.

In the past, Michigan State liked to keep two safeties deep (although not all that deep). Michigan State “played square” with the front seven eyeballs on the run game, and the slot WR given a free release.

Opponents used to pepper MSU’s slot area with bubbles and hitches and slants. Michigan State was willing to concede that in order to (theoretically) stifle the run, prevent big plays, and - if you get to the red zone - stiffen up inside the 20 and make you kick field goals.

That often worked. Sometimes, against the better teams, it was merely a slow-death way of losing. But you can’t argue with Mark Dantonio’s macro success. He did wonders, and produced a great team at the high point of his tenure. He was quite a bit better at Michigan State than Nick Saban in each coach’s first five years in East Lansing in a straight apples-to-apples comparison, and took the Spartans to heights that I suspect even the great Saban would have failed to attain at Michigan State.

As for this year’s Spartan defense, they aren’t about slow death. They crowd the slot with nickel back Shakur Brown. And they even out the numbers in the box with Henderson (a safety) often playing at the LB level. This is nothing revolutionary. Many teams play it this way. The danger is that if a play gets past the linebacker level, there is more open grass and fewer Spartans to rodeo the ball-carrier to the ground than in past years.

You saw what happened last week when a simple QB lead draw resulted in an untouched 26-yard TD run.

Michigan State will roll the dice more on defense in this fashion, even when not blitzing. They are operating without a net. Thus the chances of Michigan continuing to pop off big plays this week after a smattering of them last week remains a great possibility. Yet that’s precisely the first thing Michigan State need to prevent from happening if it wants to stay competitive.

Can Michigan State with it’s new defense, and some foggy players, play that way and somehow prevent a simple inside trap from going 70 yards, or a QB draw from going 50? Those won’t be the most difficult equations the Spartan defense will need to solve, but they could be the most telling.

* Is it possible that Michigan State will use two different defensive philosophies: last week’s 4-2-5, and possibly a holdover version of the Tressel 4-3? Who would be the third linebacker if Michigan State dusts off last year’s defense? I’m guessing Chase Kline joining Noah Harvey in the middle with Antjuan Simmons back in the slot? Simmons is 10 pounds heavier than last year and says he’s just as fast. Maybe he is. I haven’t checked.

If Michigan comes out in run personnel for 20 of its first 27 plays like last week, I suspect Michigan State will try the 4-2-5 approach. But if more physicality is needed, if Michigan State needs an anvil against some of those hard-blocking Michigan hammers, I think Kline could offer a little heftier resistance. Henderson is good in at the linebacker level. But MSU’s run defense could be, theoretically, even better if Kline is on the field rather than a third cornerback and Henderson is able to support the run from traditional safety depth.

That’s just a guess-the-gameplan thing on my behalf. I have no inside info on that.

* Michigan’s offense has young skill players on the perimeter. Players who might be household names some day, but are just youngsters right now.

If you play the old Dantonio system, Michigan’s speed-in-space offensive approach could pepper the soft slot areas for nice yards-after-catch production. But good tackling would theoretically keep things contained for a date in the red zone.

If you play the Hazelton approach, Michigan will likely answer with last week’s approach - run-oriented personnel on 20 of the first 27 snaps. Of course they can throw out of these sets too, but they won’t be flooding your secondary with proven All-Big Ten wide receivers.

That’ll be intriguing football in and of itself: Michigan’s surprising offensive line, with Ben Mason as a battering ram blocking back, against what’s been a proud Michigan State run defense, one that played well last week, but now has to prove itself with a new system when the adversary comes a little bit bigger.

ANY PATHS TO VICTORY FOR MSU?

* The scores and outcomes of last week’s Michigan and Michigan State games were decidedly different last week. But if you just looked at the teams working as if it were a preseason high school scrimmage, these two teams wouldn’t seem as drastically different as the pregame suppositions we’re all hearing and feeling this week.

The one drastic caveat of that statement is that MSU’s o-line was indeed as terrible as initially perceived, and wasn’t nearly in the same stratosphere as Michigan’s offensive line last week.

If Michigan State can somehow show Cinderella improvement on the offensive line in one week, then this could become a competitive game. But you would have to believe in fairy tales for that to happen. I’ve seen a few football fairy tales come true, but not many.

The other less-drastic caveat is that Michigan indeed looked elite in the fourth quarter with its pass rush, once Minnesota lost all threat of offensive balance.

A big step in the path toward competitiveness for Michigan State in this game is staying out of passing situations, both in terms of down-and-distance and on the scoreboard. That’s easier said than done, but it’s crucial. Michigan’s pass rush is that good, and MSU’s pass protection help from RBs and TEs is that suspect.

Aside from that, Michigan State actually “won” a lot of plays against Rutgers last week (plant a flag!) and Michigan “lost” a lot of plays against Minnesota. That’s what I mean by high school scrimmage film. There was enough by both teams for an impartial observer, if we can find one, to conclude that these two teams - the Spartans and Wolverines - do indeed belong on the same field together. This isn’t Tyson vs Spinks. Although it could turn into that quickly if Michigan State becomes a unwilling accomplice (via turnovers and miscues).

* Obviously, Michigan State has to avoid mistakes, avoid turnovers, avoid penalties that prolong UM drives or shorten Michigan State drives. These are all clichés of course. But Michigan State can’t bounce back from bad leaks this week they way they almost did last week. A bad leak or two, and this game is over early.

* Path to Competitiveness? Choose slow death, if possible, Michigan State. Michigan’s offense is good. They’re going to drive and get points. Just don’t give up the big plays like Minnesota did (long kickoff return, strip sack defensive TD, 70-yard TD run, foiled fake punt resulting in a short 29-yard field). That’s 28 points without needing to collect first downs.

Get first downs, punt the ball, make Michigan with a still-developing QB go 80 yards.

It would be nice if you forced Michigan to punt four or five times, of course. Michigan didn’t punt once against Minnesota. You read that right.

By slow death, I mean if Michigan is going to score, make them eat some clock and shorten the game, and perhaps give the Spartans a chance to stiffen in the red zone and force field goal attempts … just in case you get some breaks with turnovers or on special teams or one of those Domato Peko scoop and scores from a hundred yards out. Just in case your offensive line joins the human race and helps you get 300 or more yards of offense. Just in case pass protection holds up, just in case Rocky Lombardi proves efficient at reading pressures and delivering the ball accurately, just in case you don’t turn the ball over seven times your damn self.

If all of those fairy tales come true, and you achieve slow death on defense, then Michigan State could conceivably be within 13 points going into the fourth quarter.

Michigan fumbled once inside the Minnesota 5-yard line, but Michigan recovered and soon scored a TD. Michigan fumbled a kickoff early in the 2H after Minnesota had cut the lead to 35-24, but Michigan recovered and soon scored a TD. If Michigan’s opponent recovers either of those two turnovers, you could conceivably get a 21-point swing. Football can swing that way, especially in fairy tales.


* If you can harness slow death and make Michigan go 80 yards, MAYBE Milton will make some mistakes. He looked cool last week (a well-managed 15 of 22 for 225 yards), with little evidence (for now) that he can be shaken into mistakes. But he’s still somewhat of an unproven starter. Maybe he can be coaxed into a misread INT or two.

- Milton stared down TE Erick All on a skinny post late in the 1H last week, and threw dangerously into double-coverage. That’s the type of mistake Michigan State needs, and needs to capitalize on. He didn’t make many.

Could Michigan State coax him into more bad decisions than Minnesota was able to do last week? Yes, and that’s a theoretical staple of the Hazelton defense. His Kansas State defense was very good last year at changing up its coverages, disguising those coverages, and playing a wide variety of them without fooling itself (based on the two games I reviewed against Oklahoma and Iowa State).

He did that in one year at Kansas State.

Last week, the secondary played 60-minutes of good, same-page football - albeit against a bottom division Big Ten team. But that was a good spring game outing by the back seven in pass defense.

If Hazelton is ready to play like he did at KSU, then the Spartans will be more aggressive on passing downs in showing blitz, making the opponent account for six or seven potential rushers, and then drop back into various coverages. I’ve not seen Michigan State do this ultra-effectively; and we’ve not seen Milton presented with it. I’m not sure Michigan State can present it. We don’t know how Milton will do with it.

MSU’s problem is that a good pass rush would do wonders to complement the type of moving pictures Hazelton wants to present to a quarterback. But MSU’s pass rush was limp last week. Drew Beesley isn’t bad. Jacub Panasiuk has been pretty good in the past but was quiet last week. The back-up defensive ends aren’t much help right now.

Might Michigan State be able to bring four-man pressures with d-linemen dropping into coverage and linebackers rushing? Sure. Does that change the world? Not really.

But Michigan State surprised Rutgers’ QB with Shakur Brown dropping into curl/hook zone coverage after a steady diet of man-to-man. Brown nabbed an interception, returned it for a TD (called back for an illegal block). That’s the type of mistake Hazelton needs Milton to make. There’s a Rapunzel’s chance of that happening once, maybe even twice. That won’t win the game, but it’s on the path to competitiveness radar.

LAST WEEK, OF NOTE:

* With 10 minutes left in the first half, Minnesota trailed Michigan 21-17, and had a TD taken off the board due to illegal formation (but earned it with the blocking up front). At that point, Minnesota held a 15-5 edge in time of possession.

The game was even initially. To Michigan’s credit, the Wolverine offense took control from that point forward. But Minnesota was still only a couple of bounces (fumble recoveries) away from keeping this a game into the fourth quarter.

Michigan was good, but they weren’t the 1984 BYU Cougars.

* Michigan's fine safety Daxton Hill missed half of the game last week with an undisclosed injury. He's excellent against the run and pass, and I wonder if he hurt himself while making a forceful tackle in run defense late in the first half. Anyway, his replacement was freshman Makari Paige. It was a colassal dropoff in effectiveness from Hill to Paige last week. I'm assuming Hill is going to be okay. The TV broadcast didn't pick up any lower body problems with Hill. But if Hill can't play, Michigan's defense will be operating with a flat tire in the secondary, unless there's a better replacement or combination out there that Michigan didn't show last week. Paige might be good some day, but that wasn't the case last Saturday.

COMPARITIVE QUESTIONS

* Minnesota had some success running the ball. Their TE blockers did a good job displacing Michigan’s excellent defensive end Aidan Hutchinson at the point of attack. (Hutchinson was better vs OGs and OTs than he was vs TEs). The question is whether Michigan State has tight ends, much less an offensive line and a RB that is capable of doing the same thing. Probably not.

From what I’ve seen, you’re better off running right at Hutchinson than trying to run your running game away from him. He’s better in run defense as a pursuit guy. Secondly Kwity Paye on the other side is legitimately good against the run. So if you run away from Hutchinson, you’re running at Paye. That’s not the best choice.

Of the success Minnesota had on the ground, it came when running at Hutchinson. OR it came when Michigan was dabbling with its 30 defense.

Michigan liked to run its 3-4 personnel (taking DT Hinton out of the game and replacing him with LB VanSumeren) on second down last week. When Michigan ran its 30 defense, Michigan didn’t bolster it with extra safety help. So a lighter front 7 was often left without extra help in the box. Michigan did this against Minnesota’s 12 personnel (1 RB and 2 TEs). That made no sense. Minnesota put seven blockers on seven defensive hats and had daylight.

On one occasion, Minnesota popped off 25-yard TD run via 7-on-7 blocking vs the light 30 defense - and this was on third-and-two! Michigan had two safeties deep on third-and-two in the red zone. Made zero sense. Michigan State will have to hope Don Brown pulls some more moves like that if Michigan State is fortunate enough to have a third-and-two in the red zone once or twice.

* By the way, Michigan went with its 30 defense in third-and-4 or third-and-3 type situations a few times last week, when the game was still in doubt. This is not a good run-defense personnel group for Michigan.

If Michigan State comes out with three WRs on third-and-three, don’t be shocked of Michigan State runs the ball. Don’t be alarmed that this is a return of Perles ball. If Michigan State does this, it will be because Michigan looked susceptible to it with its 30 defense on third-and-manageable last week. And quite frankly, you might have a better chance to pick up 3 yards on the ground than trying to pass from the pocket with Hutchinson and Paye coming after you.

* If Michigan continues to go with the 30 on second downs, I wonder if Michigan State will try to power the run game in those situations. Short pass on first-and-10, then second-and-seven is a run play against the lighter 30? If so, if Michigan State wants to go with a power run attack, is Connor Heyward still the guy? He started last week, but he’s limited. Elijah Collins hasn’t looked like himself. Freshman Jordan Simmons is a good quickness guys. Don’t sleep on redshirt freshman Brandon Wright. He’s a big back who had one carry last week (for a loss of 2 when LG Blake Bueter was blown up by two-gapping Michael Dwumfour). But Wright, if he’s right, might be able to play some power ball if and when Michigan goes light. This is all unseen, early-season football theory.

* Minnesota went deep twice and completed both passes. Neither receiver was open. The first one went for 45 yards against CB Gemon Green (a good player). Green had him well-covered, but the WR reacted well to an underthrown ball.

On the second one, Michigan CB Vincent Gray (a pretty good player) was beaten deep for 40 yards by Minnesota WR Bateman. Gray was flagged for pass interference, was working hands on Bateman the whole way, but Bateman still made the catch.

Can Michigan State go deep? Michigan State tried twice last week (Lombardi missed an open WR Reed on a free play that should have been a TD).

Lombardi’s arm accuracy on deep shots is an unknown, probably not a strength. But Michigan State will probably shoot some dice in that area. They need one.

* People ask about the Ohio State example. Why have Ohio State (and Alabama) been successful in victimizing Michigan’s Don Brown defense with simple crossing routes and devastating runs after the catch?

Well, first of all, Michigan showed less man-to-man against Minnesota. The Gophers were able to hit a crossing route for 15 yards in the fourth quarter, and it nearly got out for more. But Michigan didn’t play as much single-safety-deep, man-to-man as we’ve seen in the past.

As for the Ohio State example, much of it comes down to talent. Teams can try to emulate what OSU did vs Michigan’s man-to-man, but teams don’t have OSU’s speed and NFL talent at WR, they don’t have OSU’s ability to establish chunks in the run game with NFL o-linemen and NFL running backs, and they don’t have a national Top 2 quarterback engineering the locomotive, with QB-run ability sprinkled in.

Lombardi is capable, but he’s not Justin Fields. MSU’s o-line in comparison to OSU’s o-line? I guess we can stop there.

But MSU’s receiving corps is a group on the rise. They can provide some sparks, if the offensive line gets a pixie dust visit from a fairy godfather.

(MICRO PERSONNEL INFO TO COME)

Well, I made it to the press box in record time from East Lansing (no traffic).

Have to say the drive and the walk to the stadium was the most enjoyable I've ever had here.

I wish the stadiums weren't empty, of course.

Here is Rico C's WHAT TO WATCH FOR story ahead of tomorrow's game.

I caught up with Austin Fox from TheWolverine.com for an Opponent Perspect Q&A and here is what I got.


If Michigan State were further along than what we saw last weekend, I think that the absence of Quinn Nordin at kicker would have been a bigger deal.

Swervin' Irvin will be joining @Corey_Robinson and myself for pretty much every single Game Preview and Post-Game Reaction episode of the Spartan Spotlight podcast!

He actually reached out to Corey about joining us, so he's really excited to get his insight and voice out there for Spartan Nation to hear. Interestingly, he said one thing that made him want to connect with the fanbase even more now is finding out how much support he had for his name being in consideration for the RB coach spot. "I always knew I had fans but the love they showed during that time was something else," he said. And in general, he's really excited about Tucker and this new era of MSU football, so he wanted to talk about it with an audience that will listen.

We think he'll provide invaluable insight from a player's perspective when we look evaluate some of these games. We're recording the first episode later tonight and it should be posted tomorrow around 11am.
It will be a game preview for MSU's match-up against The Team Down The Road / Michigan (depending on what side of the heavily-contentious debate you fall on...lol)

Login to view embedded media

Here is my Rocky Lombardi story based on yesterday's interview. I like Lombardi's demeanor and self-confidence. He hasn't shown the ability to win a difficult one-dimensional football game as a starter the way Connor Cook could as an experienced QB and Lewerke did on occasion during career. That said, it really isn't fair to judge him by that criteria at this stage of his career. He played better than I expected him to against Rutgers under the circumstances with adversity all over the place and no run game. And I think the poise he showed under the circumstances is easy to dismiss given the outcome of the game. This weekend is gonna be even more difficult from a poise standpoint, as Rocky is going to have to put the ball up and trust his receivers to make plays through contact. It won't be easy. A run game would be fantastic, but until we see it, I just don't think it's something that can be relied upon. This is a game where Lombardi is going to have to make plays with his feet because the pocket won't stay clean long enough to go deep into his read progression.

Login to view embedded media
@jim comparoni @Justin Thind @Corey_Robinson