The Football 411: A rundown on today's news with commentary
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 16 Replies
The Football 411: On Haynes' hiring, Tressel's promotion and more
LANSING - Michigan State head football coach Mark Dantonio announced the filling of one of the programs' three coaching vacancies, and the promotion of Mike Tressel to defensive coordiantor, after speaking at the annual Michigan High School Football Coaches Association Clinic, Friday.
Dantonio confirmed rumors that Paul Haynes is joining the staff as a defensive backs coach.Tressel's promotion to full defensive coordinator was expected.
Dantonio confirmed rumors that Paul Haynes is joining the staff as a defensive backs coach. Mike Tressel has been promoted to full defensive coordinator, as expected.
Tressel served as co-defensive coordinator with Harlon Barnett from 2015-17. Barnett left Michigan State to become defensive coordinator at Florida State earlier this month.
Barnett served as the defensive backs coach at Michigan State from 2007-17. His departure necessitated the need to hire a new DBs coach. Haynes proved to be an attractive fit.
Haynes served as defensive backs coach at Michigan State under John L. Smith from 2003-04. He left Michigan State to become defensive backs coach at Ohio State under Jim Tressel from 2005-10.
Dantonio never worked with Haynes at Michigan State or Ohio State. But Tressel’s recommendation, along with Dantonio’s observations of Haynes on the recruiting trail over the years, went a long way toward making Haynes the lead candidate to take over the primary role of defensive backs coach, once Haynes expressed interest.
“He’s coached here before so he’s got a Spartan background,” Dantonio said. “He’s been a secondary coach and co-defensive coordinator at Ohio State, coached on the highest level in the secondary.”
Haynes spent one year as co-defensive coordinator and safeties coach at Ohio State under interim head coach Luke Fickell in 2011.
He spent one year as defensive coordinator at Arkansas in 2012 under Smith.
Most recently, Haynes served as head coach at Kent State from 2013-17, compiling a record of 14-45.
“He’s been a head coach," Dantonio said. "I think that gives him a big-picture feel. I think he’s an excellent recruiter. He was a coordinator at Arkansas. I think that he’s a dynamic person.
“I’m very, very excited about Paul. He signed his contract. So, we’re very, very excited about that and he’ll start today.”
COMP’S TAKE: Haynes’ knowledge of the landscape at Michigan State drew him back to East Lansing, along with the strong reputation Dantonio has as a staff leader. Haynes has shared the building with Michigan State strength and conditioning coach Ken Mannie in the past, so the references didn’t end with Tressel.
When Haynes was at Michigan State in the early 2000s, Michigan State employed a cover-one/man-free system (single safety deep, man-to-man underneath). His Kent State team was predominantly a cover-one/man-free team last year.
Haynes won't have to change everything he does in order to fit MSU's scheme. Michigan State retained pressing quarters zone (cover four) as its base coverage in 2017, but the Spartans were much more varied with other coverages in 2017 than in any other season under Dantonio - including use of cover-one/man-free.
Under Barnett and Tressel, Michigan State played more cover-one/man-to-man in 2017 than in previous seasons, especially early in the year and in early downs. The Spartans also added cover-two (halves) in third-down passing situations as a surprise to opponents.
Last year, Michigan State became less predictable for opposing coaches and quarterbacks with its coverages behind blitzes. Prior to last year, MSU almost always played a three-deep (cover three) zone when blitzing. In 2017, Michigan State mixed in cover-one man-to-man behind blitzes, and occasionally played cover zero (no safety). Late in the year, MSU mixed in a 3-4 defense, with zone blitzes and defensive ends dropping into coverage.
Tressel and Dantonio will likely retain a pressing cover-four (quarters) as its primary base defense. Based on the success of 2017, the usage of more coverages will likely continue, with Haynes being a past practitioner of cover-one, man-to-man. In turn, Haynes will become briefed on the finer points of the Dantonio/Narduzzi/Barnett/Tressel quarters zone system that has served the program well.
As a recruiter, Haynes is well-known throughout Ohio from his days at Michigan State, then his days at Ohio State and as a head coach at Kent State.
He played high school football at Columbus St. Francis DeSales, a program Michigan State has recruited through the years.
Barnett was a strong recruiter in Cincinnati and southern Ohio for the Spartans. Haynes will likely work to fill that void.
When Haynes recruits in Ohio, he won’t have to introduce himself to any high school football coach in the state. They already know who he is.
TRESSEL 'HAS BEEN DEEPLY INVOLVED’
Tressel moves into the full coordinator position and will also remain the linebackers coach.
"We've had co-defensive coordinators before because I think that's what was warranted and I think they deserved that," Dantonio said. "Mike's done a tremendous job just as Harlon had. I think he'll do an outstanding job. He's been deeply, deeply involved in every aspect."
Tressel had relinquished the linebackers job in 2015 and ’16 in order to serve as a roving instructor while manning the co-coordinator position. However, Dantonio moved Tressel back to linebackers coach in 2017 and moved Snyder from linebackers coach to defensive ends coach. Those assignments worked well, as Michigan State had far fewer gap assignment errors in 2017.
"I think he's too good of a coach not to have him coaching our linebackers," Dantonio said.
**
Dantonio said he expects to have two more staff hires by next week. One hire will fill the new 10th assistant coaching slot. The other will fill the vacancy created when former defensive ends coach Mark Snyder left for Florida State to join Barnett’s staff.
"We're in the process on that and they're going to come one at a time,” Dantonio said. “I'm kind of hoping I get it done by mid-week. We're trying, but we want to make good decisions."
Dantonio wants to have his new staff out visiting recruits and schools for the final days of evaluation and visitation period prior to February’s late singing day.
“I’d like for them to be out on the recruiting trail for at least two weeks or one week to just sort of have a chance to introduce themselves to the high schools,” Dantonio said.
**
Dantonio indicated that the 10th assistant will share defensive back coaching duties with Haynes.
"I think that guy's going to be a special teams assistant, he's going to be a defensive back assistant," he said. "I want him to be the head coach of our freshmen and I want him to be a conduit to our offense in some regards."
Sources close to the situation told SpartanMag.com that Michigan State has spoken with Scott Booker and Amp Campbell about the vacancy.
Booker was safeties and special teams coach at Nebraska in 2017. From 2012-16, he was tight ends coach and special teams coordinator at Notre Dame. He was an offensive intern at Notre Dame from 2010-11.
With Dantonio seeking a defensive back assistant with special teams knowledge and also serve as “a conduit to our offense,” Booker would seem to fill each of those checkboxes.
Booker played defensive back for two years under Haynes in 1999-2000 when Haynes was DBs coach at Kent State.
PAULINO-BELL’S TRANSFER: ANOTHER HIT AT D-END
Dantonio confirmed rumors that redshirt freshman defensive end Lashawn Paulino-Bell is no longer with the team.
"Lashawn Paulino-Bell has decided to transfer,” Dantonio said. “So he'll be at a junior college this year. There's always going to be a little attrition."
Paulino-Bell and redshirt freshman Austin Andrews were suspended for separate incidents in December and didn’t travel with the team to the Holiday Bowl in San Diego.
Paulino-Bell was regarded as an important member of last year’s recruiting class as Michigan State sought to retool a thinned-out defensive end picture. Paulino-Bell, of Fort Lauderdale St. Thomas Aquinas, was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked the No. 45 weakside defensive end in the country by Rivals.com. Michigan State had to fight off increased recruiting pressure from SEC schools in order to preserve Paulino-Bell’s commitment at this time last year.
Paulino-Bell was injured in a watercraft accident last spring. The injuries carried over to the football field where he was not prepared to play as a true freshman in the fall.
Michigan State signed two defensive ends during the early signing period on Dec. 20 in Parks Gissinger of West Hills, Calif., and Zachary Slade of Lewis Center, Ohio.
Michigan State sought junior college d-end Jordan Allen, but he signed with Tennessee.
Michigan State signed three defensive ends last year in Paulino-Bell, Jacub Panasiuk and DeAri Todd. Panasiuk had a productive true freshman season but is more of a strong-side defensive end and possibly a part-time defensive tackle, and not a hoop-running edge threat.
Todd performed to positive reviews while redshirting but is also a boundary type of defensive end, if not a defensive tackle.
The program remains short on athletic rush end type defensive ends. Auston Robertson and Josh King were signed in 2016 to play the position. They were dismissed amid sexaul assualt allegations last year.
In 2015, Michigan State signed Justice Alexander and Mufi Hunt. Neither has contributed as a d-end. Hunt has changed positions more than once, moving to tight end in August, and then back to d-line during the season. Hunt went down with a knee injury at Ohio State in November.
Alexander made progress during bowl practice. He has good straight-line athleticism and is maturing as an athlete but needs to prove he can turn the corner as a true edge threat.
In 2014, Michigan State signed Robert Bowers and Montez Sweat. Sweat was dismissed from the team in the spring of 2016 and became All-SEC at Mississippi State in 2017. Bowers played sparingly in 2017 after ending the 2016 season as a starter. He left the team in November.
Michigan State received strong play from walk-on Kenny Willekes at defensive end in 2017. He ranked tied for fourth in the Big Ten in tackles for loss and earned third-team All-Big Ten honors. He was one of the key, major surprises of 2017, and the Spartans wouldn't have gone 10-3 if he hadn't made a storybook rise.
Michigan State will need to replace starting defensive end Demetrius Cooper, who graduated.
Brandon Randle served as a pass rushing specialist on third downs last season, but didn’t have much productivity. Coaches would like to move him full-time to his natural position of linebacker, if possible.
Walk-on Dillon Alexander has been functional at defensive end. He played through injuries last year. His role could expand, and he might have the ability to handle it.
MSU’s need for help at defensive end was made clear by their interest in Allen, out of junior college.
On the current recruiting trail, there have been no indications of further Michigan State involvement with a junior college defensive end candidate.
Michigan State would like to sign an additional defensive tackle in February as part of the 2018 class.
DeShaun Mallory
, a 5.6 three-star recruit ranked No. 12 in Illinois, plans to commit to MSU within the next two weeks and sign with Michigan State in February. Michigan State is still conduting what Mallory called “final evaluation” of him, following his official visit to Michigan State last weekend. Those evaluations include check-ups on academic progress. Defensive tackles coach Ron Burton visited Mallory at his school this week. Dantonio is expected to make an in-home visit with him next week.
Michigan State also remains in contact with
Jackson Cravens
, a 5.6 three-star defensive tackle from Provo, Utah. Burton visited him this week. Cravens visited Michigan State in September. He is scheduled to visit Oregon this weekend, and Utah the weekend of Jan. 26.
“I just wasn’t ready to sign in December yet because I knew I was going to be visiting some places in January,” Cravens told SpartanMag.com on Thursday. “I actually wanted to go out to these schools earlier but they wanted me to come in January.”
* Paulino-Bell is one of three players to announce plans to transfer this month, joining wide receivers Hunter Rison and Trishton Jackson. Rison has expressed interest in Kansas State. Jackson has indicated interest in Syracuse.
* Dantonio said MSU’s Green-White Game will likely be played on April 7. He said there are plans of possibly playing the game at night, with a 5 p.m. kickoff.
“Maybe at 5 o’clock or something like that,” Dantonio said. “That’s the plan, but I’ve got to talk to the administration about that. I don’t think that should be a problem at 5.”
Dantonio began spring practice early last season, and plans to do so again. He said Feb. 27 is the likely starting date for spring practice.
LANSING - Michigan State head football coach Mark Dantonio announced the filling of one of the programs' three coaching vacancies, and the promotion of Mike Tressel to defensive coordiantor, after speaking at the annual Michigan High School Football Coaches Association Clinic, Friday.
Dantonio confirmed rumors that Paul Haynes is joining the staff as a defensive backs coach.Tressel's promotion to full defensive coordinator was expected.
Dantonio confirmed rumors that Paul Haynes is joining the staff as a defensive backs coach. Mike Tressel has been promoted to full defensive coordinator, as expected.
Tressel served as co-defensive coordinator with Harlon Barnett from 2015-17. Barnett left Michigan State to become defensive coordinator at Florida State earlier this month.
Barnett served as the defensive backs coach at Michigan State from 2007-17. His departure necessitated the need to hire a new DBs coach. Haynes proved to be an attractive fit.
Haynes served as defensive backs coach at Michigan State under John L. Smith from 2003-04. He left Michigan State to become defensive backs coach at Ohio State under Jim Tressel from 2005-10.
Dantonio never worked with Haynes at Michigan State or Ohio State. But Tressel’s recommendation, along with Dantonio’s observations of Haynes on the recruiting trail over the years, went a long way toward making Haynes the lead candidate to take over the primary role of defensive backs coach, once Haynes expressed interest.
“He’s coached here before so he’s got a Spartan background,” Dantonio said. “He’s been a secondary coach and co-defensive coordinator at Ohio State, coached on the highest level in the secondary.”
Haynes spent one year as co-defensive coordinator and safeties coach at Ohio State under interim head coach Luke Fickell in 2011.
He spent one year as defensive coordinator at Arkansas in 2012 under Smith.
Most recently, Haynes served as head coach at Kent State from 2013-17, compiling a record of 14-45.
“He’s been a head coach," Dantonio said. "I think that gives him a big-picture feel. I think he’s an excellent recruiter. He was a coordinator at Arkansas. I think that he’s a dynamic person.
“I’m very, very excited about Paul. He signed his contract. So, we’re very, very excited about that and he’ll start today.”
COMP’S TAKE: Haynes’ knowledge of the landscape at Michigan State drew him back to East Lansing, along with the strong reputation Dantonio has as a staff leader. Haynes has shared the building with Michigan State strength and conditioning coach Ken Mannie in the past, so the references didn’t end with Tressel.
When Haynes was at Michigan State in the early 2000s, Michigan State employed a cover-one/man-free system (single safety deep, man-to-man underneath). His Kent State team was predominantly a cover-one/man-free team last year.
Haynes won't have to change everything he does in order to fit MSU's scheme. Michigan State retained pressing quarters zone (cover four) as its base coverage in 2017, but the Spartans were much more varied with other coverages in 2017 than in any other season under Dantonio - including use of cover-one/man-free.
Under Barnett and Tressel, Michigan State played more cover-one/man-to-man in 2017 than in previous seasons, especially early in the year and in early downs. The Spartans also added cover-two (halves) in third-down passing situations as a surprise to opponents.
Last year, Michigan State became less predictable for opposing coaches and quarterbacks with its coverages behind blitzes. Prior to last year, MSU almost always played a three-deep (cover three) zone when blitzing. In 2017, Michigan State mixed in cover-one man-to-man behind blitzes, and occasionally played cover zero (no safety). Late in the year, MSU mixed in a 3-4 defense, with zone blitzes and defensive ends dropping into coverage.
Tressel and Dantonio will likely retain a pressing cover-four (quarters) as its primary base defense. Based on the success of 2017, the usage of more coverages will likely continue, with Haynes being a past practitioner of cover-one, man-to-man. In turn, Haynes will become briefed on the finer points of the Dantonio/Narduzzi/Barnett/Tressel quarters zone system that has served the program well.
As a recruiter, Haynes is well-known throughout Ohio from his days at Michigan State, then his days at Ohio State and as a head coach at Kent State.
He played high school football at Columbus St. Francis DeSales, a program Michigan State has recruited through the years.
Barnett was a strong recruiter in Cincinnati and southern Ohio for the Spartans. Haynes will likely work to fill that void.
When Haynes recruits in Ohio, he won’t have to introduce himself to any high school football coach in the state. They already know who he is.
TRESSEL 'HAS BEEN DEEPLY INVOLVED’
Tressel moves into the full coordinator position and will also remain the linebackers coach.
"We've had co-defensive coordinators before because I think that's what was warranted and I think they deserved that," Dantonio said. "Mike's done a tremendous job just as Harlon had. I think he'll do an outstanding job. He's been deeply, deeply involved in every aspect."
Tressel had relinquished the linebackers job in 2015 and ’16 in order to serve as a roving instructor while manning the co-coordinator position. However, Dantonio moved Tressel back to linebackers coach in 2017 and moved Snyder from linebackers coach to defensive ends coach. Those assignments worked well, as Michigan State had far fewer gap assignment errors in 2017.
"I think he's too good of a coach not to have him coaching our linebackers," Dantonio said.
**
Dantonio said he expects to have two more staff hires by next week. One hire will fill the new 10th assistant coaching slot. The other will fill the vacancy created when former defensive ends coach Mark Snyder left for Florida State to join Barnett’s staff.
"We're in the process on that and they're going to come one at a time,” Dantonio said. “I'm kind of hoping I get it done by mid-week. We're trying, but we want to make good decisions."
Dantonio wants to have his new staff out visiting recruits and schools for the final days of evaluation and visitation period prior to February’s late singing day.
“I’d like for them to be out on the recruiting trail for at least two weeks or one week to just sort of have a chance to introduce themselves to the high schools,” Dantonio said.
**
Dantonio indicated that the 10th assistant will share defensive back coaching duties with Haynes.
"I think that guy's going to be a special teams assistant, he's going to be a defensive back assistant," he said. "I want him to be the head coach of our freshmen and I want him to be a conduit to our offense in some regards."
Sources close to the situation told SpartanMag.com that Michigan State has spoken with Scott Booker and Amp Campbell about the vacancy.
Booker was safeties and special teams coach at Nebraska in 2017. From 2012-16, he was tight ends coach and special teams coordinator at Notre Dame. He was an offensive intern at Notre Dame from 2010-11.
With Dantonio seeking a defensive back assistant with special teams knowledge and also serve as “a conduit to our offense,” Booker would seem to fill each of those checkboxes.
Booker played defensive back for two years under Haynes in 1999-2000 when Haynes was DBs coach at Kent State.
PAULINO-BELL’S TRANSFER: ANOTHER HIT AT D-END
Dantonio confirmed rumors that redshirt freshman defensive end Lashawn Paulino-Bell is no longer with the team.
"Lashawn Paulino-Bell has decided to transfer,” Dantonio said. “So he'll be at a junior college this year. There's always going to be a little attrition."
Paulino-Bell and redshirt freshman Austin Andrews were suspended for separate incidents in December and didn’t travel with the team to the Holiday Bowl in San Diego.
Paulino-Bell was regarded as an important member of last year’s recruiting class as Michigan State sought to retool a thinned-out defensive end picture. Paulino-Bell, of Fort Lauderdale St. Thomas Aquinas, was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked the No. 45 weakside defensive end in the country by Rivals.com. Michigan State had to fight off increased recruiting pressure from SEC schools in order to preserve Paulino-Bell’s commitment at this time last year.
Paulino-Bell was injured in a watercraft accident last spring. The injuries carried over to the football field where he was not prepared to play as a true freshman in the fall.
Michigan State signed two defensive ends during the early signing period on Dec. 20 in Parks Gissinger of West Hills, Calif., and Zachary Slade of Lewis Center, Ohio.
Michigan State sought junior college d-end Jordan Allen, but he signed with Tennessee.
Michigan State signed three defensive ends last year in Paulino-Bell, Jacub Panasiuk and DeAri Todd. Panasiuk had a productive true freshman season but is more of a strong-side defensive end and possibly a part-time defensive tackle, and not a hoop-running edge threat.
Todd performed to positive reviews while redshirting but is also a boundary type of defensive end, if not a defensive tackle.
The program remains short on athletic rush end type defensive ends. Auston Robertson and Josh King were signed in 2016 to play the position. They were dismissed amid sexaul assualt allegations last year.
In 2015, Michigan State signed Justice Alexander and Mufi Hunt. Neither has contributed as a d-end. Hunt has changed positions more than once, moving to tight end in August, and then back to d-line during the season. Hunt went down with a knee injury at Ohio State in November.
Alexander made progress during bowl practice. He has good straight-line athleticism and is maturing as an athlete but needs to prove he can turn the corner as a true edge threat.
In 2014, Michigan State signed Robert Bowers and Montez Sweat. Sweat was dismissed from the team in the spring of 2016 and became All-SEC at Mississippi State in 2017. Bowers played sparingly in 2017 after ending the 2016 season as a starter. He left the team in November.
Michigan State received strong play from walk-on Kenny Willekes at defensive end in 2017. He ranked tied for fourth in the Big Ten in tackles for loss and earned third-team All-Big Ten honors. He was one of the key, major surprises of 2017, and the Spartans wouldn't have gone 10-3 if he hadn't made a storybook rise.
Michigan State will need to replace starting defensive end Demetrius Cooper, who graduated.
Brandon Randle served as a pass rushing specialist on third downs last season, but didn’t have much productivity. Coaches would like to move him full-time to his natural position of linebacker, if possible.
Walk-on Dillon Alexander has been functional at defensive end. He played through injuries last year. His role could expand, and he might have the ability to handle it.
MSU’s need for help at defensive end was made clear by their interest in Allen, out of junior college.
On the current recruiting trail, there have been no indications of further Michigan State involvement with a junior college defensive end candidate.
Michigan State would like to sign an additional defensive tackle in February as part of the 2018 class.
DeShaun Mallory
, a 5.6 three-star recruit ranked No. 12 in Illinois, plans to commit to MSU within the next two weeks and sign with Michigan State in February. Michigan State is still conduting what Mallory called “final evaluation” of him, following his official visit to Michigan State last weekend. Those evaluations include check-ups on academic progress. Defensive tackles coach Ron Burton visited Mallory at his school this week. Dantonio is expected to make an in-home visit with him next week.
Michigan State also remains in contact with
Jackson Cravens
, a 5.6 three-star defensive tackle from Provo, Utah. Burton visited him this week. Cravens visited Michigan State in September. He is scheduled to visit Oregon this weekend, and Utah the weekend of Jan. 26.
“I just wasn’t ready to sign in December yet because I knew I was going to be visiting some places in January,” Cravens told SpartanMag.com on Thursday. “I actually wanted to go out to these schools earlier but they wanted me to come in January.”
* Paulino-Bell is one of three players to announce plans to transfer this month, joining wide receivers Hunter Rison and Trishton Jackson. Rison has expressed interest in Kansas State. Jackson has indicated interest in Syracuse.
* Dantonio said MSU’s Green-White Game will likely be played on April 7. He said there are plans of possibly playing the game at night, with a 5 p.m. kickoff.
“Maybe at 5 o’clock or something like that,” Dantonio said. “That’s the plan, but I’ve got to talk to the administration about that. I don’t think that should be a problem at 5.”
Dantonio began spring practice early last season, and plans to do so again. He said Feb. 27 is the likely starting date for spring practice.
MEN'S BASKETBALL Dr. G&W Sports Study Hall: The Spread vs. Victory, Basketball Edition
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 4 Replies
In one of my previous posts over on the Bunker last month, I gave a lengthy explanation of the relationship between the Vegas spread in football and the probability that the favored team would ultimately win the game. Utilizing spread data that I collected over about an 8 year period, and assuming that the actual margin of victory would adopt a Normal / Gaussian distribution centered around the spread. I found that it was fairly simple to calculate the spread vs. victory curve once you know (based on a lot of data) that the standard deviation of the deviation of the actual result from the spread is around 14-15 points. If you are curious, my original post can be found here.
I was also curious about whether a similar analysis could be made based on college basketball data, but this was something that I never looked into previously. Fortunately, I realized a few days ago that my go-to web sight for spread data (a site called "Prediction Tracker") has a mostly complete archive of spread data for all sorts of sports, including college basketball. I quickly downloaded some CSV files and within a couple of hours, I set up a simple database of college basketball spread data fro 2004 to 2017 including over 47,000 games. As one would expect, you can perform the exact same analysis and learn that in basketball, the key standard deviation value is almost exactly 10 points and this value appears to hold steady (unlike football) as the spread gets bigger. As a result, I was once again able to plot the spread vs. victory curve, which is shown here, along with the raw data from the database:
As one would expect, due to the tighter standard deviation the probability of victory rises quicker than it does in football such that a 7-point spread means a 75% chance of victory, the odds go over 90% at 13 points, and cross 99% at a spread of 23.5. In tabular form, the data looks like this:
Anyway, I thought it was interesting (and I typed less this time). Enjoy!
I was also curious about whether a similar analysis could be made based on college basketball data, but this was something that I never looked into previously. Fortunately, I realized a few days ago that my go-to web sight for spread data (a site called "Prediction Tracker") has a mostly complete archive of spread data for all sorts of sports, including college basketball. I quickly downloaded some CSV files and within a couple of hours, I set up a simple database of college basketball spread data fro 2004 to 2017 including over 47,000 games. As one would expect, you can perform the exact same analysis and learn that in basketball, the key standard deviation value is almost exactly 10 points and this value appears to hold steady (unlike football) as the spread gets bigger. As a result, I was once again able to plot the spread vs. victory curve, which is shown here, along with the raw data from the database:
As one would expect, due to the tighter standard deviation the probability of victory rises quicker than it does in football such that a 7-point spread means a 75% chance of victory, the odds go over 90% at 13 points, and cross 99% at a spread of 23.5. In tabular form, the data looks like this:
Anyway, I thought it was interesting (and I typed less this time). Enjoy!
Holiday Bowl notebook from last night
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 2 Replies
Dantonio and Leach met with media in San Diego last evening.
My notebook:
Air Raid vs. No Fly Zone? Kind Of
Jim Comparoni • SpartanMag.com
@JimComparoni
Do the Spartans care to be in the Holiday Bowl? Will Michigan State be charged up to play against Washington State in the Holiday Bowl on Dec. 28?
Those questions were part of the tenor when Mark Dantonio and Mike Leach met with west coast media in San Diego on Wednesday during the first joint press conference between the two schools during the run-up to the Dec. 28 Holiday Bowl.
“We’ve been focused on the Holiday Bowl since we’ve been invited,” Dantonio said. “Our guys are very, very excited to come out here.
“We’ve got a lot of guys that have never been to the West Coast. To come out here, see this part of the country, we have a large alumni base in Southern California, out in Arizona, as well. We’ll represent that in great fashion. I think our guys are going to be excited.”
Dantonio was asked if takes awhile to get started when a team has been off for a month.
“No, our guys will be ready to play,” Dantonio said. “I think we’re focused on that. We had a tough year last year. Our thought process was to make it back and change things back to the way they had been.
“We’ve always come ready to play. That’s the one thing that I think we pride ourselves in, that we will come ready to play.
“There’s preparation with that. There’s a mindset. We’ll get ourselves going.”
As for the locale and the event, Dantonio said: “I’ve heard nothing but outstanding things about the Holiday Bowl throughout my coaching career.
“I think they’re getting seven to ten inches of snow back home, 17 degrees. Out here on the sunny West Coast is great for us.”
Leach added weight to Dantonio’s pro-Holiday bowl sentiments.
“On behalf of Washington State, we’re thrilled to be in the Holiday Bowl, maybe the greatest bowl I’ve ever been to.”
Washington State lost to Minnesota in the Holiday Bowl, 17-12, last year.
As for the obligatory question to Dantonio about the Spartans being passed over by the Outback Bowl and how players deal with it, Dantonio said: "I think everybody goes through that. I think that’s part of it. That’s sort of old news to me."
AIR RAID vs NO FLY ZONE
Leach’s brand of offense has been dubbed the Air Raid, for its prolific passing figures - and also a play on words during his time as head coach of the Texas Tech Red Raiders.
Michigan State rose to power under Dantonio with a terrific secondary, known as The No-Fly Zone, during the 2013 run to the Rose Bowl. Michigan State secondaries have tried to live up to that monicker in subsequent years with varying degrees of success.
Texas Tech leads the nation in pass completions and is No. 2 in the country in passing offense (at 374 yards per game).
Michigan State ranks No. 31 in the nation in passing yards allowed (195 yards per game).
Penn State is the highest-ranked passing attack the Spartans have faced this year. The Nittany Lions rank No. 26 in the country in passing yards per game at 285 yards.
Leach was among the first coaches in college football to spread out five receivers and throw to various parts of the field on virtually every down, dating back to his time as offensive coordinator for Tim Couch at Kentucky in 1997-98 and then for one year at Oklahoma when Bob Stoops was getting his program going in 1999.
The following year, after Leach left Oklahoma to take the head coaching job at Texas Tech, the upstart Sooners made a surprise run to the National Championship in 2000 while using remnants of Leach’s offense.
Oklahoma’s success helped usher in an era of spread offenses at the major conference level. Zone read run action and uptempo tactics have been woven into various offshoots of some of the things Leach helped popularize.
“I think everybody takes something from somebody, so we’ve seen components of it,” Dantonio said of the Air Raid offense. “(We’ve) seen the mesh route. I think they’re the pioneers in that area, maybe the people that are the ones that do it the best certainly.”
Dealing with the Air Raid offense won’t be as stark a system shock to the Spartans in 2017 as it was when Michigan State lost to Texas Tech, 41-31, in the 2009 Alamo Bowl, a few days after Leach was fired for that job due in part to harsh treatment of a player.
“We’ve at least had some experience versus that offense,” Dantonio said. “It goes all the way back to 2002. I had my 2002 notes out the other day from when I was at Ohio State (and the Buckeyes played Texas Tech).
“It’s one of the things coaches do. You keep coaching. I think at the end of the day it’s about execution.
“Playing no-huddle offenses, passing game they’re going to spread you horizontally and vertically,” Dantonio added. “Very good players, players that play extremely well in space. We’re going to have to play well in space on defense. Always how you affect the quarterback usually affects the football game.”
Stanford is the team on Washington State’s schedule that plays the most like Michigan State. The Cougars beat Stanford 24-21 in the 10th game of the season on Nov. 4.
“They are a very good football team, very well-coached,” Dantonio said. “(Coach Leach) He’s turned programs around, has done this other times.
ONE OF NINE
The Holiday Bowl is one of nine bowl games pitting a pair of teams ranked in the College Football Playoff Top 20 against one another, with No. 16 Michigan State (9-3) and No. 18 Washington State (9-3).
“You got kind of contrasts styles,” Leach said. “They’re big and strong and physical. We’re trying to maneuver some stuff around. I think it’s a good matchup. I think it will be fun to watch.”
WSU’s WR SITUATION
Leach was asked for the second time this week about the departure and dismissal of his two leading wide receivers.
“Yeah, it’s kind of a next-man-up deal,” said Leach, unwilling to expand about it. “It’s a lot like practice or spring or camp: you just play the next guy. We’re confident in them.”
‘FANTASTIC’ SETTING
Leach was asked to expand on what made the Holiday Bowl possibly the best bowl he has ever been associated with.
“I think the setting’s fantastic,” he said. “I think where the hotels are situated with regard to things to do within walking distance is excellent. I think that’s one of the biggest keys to a bowl as far as the teams go.
“First of all, you got good hotels where everybody can have a lot of fun. You have plenty of space. Space is huge with regards to football teams.
“As a matter of fact, when we stay on the road, I don’t worry about the quality of the hotel as much as the space. So you got plenty of space. It’s a high-quality hotel.
“The other thing that I think is important is walking distance. You don’t have to mess with the logistics of cars or buses or all that. On their downtime, everything is right across the street or down the boardwalk.”
How much down time will the Washington State players have?
“Once we get here? We’ll let them go out, have kind of a later curfew early in the week, then tighten is up as we get through the week,” Leach said. “We enforce it, but from my experience in the past, generally, with a few rare exceptions, pretty good luck as far as guys getting themselves in.”
ROLLER COASTER SCORING
In jumping out to a 6-0 record and a No. 3 ranking, Washington State scored as least 30 points in each of those win. The Cougars won games by scores of 31-0 (vs. Montana State), 47-44 (vs. Boise State), 52-23 (vs. Oregon State), 45-7 (vs. Nevada) and 30-27 (vs. USC).
But then California stoned Washington state 37-3 in week seven.
And Washington held Washington State to two touchdowns in a 41-14 victory over the Cougars in the Apple Cup rivalry game on Nov. 25, WSU’s last game appearance.
“We sort of had the same types of scenarios,” Dantonio said of the Spartans. “We’ve outscored some people and had some other games that have been a little bit tight. We’ve gone back and forth as well.
“How do I see it playing out? Who knows. I don’t know. But we’re going to find out.”
“Hopefully higher scoring,” Leach said. “I think the best thing about our team this year is we’re a pretty complete team. We had contributions pretty consistently throughout the season on all three sides of the ball: special teams, offense and defense.
“Of the teams that I’ve coached, as far as all three sides of the ball contributing, not having a real weak spot, I felt like this was one of my more balanced teams.”
Dantonio on Washington State:
“When you look at them, you see a team that understands what they’re doing conceptually on both sides of the ball. They beat the two conference (division) champions in the Pac-12 (USC and Stanford).”
QUICK HITTERS
* The Holiday Bowl marks the eighth meeting between Michigan State and Washington State. MSU leads the all-time series, 5-2, with the last meeting arriving in 1977. It will be the first meeting between the two teams in a bowl game.
* The Spartans will be making their 27th all-time bowl appearance (11-15 record).
* The Spartans are in position to record their sixth double-digit win season in the last eight years with a victory in the Holiday Bowl. It marks the 10th bowl bid in 11 seasons under Dantonio.
* Dantonio owns a 99-45 record at the helm of the Spartans and will be looking for his 100th win as head coach at Michigan State.
* Dantonio owns school records for most bowl wins (four) and bowl appearances (10), including a school-record four-game bowl winning streak with victories in the 2011 Outback Bowl vs. No. 18 Georgia, 2012 Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl over TCU, 2014 Rose Bowl against No. 5 Stanford, and 2015 Cotton Bowl vs. No. 4 Baylor.
LEACH BEING LEACH:
Q. The Holiday Bowl has a reputation for shootouts, fantastic finishes. How do you see this matchup finishing out? LEACH: “I think it will be a shootout and a fantastic finish (laughter).”
Q. Your thoughts on San Diego? LEACH: “I like San Diego a lot. I’ve been to San Diego quite a bit. My wife is from San Diego, went to Patrick Henry High School. Yeah, so I’ve been to San Diego quite a bit.
“When we got married, I thought I was guaranteed a lot of trips to San Diego, then her parents moved to Utah. I got gypped out of that a little bit. But anyway, it’s good to be back.”
DANTONIO’s TURN
Q. Coach Leach mentioned his wife went to high school here. Do you have any San Diego ties we should know about?
DANTONIO: “Not that you should know about (laughter).”
Senior Washington State QB Luke Falk led the Pac-12 with 30 TD passes and is sixth in the country with 3,593 passing yards.
My notebook:
Air Raid vs. No Fly Zone? Kind Of
Jim Comparoni • SpartanMag.com
@JimComparoni
Do the Spartans care to be in the Holiday Bowl? Will Michigan State be charged up to play against Washington State in the Holiday Bowl on Dec. 28?
Those questions were part of the tenor when Mark Dantonio and Mike Leach met with west coast media in San Diego on Wednesday during the first joint press conference between the two schools during the run-up to the Dec. 28 Holiday Bowl.
“We’ve been focused on the Holiday Bowl since we’ve been invited,” Dantonio said. “Our guys are very, very excited to come out here.
“We’ve got a lot of guys that have never been to the West Coast. To come out here, see this part of the country, we have a large alumni base in Southern California, out in Arizona, as well. We’ll represent that in great fashion. I think our guys are going to be excited.”
Dantonio was asked if takes awhile to get started when a team has been off for a month.
“No, our guys will be ready to play,” Dantonio said. “I think we’re focused on that. We had a tough year last year. Our thought process was to make it back and change things back to the way they had been.
“We’ve always come ready to play. That’s the one thing that I think we pride ourselves in, that we will come ready to play.
“There’s preparation with that. There’s a mindset. We’ll get ourselves going.”
As for the locale and the event, Dantonio said: “I’ve heard nothing but outstanding things about the Holiday Bowl throughout my coaching career.
“I think they’re getting seven to ten inches of snow back home, 17 degrees. Out here on the sunny West Coast is great for us.”
Leach added weight to Dantonio’s pro-Holiday bowl sentiments.
“On behalf of Washington State, we’re thrilled to be in the Holiday Bowl, maybe the greatest bowl I’ve ever been to.”
Washington State lost to Minnesota in the Holiday Bowl, 17-12, last year.
As for the obligatory question to Dantonio about the Spartans being passed over by the Outback Bowl and how players deal with it, Dantonio said: "I think everybody goes through that. I think that’s part of it. That’s sort of old news to me."
AIR RAID vs NO FLY ZONE
Leach’s brand of offense has been dubbed the Air Raid, for its prolific passing figures - and also a play on words during his time as head coach of the Texas Tech Red Raiders.
Michigan State rose to power under Dantonio with a terrific secondary, known as The No-Fly Zone, during the 2013 run to the Rose Bowl. Michigan State secondaries have tried to live up to that monicker in subsequent years with varying degrees of success.
Texas Tech leads the nation in pass completions and is No. 2 in the country in passing offense (at 374 yards per game).
Michigan State ranks No. 31 in the nation in passing yards allowed (195 yards per game).
Penn State is the highest-ranked passing attack the Spartans have faced this year. The Nittany Lions rank No. 26 in the country in passing yards per game at 285 yards.
Leach was among the first coaches in college football to spread out five receivers and throw to various parts of the field on virtually every down, dating back to his time as offensive coordinator for Tim Couch at Kentucky in 1997-98 and then for one year at Oklahoma when Bob Stoops was getting his program going in 1999.
The following year, after Leach left Oklahoma to take the head coaching job at Texas Tech, the upstart Sooners made a surprise run to the National Championship in 2000 while using remnants of Leach’s offense.
Oklahoma’s success helped usher in an era of spread offenses at the major conference level. Zone read run action and uptempo tactics have been woven into various offshoots of some of the things Leach helped popularize.
“I think everybody takes something from somebody, so we’ve seen components of it,” Dantonio said of the Air Raid offense. “(We’ve) seen the mesh route. I think they’re the pioneers in that area, maybe the people that are the ones that do it the best certainly.”
Dealing with the Air Raid offense won’t be as stark a system shock to the Spartans in 2017 as it was when Michigan State lost to Texas Tech, 41-31, in the 2009 Alamo Bowl, a few days after Leach was fired for that job due in part to harsh treatment of a player.
“We’ve at least had some experience versus that offense,” Dantonio said. “It goes all the way back to 2002. I had my 2002 notes out the other day from when I was at Ohio State (and the Buckeyes played Texas Tech).
“It’s one of the things coaches do. You keep coaching. I think at the end of the day it’s about execution.
“Playing no-huddle offenses, passing game they’re going to spread you horizontally and vertically,” Dantonio added. “Very good players, players that play extremely well in space. We’re going to have to play well in space on defense. Always how you affect the quarterback usually affects the football game.”
Stanford is the team on Washington State’s schedule that plays the most like Michigan State. The Cougars beat Stanford 24-21 in the 10th game of the season on Nov. 4.
“They are a very good football team, very well-coached,” Dantonio said. “(Coach Leach) He’s turned programs around, has done this other times.
ONE OF NINE
The Holiday Bowl is one of nine bowl games pitting a pair of teams ranked in the College Football Playoff Top 20 against one another, with No. 16 Michigan State (9-3) and No. 18 Washington State (9-3).
“You got kind of contrasts styles,” Leach said. “They’re big and strong and physical. We’re trying to maneuver some stuff around. I think it’s a good matchup. I think it will be fun to watch.”
WSU’s WR SITUATION
Leach was asked for the second time this week about the departure and dismissal of his two leading wide receivers.
“Yeah, it’s kind of a next-man-up deal,” said Leach, unwilling to expand about it. “It’s a lot like practice or spring or camp: you just play the next guy. We’re confident in them.”
‘FANTASTIC’ SETTING
Leach was asked to expand on what made the Holiday Bowl possibly the best bowl he has ever been associated with.
“I think the setting’s fantastic,” he said. “I think where the hotels are situated with regard to things to do within walking distance is excellent. I think that’s one of the biggest keys to a bowl as far as the teams go.
“First of all, you got good hotels where everybody can have a lot of fun. You have plenty of space. Space is huge with regards to football teams.
“As a matter of fact, when we stay on the road, I don’t worry about the quality of the hotel as much as the space. So you got plenty of space. It’s a high-quality hotel.
“The other thing that I think is important is walking distance. You don’t have to mess with the logistics of cars or buses or all that. On their downtime, everything is right across the street or down the boardwalk.”
How much down time will the Washington State players have?
“Once we get here? We’ll let them go out, have kind of a later curfew early in the week, then tighten is up as we get through the week,” Leach said. “We enforce it, but from my experience in the past, generally, with a few rare exceptions, pretty good luck as far as guys getting themselves in.”
ROLLER COASTER SCORING
In jumping out to a 6-0 record and a No. 3 ranking, Washington State scored as least 30 points in each of those win. The Cougars won games by scores of 31-0 (vs. Montana State), 47-44 (vs. Boise State), 52-23 (vs. Oregon State), 45-7 (vs. Nevada) and 30-27 (vs. USC).
But then California stoned Washington state 37-3 in week seven.
And Washington held Washington State to two touchdowns in a 41-14 victory over the Cougars in the Apple Cup rivalry game on Nov. 25, WSU’s last game appearance.
“We sort of had the same types of scenarios,” Dantonio said of the Spartans. “We’ve outscored some people and had some other games that have been a little bit tight. We’ve gone back and forth as well.
“How do I see it playing out? Who knows. I don’t know. But we’re going to find out.”
“Hopefully higher scoring,” Leach said. “I think the best thing about our team this year is we’re a pretty complete team. We had contributions pretty consistently throughout the season on all three sides of the ball: special teams, offense and defense.
“Of the teams that I’ve coached, as far as all three sides of the ball contributing, not having a real weak spot, I felt like this was one of my more balanced teams.”
Dantonio on Washington State:
“When you look at them, you see a team that understands what they’re doing conceptually on both sides of the ball. They beat the two conference (division) champions in the Pac-12 (USC and Stanford).”
QUICK HITTERS
* The Holiday Bowl marks the eighth meeting between Michigan State and Washington State. MSU leads the all-time series, 5-2, with the last meeting arriving in 1977. It will be the first meeting between the two teams in a bowl game.
* The Spartans will be making their 27th all-time bowl appearance (11-15 record).
* The Spartans are in position to record their sixth double-digit win season in the last eight years with a victory in the Holiday Bowl. It marks the 10th bowl bid in 11 seasons under Dantonio.
* Dantonio owns a 99-45 record at the helm of the Spartans and will be looking for his 100th win as head coach at Michigan State.
* Dantonio owns school records for most bowl wins (four) and bowl appearances (10), including a school-record four-game bowl winning streak with victories in the 2011 Outback Bowl vs. No. 18 Georgia, 2012 Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl over TCU, 2014 Rose Bowl against No. 5 Stanford, and 2015 Cotton Bowl vs. No. 4 Baylor.
LEACH BEING LEACH:
Q. The Holiday Bowl has a reputation for shootouts, fantastic finishes. How do you see this matchup finishing out? LEACH: “I think it will be a shootout and a fantastic finish (laughter).”
Q. Your thoughts on San Diego? LEACH: “I like San Diego a lot. I’ve been to San Diego quite a bit. My wife is from San Diego, went to Patrick Henry High School. Yeah, so I’ve been to San Diego quite a bit.
“When we got married, I thought I was guaranteed a lot of trips to San Diego, then her parents moved to Utah. I got gypped out of that a little bit. But anyway, it’s good to be back.”
DANTONIO’s TURN
Q. Coach Leach mentioned his wife went to high school here. Do you have any San Diego ties we should know about?
DANTONIO: “Not that you should know about (laughter).”
Senior Washington State QB Luke Falk led the Pac-12 with 30 TD passes and is sixth in the country with 3,593 passing yards.
Read & React: A Six Pack of Dantonio Quotes (and reaction)
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 5 Replies
Read & React: A six-pack of Dantonio quotes (and reaction)
Jim Comparoni • SpartanMag.com
@JimComparoni
EAST LANSING - A “Six Pack” of interesting Mark Dantonio quotes from his weekly press conference, and publisher Jim Comparoni’s reaction:
1. Dantonio on Brian Lewerke’s 2-for-14 performance against Maryland:
“Probably what I should have said last Saturday night was that we got great game management from our quarterback. Great scramble on the third down play, the first drive. Another quarterback run for a 25-yard touchdown. No turnovers. Got out of trouble another time on a scramble. Just couldn't throw the ball very effectively because of the weather.
“We only attempted four passes in the second half. That was by design. Again, we had a three-possession lead. It was bad out there. The footing was poor. So we just didn't go in that direction.
“But I have complete confidence in him. Think he can make plays. We've seen him make enough plays in 11 games that would indicate to me that he has a big, big future here, not just at this school but in this conference. I'm excited about that.”
COMP’S TAKE: I assumed it was self-evident on Saturday as to why Lewerke’s offensive numbers were off. It was the weather, obviously.
But I was surprised to hear a smattering of complaints around the internet about Lewerke’s play. I asked one guy, “Did you think the game was played in a dome?”
Anyone who attended the game knows how challenging it was to throw the ball that day. Anyone criticizing Lewerke’s play that day must not have been at the stadium.
The response to that from critics is that Maryland’s quarterback wasn’t bothered by the elements at the end of the game.
Well, the wind and snow died down quite a bit in the last five minutes.
And Maryland did work the sidelines for a handful of passes and hit Michigan State with a 20-yarder over the middle on a nice slant-and-go.
So they completed a handful of passes at a time when Lewerke was instructed to hand it off.
Considering the elements, did Michigan State attempt a few too many high-difficulty passes? Probably so. Maryland did a better job on its last two possessions of working the sidelines and flats.
As for Lewerke, he threw 12 incompletions.
In going back over those 12, I found three inaccurate passes that were on him (all to the short sidelines, early in the game, missing high).
The other nine:
* Two were thrown away due to no one being open in the final seconds of the first half (hence Dantonio’s “game management” compliment).
* Three were dropped (by Trishton Jackson, Gerald Holmes and LJ Scott).
The drops by the running backs probably could have been delivered a little more delicately. Those weren’t easy short catches to make. But still, they were drops.
As for Jackson, this is the second straight game he looked a little awkward turning back for the ball along the sideline. And he looked frustrated with himself after that drop. He needs to make some plays and get some confidence back heading into bowl practice.
* Three were affective by foot slippage due to the field conditions (two with Lewerke falling while throwing, and one with TE Matt Sokol having to tip-toe on an out cut, then diving for an incompletion. Sokol got a hand on the ball. Some would put this one in the “drop” category.
As for one of those QB-slip incompletions, it came on third-and-nine in the fourth quarter. This one was instance in which Lewerke did not exhibit good game management skills. The pass play had little chance to pick up first-down yardage. He threw it dangerously, and would have been a 50-50 type of ball if he had gotten it near the target. Maryland had just cut the lead to 17-7. A pick-six there was as likely as a completion for a first down. That was probably the only poor decision he made all day.
* One incompletion was a deep fade for Cody White on a second-and-10 in the second half. Seemed like a high-difficulty choice considering the elements. But Lewerke is ambitious and you have to like that about him.
* Add it all up and I have three inaccurate passes, and a fourth ill-advised pass.
And Lewerke was asked several times after the game about his 2-for-14 performance, as if it’s a free throw percentage or something. People, there were other variables involved.
2. Dantonio: “It’s been 10 weeks since our bye week, so we've been going at it for 10 straight weeks. Sort of grinding, everything. But I think our football team is ready to play its final game. We're looking forward to it.”
COMP’S TAKE: I’m usually the guy pointing out the lack of a bye week for reasons why teams can lose their fizz at this time of year.
I’m impressed that this team hasn’t shown many effects of a difficult scheduling run. Well, maybe it hit in the Ohio State game a little bit. Maybe some mental and physical fatigue set in as part of the problems coaches and players talked about in terms of being ill-prepared for Ohio State’s unbalanced lines and subtle formation changes. A little more energy, a little more recall in the film room, a little more fizz, and maybe a few of those out-flank situations wouldn’t have happened.
Michigan State still would have lost, but perhaps the Spartans would have shown up a bit better were it not for this string of eight, nine, 10 games without a bye.
So we’ll see how it works for them this weekend at Rutgers. One major difference between the two teams is that Michigan State seems genuinely amped up about getting to nine wins, whereas Rutgers is now out of contention for a bowl bid.
3. Dantonio: “We flipped 3-8 (from last year) to 8-3. It's rewarding to flip it. It's rewarding to see that, to see there's something that all your hard work comes to fruition and all the things you talk about and go through as a group, you see that sort of move forward. You don't want to take any shine off of this season.”
COMP’S TAKE: I like Dantonio’s use of a mantra for game week, this week. He’s a man of many mantras in the preseason. This “Flip It” battle cry is a good one. They’re into it. It’s important that they stay focused and finish this.
Hence “You don’t want to take any shine off of this season.” Another mantra.
I think that stuff works. And I expect it to help them get rally for a ninth win this weekend.
4. Dantonio: “I think one of the main things we keep talking about is momentum, continuing to keep momentum as we go into the bowl game. Relative to how the season has gone this year, to finish going like (upward) is very, very important. Our players believe that they can flip this back.”
COMP’S TAKE: There’s that mantra again.
Secondly, there’s a lot of merit to those comments. Michigan State has momentum this week as a team. And if the Spartans get to nine wins, there will be true momentum for the program.
Michigan State isn’t going to win the Big Ten this year. But I think fans have regained an appreciation for a nine-win season, and the quest for a 10-win season. Dantonio can talk in terms of accomplishments and momentum with an 8-3 record and it’s completely justified. That’s the sign of a healthy, grounded team, program and community. There is a feeling of security about the progress and the future, and having a realistic outlook on the chance to go 10-3, and what it means with so many young players.
That’s a much healthier state of being than the insecurity we’ve seen stall SEC programs. You lose one game in that conference and distractions make it almost impossible for a coach to keep a football army marching properly. I think the rabid nature of fan support at many of those schools has moved their needle past the point of diminishing returns. I’ll be interested to see just how attractive the job openings are in the SEC in the coming weeks.
5. Dantonio: “I don't think growth ever stops. We're finishing our 11th season, but there's still growth in this program. That's the impressive thing. Point of emphasis is what our seniors have been able to accomplish. Hopefully we have awesome momentum and it will carry us forward.
“That's something that we can point to, like I said before, a little bit of a life moment, a challenge for all of us as we move forward. Any time you go through something like that (last year’s 3-9 record) where there's a lot of frustration, you bounce back a little stronger.
“I think sometimes you have to go to those depths to find yourself a little bit, to reach down. I think people sort of find themselves. They really look at themselves a lot harder sometimes when they're not successful. Once they have some quiet time, some time to recollect themselves, critique themselves, we've done that as an entire program, you work at it.
“Football is a grind. You start working back in winter workouts, summer, spring ball, all these different phases you go through. Throughout every phase there's days, there's meetings, there's different people getting to you as a person. Our strength coach, position coaches, the different people in the program, the head coach, all these different people are touching our players. They got some time to sort of reflect. I think reflection probably is as much as anything in terms of what allows us to take that next step.”
COMP’S TAKE: The coaches gained reaffirmation that what they do … works.
In the process, they gained further confirmation that they had simply allowed some of the elements that built the program into a power become stale.
Dantonio tightened the screws in every aspect of the program, and we’ve seen improved quality control across the board.
What they do works. Now they will have better reason to keep doing what they do in off-seasons to come, and doing it with tight screws.
6. “Lewerke has guys that he can throw the football to. Then you compound that with the ability to run the football last week, which was needed. We needed to take a step in that direction, and we did. I think maybe we'll peak in our 12th game, maybe our 13th. I think we still have not peaked yet as a complete football team. Maybe you never do, I don't know.”
COMP’S TAKE: I think something close to a peak might be witnessed this week. Rutgers has been a run-oriented offense this year. Michigan State has stuffed most run-oriented offenses its faced this year, especially inside-zone teams like the ones Rutgers o-coordinator Jerry Kill usually fields.
It’s supposed to be sunny at 56 on Saturday at Rutgers. Lewerke should have good throwing conditions, good pass protection. The run game gained some traction last week and is ending the season in the soft spot of the Big Ten East schedule.
Conditions are in place for the Spartans to achieve a measure of offensive balance for the first time in a long while. The Spartans should be able to mix the run and pass and finish the regular season with everyone feeling good about the week’s accomplishment and the season’s accomplishments.
Then they can try to gear toward peaking against a quality opponent at bowl time. These are healthy, positive days … provided that they close this thing out properly on Saturday.
Mark Dantonio hugs his game manager after Saturday's victory over Maryland.
Jim Comparoni • SpartanMag.com
@JimComparoni
EAST LANSING - A “Six Pack” of interesting Mark Dantonio quotes from his weekly press conference, and publisher Jim Comparoni’s reaction:
1. Dantonio on Brian Lewerke’s 2-for-14 performance against Maryland:
“Probably what I should have said last Saturday night was that we got great game management from our quarterback. Great scramble on the third down play, the first drive. Another quarterback run for a 25-yard touchdown. No turnovers. Got out of trouble another time on a scramble. Just couldn't throw the ball very effectively because of the weather.
“We only attempted four passes in the second half. That was by design. Again, we had a three-possession lead. It was bad out there. The footing was poor. So we just didn't go in that direction.
“But I have complete confidence in him. Think he can make plays. We've seen him make enough plays in 11 games that would indicate to me that he has a big, big future here, not just at this school but in this conference. I'm excited about that.”
COMP’S TAKE: I assumed it was self-evident on Saturday as to why Lewerke’s offensive numbers were off. It was the weather, obviously.
But I was surprised to hear a smattering of complaints around the internet about Lewerke’s play. I asked one guy, “Did you think the game was played in a dome?”
Anyone who attended the game knows how challenging it was to throw the ball that day. Anyone criticizing Lewerke’s play that day must not have been at the stadium.
The response to that from critics is that Maryland’s quarterback wasn’t bothered by the elements at the end of the game.
Well, the wind and snow died down quite a bit in the last five minutes.
And Maryland did work the sidelines for a handful of passes and hit Michigan State with a 20-yarder over the middle on a nice slant-and-go.
So they completed a handful of passes at a time when Lewerke was instructed to hand it off.
Considering the elements, did Michigan State attempt a few too many high-difficulty passes? Probably so. Maryland did a better job on its last two possessions of working the sidelines and flats.
As for Lewerke, he threw 12 incompletions.
In going back over those 12, I found three inaccurate passes that were on him (all to the short sidelines, early in the game, missing high).
The other nine:
* Two were thrown away due to no one being open in the final seconds of the first half (hence Dantonio’s “game management” compliment).
* Three were dropped (by Trishton Jackson, Gerald Holmes and LJ Scott).
The drops by the running backs probably could have been delivered a little more delicately. Those weren’t easy short catches to make. But still, they were drops.
As for Jackson, this is the second straight game he looked a little awkward turning back for the ball along the sideline. And he looked frustrated with himself after that drop. He needs to make some plays and get some confidence back heading into bowl practice.
* Three were affective by foot slippage due to the field conditions (two with Lewerke falling while throwing, and one with TE Matt Sokol having to tip-toe on an out cut, then diving for an incompletion. Sokol got a hand on the ball. Some would put this one in the “drop” category.
As for one of those QB-slip incompletions, it came on third-and-nine in the fourth quarter. This one was instance in which Lewerke did not exhibit good game management skills. The pass play had little chance to pick up first-down yardage. He threw it dangerously, and would have been a 50-50 type of ball if he had gotten it near the target. Maryland had just cut the lead to 17-7. A pick-six there was as likely as a completion for a first down. That was probably the only poor decision he made all day.
* One incompletion was a deep fade for Cody White on a second-and-10 in the second half. Seemed like a high-difficulty choice considering the elements. But Lewerke is ambitious and you have to like that about him.
* Add it all up and I have three inaccurate passes, and a fourth ill-advised pass.
And Lewerke was asked several times after the game about his 2-for-14 performance, as if it’s a free throw percentage or something. People, there were other variables involved.
2. Dantonio: “It’s been 10 weeks since our bye week, so we've been going at it for 10 straight weeks. Sort of grinding, everything. But I think our football team is ready to play its final game. We're looking forward to it.”
COMP’S TAKE: I’m usually the guy pointing out the lack of a bye week for reasons why teams can lose their fizz at this time of year.
I’m impressed that this team hasn’t shown many effects of a difficult scheduling run. Well, maybe it hit in the Ohio State game a little bit. Maybe some mental and physical fatigue set in as part of the problems coaches and players talked about in terms of being ill-prepared for Ohio State’s unbalanced lines and subtle formation changes. A little more energy, a little more recall in the film room, a little more fizz, and maybe a few of those out-flank situations wouldn’t have happened.
Michigan State still would have lost, but perhaps the Spartans would have shown up a bit better were it not for this string of eight, nine, 10 games without a bye.
So we’ll see how it works for them this weekend at Rutgers. One major difference between the two teams is that Michigan State seems genuinely amped up about getting to nine wins, whereas Rutgers is now out of contention for a bowl bid.
3. Dantonio: “We flipped 3-8 (from last year) to 8-3. It's rewarding to flip it. It's rewarding to see that, to see there's something that all your hard work comes to fruition and all the things you talk about and go through as a group, you see that sort of move forward. You don't want to take any shine off of this season.”
COMP’S TAKE: I like Dantonio’s use of a mantra for game week, this week. He’s a man of many mantras in the preseason. This “Flip It” battle cry is a good one. They’re into it. It’s important that they stay focused and finish this.
Hence “You don’t want to take any shine off of this season.” Another mantra.
I think that stuff works. And I expect it to help them get rally for a ninth win this weekend.
4. Dantonio: “I think one of the main things we keep talking about is momentum, continuing to keep momentum as we go into the bowl game. Relative to how the season has gone this year, to finish going like (upward) is very, very important. Our players believe that they can flip this back.”
COMP’S TAKE: There’s that mantra again.
Secondly, there’s a lot of merit to those comments. Michigan State has momentum this week as a team. And if the Spartans get to nine wins, there will be true momentum for the program.
Michigan State isn’t going to win the Big Ten this year. But I think fans have regained an appreciation for a nine-win season, and the quest for a 10-win season. Dantonio can talk in terms of accomplishments and momentum with an 8-3 record and it’s completely justified. That’s the sign of a healthy, grounded team, program and community. There is a feeling of security about the progress and the future, and having a realistic outlook on the chance to go 10-3, and what it means with so many young players.
That’s a much healthier state of being than the insecurity we’ve seen stall SEC programs. You lose one game in that conference and distractions make it almost impossible for a coach to keep a football army marching properly. I think the rabid nature of fan support at many of those schools has moved their needle past the point of diminishing returns. I’ll be interested to see just how attractive the job openings are in the SEC in the coming weeks.
5. Dantonio: “I don't think growth ever stops. We're finishing our 11th season, but there's still growth in this program. That's the impressive thing. Point of emphasis is what our seniors have been able to accomplish. Hopefully we have awesome momentum and it will carry us forward.
“That's something that we can point to, like I said before, a little bit of a life moment, a challenge for all of us as we move forward. Any time you go through something like that (last year’s 3-9 record) where there's a lot of frustration, you bounce back a little stronger.
“I think sometimes you have to go to those depths to find yourself a little bit, to reach down. I think people sort of find themselves. They really look at themselves a lot harder sometimes when they're not successful. Once they have some quiet time, some time to recollect themselves, critique themselves, we've done that as an entire program, you work at it.
“Football is a grind. You start working back in winter workouts, summer, spring ball, all these different phases you go through. Throughout every phase there's days, there's meetings, there's different people getting to you as a person. Our strength coach, position coaches, the different people in the program, the head coach, all these different people are touching our players. They got some time to sort of reflect. I think reflection probably is as much as anything in terms of what allows us to take that next step.”
COMP’S TAKE: The coaches gained reaffirmation that what they do … works.
In the process, they gained further confirmation that they had simply allowed some of the elements that built the program into a power become stale.
Dantonio tightened the screws in every aspect of the program, and we’ve seen improved quality control across the board.
What they do works. Now they will have better reason to keep doing what they do in off-seasons to come, and doing it with tight screws.
6. “Lewerke has guys that he can throw the football to. Then you compound that with the ability to run the football last week, which was needed. We needed to take a step in that direction, and we did. I think maybe we'll peak in our 12th game, maybe our 13th. I think we still have not peaked yet as a complete football team. Maybe you never do, I don't know.”
COMP’S TAKE: I think something close to a peak might be witnessed this week. Rutgers has been a run-oriented offense this year. Michigan State has stuffed most run-oriented offenses its faced this year, especially inside-zone teams like the ones Rutgers o-coordinator Jerry Kill usually fields.
It’s supposed to be sunny at 56 on Saturday at Rutgers. Lewerke should have good throwing conditions, good pass protection. The run game gained some traction last week and is ending the season in the soft spot of the Big Ten East schedule.
Conditions are in place for the Spartans to achieve a measure of offensive balance for the first time in a long while. The Spartans should be able to mix the run and pass and finish the regular season with everyone feeling good about the week’s accomplishment and the season’s accomplishments.
Then they can try to gear toward peaking against a quality opponent at bowl time. These are healthy, positive days … provided that they close this thing out properly on Saturday.
Mark Dantonio hugs his game manager after Saturday's victory over Maryland.
Pre-Snap Read: MSU vs Maryland
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 12 Replies
Pre-Snap Read: MSU vs Maryland
By Jim Comparoni
Publisher, SpartanMag.com
EAST LANSING - The consolation after last week’s loss at Ohio State was the idea that Michigan State can and should win the last two games and get to 9-3.
A lot of people, including myself, are talking about 9-3 like it’s almost a done deal.
Well, it’s not.
Maryland isn’t as bad as they played last week against Michigan. They had a fifth-string QB last week, and he wasn’t capable of throwing.
They should have Max Bortenschlager back at QB this week. He began the year as a fourth-string QB but he is decently functional. He has started five games. He is 2-3 as a starter with wins over Indiana and Minnesota.
I suspect if you polled Indiana players as to which team is better, Maryland or Michigan State, you might get a 50-50 split.
I think Indiana d-linemen would tell you that Maryland’s run game is better than Michigan State’s.
As good as MSU’s WRs are, I think Indiana CB Rashard Fant would tell you that no one for Michigan State is as good as Maryland WR D.J. Moore.
Maryland’s defensive front is active and sturdy. I have questions about the way they fill their linebackers. And they are bad on third down because their pass rush is not good and you can plan for man-to-man coverage.
But your QB needs to be accurate.
The weather man says (in my George Kell voice) it’s going to be about 39 degrees and raining throughout the game.
I hate that for the fans. Snowfall would be better. There’s not much worse than 30s and rain. But Mark Dantonio said on his radio show last night that he wants Michigan State fans to “gear up” and show up. They need it, for senior day.
This is not a lead-pipe cinch victory.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST
Michigan State was terrible against the run last week against Ohio State. Like I said in the Skull Session, when going back over the film, I didn’t think Michigan State was physically manhandled or athletically blown out.
I thought Michigan State had problems with misalignment way too often. Too often with five guys in three gaps on one side of the line, and two guys in four gaps on the other side.
Dantonio said there were problems getting calls in, getting calls relayed, problems with the tempo that they didn’t expect.
It led to “being out-flanked” as Dantonio said.
That’s a good term. It’s a macro term. On more of a mico level, the simplest way I can say it is five guys in three gaps over here and three guys trying to cover four or five gaps over there.
Sometimes Ohio State scooped or reached Michigan State d-linemen and carved them out of a gap (which was the case on the first long TD run of 47 yards).
Dantonio felt OSU moved the line of scrimmage vs Michigan State defensive tackles. He felt Michigan State didn’t play double-teams on the inside zone “as well as they had (in other games).” I would agree with that but when I watched it again, Michigan State wasn’t as weak in that area as I expected. And like I said in the V-Cast, Mike Panasiuk was solid all game long.
Raequan Williams gave up a foot or two a few more times than usual. And Kyonta Stallworth was not good enough. So the film work and realization will be good for those guys. And this weeks marks the next challenge, because Maryland will challenge you with a good inside zone run game.
Michigan State needs to stop the inside zone, like they did against Western Michigan, Northwestern and several teams since then. Last week’s game should help Michigan State focus on the task of stopping the run this week. Michigan State is having its manhood challenged this week and I expect the run defense to respond.
Maryland ran the ball better against Indiana than Michigan State did. And they ran it a little better against Michigan than Michigan State did (although Michigan called off the dogs).
Maryland’s Rushing Offense:
180 vs Michigan
167 vs Rutgers
174 vs Indiana
143 vs Wisconsin
85 vs Northwestern
50 vs Ohio State
262 vs Minnesota
* The trend: Maryland has settled in as a rushing offense that gets somewhere between 150 and 175 against solid Big Ten teams.
* Their run game is heavy on inside zone, with little RBs squirting around with toughness, kind of like Western Michigan or Minnesota. Michigan State has matched up well against these type of run games.
After last week’s OSU film, Maryland will have some belief that they can do the same vs Michigan State. Meanwhile, Michigan State will be out to re-prove their manhood.
The good news for Michigan State: Maryland isn’t as varied as Ohio State (and of course not as talented).
Maryland doesn’t feature the QB run in the offense when Bortenschlager is the QB (but they do feature it when Brand is the QB because that’s about all he can do).
But they vary it a little bit with quick-action pull guards on counters.
* Maryland CAN go uptempo. From what I’ve seen, they prefer to do it in the red zone. But they can go to it at anytime, and they do it pretty well.
After seeing MSU’s struggles with it last week, Maryland will certainly test Michigan State with it this week.
Overall, Maryland’s run game is pretty good. Their QB, if it’s Bortenschlager, is functional, probably a little better right now than Iowa’s QB was in early October, a little better than Michigan’s O’Korn. He’s not bad, and his WRs run better routes than what O’Korn had to work with. Maryland’s WRs are better-coached than Michigan’s; they run tricky routes with slippery moves at the top of their routes.
Maryland can contain a one-dimensional run game. If Michigan State runs 70 pct of the time like they did against Indiana, they could get into a struggle in this game.
Maryland doesn’t have a good pass rush. Brian Lewerke will have time to throw and avenues to throw. If he’s good-to-solid, Michigan State should be okay.
But don’t miss field goals, like you did against Northwestern. Don’t give Maryland a blocked punt and a blocked PAT like they had against Indiana. Don’t allow strange, game-changing plays on special teams, and you should be okay.
But it’s going to take 60 minutes of football to win. Michigan State struggled with Indiana, ended up struggling with Minnesota. Maryland is in a similar category. Michigan State was capable of losing to Indiana and, as it turned out, Michigan State had some scares with Minnesota. If Michigan State doesn’t improve and build upon what they established and learned in the last three weeks against Northwestern, Penn State and Ohio State, then they could find themselves in another struggle.
But I think Michigan State will be recollected and aimed for a strong senior day showing.
REASONS FOR MSU TO BE CONCERNED:
* Wide receiver DJ Moore is truly outstanding. Michigan State had trouble late in the game with Minnesota’s top WR, couldn’t get a handle on him. Moore is better.
* Maryland’s run game is good. Not great. But good.
Probably better than Northwestern’s because I think their inside zone blocking is better than Northwestern’s, although Maryland’s RBs aren’t as good as NU’s Justin Jackson.
* Maryland ranks No. 2 in the Big Ten in turnover margin at +4.
* Maryland ranks No. 5 in the Big Ten in rushing offense at 173.3 yards per game and No. 4 in the Big Ten in yards per carry average at 4.6.
* Maryland is ranked No. 4 in the Big Ten in scoring offense (however just No. 11 in total offense.)
This quote from Indiana coach Tom Allen after the Hoosiers’ 42-39 loss to Maryland three weeks ago:
“I will say this, I will be very transparent: What they do, and what they did last year, it stresses our athleticism in spots. It does. And they have a lot of speed. You try your best to protect that without exposing guys. Sometimes that holds up and sometimes it doesn’t.
“But they run the ball so well that you have to make sure you get enough hats on the run.
“To me it’s a matter of them isolating some guys and the other guys won those one-on-ones. I just know that their speed makes it hard us and that’s just being honest.”
* Maryland has a penchant for making big plays on special teams.
* The Terps rank No. 3 in the Big Ten in kickoff return average and No. 3 in the Big Ten in punt return average.
WHERE MARYLAND IS WEAK:
* Third-down defense and third-down offense. Dead last in the Big Ten in both categories.
* Their injuries at QB obviously hurts them on third down.
* On defense, they are allowing teams to convert 49 pct on third down. (By familiar comparison Michigan State is No. 7 at 33 pct. And MSU’s offense is No. 3 in the Big Ten on third down at 41 pct, and had been No. 1 in the nation in third-and-eight or more prior to last week).
On defense, they are hurt by a lack of pass rush. They have only six sacks in Big Ten games, dead last in the conference (Michigan State has 16, tied for seventh).
[Maryland has 15 sacks on the year overall, ranked No. 12 in the Big Ten.]
* Pass defense: No. 13 in the Big Ten at 247 yards per game, having allowed a conference-high 20 TD passes.
* No. 14 in the Big Ten in pass efficiency defense.
* Maryland dead last in scoring defense in the Big Ten at 36.2 points per game.
WHERE MSU CAN HAVE SUCCESS:
* Offensive balance. Need to probe the run, as much as that irks people, to get the attention of linebackers and safeties for your pass game. But don’t spend all day trying to establish the run. There’s a delicate balance there.
Michigan spent a drive or two with mediocre results in the interior run game but eventually got it on track, and set up play-action passing with it.
Michigan State is not run blocking as well as Michigan right now. Michigan went with heavy formations and was dedicated to making it work.
Michigan State will do some of that, but I doubt Michigan State will want to try to make an afternoon out of it. Need balance.
* Michigan State should have time to throw. MSU’s pass protection failed last week against a good, charged-up OSU pass rush. Maryland’s pass rush is not good. Michigan State has been working all week with last week’s humbling experience in mind. That means they will be working to try to get up to the OSU level. That should yield quality pass pro this week. That’s the way this stuff usually works in college football.
* Maryland plays a lot of man-to-man, probably too much.
They blitz a lot on third down but still have trouble getting home. That leaves their man-to-man out to dry.
The combination of play-action passing on first or second down, and picking up blitzes on third down SHOULD give QB Brian Lewerke open avenues with which to work.
Lewerke’s ability to flush out and elongate plays and continue to read downfield also matches up well with this team that has a substandard pass rush, merely average pass defense and then ocasionally-shaky tackling in the secondary.
MARYLAND THUS FAR:
* Maryland is 4-6 overall and 2-5 in the Big Ten.
* After getting off to a 3-1 start, including a win over Texas, injuries at the QB position and a leaky defense has sunk the Terps’ season onto the bowl game ropes.
The results:
Maryland 51, Texas 41
Maryland 63, Towson 17
Central Florida 38, Maryland 10
Maryland 31, Minnesota 24
Ohio State 62, Maryland 14
Northwestern 37, Maryland 21
* The Wildcats rushed for 238 and passed for 293. That’s the type of balance Michigan State can and should aim for in this game.
Wisconsin 38, Maryland 13
Maryland 42, Indiana 39
Rutgers 31, Maryland 24
Michigan 35, Maryland 10.
LAST WEEK: Lost to Michigan, 35-10
* Trailed 28-0 at halftime.
* Maryland outscored Michigan 10-7 in the second half. Some think Harbaugh throttled back against his former defensive coordinator, DJ Durkin, who is now in his second year as head coach of the Terps.
* Maryland ended up out-gaining Michigan 340-305.
* Maryland averaged 5.6 yards per rush, Michigan averaged 4.2.
Durkin on Michigan game:
“You saw us in the second half finally take a deep breath and play good football,” Durkin said. “We’re a team still trying to find ourself. Last week, we started a fifth-string quarterback against one of the best teams in the country and there was some tentativeness, like, ‘Can we do this? Is this actually going to work?’ We finally gained some (belief) and just played, but you can’t do it that way. So we’re a team in the process of learning and growing.
“I love our team. I love where we’re at. There’s a lot of talent and a lot of guys that will continue to be part of this program moving forward that I think we can win a lot of games with.
“There was no yelling and screaming in the locker room at halftime. It was just, ‘Okay, are you ready to stop shooting ourselves in the foot and just play our game?’ And a credit to our guys, they went out and did that in the second half.”
VS INDIANA, three weeks ago:
* Indiana out-gained Maryland 483-345, and had a 35-18 edge in first downs.
* “We made too many mistakes to beat Big Ten team on the road,” said Indiana coach Tom Allen. “You lose by three and you get a punt blocked and give up a 70-yard kickoff return that ends up in points.”
* OUT OF WHACK STAT: Early in the fourth quarter, Indiana was 10-of-18 on third down; Maryland was 2-of-6.
Maryland was living on big plays and leading 35-33 at the time. Indiana was controlling the ball and scoring, but not enough.
OTHER STUFF
The game will be televised by Fox at 4 pm. Former Spartan golfer Holly Sonders is the sideline correspondent.
* Maryland beat Michigan State 28-17 last year. Michigan State led 17-14 before former Maryland QB Perry Hills led TD drives of eight and 10 plays to rally the Terps to victory.
Maryland rushed for 247 yards.
* Maryland has started four different QBs this season, with Ryan Brand getting his first start last week against Michigan.
* Maryland has won games with three different QBs this year: Pigrome, Hill and Bortenschlager.
INDIANA PERSONNEL
QUARTERBACK
* Sophomore Kasim Hill and freshman Tyrrell Pigrome each went down with knee injuries early in the year.
QB 18 MAX BORTENSCHLAGER (6-3, 211, Soph.)
* Inconsistent. Not bad at times, but sprays it inaccurately at times, like a third-and-seven open hitch vs Indiana in the 2Q on third down. After that one, he came to the sideline and threw some practice passes.
* Got caught starting down a receiver and not going through route progression to an open sit-down route during a sack late in the Indiana game when Maryland could have iced the game with a first down.
* Five starts this year. Is 2-3 as a starter.
* Began the year as third-string QB.
* Was a two-star recruit, unranked out of Indianapolis Cathedral.
* Had two MAC offers. Committed a few days before signing day.
* Sat out the Michigan game with an undisclosed injury.
* Maryland coach DJ Durkin said Bortenschlager will start against Michigan State “if he’s healthy.”
“I anticipate he’ll be ready to go,” Durkin said.
* Went down with an undisclosed injury during a 31-24 loss to Rutgers on Nov. 4.
* 88 of 172 passes for 1,007 yards with 10 TDs and 5 INTs this year.
* Maryland has won two of his three starts this year: at Minnesota on Sept. 30 and at home against Indiana on Oct. 28.
* Was 10 of 16 for 171 yards with 2 TD and 1 INT passes in win over Indiana.
* Passed for 255 yards and 3 TD passes against Northwestern.
* Made first start of season at Minnesota, going 18 of 28 with three TDs.
“Max is calm and tough and executes well for us and communicates well,” Durkin said. “He improves each game. He has really taken ownership of the job.”
* INT on deep pass, first pass attempt of game vs Indiana, left a deep fade short.
QB RYAN BRAND (S5-11, 182, Soph., Detroit Jesuit)
* Began the season as the No. 5 QB.
* Went 16 of 35 for 136 yards and 1 TD against Michigan.
* Walk-on.
* Began his career as a scholarship player at Air Force.
* Was 8 of 12 for 68 yards against Rutgers in relief.
* Threw a game-tying TD pass late in the Rutgers game but it was called back for holding.
QB CALEB HENDERSON (6-3, 225, Jr., Burke, Va.)
* Transfer from North Carolina.
* Played a little bit against Ohio State.
* Is listed No. 2 this week, behind Bortenschlager.
* Has had lingering ankle injuries.
WIDE RECEIVERS
* 104 of Indiana’s 141 receptions are funneled to only two guys No. 1 (Moore) and No. 12 (Jacobs)
++ 15-yard TD pass to Jacobs vs Indiana was a quality pass play. Jacobs was in the slot, ran a slant-and-go with a wiggle to the post at the top of the route. Off of play action, sucked the safety in. Good route. Good zip on the ball, good pass, accurate. Good football.
* Maryland WRs get you with slippery, subtle little double-moves. They just kind of bend and twist them upfield while getting depth and speed.
WR 1 DJ MOORE (5-11, 215, Jr., Philadelphia)
* Was a four-star recruit, ranked No. 6 in Pennsylvania.
* Was a July commitment. Michigan State took a long look at him. He aimed to impress Michigan State coaches at Detroit Sound Mind Sound Body Camp but did not get offered.
* Had offers from BC, Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Pitt, Virginia, but not a great list for a four-star guy who has become one of the best in the Big Ten. He was available. But Michigan State has done pretty well with its WR recruiting in the meantime.
* Leads the Big Ten with 64 catches.
* Leads the Big Ten in TD catches with 8 and receiving yards with 857.
* Had five receptions against Michigan.
* Has receptions in 31 straight games.
* Great hands, runs great routes. That’ll do it.
“He made a phenomenal catch on Rashard (Fant) in the first half that set up one of their touchdowns,” said Indiana coach Tom Allen.
That was a deep go route for about 35 yards on a deep go route. Good ball from Bortenschlager from the right hash to the left corner, good air - not too much - good zip, not too much. Good football.
++ Crazy good timing to high point the ball and snatch it for corner fade 5-yard TD vs Indiana’s ant to put Maryland up 28-23.
* As a receiver, Moore is like Darrell Stewart, but more slippery and crazy-good hands, plus timing to high-point and snatch it.
Said BTN’s Glen Mason: “They have good players, they just don’t have an abundance of them. Teams know that the ball is going to DJ Moore and they still don’t stop him.”
What’s he’s good at:
* Terrific tight square-in route at about 7 yards, going HIGH for the catch over the middle and going the distance for a 20-yard TD.
Login to view embedded media
TAIVON JACOBS (5-11, 170, Sr.)
* Has scored a TD in four of his last five games.
* Has 15 catches for 189 yards in the last two weeks.
* Has 40 catches on the year for 482 yards and 5 TDs.
RUNNING BACKS
6 TY JOHNSON (5-10, 208, Jr.)
* Rushed for 67 yards against Michigan.
* Became the 13th player in Maryland history to surpass the 2,000-yard career mark last week.
*
RB 2 LORENZO HARRISON (5-8, 195, Soph.)
* Has rushed for at least 60 yards in four straight weeks.
* Had 81 yards rushing against Michigan.
* Is averaging 5.3 yards per carry over the last four games.
* Quick little squatty guy with acceleration.
RB 34 Jake Funk (5-11, 202)
* A pretty good short-yardage, downhill slant guy. Has four TDs.
TE 48 DERRICK HAYWARD (6-5, 240, Sr.)
- Didn’t give good effort vs Indiana DE inside their own 5-yard line, resulting in RB Ty Johnson getting tackled in end zone for safety. Indiana led 16-7.
OFFENSIVE LINE
* I think pass pro looks pretty good on the left side.
* Zone blocking inside in the ground game is good, above average. Little RBs hide and squirt around pretty well on the inside zone.
* Maryland has allowed 26 sacks, tied for 12th worst in the Big Ten.
++ The LT/LG combination of 55 Gray and 70 Christie got great movement on Indiana DT on an inside zone to cave the line of scrimmage for RB Lorenzo Harrison’s 14-yard TD run in the 1Q. (Jacob Robinson was the DT for Indiana on that play, 6-4, 285. Robinson isn’t bad).
++ And 70 and center 64 did it to Robinson during a crucial TD drive early in the QB in the red zone.
LT 55 DERWIN GRAY (6-5, 330, Jr.)
+ Moves his feet well, good size, but was beaten on a fast bull rush by Rashan Gary on third down in the first quarter last week.
LG SEAN CHRISTIE (6-4, 305, Jr.)
* Solid, not great. Got buckled a couple of times by Indiana’a Nate Hoff, but Hoff is pretty good.
C 64 BRENDAN MOORE (6-3, 302, Jr.)
* Lively.
* Solid player. Was solid against Hoff, too.
RG:
No opinion.
RT 58 DAMIAN PRINCE (6-3, 315, Jr.)
* Lacks range, and looked that way when giving up an edge rush sack in 1Q vs Indiana.
MARYLAND DEFENSE
* They have pretty good athletes in the front seven and they give effort. They have a high-energy second-year head coach who is a d-coordinator by trade and he has the front seven playing hard.
* Their weakness is in the pass rush and third down defense (which go together).
* Maryland rush defense is a strange study. They rank No. 12 in the Big Ten in rushing defense, allowing 173 yards per game.
* Maryland is 4-0 when holding teams under 100 yards rushing (beating Texas, Towson, Minnesota and Indiana).
* They held Indiana to 2.1 yards per rush.
Yards Allowed By Maryland:
Michigan rushed for 160
Rutgers … 239
Indiana … 73
Wisconsin … 215
Northwestern … 238
Ohio State … 281
Minnesota … 80
* The trend: Maryland gives up 215-plus against good-to-fair rushing attacks (Rutgers, Northwestern). But Maryland stopped Indiana and Minnesota cold. (Note, Indiana was without its two two RBs).
* My observation: The Terps aren’t consistently bad in run defense. It’s not like every play, every team carves them up. They are just badly inconsistent.
I’m not surprised they were able to stack up Indiana and Minnesota for little rushing yardage. Their d-linemen aren’t bad against the run. Their DTs are somewhat firm.
Their d-line personnel is full of guys like Demetrius Cooper and Kevin Williams (the Nebraska grad transfer who played for Michigan State last year). Not bad players, but not play-making plus players.
They don’t get owned at the line of scrimmage.
From what I can see, their problem in run defense is at linebacker. Their linebackers aren’t bad players, but the scheme calls for them to read and jump gaps and try to figure out where the play is going rather than playing one-gap and attacking upfield accordingly.
It’s okay to ask LBs to read and react in a two-gap scheme if the d-line is dominating. Maryland’s d-line is respectable, but not dominant.
Maryland does a lot of two-gapping up front. Their d-linemen aren’t bad, but they aren’t the type to dominate and move the line of scrimmage backward and command double-teams like needed from a two-gap scheme. When two-gapping, those guys are supposed to be knocking their man backward and giving the LBs a chance to pick and choose wisely.
* You Would Hope … that Michigan State is in the good-to-fair category and can rush for 200-plus. But there isn’t much in recent weeks to suggest that Michigan State is in that category.
Perhaps Michigan State can pass to set up the run and find success that way.
I will be interested to see if the toss sweep or jet shovel works against Maryland. It didn’t work against the speed of Ohio State and Penn State. And it didn’t work against Northwestern with their strong d-ends setting the edge. Michigan State figured that would be the case and didn’t try it very much. There’s a chance it could work better in this game, although not as good as it did against Minnesota.
* Maryland allowed 410 yards passing to Indiana. (Starter Peyton Ramsey was knocked out of the game and Richard Lagow replaced him and threw for 131 of the 410).
WHAT MICHIGAN DID:
* Michigan came out and tried to hammer the run on the opening drive. Michigan had a little bit of early success, but not much, with net gains on the ground of 4, 6, 2, 3 and 3 yards before an incompletion caused a punt.
The Takeaway: Maryland is supposed to have a bad rushing defense, and Michigan tried to test it. But Maryland passed the opening drive test.
In Michigan’s second drive, they hit inside ground attempts for gains of 3, 13, 9, 13, 3 and 2 (TD).
* Rutgers caught Maryland in a blitz and hit them with a flare route to the RB for a 23-yard TD pass to break a 24-24 tie with 7:30 left.
DEFENSIVE LINE:
* They lost standout d-end Jesse Aniebonam for the year to an ankle injury in the season opener against Maryland. He had 11 sacks last year.
They don’t have much depth at d-end and have had to shuffle guys around to try to make up for his loss.
* Their d-linemen didn’t get crushed by Michigan’s onslaught of interior runs in the first quarter, but they didn’t win, either. They barely held somewhat firm, but they certainly didn’t penetrate or push back any o-linemen.
* Sometimes they are a 30 front, sometimes a 4-3.
* Sometimes one-gapping, sometimes two-gapping.
* Sometimes two-gapping as part of four down linemen, which is rare these days (Iowa does it all the time, Miami does it some, so does Michigan).
* In order to two-gap, you need hosses. Their two-gapping d-linemen are functional but they aren’t the kind of hosses needed to enable a two-gapping scheme to work often enough. That’s probably why they don’t two-gap all the time, just some of the time at defensive tackle.
* They have solid, relatively quick, squatty tree stump type guys at d-tackle. Some teams can have trouble uprooting them.
From what we’ve seen in the last month or so from Michigan State on interior runs, there isn’t a lot of evidence that would suggest that Michigan State should have great success running inside against Maryland. If Michigan State does have success, that would be progress. It doesn’t take a great team to be able to run against Maryland. But the poor ones can’t. Where does Michigan State fit in that category? We’ll find out.
* Maryland d-tackles are solidly-built guys, playing the kind of football we expected to see from Enoch Smith.
DT 8 KINGSLEY OPARA (6-3, 300, Sr.)
* Good comb of strength and quickness. Upper body and lower body quickness.
+ Nice tackle for no gain vs Indiana in the first half. Blasted into the right guard like he was going to two-gap him, then he shucked him, got rid of him, threw him to the side and penetrated the backfield to make the wrap.
DT 5 CAVON WALKER (6-2, 278, Sr.)
* Quick with two-handed shuck when OG is expecting two-gap force.
DT 52 OLU OLUWATIMI (6-1, 198, Soph.)
* Not bad with the two-gap technique, coming off the bench.
DT 50 MBI TANYI (6-1, 296, Jr.)
* Allowed too much movement on a 9-yard TD run against Rutgers.
BUCK DE 92 CHANDLER BURKETT (6-3 ,254, Sr.)
* Will stand up in a 3-4 or play down in a 4-3.
* Runs pretty well for his size. Good job spying Indiana QB on the flush for a sack.
DE 59 Keiron Howard (6-3, 293, Soph.)
* Not bad, coming off the bench.
DE 96 Brett Kulka (6-4, 260, Jr.)
* Looks like a Brett Kulka. Ham and egger, not bad. Just kind of survives at d-end, but helps, plays a role.
LINEBACKERS
* They run and hurry around pretty well. Quickness isn’t a weakness with these guys.
MLB 1 JERMAINE CARTER (6-0, 228, Sr.)
* 6 TFLs this season.
* Plays with pop. Active, quick.
* Had 2 TFLS in victory over Indiana, and caused a fumble.
* Has 29 career TFLS, ranking No. 13 in program history.
* 8 Tackles against Michigan.
* 300 career tackles.
* Is on pace to lead Maryland in tackling for a third straight season.
* Accelerates downhill will good will, plays more firm than his size.
* Their best pass rusher. Learns the snap count, gets off the ball fast, accelerates off the edge, can chop, dip and during the corner. Had a sack vs Indiana but flagged for being off-side.
WLB 22 ISAIAH DAVIS (6-1, 238, Soph.)
* Active feet.
- Was misaligned for deep wheel route to RB by Indiana but Indiana QB missed the open receiver.
Nickel Back 25 ANTOINE BROOKS (5-11, 210, Soph.)
* He’s a “nickel back” but plays every down
* Leads team in TFLs with 8.5.
* 64 tackles on the year.
* Has two INTs.
PASS DEFENSE
* On third-and-medium, they like to blitz five, sometimes six. And it’s almost always man-to-man behind it.
Pick up that blitz and go to the shallow crossing route, or pick on a favorable matchup, or throw where the safety ain’t. Sounds simple, and it might be, if Indiana continues to be predictably man-to-man without a pass rush on third down.
SOMETHING TO WATCH FOR:
* What Michigan did: On third-and-medium, they went with shallow crossing routes. Harbaugh knows Durkin’s defense. Following his lead isn’t a bad idea.
* Durkin has been a proponent in recent years of playing cover-three in two-thirds of the field, and playing press-man in the other third. It’s a rare combination coverage.
This coverage is called “two-thirds” or “cover three lock.”
The Seattle Seahawks have done this in the past with Richard Sherman as the single man-to-man guy. NY Giants did it in 2016.
Harbaugh ran a crossing route to the man-to-man side, throwing to the TE late after he crossed to the flat, knowing there would be no one in the flat. Threw to TE Gentry for a gain of 20 to the 5-yard line to set up UM’s first TD.
The coaching manual says a three-level floor combination can beat it too, sending a receiver to the flat, a second receiver on an intermediate out, and a third receiver on a deeper out. Sounds simple, if you hae time to throw. Maryland usually gives you time to throw, that’s why they have to blitz on third downs.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
S 4 DARNELL SAVAGE (5-10, 191, Jr.)
*Quality play-maker.
+ Covers ground QUICKLY when covering the slot out.
* Blocked a punt and had an INT in the first half against Indiana that kept the Terps in the game when things didn’t start well.
* His punt block, which he scooped and scored, cut lead to 16-14.
+ Pass break up on third-and-8 on a shallow crosser for Grant Perry on the opening drive last week. Lots of early contact. Closed quickly. Could have been called pass interference.
* Can change direction, accelerate and tackle.
+ His INT vs Indiana came on a shallow crossing route in man-to-man. Returned it about 20 yards to the Indiana 14-yard line. Maryland scored on the next play to come back from a 14-0 deficit.
+ Had a pick six against Towson.
CB 17 TINO ELLIS 6-1, 193, Soph.
- Beaten deep for 34-yard TD by Simmie Cobbs of Indiana.
CB 7 JC JACKSON (6-1, 193, JR.)
* Supposed to be their best cover corner.
- Got away with pass interference in 1Q last week against Don Peoples Jones on a 15-yard curl. Jackson trying to play press, not very confident.
- Missed a tackle on Indiana RB on a swing pass, got bowled over, for a 25-yard TD pass play, giving Indiana a 14-0 lead.
(21 21 Ravon Davis, 5-10, 177, Jr.)
- Allowed 10-yard TD fade to Indiana’s Simmie Cobbs to cut Maryland’s lead to 42-39 with 8:00 to go.
S 10 JOSH WOODS (6-1, 204, Sr.)
No opinion.
But Maryland beat writer Scott Greene says he's solid.
(S 24 Quantrezz Knight 6-0, 197, Soph.)
- Beaten for 35-yard TD pass on No. 3 post bener to WR Juke Timian of Indiana, as Maryland fell behind 23-14. Not bad feet by Knight. Good pass and catch.
SPECIAL TEAMS
* Maryland has four blocked kicks this year, the most of any team in the Big Ten and No. 6 in the nation.
* Rank in top three in Big Ten in punt return average and kick return average.
* Attempted a fake punt last week against Michigan, failed, and helped cause the game to get away from the Terps.
* Allowed a blocked punt last week against Michigan.
* Blocked a punt and had a kickoff return for 70 yards against Indiana, and blocked an extra point.
* Maryland’s kickers are 7 of 12 for the year, No. 13 in the Big Ten in FG accuracy. A grad transfer from Georgetown has taken the job and is 6 of 9.
* Kickoffs reach the 5-yard line.
ADD IT ALL UP
* It’s kind of late in the season for us to waiting and wondering to see what Michigan State is made of. Some of us have already concluded that Michigan State is a good, over-achieving, 9-3 team.
Not so fast my friends. Need to get this work done. Need to avoid getting bogged down in the run, as was the case against Indiana. But need to find balance that they didn’t have against Northwestern. That’s a delicate situation for MSU’s offense.
Wide receiver DJ Moore is tough to cover, and even if you cover him, he can go up and snatch it. He can carry an offense the way the WR did for Minnesota for 8 minutes late in that game, whatever his name was. Michigan State has good, solid coverage DBs, but Moore is at another level. So you have to be concerned about his potential to catch fire if Bortenschlager is on, especially if MSU’s pass rush fails.
Overall, Michigan State has too many edges in this game, and should be fine. In the process, if Michigan State can re-establish the run game, which has been missing since October, that would not only almost ensure victory but it would be a good late-season building block, building toward a challenging road game next week and bowl season.
As for MSU’s run defense, it’s a challenge-your-manhood game. Maryland has a good inside zone scheme. Michigan State was devoured by a better one last week, and didn’t show up (in their gaps) in many respects last week. Whatever it was that caused the tardy, distracted nature of last week’s defensive debacle obviously needs to be eradicated for this game.
It’s a game. Just like I told you the Indiana game would be. Just like I told you the Northwestern game would be. Maryland is better than Indiana, not as good as Northwestern. I realize that the transitive property doesn’t pertain to college football, but Maryland has some excited kids playing for an energetic second-year coach. No one for their team is quitting. They’ll bring some effort, enthusiasm and a smattering of talent. Just ask Indiana.
By Jim Comparoni
Publisher, SpartanMag.com
EAST LANSING - The consolation after last week’s loss at Ohio State was the idea that Michigan State can and should win the last two games and get to 9-3.
A lot of people, including myself, are talking about 9-3 like it’s almost a done deal.
Well, it’s not.
Maryland isn’t as bad as they played last week against Michigan. They had a fifth-string QB last week, and he wasn’t capable of throwing.
They should have Max Bortenschlager back at QB this week. He began the year as a fourth-string QB but he is decently functional. He has started five games. He is 2-3 as a starter with wins over Indiana and Minnesota.
I suspect if you polled Indiana players as to which team is better, Maryland or Michigan State, you might get a 50-50 split.
I think Indiana d-linemen would tell you that Maryland’s run game is better than Michigan State’s.
As good as MSU’s WRs are, I think Indiana CB Rashard Fant would tell you that no one for Michigan State is as good as Maryland WR D.J. Moore.
Maryland’s defensive front is active and sturdy. I have questions about the way they fill their linebackers. And they are bad on third down because their pass rush is not good and you can plan for man-to-man coverage.
But your QB needs to be accurate.
The weather man says (in my George Kell voice) it’s going to be about 39 degrees and raining throughout the game.
I hate that for the fans. Snowfall would be better. There’s not much worse than 30s and rain. But Mark Dantonio said on his radio show last night that he wants Michigan State fans to “gear up” and show up. They need it, for senior day.
This is not a lead-pipe cinch victory.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST
Michigan State was terrible against the run last week against Ohio State. Like I said in the Skull Session, when going back over the film, I didn’t think Michigan State was physically manhandled or athletically blown out.
I thought Michigan State had problems with misalignment way too often. Too often with five guys in three gaps on one side of the line, and two guys in four gaps on the other side.
Dantonio said there were problems getting calls in, getting calls relayed, problems with the tempo that they didn’t expect.
It led to “being out-flanked” as Dantonio said.
That’s a good term. It’s a macro term. On more of a mico level, the simplest way I can say it is five guys in three gaps over here and three guys trying to cover four or five gaps over there.
Sometimes Ohio State scooped or reached Michigan State d-linemen and carved them out of a gap (which was the case on the first long TD run of 47 yards).
Dantonio felt OSU moved the line of scrimmage vs Michigan State defensive tackles. He felt Michigan State didn’t play double-teams on the inside zone “as well as they had (in other games).” I would agree with that but when I watched it again, Michigan State wasn’t as weak in that area as I expected. And like I said in the V-Cast, Mike Panasiuk was solid all game long.
Raequan Williams gave up a foot or two a few more times than usual. And Kyonta Stallworth was not good enough. So the film work and realization will be good for those guys. And this weeks marks the next challenge, because Maryland will challenge you with a good inside zone run game.
Michigan State needs to stop the inside zone, like they did against Western Michigan, Northwestern and several teams since then. Last week’s game should help Michigan State focus on the task of stopping the run this week. Michigan State is having its manhood challenged this week and I expect the run defense to respond.
Maryland ran the ball better against Indiana than Michigan State did. And they ran it a little better against Michigan than Michigan State did (although Michigan called off the dogs).
Maryland’s Rushing Offense:
180 vs Michigan
167 vs Rutgers
174 vs Indiana
143 vs Wisconsin
85 vs Northwestern
50 vs Ohio State
262 vs Minnesota
* The trend: Maryland has settled in as a rushing offense that gets somewhere between 150 and 175 against solid Big Ten teams.
* Their run game is heavy on inside zone, with little RBs squirting around with toughness, kind of like Western Michigan or Minnesota. Michigan State has matched up well against these type of run games.
After last week’s OSU film, Maryland will have some belief that they can do the same vs Michigan State. Meanwhile, Michigan State will be out to re-prove their manhood.
The good news for Michigan State: Maryland isn’t as varied as Ohio State (and of course not as talented).
Maryland doesn’t feature the QB run in the offense when Bortenschlager is the QB (but they do feature it when Brand is the QB because that’s about all he can do).
But they vary it a little bit with quick-action pull guards on counters.
* Maryland CAN go uptempo. From what I’ve seen, they prefer to do it in the red zone. But they can go to it at anytime, and they do it pretty well.
After seeing MSU’s struggles with it last week, Maryland will certainly test Michigan State with it this week.
Overall, Maryland’s run game is pretty good. Their QB, if it’s Bortenschlager, is functional, probably a little better right now than Iowa’s QB was in early October, a little better than Michigan’s O’Korn. He’s not bad, and his WRs run better routes than what O’Korn had to work with. Maryland’s WRs are better-coached than Michigan’s; they run tricky routes with slippery moves at the top of their routes.
Maryland can contain a one-dimensional run game. If Michigan State runs 70 pct of the time like they did against Indiana, they could get into a struggle in this game.
Maryland doesn’t have a good pass rush. Brian Lewerke will have time to throw and avenues to throw. If he’s good-to-solid, Michigan State should be okay.
But don’t miss field goals, like you did against Northwestern. Don’t give Maryland a blocked punt and a blocked PAT like they had against Indiana. Don’t allow strange, game-changing plays on special teams, and you should be okay.
But it’s going to take 60 minutes of football to win. Michigan State struggled with Indiana, ended up struggling with Minnesota. Maryland is in a similar category. Michigan State was capable of losing to Indiana and, as it turned out, Michigan State had some scares with Minnesota. If Michigan State doesn’t improve and build upon what they established and learned in the last three weeks against Northwestern, Penn State and Ohio State, then they could find themselves in another struggle.
But I think Michigan State will be recollected and aimed for a strong senior day showing.
REASONS FOR MSU TO BE CONCERNED:
* Wide receiver DJ Moore is truly outstanding. Michigan State had trouble late in the game with Minnesota’s top WR, couldn’t get a handle on him. Moore is better.
* Maryland’s run game is good. Not great. But good.
Probably better than Northwestern’s because I think their inside zone blocking is better than Northwestern’s, although Maryland’s RBs aren’t as good as NU’s Justin Jackson.
* Maryland ranks No. 2 in the Big Ten in turnover margin at +4.
* Maryland ranks No. 5 in the Big Ten in rushing offense at 173.3 yards per game and No. 4 in the Big Ten in yards per carry average at 4.6.
* Maryland is ranked No. 4 in the Big Ten in scoring offense (however just No. 11 in total offense.)
This quote from Indiana coach Tom Allen after the Hoosiers’ 42-39 loss to Maryland three weeks ago:
“I will say this, I will be very transparent: What they do, and what they did last year, it stresses our athleticism in spots. It does. And they have a lot of speed. You try your best to protect that without exposing guys. Sometimes that holds up and sometimes it doesn’t.
“But they run the ball so well that you have to make sure you get enough hats on the run.
“To me it’s a matter of them isolating some guys and the other guys won those one-on-ones. I just know that their speed makes it hard us and that’s just being honest.”
* Maryland has a penchant for making big plays on special teams.
* The Terps rank No. 3 in the Big Ten in kickoff return average and No. 3 in the Big Ten in punt return average.
WHERE MARYLAND IS WEAK:
* Third-down defense and third-down offense. Dead last in the Big Ten in both categories.
* Their injuries at QB obviously hurts them on third down.
* On defense, they are allowing teams to convert 49 pct on third down. (By familiar comparison Michigan State is No. 7 at 33 pct. And MSU’s offense is No. 3 in the Big Ten on third down at 41 pct, and had been No. 1 in the nation in third-and-eight or more prior to last week).
On defense, they are hurt by a lack of pass rush. They have only six sacks in Big Ten games, dead last in the conference (Michigan State has 16, tied for seventh).
[Maryland has 15 sacks on the year overall, ranked No. 12 in the Big Ten.]
* Pass defense: No. 13 in the Big Ten at 247 yards per game, having allowed a conference-high 20 TD passes.
* No. 14 in the Big Ten in pass efficiency defense.
* Maryland dead last in scoring defense in the Big Ten at 36.2 points per game.
WHERE MSU CAN HAVE SUCCESS:
* Offensive balance. Need to probe the run, as much as that irks people, to get the attention of linebackers and safeties for your pass game. But don’t spend all day trying to establish the run. There’s a delicate balance there.
Michigan spent a drive or two with mediocre results in the interior run game but eventually got it on track, and set up play-action passing with it.
Michigan State is not run blocking as well as Michigan right now. Michigan went with heavy formations and was dedicated to making it work.
Michigan State will do some of that, but I doubt Michigan State will want to try to make an afternoon out of it. Need balance.
* Michigan State should have time to throw. MSU’s pass protection failed last week against a good, charged-up OSU pass rush. Maryland’s pass rush is not good. Michigan State has been working all week with last week’s humbling experience in mind. That means they will be working to try to get up to the OSU level. That should yield quality pass pro this week. That’s the way this stuff usually works in college football.
* Maryland plays a lot of man-to-man, probably too much.
They blitz a lot on third down but still have trouble getting home. That leaves their man-to-man out to dry.
The combination of play-action passing on first or second down, and picking up blitzes on third down SHOULD give QB Brian Lewerke open avenues with which to work.
Lewerke’s ability to flush out and elongate plays and continue to read downfield also matches up well with this team that has a substandard pass rush, merely average pass defense and then ocasionally-shaky tackling in the secondary.
MARYLAND THUS FAR:
* Maryland is 4-6 overall and 2-5 in the Big Ten.
* After getting off to a 3-1 start, including a win over Texas, injuries at the QB position and a leaky defense has sunk the Terps’ season onto the bowl game ropes.
The results:
Maryland 51, Texas 41
Maryland 63, Towson 17
Central Florida 38, Maryland 10
Maryland 31, Minnesota 24
Ohio State 62, Maryland 14
Northwestern 37, Maryland 21
* The Wildcats rushed for 238 and passed for 293. That’s the type of balance Michigan State can and should aim for in this game.
Wisconsin 38, Maryland 13
Maryland 42, Indiana 39
Rutgers 31, Maryland 24
Michigan 35, Maryland 10.
LAST WEEK: Lost to Michigan, 35-10
* Trailed 28-0 at halftime.
* Maryland outscored Michigan 10-7 in the second half. Some think Harbaugh throttled back against his former defensive coordinator, DJ Durkin, who is now in his second year as head coach of the Terps.
* Maryland ended up out-gaining Michigan 340-305.
* Maryland averaged 5.6 yards per rush, Michigan averaged 4.2.
Durkin on Michigan game:
“You saw us in the second half finally take a deep breath and play good football,” Durkin said. “We’re a team still trying to find ourself. Last week, we started a fifth-string quarterback against one of the best teams in the country and there was some tentativeness, like, ‘Can we do this? Is this actually going to work?’ We finally gained some (belief) and just played, but you can’t do it that way. So we’re a team in the process of learning and growing.
“I love our team. I love where we’re at. There’s a lot of talent and a lot of guys that will continue to be part of this program moving forward that I think we can win a lot of games with.
“There was no yelling and screaming in the locker room at halftime. It was just, ‘Okay, are you ready to stop shooting ourselves in the foot and just play our game?’ And a credit to our guys, they went out and did that in the second half.”
VS INDIANA, three weeks ago:
* Indiana out-gained Maryland 483-345, and had a 35-18 edge in first downs.
* “We made too many mistakes to beat Big Ten team on the road,” said Indiana coach Tom Allen. “You lose by three and you get a punt blocked and give up a 70-yard kickoff return that ends up in points.”
* OUT OF WHACK STAT: Early in the fourth quarter, Indiana was 10-of-18 on third down; Maryland was 2-of-6.
Maryland was living on big plays and leading 35-33 at the time. Indiana was controlling the ball and scoring, but not enough.
OTHER STUFF
The game will be televised by Fox at 4 pm. Former Spartan golfer Holly Sonders is the sideline correspondent.
* Maryland beat Michigan State 28-17 last year. Michigan State led 17-14 before former Maryland QB Perry Hills led TD drives of eight and 10 plays to rally the Terps to victory.
Maryland rushed for 247 yards.
* Maryland has started four different QBs this season, with Ryan Brand getting his first start last week against Michigan.
* Maryland has won games with three different QBs this year: Pigrome, Hill and Bortenschlager.
INDIANA PERSONNEL
QUARTERBACK
* Sophomore Kasim Hill and freshman Tyrrell Pigrome each went down with knee injuries early in the year.
QB 18 MAX BORTENSCHLAGER (6-3, 211, Soph.)
* Inconsistent. Not bad at times, but sprays it inaccurately at times, like a third-and-seven open hitch vs Indiana in the 2Q on third down. After that one, he came to the sideline and threw some practice passes.
* Got caught starting down a receiver and not going through route progression to an open sit-down route during a sack late in the Indiana game when Maryland could have iced the game with a first down.
* Five starts this year. Is 2-3 as a starter.
* Began the year as third-string QB.
* Was a two-star recruit, unranked out of Indianapolis Cathedral.
* Had two MAC offers. Committed a few days before signing day.
* Sat out the Michigan game with an undisclosed injury.
* Maryland coach DJ Durkin said Bortenschlager will start against Michigan State “if he’s healthy.”
“I anticipate he’ll be ready to go,” Durkin said.
* Went down with an undisclosed injury during a 31-24 loss to Rutgers on Nov. 4.
* 88 of 172 passes for 1,007 yards with 10 TDs and 5 INTs this year.
* Maryland has won two of his three starts this year: at Minnesota on Sept. 30 and at home against Indiana on Oct. 28.
* Was 10 of 16 for 171 yards with 2 TD and 1 INT passes in win over Indiana.
* Passed for 255 yards and 3 TD passes against Northwestern.
* Made first start of season at Minnesota, going 18 of 28 with three TDs.
“Max is calm and tough and executes well for us and communicates well,” Durkin said. “He improves each game. He has really taken ownership of the job.”
* INT on deep pass, first pass attempt of game vs Indiana, left a deep fade short.
QB RYAN BRAND (S5-11, 182, Soph., Detroit Jesuit)
* Began the season as the No. 5 QB.
* Went 16 of 35 for 136 yards and 1 TD against Michigan.
* Walk-on.
* Began his career as a scholarship player at Air Force.
* Was 8 of 12 for 68 yards against Rutgers in relief.
* Threw a game-tying TD pass late in the Rutgers game but it was called back for holding.
QB CALEB HENDERSON (6-3, 225, Jr., Burke, Va.)
* Transfer from North Carolina.
* Played a little bit against Ohio State.
* Is listed No. 2 this week, behind Bortenschlager.
* Has had lingering ankle injuries.
WIDE RECEIVERS
* 104 of Indiana’s 141 receptions are funneled to only two guys No. 1 (Moore) and No. 12 (Jacobs)
++ 15-yard TD pass to Jacobs vs Indiana was a quality pass play. Jacobs was in the slot, ran a slant-and-go with a wiggle to the post at the top of the route. Off of play action, sucked the safety in. Good route. Good zip on the ball, good pass, accurate. Good football.
* Maryland WRs get you with slippery, subtle little double-moves. They just kind of bend and twist them upfield while getting depth and speed.
WR 1 DJ MOORE (5-11, 215, Jr., Philadelphia)
* Was a four-star recruit, ranked No. 6 in Pennsylvania.
* Was a July commitment. Michigan State took a long look at him. He aimed to impress Michigan State coaches at Detroit Sound Mind Sound Body Camp but did not get offered.
* Had offers from BC, Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Pitt, Virginia, but not a great list for a four-star guy who has become one of the best in the Big Ten. He was available. But Michigan State has done pretty well with its WR recruiting in the meantime.
* Leads the Big Ten with 64 catches.
* Leads the Big Ten in TD catches with 8 and receiving yards with 857.
* Had five receptions against Michigan.
* Has receptions in 31 straight games.
* Great hands, runs great routes. That’ll do it.
“He made a phenomenal catch on Rashard (Fant) in the first half that set up one of their touchdowns,” said Indiana coach Tom Allen.
That was a deep go route for about 35 yards on a deep go route. Good ball from Bortenschlager from the right hash to the left corner, good air - not too much - good zip, not too much. Good football.
++ Crazy good timing to high point the ball and snatch it for corner fade 5-yard TD vs Indiana’s ant to put Maryland up 28-23.
* As a receiver, Moore is like Darrell Stewart, but more slippery and crazy-good hands, plus timing to high-point and snatch it.
Said BTN’s Glen Mason: “They have good players, they just don’t have an abundance of them. Teams know that the ball is going to DJ Moore and they still don’t stop him.”
What’s he’s good at:
* Terrific tight square-in route at about 7 yards, going HIGH for the catch over the middle and going the distance for a 20-yard TD.
Login to view embedded media
TAIVON JACOBS (5-11, 170, Sr.)
* Has scored a TD in four of his last five games.
* Has 15 catches for 189 yards in the last two weeks.
* Has 40 catches on the year for 482 yards and 5 TDs.
RUNNING BACKS
6 TY JOHNSON (5-10, 208, Jr.)
* Rushed for 67 yards against Michigan.
* Became the 13th player in Maryland history to surpass the 2,000-yard career mark last week.
*
RB 2 LORENZO HARRISON (5-8, 195, Soph.)
* Has rushed for at least 60 yards in four straight weeks.
* Had 81 yards rushing against Michigan.
* Is averaging 5.3 yards per carry over the last four games.
* Quick little squatty guy with acceleration.
RB 34 Jake Funk (5-11, 202)
* A pretty good short-yardage, downhill slant guy. Has four TDs.
TE 48 DERRICK HAYWARD (6-5, 240, Sr.)
- Didn’t give good effort vs Indiana DE inside their own 5-yard line, resulting in RB Ty Johnson getting tackled in end zone for safety. Indiana led 16-7.
OFFENSIVE LINE
* I think pass pro looks pretty good on the left side.
* Zone blocking inside in the ground game is good, above average. Little RBs hide and squirt around pretty well on the inside zone.
* Maryland has allowed 26 sacks, tied for 12th worst in the Big Ten.
++ The LT/LG combination of 55 Gray and 70 Christie got great movement on Indiana DT on an inside zone to cave the line of scrimmage for RB Lorenzo Harrison’s 14-yard TD run in the 1Q. (Jacob Robinson was the DT for Indiana on that play, 6-4, 285. Robinson isn’t bad).
++ And 70 and center 64 did it to Robinson during a crucial TD drive early in the QB in the red zone.
LT 55 DERWIN GRAY (6-5, 330, Jr.)
+ Moves his feet well, good size, but was beaten on a fast bull rush by Rashan Gary on third down in the first quarter last week.
LG SEAN CHRISTIE (6-4, 305, Jr.)
* Solid, not great. Got buckled a couple of times by Indiana’a Nate Hoff, but Hoff is pretty good.
C 64 BRENDAN MOORE (6-3, 302, Jr.)
* Lively.
* Solid player. Was solid against Hoff, too.
RG:
No opinion.
RT 58 DAMIAN PRINCE (6-3, 315, Jr.)
* Lacks range, and looked that way when giving up an edge rush sack in 1Q vs Indiana.
MARYLAND DEFENSE
* They have pretty good athletes in the front seven and they give effort. They have a high-energy second-year head coach who is a d-coordinator by trade and he has the front seven playing hard.
* Their weakness is in the pass rush and third down defense (which go together).
* Maryland rush defense is a strange study. They rank No. 12 in the Big Ten in rushing defense, allowing 173 yards per game.
* Maryland is 4-0 when holding teams under 100 yards rushing (beating Texas, Towson, Minnesota and Indiana).
* They held Indiana to 2.1 yards per rush.
Yards Allowed By Maryland:
Michigan rushed for 160
Rutgers … 239
Indiana … 73
Wisconsin … 215
Northwestern … 238
Ohio State … 281
Minnesota … 80
* The trend: Maryland gives up 215-plus against good-to-fair rushing attacks (Rutgers, Northwestern). But Maryland stopped Indiana and Minnesota cold. (Note, Indiana was without its two two RBs).
* My observation: The Terps aren’t consistently bad in run defense. It’s not like every play, every team carves them up. They are just badly inconsistent.
I’m not surprised they were able to stack up Indiana and Minnesota for little rushing yardage. Their d-linemen aren’t bad against the run. Their DTs are somewhat firm.
Their d-line personnel is full of guys like Demetrius Cooper and Kevin Williams (the Nebraska grad transfer who played for Michigan State last year). Not bad players, but not play-making plus players.
They don’t get owned at the line of scrimmage.
From what I can see, their problem in run defense is at linebacker. Their linebackers aren’t bad players, but the scheme calls for them to read and jump gaps and try to figure out where the play is going rather than playing one-gap and attacking upfield accordingly.
It’s okay to ask LBs to read and react in a two-gap scheme if the d-line is dominating. Maryland’s d-line is respectable, but not dominant.
Maryland does a lot of two-gapping up front. Their d-linemen aren’t bad, but they aren’t the type to dominate and move the line of scrimmage backward and command double-teams like needed from a two-gap scheme. When two-gapping, those guys are supposed to be knocking their man backward and giving the LBs a chance to pick and choose wisely.
* You Would Hope … that Michigan State is in the good-to-fair category and can rush for 200-plus. But there isn’t much in recent weeks to suggest that Michigan State is in that category.
Perhaps Michigan State can pass to set up the run and find success that way.
I will be interested to see if the toss sweep or jet shovel works against Maryland. It didn’t work against the speed of Ohio State and Penn State. And it didn’t work against Northwestern with their strong d-ends setting the edge. Michigan State figured that would be the case and didn’t try it very much. There’s a chance it could work better in this game, although not as good as it did against Minnesota.
* Maryland allowed 410 yards passing to Indiana. (Starter Peyton Ramsey was knocked out of the game and Richard Lagow replaced him and threw for 131 of the 410).
WHAT MICHIGAN DID:
* Michigan came out and tried to hammer the run on the opening drive. Michigan had a little bit of early success, but not much, with net gains on the ground of 4, 6, 2, 3 and 3 yards before an incompletion caused a punt.
The Takeaway: Maryland is supposed to have a bad rushing defense, and Michigan tried to test it. But Maryland passed the opening drive test.
In Michigan’s second drive, they hit inside ground attempts for gains of 3, 13, 9, 13, 3 and 2 (TD).
* Rutgers caught Maryland in a blitz and hit them with a flare route to the RB for a 23-yard TD pass to break a 24-24 tie with 7:30 left.
DEFENSIVE LINE:
* They lost standout d-end Jesse Aniebonam for the year to an ankle injury in the season opener against Maryland. He had 11 sacks last year.
They don’t have much depth at d-end and have had to shuffle guys around to try to make up for his loss.
* Their d-linemen didn’t get crushed by Michigan’s onslaught of interior runs in the first quarter, but they didn’t win, either. They barely held somewhat firm, but they certainly didn’t penetrate or push back any o-linemen.
* Sometimes they are a 30 front, sometimes a 4-3.
* Sometimes one-gapping, sometimes two-gapping.
* Sometimes two-gapping as part of four down linemen, which is rare these days (Iowa does it all the time, Miami does it some, so does Michigan).
* In order to two-gap, you need hosses. Their two-gapping d-linemen are functional but they aren’t the kind of hosses needed to enable a two-gapping scheme to work often enough. That’s probably why they don’t two-gap all the time, just some of the time at defensive tackle.
* They have solid, relatively quick, squatty tree stump type guys at d-tackle. Some teams can have trouble uprooting them.
From what we’ve seen in the last month or so from Michigan State on interior runs, there isn’t a lot of evidence that would suggest that Michigan State should have great success running inside against Maryland. If Michigan State does have success, that would be progress. It doesn’t take a great team to be able to run against Maryland. But the poor ones can’t. Where does Michigan State fit in that category? We’ll find out.
* Maryland d-tackles are solidly-built guys, playing the kind of football we expected to see from Enoch Smith.
DT 8 KINGSLEY OPARA (6-3, 300, Sr.)
* Good comb of strength and quickness. Upper body and lower body quickness.
+ Nice tackle for no gain vs Indiana in the first half. Blasted into the right guard like he was going to two-gap him, then he shucked him, got rid of him, threw him to the side and penetrated the backfield to make the wrap.
DT 5 CAVON WALKER (6-2, 278, Sr.)
* Quick with two-handed shuck when OG is expecting two-gap force.
DT 52 OLU OLUWATIMI (6-1, 198, Soph.)
* Not bad with the two-gap technique, coming off the bench.
DT 50 MBI TANYI (6-1, 296, Jr.)
* Allowed too much movement on a 9-yard TD run against Rutgers.
BUCK DE 92 CHANDLER BURKETT (6-3 ,254, Sr.)
* Will stand up in a 3-4 or play down in a 4-3.
* Runs pretty well for his size. Good job spying Indiana QB on the flush for a sack.
DE 59 Keiron Howard (6-3, 293, Soph.)
* Not bad, coming off the bench.
DE 96 Brett Kulka (6-4, 260, Jr.)
* Looks like a Brett Kulka. Ham and egger, not bad. Just kind of survives at d-end, but helps, plays a role.
LINEBACKERS
* They run and hurry around pretty well. Quickness isn’t a weakness with these guys.
MLB 1 JERMAINE CARTER (6-0, 228, Sr.)
* 6 TFLs this season.
* Plays with pop. Active, quick.
* Had 2 TFLS in victory over Indiana, and caused a fumble.
* Has 29 career TFLS, ranking No. 13 in program history.
* 8 Tackles against Michigan.
* 300 career tackles.
* Is on pace to lead Maryland in tackling for a third straight season.
* Accelerates downhill will good will, plays more firm than his size.
* Their best pass rusher. Learns the snap count, gets off the ball fast, accelerates off the edge, can chop, dip and during the corner. Had a sack vs Indiana but flagged for being off-side.
WLB 22 ISAIAH DAVIS (6-1, 238, Soph.)
* Active feet.
- Was misaligned for deep wheel route to RB by Indiana but Indiana QB missed the open receiver.
Nickel Back 25 ANTOINE BROOKS (5-11, 210, Soph.)
* He’s a “nickel back” but plays every down
* Leads team in TFLs with 8.5.
* 64 tackles on the year.
* Has two INTs.
PASS DEFENSE
* On third-and-medium, they like to blitz five, sometimes six. And it’s almost always man-to-man behind it.
Pick up that blitz and go to the shallow crossing route, or pick on a favorable matchup, or throw where the safety ain’t. Sounds simple, and it might be, if Indiana continues to be predictably man-to-man without a pass rush on third down.
SOMETHING TO WATCH FOR:
* What Michigan did: On third-and-medium, they went with shallow crossing routes. Harbaugh knows Durkin’s defense. Following his lead isn’t a bad idea.
* Durkin has been a proponent in recent years of playing cover-three in two-thirds of the field, and playing press-man in the other third. It’s a rare combination coverage.
This coverage is called “two-thirds” or “cover three lock.”
The Seattle Seahawks have done this in the past with Richard Sherman as the single man-to-man guy. NY Giants did it in 2016.
Harbaugh ran a crossing route to the man-to-man side, throwing to the TE late after he crossed to the flat, knowing there would be no one in the flat. Threw to TE Gentry for a gain of 20 to the 5-yard line to set up UM’s first TD.
The coaching manual says a three-level floor combination can beat it too, sending a receiver to the flat, a second receiver on an intermediate out, and a third receiver on a deeper out. Sounds simple, if you hae time to throw. Maryland usually gives you time to throw, that’s why they have to blitz on third downs.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
S 4 DARNELL SAVAGE (5-10, 191, Jr.)
*Quality play-maker.
+ Covers ground QUICKLY when covering the slot out.
* Blocked a punt and had an INT in the first half against Indiana that kept the Terps in the game when things didn’t start well.
* His punt block, which he scooped and scored, cut lead to 16-14.
+ Pass break up on third-and-8 on a shallow crosser for Grant Perry on the opening drive last week. Lots of early contact. Closed quickly. Could have been called pass interference.
* Can change direction, accelerate and tackle.
+ His INT vs Indiana came on a shallow crossing route in man-to-man. Returned it about 20 yards to the Indiana 14-yard line. Maryland scored on the next play to come back from a 14-0 deficit.
+ Had a pick six against Towson.
CB 17 TINO ELLIS 6-1, 193, Soph.
- Beaten deep for 34-yard TD by Simmie Cobbs of Indiana.
CB 7 JC JACKSON (6-1, 193, JR.)
* Supposed to be their best cover corner.
- Got away with pass interference in 1Q last week against Don Peoples Jones on a 15-yard curl. Jackson trying to play press, not very confident.
- Missed a tackle on Indiana RB on a swing pass, got bowled over, for a 25-yard TD pass play, giving Indiana a 14-0 lead.
(21 21 Ravon Davis, 5-10, 177, Jr.)
- Allowed 10-yard TD fade to Indiana’s Simmie Cobbs to cut Maryland’s lead to 42-39 with 8:00 to go.
S 10 JOSH WOODS (6-1, 204, Sr.)
No opinion.
But Maryland beat writer Scott Greene says he's solid.
(S 24 Quantrezz Knight 6-0, 197, Soph.)
- Beaten for 35-yard TD pass on No. 3 post bener to WR Juke Timian of Indiana, as Maryland fell behind 23-14. Not bad feet by Knight. Good pass and catch.
SPECIAL TEAMS
* Maryland has four blocked kicks this year, the most of any team in the Big Ten and No. 6 in the nation.
* Rank in top three in Big Ten in punt return average and kick return average.
* Attempted a fake punt last week against Michigan, failed, and helped cause the game to get away from the Terps.
* Allowed a blocked punt last week against Michigan.
* Blocked a punt and had a kickoff return for 70 yards against Indiana, and blocked an extra point.
* Maryland’s kickers are 7 of 12 for the year, No. 13 in the Big Ten in FG accuracy. A grad transfer from Georgetown has taken the job and is 6 of 9.
* Kickoffs reach the 5-yard line.
ADD IT ALL UP
* It’s kind of late in the season for us to waiting and wondering to see what Michigan State is made of. Some of us have already concluded that Michigan State is a good, over-achieving, 9-3 team.
Not so fast my friends. Need to get this work done. Need to avoid getting bogged down in the run, as was the case against Indiana. But need to find balance that they didn’t have against Northwestern. That’s a delicate situation for MSU’s offense.
Wide receiver DJ Moore is tough to cover, and even if you cover him, he can go up and snatch it. He can carry an offense the way the WR did for Minnesota for 8 minutes late in that game, whatever his name was. Michigan State has good, solid coverage DBs, but Moore is at another level. So you have to be concerned about his potential to catch fire if Bortenschlager is on, especially if MSU’s pass rush fails.
Overall, Michigan State has too many edges in this game, and should be fine. In the process, if Michigan State can re-establish the run game, which has been missing since October, that would not only almost ensure victory but it would be a good late-season building block, building toward a challenging road game next week and bowl season.
As for MSU’s run defense, it’s a challenge-your-manhood game. Maryland has a good inside zone scheme. Michigan State was devoured by a better one last week, and didn’t show up (in their gaps) in many respects last week. Whatever it was that caused the tardy, distracted nature of last week’s defensive debacle obviously needs to be eradicated for this game.
It’s a game. Just like I told you the Indiana game would be. Just like I told you the Northwestern game would be. Maryland is better than Indiana, not as good as Northwestern. I realize that the transitive property doesn’t pertain to college football, but Maryland has some excited kids playing for an energetic second-year coach. No one for their team is quitting. They’ll bring some effort, enthusiasm and a smattering of talent. Just ask Indiana.
Monday Morning Football: Dantonio with the latest
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 6 Replies
Monday Morning Football
Jim Comparoni • SpartanMag.com
@JimComparoni
EAST LANSING - Michigan State’s surprisingly strong first three quarters of the season won’t do the program much good if the Spartans don’t capitalize with two more wins and a shiny 9-3 regular season record.
Moving on from a 48-3 loss in Saturday's a de facto Big Ten semifinal game at Ohio State is the first and last order of business at the Skandalaris Center today, with a game against Maryland (4-6) looming in the final home game of the year.
“We’ve got to get ourselves ready to play our next game and get win No. 8,” Mark Dantonio said during Sunday’s weekly teleconference.
In the weekly teleconference, which usually lasts about 15 minutes, Dantonio rarely talks about the upcoming game, and saves those comments for the weekly Tuesday press conference.
But he briefly broke from his usual protocol in mentioning in his opening statement about the need to point all focus toward getting the team’s eighth win this weekend.
“That’s the thing we can control,” he said. “Focus on the things we control and get ready to go.”
FILM DOESN’T LIE
Dantonio found nothing in the game film that he didn’t already know the last time he spoke with us, on Saturday evening.
“We obviously did not play well enough in any area to win and that is supported by the film,” Dantonio said. “I think also momentum sort of took over. Momentum swung in their favor and it was like a wave. So (we’ve) got to be able to respond better and the other thing we have to be able to do is move forward.”
VALUE IN FILM
Some might believe that the coaches would want to smash the game tape, move on and pretend it never happened - like Tom Izzo has famously done in past seasons.
But Izzo usually has 30 other game tapes to learn from during his teaching process.
Football coaches have fewer games to view, and more players to evaluate. Every snap of Saturday’s blowout loss can be used as teaching material, and Dantonio is deep into that process right now.
“There are things to learn from, especially schematically whether you were outflanked or you were out of position,” Dantonio said. “So I think it needs to be corrected more from a standpoint of what plays or defense was run. You need to just look at it and say, ‘Here’s all these formations, how did you adjust?’ Look at those things and draw from it and try and make it a learning experience.”
But he admitted there will be a time to dispose of it.
“This is one you want to burn and you don’t want it to be indicative of how you play all the time,” he said.
THE TEMPO QUESTION
I was surprised by the problems Michigan State had with Ohio State’s tempo. Dantonio and Joe Bachie commented after the game about the difficulty the defense had in getting the calls in on time, and getting set for pre-snap against Ohio State’s tempo.
Bachie said they worked on it in practice and thought they were ready for it, but it turned out that they were not.
Without getting a chance to clock it myself on film, I theorized that Ohio State perhaps had played faster than the Buckeyes had shown on film, and caught Michigan State a bit off-guard. I asked Dantonio on Sunday night if this had been the case, if OSU’s tempo was different from what they had shown up to that point in the season, and whether they snapped the ball even faster than the :12-second clip that Indiana used at times against Michigan State, three weeks ago.
“No, I think it was about the same,” Dantonio said. “I don’t think it was any faster. And they looked to the sideline and would change the play on us.
“I think they did a very good job of formationing us, formations that were a lot like what we’ve seen before, but (with) little a little bit of tweaks, whether it was an alignment here or an alignment there.”
Defenses expect to get new wrinkles each week, and prepare for the possibility of drastic changes. But Ohio State apparently disrupted Michigan State with some of the slight changes in formations that they showed, which caused some pause.
“They changed up some things there,” Dantonio said. “The (Michigan State defensive) calls were coming in, but for whatever reason, it just didn’t feel like we were lined up and ready to play. Now, on the film, it would appear you’re lined up, but I know in the game, I felt like it was a scramble.”
**
COMP’S TAKE: The margin of victory in this game, and the quick TKO, surprised everybody, from Dantonio, to fans, to myself, and most media. Vegas had Ohio State as a 17-point favorite, and that line seemed astronomical. But even Vegas sold it short by a couple of touchdowns.
Michigan State had played so soundly a week before, against Penn State. And Ohio State had looked awful a week earlier against Iowa.
Michigan State had matched up well against Ohio State over the years, with Dantonio having more success against Meyer than any coach in the Big Ten. Yet Michigan State was blown out of this game inside of 12 minutes.
In processing this surprising 45-point margin of victory, I wonder if part of MSU’s poor performance was due to the stunned surprise the Spartans may have felt, on both sides of the ball, when realizing early-on that Ohio State was just plain more talented than any team the Spartans had faced this year. Not only were the Buckeyes more talented, but they were more mature, and they had a leg-up in some schematic areas, AND they were just as motivated as the Spartans, if not more. These had to be stark discoveries for the young Spartans.
When Dantonio mentioned that the game in some respects “seemed like a scramble,” I think this gets back to the point of Michigan State realizing that Ohio State was a different animal than the one that showed up on the game tape from Iowa City. This was the first time many youthful players in the Spartan playing group had dealt with taking that type of a blow.
“I think sometimes when things are going against you, everything seems like a scramble,” Dantonio said. “Everything. And that’s the nature of this one. Everything – whether it was tackling or playing the ball in the deep part of the field or pressuring the quarterback or getting lined up, everything seemed to be a scramble. And we’ve got to negate that.”
D-TACKLES FAIL FOR A CHANGE
Ohio State’s 335 yards on the ground was the biggest surprise of the game. Firm play from defensive tackles Raequan Williams and Mike Panasiuk, along with reserve Naquan Jones, has been a team strength the Spartans all season. But OSU defeated MSU's strength in this game.
Williams and Panasiuk have been strong against double-teams on interior run plays since last November. They’ve been strong all year against the run, inside, against Michigan, Penn State, and even Notre Dame’s prodigious ground attack. When ND gained yards on the ground, they didn’t send the ball through MSU’s defensive tackles.
Last year, when Michigan State battled Ohio State to a tight 17-16 loss, Williams and Panasiuk were firm against OSU’s inside zone runs, and that set the foundation for the near-upset.
Now, Panasiuk and Williams are a year better, and have better back-ups. That’s why it was such a surprise that MSU’s defensive tackles struggled in this game.
“I don’t think we quit, I just think we didn’t play effectively,” Dantonio said. “Inside, our defensive tackles were getting reached.
“Out of our gaps, gap integrity, leverage issues on defense, tackling issues,” he added. “On offense, (we had) protection issues. They were getting pressure. They were doing the things they needed to do to beat you. Things that you can control to some degree. But, hey, Ohio State has got good players. They played well, and they were prepared to play.
“It’s very difficult when things are going in this direction to continue to play hard. And I thought we did play hard, we just didn’t play well enough.”
**
My Follow-Up: In writing about the on Saturday night, I analyzed Mike Weber’s TD runs of 47 and 82 yards. On neither occasion did I see MSU’s defensive tackles bashed vertically downfield. I saw defensive players influenced out of the area. And I saw Williams fail to secure his gap on the 47-yarder, due to a slant and a unique zone counter step by OSU’s offensive line. I thought it was a good finesse move by OSU, but not necessarily a display of physical dominance.
I still haven’t had a chance to go over the rest of the film, so I was intrigued by Dantonio’s statement about defensive tackle play early on in this teleconference.
When Dantonio said the defensive tackles “were getting reached,” that means offensive linemen were crossing the faces of the Michigan State d-tackles and controlling their far shoulder, and scooping them out of gaps. That can be done with quickness, or combinations sometimes referred to as “pyramid” techniques, or the counter zone step that I mentioned earlier.
I would consider those moves to be quick, technical, almost finesse moves, not necessarily power moves. That’s why I asked Dantonio if he could elaborate about the process of being reached, and if OSU was having success with more of a horizontal approach to beating the d-tackles, rather than vertically bashing them downfield.
He said it was more than just horizontal schematics.
“They moved the line of scrimmage,” Dantonio said. “They got movement on the three technique and on the nose by doubling them and then coming off the double and getting up to the ‘backers.”
That’s something that Panasiuk and Williams haven’t allowed anyone to do to them on a consistent basis in their young careers at Michigan State.
(So why didn’t I recognize this while it was taking place? Well, when watching the game live, I focus on the defensive back seven, and especially the secondary, trying to identify the coverages, and coaching calls on the back end. I watch d-line play when I go back over the TV replay, which I haven't yet done. So I was reduced to asking Dantonio about d-line play rather blindy.)
“At times where they scooped us — in other words zone blocked us — we’re supposed to be in this gap and we end up in a different gap,” Dantonio said. “Combination of both.”
Meaning, a combination of being scheme-scooped, and also moved off the line by brute strength double-teams.
“We played the zone play much more effectively in the past,” Dantonio said. “A lot of it depends on if they’re able to move our defensive tackles. They were able to move them. So that creates different gaps and issues that go along with that.
“But they got movement and they changed the line of scrimmage,” Dantonio said. “Both sides of the ball.”
On offense, Michigan State tries several times a game to get movement with double-team blocking. This game was no different. But, as has been the case in many games recently, the Spartans haven’t gotten much movement up front - despite a great start on Saturday with a 20-yard run by LJ Scott.
“They won up front,” Dantonio said. “(They) changed the line of scrimmage. Usually what we’ve always said here is you’ve got to win up front first. It makes the quarterback’s job easier. It makes the linebackers’ job easier, and you can play around that. We just didn’t win up front.
“Now, we’re young. We’re young up front on both sides of the ball. But you still have to win. You have to win your share.
“We’re a better football team than that, but it’s in the books. We’ve got to be able to also take responsibly for coaching, take responsibly for how we played. But we also have to just focus on the future of this next week, and that’s what we’ll do.”
HOW THE TEAM IS TAKING IT
Dantonio said his team’s initial response to this loss has been what he would expect and want.
“It was tough,” he said of their response after returning home to East Lansing. “It was tough because we’ve been very competitive with Ohio State.
“It was tough, very quiet, very somber. And usually when you have that, people are reflecting on it themselves, I think, which is a good thing.
“We’ve always responded. We’ve always looked at things: How do you play after a tough game? How do you play after a great game in a big environment, a game that had this kind of magnitud? So we look for reaction.
“We’ll take the next step, but we’ll look for reaction, see how we play this week. But I anticipate our guys will come to play.”
MIXED BAG IN THE SECONDARY
I asked Dantonio about the play of the Spartan defensive backs. Justin Layne gave up a deep ball for a touchdown, was flagged for a pass interference, but bounced back with good pass defense on a deep ball and a one-armed interception in the end zone.
For Dantonio, defensive back play went beyond pass defense. He wanted DBs to rally in run support better than they did.
“Ball got out on us,” Dantonio said. “We have to be able to track it down. Leverage issues. A lot of it stems from a couple of different formations that sort of put us in difficult situations. But over and above everything, we’ve got to be able to tackle more effectively on the perimeter.
“Can’t give up a deep ball - not when you’re supposed to be bailing. Justin is supposed to be bailing (on the deep TD), can’t give it up. But we’ll continue to compete back there. We’ll be fine.
“I thought that we need to play better technique on the edges,” Dantonio said. “By edges, we need to tackle more effectively in the back end. David Dowell had a big interception. Justin Layne has a great interception in the end zone. But (we need) consistency, consistency in performance.”
THE SACK PROBLEMS
Michigan State had ranked in the top three in the Big Ten in sack prevention. But Ohio State rang up six sacks against the Spartans, although half of those sacks came on the last four snaps of the game.
Still, Michigan State had problems in pass protection against some of the same players who didn’t bother the Spartan backfield much at all, last year.
“Obviously we gave up too much pressure,” Dantonio said. “Ohio State did a nice job. (Nick) Bosa and some of the other guys, (Jalyn) Holmes and other guys are very good in pass rushing. They got us in long-yardage situations. We talked about that; the inability to run the football puts you in long-yardage situations at times, and then they can tee off on you. And then if you over-set or if you don’t do it exactly right, then there’s a power issue, you’re not in a position of power to protect the quarterback. And then everything else just starts to fall downhill - pressure on the quarterback, makes you nervous, try to get the quarterback out on the edge, not as accurate as he has been, can’t separate downfield with the receivers. So there was a little bit of everything. We’ve talked about the storms that we’ve been in or played through. This one was a storm as well and we couldn’t play through it.”
ANYTHING POSITIVE?
True freshman Antjuan Simmons ranked third on the team in tackles on Saturday, with seven stops (three solos, four assists).
He saw extended playing time in place of junior starter Andrew Dowell at ‘slot’ linebacker.
Simmons (6-0, 217, Ann Arbor) has seen spot duty at other times this year. But this marked the most snaps he has seen in a game.
“Antjuan played 26 snaps,” Dantonio said. “I thought that for a freshman in that environment, he played very well. He was under control. He tackled well, he hustled. He made some plays down the field, tackling relative to pursuit. Couple of mistakes in terms of his assignments, but I thought he played -- for a freshman, I thought he played OK. You can see there is a bright future there.
“You could say that about a lot of our guys, but collectively as a group, we got to get them off the field defensively.”
Monday Morning Football: Dantonio Talks Defense
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 7 Replies
Monday Morning Football: Dantonio talks defense
Jim Comparoni | Publisher
EAST LANSING - Some attention will turn this week to Michigan State’s surprising problems on offense against Indiana during Saturday’s 17-9 Spartan victory.
But head coach Mark Dantonio began Sunday night’s weekly teleconference with a salute to the Michigan State defense.
Aside from the leaky fourth quarter against desperation-mode Minnesota, the Spartans have allowed only two touchdowns over the last 16 quarters.
No. 18-ranked Michigan State heads into Saturday’s game at Northwestern ranked No. 4 in the nation in total defense (Alabama is No. 1) and No. 14 in the country in scoring defense (Penn State is No. 1).
Michigan State is 6-1 overall and 4-0 in the Big Ten. Northwestern is 4-3 and 2-2.
Northwestern is on a two-game win streak, having beaten Maryland (37-21) and Iowa (17-10 in OT) in the past two games.
In complimenting the Spartans’ ability to hold Indiana to 253 yards of total offense, Dantonio began with the defensive interior - an area that has been strong all season.
“We got great play from Mike Panasiuk inside and Raequan Williams,” Dantonio said. “I thought they played outstanding, really built a wall basically that we always talk about when you play against the run - stop the run.”
Williams defeated Indiana’s left guard and pressured Indiana quarterback Peyton Ramsey on the the Hoosiers’ final play, batted the ball and forced an incompletion on fourth-and-nine.
“But really, collectively as a defense, I thought our defense played outstanding,” Dantonio said. “Joe Bachie had another big game. I thought our corners played extremely well as did our entire secondary.
“You really can’t point to a person and say, ‘He did not play well.’ Which is the reason we didn’t give up a touchdown and allowed field goals.
“(We got) a little soft there on two consecutive drives, a little bit where one play sort of led to another play on the third down. Got a little bit tired on that, I guess it was the end of the third quarter drive that continued on into the fourth quarter. But I thought we got the game back with the three-and-out series in the fourth quarter and got the ball back to the offense and went down and scored.”
Williams had burst for the final snap of the, in part, due to Michigan State’s commitment to utilizing second-stringers on defense, especially on the defensive line. Second-string defensive tackles Gerald Owens and Naquan Jones played their usual allotment of snaps and didn’t cause Michigan State to suffer much of a dropoff while Panasiuk and Williams rested.
At defensive end, second-string true freshman Jacub Panasiuk saw the most playing time of his young career, and had one of the more productive games of the season by a Spartan defensive lineman.
The younger Panasiuk was in on five tackles, and had his first career sack.
Jacub Panasiuk also provides a measure of versatility to the d-line. When he checks in at boundary defensive end, that allows starting boundary DE Demetrius Cooper to rep a few snaps at field defensive end, where Cooper gets a chance to operate in space a bit more.
“He (Jacub Panasiuk) had about 22 or so (snaps),” Dantonio said. “He got his first sack so that was exciting for him to have.”
Panasiuk is another one of these classic underrated three-star Midwestern recruit that Dantonio has a penchant for turning into college stars. The younger Panasiuk appears well on his way to an impact career.
Panasiuk went down with a lower body injury in the Indiana game, but Mike Panasiuk told media after the game that Jacub was fine. Dantonio didn’t mention the injury on Suday.
“He’s another guy that is going to be an outstanding player,” Dantonio said. “He’s a true freshman; he goes about 272 pounds. Good player, and he’s active. We roll our guys in there, and we have to because of the nature of offenses today. So we roll our guys in, and they’ve done an outstanding job.”
Kenny Willekes and Cooper join Mike Panasiuk and Williams in logging the majority of reps on the d-line. But Dillon Alexander joins Jacub Panasiuk, Owens and Jones on the second unit.
Designated pass rusher Brandon Randle plays in the nickel defense, which morphed into a dime package against the Hoosiers with the Spartans using a sixth DB (Josh Butler) in place of linebacker Andrew Dowell in passing situations.
Randle was completely fresh in pressuring the edge in the late going as Indiana failed to mount a threat in the final minutes. Randle had one QB pressure.
Elsewhere in the front seven, Tyriq Thompson spelled Chris Frey for a few snaps on the day, and true freshman Antjuan Simmons relieved Dowell for a bit.
Dantonio was satisfied with the support provided by second-stringers, and also the conditioning level of his starters.
“We work extremely hard to do the things we do, whether it’s the weight room under Ken Mannie or on the field,” Dantonio said. “We really have to, first of all, be in great shape. But on average, we probably work about 130 plays a practice as ‘team’ (11-man unit) plays, getting ready for these types of games. You got to work your 1s and 2s. Our front is working those plays. So they’re going to get ready for that kind of tempo, and that helps immensely.
“I thought our coaches did an outstanding job. I think Ron Burton and Mark Snyderhave those guys playing at a very high level in terms of execution right now. You play against a lot of different types of offenses as we go through this season. So we’ve seen it all. But thus far they’re playing extremely well.
“They’re big, firm guys that have power and they’re young. Mike played last year as a true freshman, Raequan as a redshirt freshman. So they have game experience, but they’re still young. I think the best is yet to come with these guys. I still think that as a football team we’ve not peaked on all cylinders. I’m waiting for that to happen.”
Raequan Williams had enough in his gas tank to play big, late in the game, Saturday.
Other than Notre Dame, Michigan State hasn’t yet faced a dangerous, balanced offense. The Spartans have gotten a good handle on a reliable rotation, with firm d-linemen, steady linebackers and same-page communication in the defensive backfield. That organization and accountability will be in place when the athletic tests become more difficult in the weeks ahead, against Penn State and Ohio State. But Dantonio said on Sunday the Spartans will save November challenges for November.
OCTOBER PHASE NEARS END
“I’ve talked to you guys about being in phases here,” Dantonio said, when asked about becoming a factor in the Big Ten race. “We’ve got one more game here against Northwestern to sort of complete October. We knew that this stretch of five games that we had, two at home and three away, was going to be tough. So we’re just going to focus on the task at hand right now, and then we’ll worry about what happens in November when November comes.
“We have a young football team. I was told today we have 64 players on our football team who’ve never been to a bowl game.”
Michigan State has missed out on a bowl bid in only one of Dantonio’s 10 seasons with the Spartans - last year.
“So that tells you how young our football team is,” Dantonio said. “That’s exciting for us to be bowl eligible at 6-1. We’re 4-0 in the conference. All those things are very exciting. But I think the other message of last night’s football game is that we’re inches away. We’re inches away from not being 6-1, and we have to take care of the small things. Big things will follow.”
A BIG LIBRARY
Michigan State sought to pound the run against Indiana on Saturday, and had limited success. From there, the plans of complementing things with a balanced passing attack fell flat for much of the day - until Michigan State exploded for two touchdowns in its final two drives.
Dantonio steered away from any thoughts that offensive creativity is lacking.
“The system works,” Dantonio said. “We got RPOs in there, we got a lot of different things that we do, we got no-huddle, we got these different things, getting the ball to the perimeter, inside zone things, power game, different types of concepts – about every running concept that you can use is used here. And then we lean on certain ones relative to what’s being successful. From that standpoint, we are difficult to prepare for, I think. Because when you take all the different formations and the run concepts out of that, the same can be said for passes, you start to build up a big library there.
“But there is no question we need to score more points. When you look around the Big Ten conference, really, there’s teams playing good defense. We’re certainly of that vintage at this point in time. But it’s a game-to-game process, it always will be. So we’ll get ready to play against Northwestern and go from there.”
Dantonio’s macro thoughts on MSU’s offensive performance against Indiana:
“On the offensive side of the ball, (we) really sort of came alive there at the end of the game and had huge plays,” Dantonio said. “Obviously, Cody White has a big, big catch at the end of the game on third-and-19 to get us 16 of that and then has another big catch on third-and-9 the second series and then Hunter Rison. Those are very big plays. So, big plays from Felton (Davis) as well.”
PLAYING TO WIN: THE PROCESS
Dantonio changed his usual approach to late-game play calling when he opted to go to the air on third-and-eight, and third-and-nine on MSU’s final offensive drive. Michigan State was up 10-9 at the time, enjoying a strong day from its defense, with less than four minutes to play. But the Spartans elected to get aggressive and throw for first downs rather than playing to their defense.
Dantonio outlined the conversational structure that he has with co-offensive coordinator Dave Warner and his co-defensive coordinators through the course of a game.
“I always know what plays are going in,” Dantonio said. “I do not micromanage our offense or our defense. I think that our coordinators do an outstanding job, and they have to make decisions probably within 10 seconds. And for me to sit there and interrupt them in their communication with our coaches and then our players would just be disruptive. So what I will do is ask things between series and during timeouts, and obviously during certain situations.
“If he (Warner) wants input, he’s going to ask me. For example, throwing the ball on the third downs at the end of the game, if he wants input, and asks ‘What do you want to do here?’ Then I’m going to tell him.
“But there’s very, very few times that I’m going to interrupt and say, ‘No, don’t do this,’ and disrupt someone, because I think that has long-term problems. That’s not a short-term problem, that is a long-term problem, beginning to question someone’s decisions on the field. We can critique that after the fact and I can have discussions after the fact, which we do, and they are healthy discussions. I think to do that during a play is very difficult.”
Warner did ask for input from Dantonio for the third-and-long situations late in the game with the Spartans protecting a 1-point lead.
“Well, Coach Warner asked me what I wanted to do, did I want to run it or pass it?” Dantonio said. “And I said, ‘Let’s go. I got faith in our football team.’
“We need to play the game to win and attack the football game. I didn’t feel we could just go in the bag and punt it down there with four minutes to go or whatever it was. And so we went ahead with it. And then the second one, the same thing. I felt like, ‘Let’s try and win the football game.’
“And even though we were playing very well defensively, they had driven down the field. And if you get in a rhythm when they’re going fast like that, they’re only one play away. I thought as long as we didn’t make a crucial mistake, we could survive the clock stopping for a play (if Michigan State had an incompleted pass). Let’s try and make one.”
QB Brian Lewerke had been inconsistent, with bouts of inaccuracy earlier in the game. But Dantonio gave Lewerke the ball and trusted him.
“We always do with our quarterbacks,” Dantonio said of the trust element. “We have a belief system in our players, and our guys can make plays. And I’ve said it all along, in crunch time he might be at his best due to just his sort of demeanor.”
Lewerke completed his last five pass attempts - four of which went for first downs - including a 10-yard TD pass to Davis.
“He’s gaining experience and knowledge as we go,” Dantonio said. “There’s no question he made some decisions on the field that probably he would like to have back, but that probably could be said for almost everybody out there, including coaches.”
BEEDLE BACK
Former starter David Beedle returned to the field at right guard against Indiana, after sitting out three games with an undisclosed injury.
Beedle split time with current starter, Kevin Jarvis. Beedle and Jarvis rotated from series to series, throughout the second half.
Dantonio didn’t talk at length about Beedle’s performance and situation, but said: “Dave, I thought, played pretty well in there for his first day back. He looked healthy, and that’s a good thing.”
Hunter Rison lunges for the line of gain during a key fourth-down conversion on Saturday night, helping fuel Michigan State's go-ahead TD drive.
Jim Comparoni | Publisher
EAST LANSING - Some attention will turn this week to Michigan State’s surprising problems on offense against Indiana during Saturday’s 17-9 Spartan victory.
But head coach Mark Dantonio began Sunday night’s weekly teleconference with a salute to the Michigan State defense.
Aside from the leaky fourth quarter against desperation-mode Minnesota, the Spartans have allowed only two touchdowns over the last 16 quarters.
No. 18-ranked Michigan State heads into Saturday’s game at Northwestern ranked No. 4 in the nation in total defense (Alabama is No. 1) and No. 14 in the country in scoring defense (Penn State is No. 1).
Michigan State is 6-1 overall and 4-0 in the Big Ten. Northwestern is 4-3 and 2-2.
Northwestern is on a two-game win streak, having beaten Maryland (37-21) and Iowa (17-10 in OT) in the past two games.
In complimenting the Spartans’ ability to hold Indiana to 253 yards of total offense, Dantonio began with the defensive interior - an area that has been strong all season.
“We got great play from Mike Panasiuk inside and Raequan Williams,” Dantonio said. “I thought they played outstanding, really built a wall basically that we always talk about when you play against the run - stop the run.”
Williams defeated Indiana’s left guard and pressured Indiana quarterback Peyton Ramsey on the the Hoosiers’ final play, batted the ball and forced an incompletion on fourth-and-nine.
“But really, collectively as a defense, I thought our defense played outstanding,” Dantonio said. “Joe Bachie had another big game. I thought our corners played extremely well as did our entire secondary.
“You really can’t point to a person and say, ‘He did not play well.’ Which is the reason we didn’t give up a touchdown and allowed field goals.
“(We got) a little soft there on two consecutive drives, a little bit where one play sort of led to another play on the third down. Got a little bit tired on that, I guess it was the end of the third quarter drive that continued on into the fourth quarter. But I thought we got the game back with the three-and-out series in the fourth quarter and got the ball back to the offense and went down and scored.”
Williams had burst for the final snap of the, in part, due to Michigan State’s commitment to utilizing second-stringers on defense, especially on the defensive line. Second-string defensive tackles Gerald Owens and Naquan Jones played their usual allotment of snaps and didn’t cause Michigan State to suffer much of a dropoff while Panasiuk and Williams rested.
At defensive end, second-string true freshman Jacub Panasiuk saw the most playing time of his young career, and had one of the more productive games of the season by a Spartan defensive lineman.
The younger Panasiuk was in on five tackles, and had his first career sack.
Jacub Panasiuk also provides a measure of versatility to the d-line. When he checks in at boundary defensive end, that allows starting boundary DE Demetrius Cooper to rep a few snaps at field defensive end, where Cooper gets a chance to operate in space a bit more.
“He (Jacub Panasiuk) had about 22 or so (snaps),” Dantonio said. “He got his first sack so that was exciting for him to have.”
Panasiuk is another one of these classic underrated three-star Midwestern recruit that Dantonio has a penchant for turning into college stars. The younger Panasiuk appears well on his way to an impact career.
Panasiuk went down with a lower body injury in the Indiana game, but Mike Panasiuk told media after the game that Jacub was fine. Dantonio didn’t mention the injury on Suday.
“He’s another guy that is going to be an outstanding player,” Dantonio said. “He’s a true freshman; he goes about 272 pounds. Good player, and he’s active. We roll our guys in there, and we have to because of the nature of offenses today. So we roll our guys in, and they’ve done an outstanding job.”
Kenny Willekes and Cooper join Mike Panasiuk and Williams in logging the majority of reps on the d-line. But Dillon Alexander joins Jacub Panasiuk, Owens and Jones on the second unit.
Designated pass rusher Brandon Randle plays in the nickel defense, which morphed into a dime package against the Hoosiers with the Spartans using a sixth DB (Josh Butler) in place of linebacker Andrew Dowell in passing situations.
Randle was completely fresh in pressuring the edge in the late going as Indiana failed to mount a threat in the final minutes. Randle had one QB pressure.
Elsewhere in the front seven, Tyriq Thompson spelled Chris Frey for a few snaps on the day, and true freshman Antjuan Simmons relieved Dowell for a bit.
Dantonio was satisfied with the support provided by second-stringers, and also the conditioning level of his starters.
“We work extremely hard to do the things we do, whether it’s the weight room under Ken Mannie or on the field,” Dantonio said. “We really have to, first of all, be in great shape. But on average, we probably work about 130 plays a practice as ‘team’ (11-man unit) plays, getting ready for these types of games. You got to work your 1s and 2s. Our front is working those plays. So they’re going to get ready for that kind of tempo, and that helps immensely.
“I thought our coaches did an outstanding job. I think Ron Burton and Mark Snyderhave those guys playing at a very high level in terms of execution right now. You play against a lot of different types of offenses as we go through this season. So we’ve seen it all. But thus far they’re playing extremely well.
“They’re big, firm guys that have power and they’re young. Mike played last year as a true freshman, Raequan as a redshirt freshman. So they have game experience, but they’re still young. I think the best is yet to come with these guys. I still think that as a football team we’ve not peaked on all cylinders. I’m waiting for that to happen.”
Raequan Williams had enough in his gas tank to play big, late in the game, Saturday.
Other than Notre Dame, Michigan State hasn’t yet faced a dangerous, balanced offense. The Spartans have gotten a good handle on a reliable rotation, with firm d-linemen, steady linebackers and same-page communication in the defensive backfield. That organization and accountability will be in place when the athletic tests become more difficult in the weeks ahead, against Penn State and Ohio State. But Dantonio said on Sunday the Spartans will save November challenges for November.
OCTOBER PHASE NEARS END
“I’ve talked to you guys about being in phases here,” Dantonio said, when asked about becoming a factor in the Big Ten race. “We’ve got one more game here against Northwestern to sort of complete October. We knew that this stretch of five games that we had, two at home and three away, was going to be tough. So we’re just going to focus on the task at hand right now, and then we’ll worry about what happens in November when November comes.
“We have a young football team. I was told today we have 64 players on our football team who’ve never been to a bowl game.”
Michigan State has missed out on a bowl bid in only one of Dantonio’s 10 seasons with the Spartans - last year.
“So that tells you how young our football team is,” Dantonio said. “That’s exciting for us to be bowl eligible at 6-1. We’re 4-0 in the conference. All those things are very exciting. But I think the other message of last night’s football game is that we’re inches away. We’re inches away from not being 6-1, and we have to take care of the small things. Big things will follow.”
A BIG LIBRARY
Michigan State sought to pound the run against Indiana on Saturday, and had limited success. From there, the plans of complementing things with a balanced passing attack fell flat for much of the day - until Michigan State exploded for two touchdowns in its final two drives.
Dantonio steered away from any thoughts that offensive creativity is lacking.
“The system works,” Dantonio said. “We got RPOs in there, we got a lot of different things that we do, we got no-huddle, we got these different things, getting the ball to the perimeter, inside zone things, power game, different types of concepts – about every running concept that you can use is used here. And then we lean on certain ones relative to what’s being successful. From that standpoint, we are difficult to prepare for, I think. Because when you take all the different formations and the run concepts out of that, the same can be said for passes, you start to build up a big library there.
“But there is no question we need to score more points. When you look around the Big Ten conference, really, there’s teams playing good defense. We’re certainly of that vintage at this point in time. But it’s a game-to-game process, it always will be. So we’ll get ready to play against Northwestern and go from there.”
Dantonio’s macro thoughts on MSU’s offensive performance against Indiana:
“On the offensive side of the ball, (we) really sort of came alive there at the end of the game and had huge plays,” Dantonio said. “Obviously, Cody White has a big, big catch at the end of the game on third-and-19 to get us 16 of that and then has another big catch on third-and-9 the second series and then Hunter Rison. Those are very big plays. So, big plays from Felton (Davis) as well.”
PLAYING TO WIN: THE PROCESS
Dantonio changed his usual approach to late-game play calling when he opted to go to the air on third-and-eight, and third-and-nine on MSU’s final offensive drive. Michigan State was up 10-9 at the time, enjoying a strong day from its defense, with less than four minutes to play. But the Spartans elected to get aggressive and throw for first downs rather than playing to their defense.
Dantonio outlined the conversational structure that he has with co-offensive coordinator Dave Warner and his co-defensive coordinators through the course of a game.
“I always know what plays are going in,” Dantonio said. “I do not micromanage our offense or our defense. I think that our coordinators do an outstanding job, and they have to make decisions probably within 10 seconds. And for me to sit there and interrupt them in their communication with our coaches and then our players would just be disruptive. So what I will do is ask things between series and during timeouts, and obviously during certain situations.
“If he (Warner) wants input, he’s going to ask me. For example, throwing the ball on the third downs at the end of the game, if he wants input, and asks ‘What do you want to do here?’ Then I’m going to tell him.
“But there’s very, very few times that I’m going to interrupt and say, ‘No, don’t do this,’ and disrupt someone, because I think that has long-term problems. That’s not a short-term problem, that is a long-term problem, beginning to question someone’s decisions on the field. We can critique that after the fact and I can have discussions after the fact, which we do, and they are healthy discussions. I think to do that during a play is very difficult.”
Warner did ask for input from Dantonio for the third-and-long situations late in the game with the Spartans protecting a 1-point lead.
“Well, Coach Warner asked me what I wanted to do, did I want to run it or pass it?” Dantonio said. “And I said, ‘Let’s go. I got faith in our football team.’
“We need to play the game to win and attack the football game. I didn’t feel we could just go in the bag and punt it down there with four minutes to go or whatever it was. And so we went ahead with it. And then the second one, the same thing. I felt like, ‘Let’s try and win the football game.’
“And even though we were playing very well defensively, they had driven down the field. And if you get in a rhythm when they’re going fast like that, they’re only one play away. I thought as long as we didn’t make a crucial mistake, we could survive the clock stopping for a play (if Michigan State had an incompleted pass). Let’s try and make one.”
QB Brian Lewerke had been inconsistent, with bouts of inaccuracy earlier in the game. But Dantonio gave Lewerke the ball and trusted him.
“We always do with our quarterbacks,” Dantonio said of the trust element. “We have a belief system in our players, and our guys can make plays. And I’ve said it all along, in crunch time he might be at his best due to just his sort of demeanor.”
Lewerke completed his last five pass attempts - four of which went for first downs - including a 10-yard TD pass to Davis.
“He’s gaining experience and knowledge as we go,” Dantonio said. “There’s no question he made some decisions on the field that probably he would like to have back, but that probably could be said for almost everybody out there, including coaches.”
BEEDLE BACK
Former starter David Beedle returned to the field at right guard against Indiana, after sitting out three games with an undisclosed injury.
Beedle split time with current starter, Kevin Jarvis. Beedle and Jarvis rotated from series to series, throughout the second half.
Dantonio didn’t talk at length about Beedle’s performance and situation, but said: “Dave, I thought, played pretty well in there for his first day back. He looked healthy, and that’s a good thing.”
Hunter Rison lunges for the line of gain during a key fourth-down conversion on Saturday night, helping fuel Michigan State's go-ahead TD drive.
Pre-Snap Read: MSU vs Indiana
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 13 Replies
Pre-Snap Read: MSU vs Indiana
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.com Publisher
EAST LANSING - Indiana is better than Minnesota.
A week ago, I said if Michigan State played its C-game and Minnesota played its B-plus game, the Spartans would still be 7 points better than the Gophers (that was based on the Conor Rhoda version of Minnesota).
Well, that script held up for about 52 minutes, then Rhoda’s replacement found a groove and the Pre-Snap Read forecast became a crop shoot, with QB Croft being a pure variable.
Prior to the Notre Dame, we wrote that QB Wimbush had been struggling. We said the Michigan State-ND game was an arms race of sorts, meaning a race to find out when Wimbush would turn the corner and gain traction as a viable starting QB. There were too many credible sources in South Bend who were saying that Wimbush had played just fine in practice and it was a matter of time until he figured out gameday. Well, the arms race ended in East Lansing as Wimbush took a major step that night. He and ND took it to another level, and Michigan State helped the cause by feeding the Irish 21 points off of turnovers.
Indiana represents another arms race of sorts, in two areas:
1. Their new QB, redshirt freshman Peyton Ramsey, is pretty good. He has some pretty good moments. He doesn’t have the strongest arm in the world. He is a pretty good runner, and effective runner, not quite the athlete that Brian Lewerke is, but he can move the chains with his feet and buy some time with his feet.
He’s not bad. Probably similar to Lewerke of last year.
But he also represents an arms race similar to that of Wimbush. He’s going to be a quality QB at some point in his career, probably a plus QB. The question is when will he make that leap?
He will be making his third start of the season on Saturday. If he remains the same QB who played against Michigan and Penn State, then the Spartans don’t have too much to worry about. He’s solid, but he’s not going to destroy you.
But this is college football, and each week is like a new season, and sometimes young players make astronomical improvements in a short period of time. I’m not saying he is Trace McSorley or CJ Beathard, but if Ramsey makes a McSorley or Beathard type of overnight leap in improvement, well, you have to hope it doesn’t happen on your watch. But it’s possible. He’s not bad. His receivers are good. His pass protection is good. His running game has been decent but not explosive.
Michigan State’s defense is good, solid, pretty heady, with good speed at most positions. But the defense Ramsey and the Hoosiers played against this week will be easier to navigate than the Michigan defense they played against last week.
Indiana’s offense has been on the field against Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. As good as MSU’s defense has played, Indiana will see nothing that would make them flinch.
But here’s the other side of that coin: MSU’s offense is more capable of putting points on the board than Michigan’s. Way more. And MSU’s o-line is better than Penn State’s. Way better. If Brian Lewerke can continue to gain ground on the Trace McSorleys of the world, then Michigan State’s offense will be better than Penn State’s in the coming weeks. Yeah, I said that.
2. Indiana’s ground defense represents the second arms race. By arms race, I mean it’s an area of construction. They are trying to improve. Will they get it up to a winnable level in time to play your team? Their ground defense is part of an arms race.
Their ground defense isn’t bad, from an individual standpoint. But from a collective standpoint, they had way too many plays last week in which their gap integrity, their run fits, were off. Michigan gashed them for 270-plus yards rushing.
Some of Indiana’s ground game problems are correctable, in terms of run fits. New head coach Tom Allen, a defensive guy, spoke at length about that stuff earlier in the week. He’s on it. Did he have “too much” defense in, to the point of leaving his guys a half-step slow to their gaps on a few too many occasions?
Allen made the point that when a defense does as many things as Indiana does (and they are multiple. Not crazy multiple, but they do move a lot up front), it makes it that much harder to play the run fit game of Tetris (my analogy, not his) when trying to get a set of slants and stunts to fit when Michigan is running a quick-breaking counter at you. The gaps change rapids. The Tetris blocks start whirling and falling quicker. And it becomes harder to stay in your gap and get all the gaps fit than if you reduce the volume and stay simple on offense.
To their credit, they generate TFLs with their slants, stunts, movements and well-disguised blitzes.
But will then reduce their volume in order to try to keep things more simple against an Michigan State run game that will run another steady diet of counters, powers, traps and sweeps at them - plus a new weekly run game wrinkle that has yet to be revealed?
It’s an arms race. If they try to improve what they did last week, they will probably blow up more rocket ships than they put in orbit and give up 200-plus on the ground again. Indiana has been working all week to improve its run fit problem. There’s a solid chance they will improve. But can they improve THAT MUCH in seven days? Good question. And the answer to that question will go a long, long way to determining how much ease, or trouble, Michigan State has in trying to win this game.
Or will Indiana reduce the volume, and play things simpler?
Probably a combination of both. One way or another, they aren’t likely to have the run fit problems they had last week. They will have SOME problems, because mode of operation is too hard to change in one week at this point in the season. Run fits are a quality control matter, and Tom Allen should have had it identified and snuffed out in the spring and August camp. But the problem made its way to the field last week and it was the main reason Indiana lost, because Indiana was Michigan’s equal in all other areas.
How much improvement will Indiana make in ground defense? Meanwhile, will MSU’s new success in the tailback run game from a week ago continue to surge forward? Mark Dantonio announced on Friday that LJ Scott will play on Saturday, despite Wednesday’s arrest for a traffic violation (driving with a suspended license). That helps MSU’s chances of winning, as long as he doesn’t fumble.
It’s a week-to-week thing in college football. Which team CONTINUES to improve in week seven? It’s a simple question, but that’s what determines whether Michigan State falls back to the back as a failed pretender or takes another step forward as a possible contender. Indiana will provide a test.
MSU’s improving ground game vs Indiana’s under-construction ground defense. I call it an arms race in name only. It’s actually a ground race.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST
If Michigan State and Indiana each play their B-game, Michigan State should be 10 points better than Indiana. If Michigan State plays with the ball-security smarts the Spartans had against Iowa and Michigan, then the Spartans should be fine. But chances of a spectacular beatdown are low.
I would be very impressed if Michigan State handles its business in all facets of the game and wins by 17 or more. If they do that, then this team will have taken a definite step toward becoming a real threat against Penn State and maybe Ohio State.
Penn State had some great moments in the first half of the season, but some weaknesses have popped up. PSU’s o-line gets a bad rap, and for good reason. PSU’s o-line is shoddy, especially on the right side. Indiana’s pass rush ransacked PSU’s backfield all day. Saquon Barkley is not going to be able to put up Heisman numbers on the ground in the second half of the season behind that o-line, and Penn State is going to have a terrible time on offense against the Wolverines. (Michigan is going to have a tough time against PSU’s defense too. Michigan will have a better chance to get its ground game going than Barkley will against the Wolverines, but PSU will have an edge at QB, WR and pass game construct).
Penn State beat Indiana comfortably on the scoreboard. But at the line of scrimmage, and in the defensive backfields, Indiana played PSU almost straight-up, closely. PSU benefitted from two TDs on special teams and a short-field TD drive early in the game. After a 21-0 lead in the opening minutes, Indiana was surprisingly even with PSU at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. Did PSU’s level of intensity dip due to the big lead? Probably. But line of scrimmage work is line of scrimmage work and there aren’t many linemen who are willing to take plays off and quit in the second quarter. Indiana won as many plays as they lost at the line of scrimmage in the last three quarters of that game. I came away almost as impressed with Indiana against PSU as you might have been with Indiana after last week’s game against Michigan. Indiana can hang with the best in the Big Ten East, and we don’t know for sure whether Michigan State is in that category, yet.
THE MACRO ON INDIANA:
* New head coach in Tom Allen. He was d-coordinator for Indiana last year, after serving as d-coordinator for one year at South Florida. Prior to that, he was linebackers coach at Ole Miss from 2012-14. He’s an Indianapolis native. Seems like a stern disciplinarian. I like his style, but he’s going to need a new offensive coordinator at some point in order for Indiana to get over the hump as a program.
He was elevated to the head coaching job last December after Kevin Wilson was fired for being rude or something like that.
Individually, Indiana is:
* Decent, and growing at QB, with Peyton Ramsey winning the starting job, and rightfully so, over inaccurate Richard Lagow.
* Decent and growing at RB, with true freshman Morgan Ellison.
* Indiana’s o-line is one of the most underrated units in the Big Ten. They aren’t dominant, but they are stable and functional. They are good in pass protection. Michigan managed to get pretty good heat on the QB as the game progressed, with blitzes. But Michigan COULD NOT get consistent pressure on the QB with a standard four-man rush.
* Indiana has quality WRs. Simmie Cobbs looks like an NFL player to me. No. 25, Luke Timian, is a classic possession route guy, who can make crafty plays over the middle to move the chains. Tight end Ian Thomas was not used enough against Michigan, but he is one of the most underrated players in the Big Ten. He’s in his second year at Indiana as a juco transfer. He’s good, at 6-5, with hands, and RAC ability (run after the catch).
* New Indiana o-coordinator Mike DeBord has tried to reinvent himself as an uptempo guy, after two years with Butch Jones at Tennessee. He left Tennessee to take the same job at Indiana, which means he was probably let go in Knoxville.
DeBord was o-coordinator at Michigan from 1997-99, which includes their National Championship season, and the season in which no one in Ann Arbor could identify that Tom Brady was better than Drew Henson. DeBord has been milquetoast since then, including a miserable stint as head coach at Central Michigan, a second tour or duty at Michigan, during which he was o-coordinator for the App State game, then five years as an NFL assistant coach, then he resurfaced at Tennessee.
Indiana still runs an uptempo offense, but it’s not as dynamic and problematic with run-pass conflicts as it was under Kevin Wilson. They still manage to snap the ball at :11 seconds from time to time, but it’s not quite the same outfit.
* On defense, their DTs - Hoff and Robinson - are comparable to Panasiuk and Raequan Williams. They’re pretty good.
Their d-ends are suspect against the run, but pass rush is occasionally decent.
LBs are average with their run-game collisions, below average in run fit consistency (or gap integrity), but a couple of their guys pursue the ball well as athletes.
Their CBs are good, with Fant being an NFL guy. One of their safeties is inconsistent and I don’t have an opinion on the other guy.
They play a lot of second-stringers on defense, and some third-stringers. They have quite a dropoff when playing reserves. The probably play some of those reserves too much, but that’s the luxury a first-year coach has, when trying to develop for the future.
But overall, their defense is better than it was in the Kevin Wilson days. They start eight seniors on defense, with a good one at every level (Hoff at DT, Scales at MLB and Font at CB). This was probably the defense Wilson was working toward before he was fired last year.
* On special teams, their place kicker is one of the best in the Big Ten, leads the conference in FG pct. Their punt return game is outstanding, with their return man having taken two back for TDs this year, and a long one of 50-plus yards serving as a game-changer in the final minutes last week against Michigan.
* In all, Indiana isn’t as physical up front as Iowa, but their QB and WR situation is better than Iowa’s was. We know more about Michigan State now than we did prior to the Michigan State-Iowa game. But we also know more about Indiana. And what we know is that this game has a good chance to be as challenging as the Iowa game was. Michigan State needed to stay clean in the turnover department to win that game. Michigan State might be able to get away with a -1 in this game, but it would be wise not to tempt that formula.
As for turnover margin, Indiana is the worst in the Big Ten. They have produced precious few turnovers this year.
* So this is a game. I call it The Border Skirmish. I’m the only one who calls it that, for now. You can join in with that monicker if you wish. It’s not quite a border war, but it’s an annual scuffle of intrigue, with The Old Brass Spittoon on the line. It’s a game. And why wouldn’t it be? Indiana took Michigan to overtime last week. Indiana benefitted from painfully conservative approach by Michigan to have a chance to rally late. Indiana used a long punt return in the final minutes to cause UM’s strategy to blow up in its face.
Functional QB, good WR, good pass protection, credible running back, good d-tackles, solid secondary, questions in run fits, question in run game collisions, questions in run defense at d-end, quality kicker, quality punt returner. Indiana isn’t perfect, but they have more than enough to give you problems, especially if you help them.
HOT TAKES AND SAUSAGE
* Indiana throws the ball much better than Minnesota did, coming into the game, with Rhoda. But Minnesota ran the ball much better, in previous games, than Indiana does.
Indiana has had some moments with freshman Ellison. But down-in and down-out, Indiana has not been a quality ground attack, overall.
* Both Indiana and Minnesota are good in pass pro. Minnesota is better, statistically, in pass pro than Indiana. But I like Indiana’s o-tackles in pass pro better.
* The Hoosiers rank dead last in the Big Ten in yards per carry. Second to last in yards per play on offense.
* Indiana is dead last in the Big Ten in turnover margin at -9. That might mean the percentages say they are due for a lift. Or it might mean they’ll continue to have a problem with it every week. Michigan State is No. 8 in the Big Ten in turnover margin at +0 (thanks to eight ugly fumbles).
* Indiana’s defense, surprisingly, is not bad. It’s pretty good, statistically and to the eye. That’s a big change from the Kevin Wilson days. (But their offense has taken a backward step).
* On pass defense, IU has allowed fewer than 100 yards through the air in consecutive weeks for the first time since 1989. The cover well at CB, they have a pretty decent pass rush, they bring some decent linebacker blitzes. They aren’t bad on pass defense, although No. 30 at safety is questionable.
* Their punt returner, J-Shun Harris, has returned two for TDs this year. He is the best in the Big Ten.
* Their primary WR, Simmie Cobbs, is a big, 6-foot-4, long-armed, strong guy. QB Ramsey didn’t target him enough last week against Michigan. But he had terrific moments against Ohio State and Virginia (and a couple against Penn State).
* Last year, Indiana finished 6-7 after losing to Utah in the Foster Farms Bowl, 26-24,with Tom Allen taking over for Kevin Wilson.
* It’s been written that IU football is now in its best place in 25 years.
* Indiana is looking for its third straight bowl bid.
THIS YEAR’S RESULTS
Indiana is 3-3, 0-3 in the Big Ten
Ohio State 49, Indiana 21
Indiana 34, Virginia 17*
vs Florida International (canceled due to hurricane. Indiana picked up Charleston Southern as an opponent for its open date on Oct. 7)
Indiana 52, Georgia Southern 17
Penn State 45, Indiana 14
Indiana 27, Charleston Southern 0
Michigan 27, Indiana 20 (OT)
* That’s one of the best non-conference wins of the year for the Big Ten. Virginia is 5-1 with wins over Duke, UNC, Boise State and UConn.
INDIANA OFFENSE
* They don’t stretch our slot LB with run-pass conflicts (and thereby stretch the interior B gap) the way they did when Kevin Wilson had Tevin Coleman or Jordan Howard at RB.
* “Indiana is a tempo team. They’re not terribly complex: slant, fade, in-cut,” said ABC analyst Brock Huard.
* Ranks No. 6 in the Big Ten in total offense (Michigan State is No. 5) and No. 6 in scoring offense, but those numbers get skewed by extra possessions created by tempo. More telling, Indiana ranks No. 13 in the Big Ten in yards per play, ahead of only Rutgers (Michigan State is No. 6 in the Big Ten in yards per play, not bad considering that one third of MSU’s games have been played in rain).
* IU ranks No. 5 in passing offense at 249 yards per game but No. 13 in the more important yards-per-pass-attempt category at 6.3. (Michigan State is tied for 11th in the Big Ten at 6.6 yards per pass attempt, but again … rain has had an impact on that).
THE LATEST ON Michigan State
* Enough games have been played that Big Ten stats are starting to paint an interesting picture:
+ Michigan State ranks No. 3 in the Big Ten in rush offense at 192 yards per game (fourth in the Big Ten in yards per carry at 4.5, trailing Ohio State, Penn State and Wisconsin).
+ Michigan State ranks No. 3 in the Big Ten in rush defense (93 yards per game), and tied for third in yards allowed per carry.
* Michigan State d-end Kenny Willekes is No. 5 in the Big Ten in sacks with four, and No. 4 in the Big Ten in TFLs with 8 (six solos, four assists equals eight, they say).
THE MICRO: On Indiana Personnel
QB PEYTON RAMSEY (6-2, 210, R-Fr, Cincinnati Elder)
* Was a 5.4 two-star recruit, and a spring commitment over offers from Illinois, BC, Wake Forest. Rivals missed on this evaluation.
* Started for the first time two weeks ago against Charleston Southern.
* 62 pct completions, 7 TDs, 4 INTs, 135 yards per game.
* Had a little success with QB draws vs PSU, counting few people in the box and it becomes a pass-run option for Ramsey, with the option to tuck and run almost immediately.
* Last week he was a respectable 20 of 41 for 178 yards against Michigan’s outstanding pass defense.
* Ramsey was 32 of 41 for 321 yards against Charleston Southern with 2 TDs and 1 INT.
* Most IU throws are quick-drop, short reads, a lot of slants and fades, probably too man, but when he wanted to take longer reads, his o-line usually gave him pretty good time to throw through the first two and a half quarters. UM’s pass rush became more of a problem two-thirds of the way through the game. He was sacked twice.
* His 48% completion percentage vs Michigan is quite a bit better than the seasonal rate UM has been allowing.
* He rushed 14 times for a net of 14 yards last week (gained 35, lost 21). Had along run of 9 yards.
- INT on a deep fade for WR Taysir Mack with 6:10 to go in the game. Great leaping INT by UM’s Lavert Hill.
* He looked for No. 25, Timian A LOT on third downs last week, including a big third-and-10 conversion in the red zone on an intermediate dig with 3:51 to play and IU down 20-10. Good pass protection to find him.
+ stepped up into the pocket vs a 5 man rush to find WR 22 Whop Philyor on a shallow crossing route for an 8-yard TD pass to cut it to 20-17 with 3:27 left last week.
* On the game-tying drive, he found Cobbs on a 10-yard square in and Timian dig route, caught at 15 yards vs man to man and good for 23 yards, then Cobbs for 10 more on a crossing route to get into field goal range.
* In overtime, he was stopped on a zone read keeper and a pair of roll-out INCs. Indiana coaches were criticized for rolling him out to his off hand.
* He came off the bench at Virginia to go 16 of 20 and help Indiana win on the road.
* As a runner, Ramsey is something less than Brian Lewerke, maybe in the Tyler O’Connor category for now.
* He carried the ball on two zone read keepers on the opening drive vs Michigan for 6 and 5 yards. One to the edge, and one up the middle.
(Richard Lagow, 6-6, 240, Sr., juco transfer)
* Lagow is streaky, but sometimes good. That gives you an idea of what they think about Ramsey.
* He was inaccurate against Penn State. Ramsey relieved him and played better. Ramsey won the job in the days that followed.
* IU runs a lot of fades vs press. I think Lagow throws the fade better than Ramsey. When Lagow gets in a hot rhythm with those fades to his big WRs, he can be a pain in the neck.
* Lagow started last year. Has four 300-plus yard passing games, the fourth most in school history.
* Completed 38 pct of this passes in the bowl loss last year.
* This year: 56 pct completions, 4 TDs, 3 INTs, 136 yards passing per game.
* Indiana is No. 10 in third down pct at 37.3 (Michigan State is No. 4 at 41.6).
Login to view embedded media
THIRD AND MEDIUM SAMPLE STUDY
+ Short out route to RB Majette for a gain of 10 last week in the 1Q.
+ Ramsey creative flip to No. 25 WR Timian while Ramsey was being tackled from behind, got it away for a completion to move the chains last week on their second possession. Creative.
= Cobbs dropped a slant last week in the 1q in tight handsy coverage.
- QB had him open but didn’t pass to No. 7 Taysir Mack on a slant on third-and-10 in the second quarter last week. Held the ball, dumped it off to the RB for a short gain, then punt.
* WR Taysir Mack (No. 7) was open on a neat little play, with three receivers crammed to the boundary. The other two ran interference for him, heading downfield on verts, while No. 7 cut to the inside behind their wakes, open vs man to man on a slant. But QB didn’t see him.
Decent play by DeBoard. Freshman QB didn’t execute.
WIDE RECEIVERS
* When IU stacks two WRs to each side, the deeper WR (the ones farthest from the line of scrimmage) are often used as the in-route receivers.
* They run a handful of pass plays with FIB (formation into the boundary), meaning two (sometimes three) WRs to the short side of the field. That can create traffic issues for the DBs. The good news is that LJ Scott doesn’t play DB. (It’s a thinker)
WR 1 SIMMIE COBBS (6-4, 220, R-Jr., Oak Park, Ill.)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 27 in Illinois. Also visited Purdue.
* No. 4 in the Big Ten in receiving with 37 catches (3 TDs), averaging 68 yards receiving per game.
* Had 4 catches for 39 yards against Michigan.
* He is a very impressive player when he extends his arms and catches it high, like Matt Trannon, or your dad against you when you were 10.
* Is very hard to stop on fades, whether jumpball or back-shoulder, WHEN the QB is accurate.
+ Had catches of 12 and 16 yards on the opening drive vs Charleston Southern two weeks ago, both on RPO crossing routes vs off coverage. He won’t see that much off coverage vs Michigan State.
I didn’t notice that much RPO vs Michigan or Penn State from Indiana. Maybe it’s something they do more of vs off coverage.
* Had a terrific TD vs Ohio State on a back shoulder fade.
++ Real nice 29-yard TD at Virginia. Three WRs crammed to the short side (FIB, formation into the boundary). Cobbs the outside guy. The two inside guys clear out with deep verticals. Cobbs runs a crossing route across their wake. Caught at 5 yards, 24 yards afte contact, very good run-after-catch ability.
- Dropped a third-and-three slant last week, with a UM DB having hands all over him, but still should have been caught.
* Had a 60-yarder called back last week because he stepped out of bounds earlier in the route and didn’t completely reestablish himself on the field. Caught that one high on a deep fade. Impressive.
(Taysir Mack, 6-2, 200, R-Fr., Brooklyn, NY)
* 9 catches on the year, two TDs.
* 5.6 three-star recruit. Also visited Rutgers. Had a Syracuse offer.
(I didn't put the title on this YouTube film, but I don't necessarily disagree with its title):
Login to view embedded media
25 WR LUKE TIMIAN (6-0, 195, R-Jr., Southlake, TX)
* Was a 5.4, two-star recruit, walked on at Indiana. Had an offer from Columbia. Visited Minnesota.
* Slippery guy, a poor man’s Blair White.
* Ramsey looked for No. 25 time after time on third downs last week. usually as a slot WR on in routes.
+ 6 yard gain on a slant as the middle of three WRs last week, as part of one of IU’s bread-and-butter plays (‘70s term).
* Had a team-high 7 catches for 95 yards last week.
* Possession type receiver.
+ Had a 17-yarder last week on a dig route, operating as a stacked WR. The stacked WR has a natural free release; IU uses it to gain a step of leverage on in routes. Sometimes IU stacks two receivers to each side. Usually symmetrical routes to each side.
* Michigan double-teamed him in the end zone on the fourth-down stoppage in overtime. He was the guy UM sought to stop.
WR DONAVAN HALE (6-4, 225, JR., Largo, Fla.)
* 5.4, two-star recruit. Also visited Syracuse. Also offered by Minnesota and South Florida.
* Sat out last week with an injury. Status unknown this week.
* 7 catches on the year.
(22 Whop Philyor, 5-11, 180, Fr., Plant City, Fla.) has one of the great names in the Big Ten. (Careful with that one.) He had three catches for 13 yards last week including an 8-yard TD grab which cut UM’s lead to 20-17.
* Was a 5.4, two-star recruit. Apparently had offers from Arizona, Iowa State, Louisville, Maryland, Va Tech, Syracuse.
RUNNING BACKS
* IU ranks No. 10 in rushing offense (137 yards per game) and dead last in the Big Ten in yards per carry (3.5), that’s a big change from the Kevin Wilson days of Tevin Coleman and the explosive run-pass conflict, sometimes featuring the run blast.
But Ellison is a talent on the rise.
* Indiana averaged only 3.5 yards per rush against Charleston Southern two weeks ago. The Hoosiers rushed for 157 yards that day.
* They will sprinkle in some zone read option. They don’t live on it.
* Inside zone. Some interior counters and powers. Not much in terms of sweeps or toss plays or fly sweeps.
* Didn’t see one bubble screen in nine quarters of film study.
RB MORGAN ELLISON (6-1, 225, Fr., Pickerington, Ohio)
* No. 30 in Ohio, also visited Ohio University. Had MAC offers. Rivals had him rated higher than most, and got it right.
* Rushed for 68 yards on 14 carries last week including a 31-yarder
* Ran for 187 yards vs Georgia Southern in late September.
+ A rambler. Kind of a watered down LJ Scott type. Solid player.
* Morgan Ellison rushed 14 times for 68 yards against Michigan. The Hoosiers netted 80 yards rushing against the Wolverines.
* Ellison rushed for 48 yards on 16 carries (3.0 per) vs Charleston Southern.
+ On the 31-yarder, UM outside LB Khaleke Hudson came out too wide to honor the QB on a zone read, leaving too much daylight outside the tight end. Ellison with good vision, decent burst, ran to daylight and untouched for the first 25 yards.
+ 8 yard TD run last week on an inside zone. RT Brandon Knight downblocked a tired Devin Bush as UM was caught on the field too long vs a tempo offense and wore down badly for the final two plays of this TD drive which cut UM’s lead to 13-10.
Login to view embedded media
24 RB MIKE MAJETTE (5-11, 210, Jr., Woodbridge, Va.)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 36 in Virginia.
* 22 carries on the year for a net of 22 yards.
* Is on the field a lot but had only one carry last week. I gather that when he’s on the field, the pass tendency is greater.
* He had 5 catches last week for 49 yards.
* 12 catches on the year for 90 yards.
* Made an error in blitz protection last week, resulting in QB Ramsey getting banged up and sidelined for a few plays.
+ 22-yard gain on a nice “wide receiver screen” to the RB out of empty formation last week in the 1H.
* Attempted a trans-contintental pass back to Ramsey last week in the 1Q but it fell incomplete. They were trying to duplicate the play Purdue hit Michigan with. It didn’t work because, I think, UM was in zone coverage. But BTN’s camera man sucks so bad and felt he (or she) had to zoom in on the football as soon as it was snapped. Dude needs to stick to basketball (or BTN needs to give him different instructions. Terrible. That’s one area in which the NFL TV product is consistently better than college - cameramen in the NFL show all 22 players on most plays.) This dude for BTN zoomed so quickly. I am calling for a drug test.
* Diving catch on wheel route in the red zone vs Ohio State.
TIGHT END
IAN THOMAS (6-5, 248, Sr., Baltimore, Md./Nassau Community College, NY)
* Out of nowhere, this guy is going to get All-Big Ten votes. Good tight end.
* 17 catches on the year, 3 TDs. Had a 54-yarder vs PSU when getting matched up with a LB in man to man on a crossing route.
* 8-yard gain on an over route on third-and-10 midway through the 4q last week.
+ 22 yard catch on a deep over route from Lagow early in the Penn State game.
* Had a one-handed catch on a pass thrown behind him midway through the PSU game.
* TD vs OSU on an out and up.
* He’s a weapon.
* If I had time, I would go back and watch his blocking more closely to see just how well-rounded he is. I didn’t notice his blocking one way or another when going through things initially.
OFFENSIVE LINE
* Their o-line is good - individually and collectively. I’m not sure why they don’t run the ball better.
* IU has done a good job evaluating and developing o-linemen. These guys look sturdy, they move well.
None of them are dumpy or defective.
IU doesn’t get first pick of the o-line recruiting pool, but they are doing something right. Dan Feeney and Jason Spriggs were a couple of Indiana OL NFL Draft picks in the last three years. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were one or two NFL guys in the current Hoosier OL batch.
* Indiana is No 8 in the Big Ten in sacks allowed with 13 (Michigan State is No. 3, having allowed only six sacks), but their pass pro looked pretty good in the first half against Michigan and for good chunks of the PSU game.
Their sack numbers are high probably due to having played PSU, OSU and UM.
* The center and guards each were beaten by Mo Hurst as part of TFLs last week, but he did that to MSU’s center and guards too.
* Freshmen (two true frosh) make up the second-string on the offensive line at four of the five positions.
54 LT COY CRONK (6-5, 305, Soph, Lafayette, Ind.)
* 5.6 three-star, ranked No. 13 in Indiana.
* Also visited Iowa State. Had additional offers from Illinois, Vanderbilt.
* Very much functional.
* Moves okay laterally in pass pro. Looks shorter than 6-5. Doesn’t have long arms, but he gets by.
+ Real good, smooth job of passing off one man to pick up a stunting Rashan Gary coming inside-out into his Cronk’s area. Filtered it out with no problem. QB had time to read then stepped up and scrambled for a 5 yard gain.
- Allowed a pressure to Rashan Gary on third-and-seven but got enough of Gary for long enough, then Gary got off of him and was tackling the QB Ramsey when Ramsey completed a pass while falling down to the Blair White guy for a gain of 8 and a first down in the first quarter.
LG 76 WES MARTIN (6-3, 310, Jr., West Milton, Ohio )
* 5.4, two-star recruit, unranked in Ohio. Had MAC offers.
* Mobile out to the flat, cut-blocking a Michigan CB last week on the opening drive, and flagged for doing it illegally. But that was a scary/sinister play. He can get out and get low. Pain in the rear.
+ Real nice, quick, sudden, tough trap block last week to help spring Ellison for a gain of 8.
+ Can pull and quick-foot it on shot gun power, too.
- Allowed a QB pressure to Winovich when he was influenced too far inside by a DT slant. Winovich came from outside-in into Martin’s area. QB flush, INC on a third down late in the 1H. Decent ploy by UM. Martin wasn’t physically beaten.
- Got stood-up by UM reserve DT Mone on a key third-and-one early in the 4q. Stuffed, no gain on an inside zone.
C HUNTER LITTLEJOHN (6-3, 305,Soph., Powell, Ohio, Olentangy Liberty)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 60 in Ohio.
* Had offers from Illinois, Minnesota, Purdue, Syracuse. Summer commitment.
+ Nice, solid job of zone blocking, getting out to LB Bush for a square block on an inside zone early in the 2H for a gain of 6.
* Didn’t see anything terrible from him.
RG SIMON STEPANIAK (6-4, 305, Soph., Hamilton, Ohio)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 44 in Ohio.
* Summer commitment. Also had offers from Illinois, Kentucky, Louisville, Minnesota, Syracuse and others, and apparently Penn State at some point.
* Sat out last week. Status unknown this week. Coach Allen hinted that he probably wouldn’t be back.
(51 Mackenzie Nworah, 6-4, 305, R-Fr., Houston) started last week against Michigan.
+ Real nice job picking up a stunting Maurice Hurst and moving his feet well to stay with him and give the QB a chance to throw it away.
* Was a three-star recruit, offered by ASU, BC, Colorado and others but didn’t take any other official visits after a December trip to Indiana, committing two weeks before signing day.
* is a little bit sloppy but has good make-up athleticism to catch up when he might get a step behind.
- Hurst beat him with a shoulder club move for a sack in the third quarter.
RT BRANDON KNIGHT (6-5, 305, Jr., Noblesville, Ind.)
* 5.7 three-star recruit, No. 7 in Indiana.
* Summer commitment with additional offers from Purdue, Illinois, Maryland, Miami (Fla.), Minnesota.
* Quality pass protector.
+ Good pass pro vs Michigan’s Winovich on an inside move on third-and-10 in the first quarter last week.
* Solid, balanced, poised, under control vs Winovich.
+ No problems vs a tiring Gary on a third-and-five late in the 1q, QB with plenty of time to find RB Majette on an out for a gain of 10.
- Beaten for a sack on third and long in the first quarter at PSU by LB Jason Cabinda blitzing off the edge.
DEFENSE
4-2-5 defense. Hybrid LB will play in the box. Wasn’t ideal against Michigan last week.
* They start eight seniors on defense, and this isn’t a bad unit. They aren’t afraid to play some second- and third-stringers, although those guys aren’t quite ready for prime time.
* UM’s O’Korn was 10 of 20 for 58 yards last week. He missed a wide-open Peoples-Jones in the first quarter which could have added about 60 more yards and a TD to the stats.
* Michigan had success with the basic inside zone in the first half, and it’s not like they were blowing people off the ball all the time. IU had some moving parts up front and sometimes didn’t fill all the puzzle pieces.
* Indiana disguises its blitzes well, No. 8 MLB Scales has good closing speed.
* Their CBs are good. There is no mismatch there. If you beat them on a route, you've earned it. They will put their hands on you and challenge the official to throw a flag (as they did in overturning an INT against Michigan).
* The player on defense to attack is safety, No. 30.
THE STATS:
* Indiana’s pass defense is pretty good, as is their third-down defense.
* Indiana is No. 7 in the Big Ten in total defense, and No. 6 in yards allowed per play. That’s a big improvement for Indiana defense.
* Indiana is tied for No. 2 in third down defense (tied with Michigan State), allowing 29.1 pct success. [Michigan is No. 1 by a big margin at 20.5 pct.]
* Indiana is No. 11 in the Big Ten in rush defense (172 yards allowed per game), No. 8 in yards allowed per rush.
* Indiana is No. 4 in pass defense (180 yards per game) [Michigan State is No. 3 at 170.]
* Indiana is tied for No. 5 in the Big Ten in yards allowed per pass play (Michigan State is No. 4, trailing Michigan, PSU and Minnesota).
* Indiana tackled real well in space on the perimeter in the first half against OSU. But I wouldn’t say they were a plus tackling team against UM and PSU.
* Indiana has only one interception this season (Michigan State has 6).
* Indiana has allowed 9 TD passes (Michigan State has allowed 4).
* Indiana is No. 6 in the Big Ten in sacks with 14 (Michigan State is No. 4 with 16).
THE TRAITS
* They are multiple on defense, but sometimes they confuse themselves. Multiple with stunts and slants, especially on third down.
Multiple fronts - not a ton of them - just an assortment.
They’ll do some 30 with a stand-up end, but it’s not a two-gapping 30. It’s cute to be multiple, but is that part of the reason they too often left gaps unfilled on some of those Higdon chunk runs last week. Coach Allen was pondering that this week.
* Last week we said Minnesota lacked speed in the middle of the field, and Michigan State took advantage with the new toss sweep look.
Indiana has some speed issues in pursuit, too. Play-side CBs not great at setting the edge on outside run plays.
But the toss sweep will lose its surprise element this week. Can Michigan State cook up other ways to probe the perimeter?
Michigan ran the toss sweep three times, that I noticed, last week, gaining about 5, 9 and 1 yards.
DEFENSIVE LINE
* They go two-deep at DT, although the reserves they bring in, 51 and 95, aren’t good right now. 95, Wilson, a sophomore, allowed movement vs double-teams last week.
49 DE GREG GOOCH (6-2, 250, Sr., Lyman, Fla.)
* 5.6 three-star recruit, No. 100 in Florida.
* Committed on signing day. Also visited Iowa State and Cincinnati
* Boundary DE
* Lost contain, getting nosy inside, on UM’s one-play overtime TD run of 25 yards by Higdon. Just good enough to lose.
* Ran okay to chase down O’Korn from behind on a QB zone read keeper.
(99 Allen Stallings, 6-2, 240, Soph., Oak Park, Ill.)
* Unranked 5.3 two-star recruit
* Good find for Indiana. No other offers.
* Stallings has come off the bench for 2.5 sacks.
* Good-looking athlete. Can bend his knees, read, stop and start with quickness, close ground. Another St. Dic type of d-end, but he looks better in the airport than St. Dic did.
- Vs the run, he lost his outside containment gap, hooked inside (legally) by LT Mason Cole. His error allowed Higdon to bounce outside for a 12-yard TD run.
91 DT JACOB ROBINSON (6-4, 285, Jr., Westfield, Ind.)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 18 in Indiana.
* Spring commitment over offers from Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin.
* Quality DT. Not a difference-maker, but he does the job.
* 2 sacks
* Not a bad athlete although he is kind of awkward, but he doesn’t quit when pursuing to the sideline.
* He gets free to the QB when Hoff sets a pick for him on DT/DT twist games. MSU’s inconsistent, young o-guards have worked with Brian Allen this week to pick that up. Good test.
* Makes pretty good use of long arms with two-hand shiver to the breast plate on the bull rush.
* I voiced my doubts about him on the Skull Session podcast, but I retract. I saw some DTs allowing some movement, but it wasn’t him. It was the reserves.
+ Good play, using long arms to defeat a cut block and pursuing out to the edge to make first contact on Higdon on a toss sweep
+ Beat UM’s Bredeson to gum up an isolation play before it got started on the first play of the 2H last week, resulting in a two-yard loss.
(98 Jerome Johnson, 6-3, 295, R-Fr., plays some snaps and is terrible vs double teams on inside runs.)
DT NATE HOFF (6-2, 310, Sr., Solon, Ohio/Newport R.I. Naval Academy Prep)
* Originally committed to Navy.
* no-star recruit. Good find by Indiana.
* Camped at MSU. They took a long look at him.
* Quality player, been a quality player for a long time.
* Big dude, hard to move, but he also has a quick upper body, can swim and cross your face and stay there. If he gets an inch on you, you don't get it back.
* Never seems to give up a negative play.
+ Big TFL vs Onwenu on third-and-10 with 4:15 left helped launch Indiana’s comeback from a 20-10 deficit to force overtime.
* Nate Hoff beat Ohio State’s LG and RG on different plays in the opener. Equal opportunity winner.
(51 Mike Barwick, 6-0, 295, Soph.)
* They lose a lot when they sub Hoff out and put Barwick in, in terms of firmness vs double-teams. Barwick not good vs double-teams. Isaac of UM had a 14 yard run on an inside zone because of it, last week in the 2q.
+ Defeated UM LG Bredeson on an end sweep attempt in the third quarter last week.
47 DE ROBERT McCRAY (6-2, 270, Sr., Conyers, Ga.)
* 5.4 two-star recruit, unranked in Ga.
* Committed on signing day, also visited Southern University. Apparently had offers from Boise State, East Carolina and Ga Tech.
+ Pretty good wheels on an inside stunt on third down last week to force a quick O’Korn thrown (complete to TE).
- Lost outside contain on a sweep, getting nosy to the inside, on a 1Q run.
* Decent take-off, plays low as a short St. Dic type of d-end. Not bad, but MSU’s o-tackles have seen better.
- Mediocre with his hands in trying to beat mediocre UM right tackle.
(Brandon Wilson, 6-3, 255, Soph.)
LINEBACKERS
4 LB CHRIS COVINGTON (6-2, 230, Sr., Chicago)
* 5.4 two-star, unranked in Illinois
* Committed on signing day over MAC offers
* Usually plays in space. Had to play in the box as a Sam last week.
- Wasn’t firm and low enough when slanting from the C to the B gap vs a UM inside zone. UM RG Onwenu sealed him from the B gap and put him on skates, gain of 14. This was one of those examples Coach Allen was talking about doing so much on defense that it can mess with your run fits.
* Gets up to speed quickly to go full-tilt into the ball carrier. Respectable.
+ Good break on a TE curl on third-and-four to break it up early in the 4q last week.
(Dameon Willis, 6-1, 230, Jr.)
8 MLB TEGRAY SCALES (6-0, 230, Sr., Cincinnati Colerain)
* 5.7 three-star recruit, No. 29 in Ohio.
* Committed two weeks before signing day, no other visits. Also apparently had offers from Boston College, Lousiville, Minnesota.
* Good vs the ball carrier, not great vs blocks.
* Three sacks vs Penn State. One on an inside blitz, quick. The other two were chase-around, loose plays to the outside, including a green dog (cross key) blitz. He has plus closing speed for a linebacker.
* He leads the team in sacks with 3.5 and tackles with 48. He’s good, not great.
+ Showed some heart in tacking on FB Poggi in the B gap on an isolation play but Poggi caught him 1 yard deep and won the collision. Scales had heart, but at 230 pounds and arriving a little late, there was a little too much daylight. Meanwhile, DE 49 Gooch got carved out of his gap by LT Cole, who isn’t that great. Higdon bounced outside for a 12-yard TD run in the second quarter.
- Might have shown a lack of heart in doing an olé number in avoiding the fullback at the point of attack on a 59-yard TD run by Higdon on a counter early in the fourth quarter.
(Reakwon Jones, 6-2, 230, Soph.)
19 HYBRID LB TONY FIELDS (5-11, 205, Sr., Tallahassee, Fla.)
* 5.6 three-star recruit. No. 87 in Florida.
* Committed two weeks before signing day. No other visits. Apparently had offers from Louisville, Michigan State, NC State.
+ Dodged a TE and delivered a good stick to blow up a WR screen last week.
+ Good INT vs Penn State, covering WR in man to man, under cut it.
- Allowed TD on slot corner fade vs PSU. Good pass, not much he could do.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
* 3-12, quarters in the red zone, with the slot LB off, like Michigan State’s base.
16 CB RASHARD FANT (5-10, 180, Sr., Fairburn, Ga.)
* Four-star recruit, No. 18 in Georgia.
* October commitment, no other visits. Also had offers from FSU, Kentucky, Ole Miss.
* NFL player. Projected as a third- or fourth-rounder by NFLDraftScout.com.
+ Terrific coverage and high-point INT on a third and 7 fade intended for McDoom last week. But it was flagged for pass interference because Fant grabbed some cloth.
+ Good pass break up on a deep INC to Crawford last week.
* No. 3 in the nation in passes defensed last year with 20. Second-team All-Big Ten (media).
CB 14 ANDRE BROWN (6-0, 195, Decatur, Ga.).
- Missed a little time last week after tweaking something in his lower body.
- Not all that aggressive in setting the edge vs the UM toss sweep to his side. He’ll need to improve upon that for Michigan State. Because of him, an otherwise well-defended toss sweep got out for 14 yards in the third quarter last week.
* Will puts hands on you in coverage, got away with it vs a deep route in the Penn State game.
(3 Tyler Green 6-3, 190, Jr., played a little bit in place of Brown last week)
S 30 CHASE DUTRA (6-1, 212, Sr. Brownsbrug, Ind.)
* 5.7 three-star recruit. No. 9 in Indiana.
* Summer commitment over Indiana State and Western Michigan.
- Wildly inconsistent player. Will tackle well on one play, then whiff on the next.
- Beaten on a deep post by two steps by Don Peoples-Jones during UM’s first drive last week, but the QB overthrew. Michigan isolated him in the slot and blew by him. UM should have tried it a few more times.
- Missed a tackle on Issac on a run blitz in the 1q last week.
+ pretty good tackle scraping to the short sinde on a Higdon sweep.
- Missed tackle in being late to fill the eighth gap on an inside zone in the 2q on HIgdon. Missed the tackle at 4 yards, and the play got out for 17.
- Pursuit angle not great on the Paris Campbell long TD by OSU in the opener, squeezed too far to the inside, couldn’t get back to the boundary to tackle Campbell.
(Zeke Walker, 6-2, 215, Jr.)
9 S JON CRAWFORD (6-2, 203, Jr., Largo, Fla.)
* 5.5 three-star, unranked.
* December commitment also took official visits to Iowa, North Carolina, Syracuse.
- Missed a tackle on Higdon on a power in the 1Q, allowing 5 extra yards.
- Beaten on slot fade to the corner vs PSU for a TD.
SPECIAL TEAMS
Kicker Griffin Oakes is a good one. Forced OT with a clutch kick at the end of regulation last week.
+ He is 7 of 8 on field goals for the year.
PR J-Shun Harris (5-8, 170, Jr., Fishers, Ind.)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 13 in Indiana.
* Summer commitment over MAC offers.
* Indiana is No. 1 in the Big Ten in punt return average at 19.0 per (has taken two back for TDs).
* 11 punt returns for a 23.3 average, with 2 TDs including a 70-yarder.
* Is back after tearing ACL in both knees.
+ IU set up for the return when down 20-10 rather than going for a block when UM punting from own 27-yard line with 4:15 left. Good decision. Harris returned it about 55 yards to the Michigan red zone, setting up a TD and IU’s comeback toward overtime.
- Indiana allowed a game-opening KO return for a TD to Penn State’s Saquan Barkley.
P Haydon Whitehead: no opinion.
KR Devonte Williams (5-10, 190, Soph.)
* Indiana is second to last in kickoff return average (16.9 per) [Michigan State is No. 4 at 24.3.]
ADD IT ALL UP
My guess on the ground game arms race? Will Indiana’s ground defense improve enough this week in order to head off a Michigan State tailback attack that is suddenly gaining traction? I’m going to say no. By that, I mean I’ll go with the most recent body of work. Michigan State rushed for 200-plus at Minnesota, at times against a stacked box. Indiana looked leaky in allowing Michigan to rush for 271. It doesn’t take a math major to expect success for Michigan State on the ground in this game, although Paul Konyndyk wisely cautions that in sports last week’s problem is this week’s area of emphasis, so expect improvement if the problem is not a physical or athletic one. In this case, I think MOST of Indiana’s problems in run defense were structural and assignment-oriented rather than physical - thus the problems are somewhat correctable. So the Konyndyk theorem should be noted here.
Ground game, Michigan State 200-plus? I’m going to say 170. If they get over 215, and there are no game-changers on special teams or turnovers, then Michigan State should win by 13 or more.
Will Lewerke show new levels of development, able to operate on a dry track for a change? Quite possible. Indiana's pass defense is good. They have good blitz packages. MSU's pass pro will get a good test but I think MSU is up for it. And MSU may prove to be the most balanced offense Indiana has faced since the Ohio State game - if MSU continues its current trends of improvement.
MSU should stop Indiana's ground game, and hold the Hoosiers below 90 yards.
How much has Ramsey grown as a starter in these last couple of weeks? How much more will he target Cobbs? How much more with the TE be a factor than last week? Indiana has some elements that can test MSU in this part of the matchup, but the overall pass game structure by DeBord has not been great.
Overall, MSU has the ability to score more on Indiana than Michigan did. But Indiana has ability to score more against MSU than they did in the first 55 minutes against Michigan.
Overall, if both play their B game, MSU should be in good shape. But this is a test.
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.com Publisher
EAST LANSING - Indiana is better than Minnesota.
A week ago, I said if Michigan State played its C-game and Minnesota played its B-plus game, the Spartans would still be 7 points better than the Gophers (that was based on the Conor Rhoda version of Minnesota).
Well, that script held up for about 52 minutes, then Rhoda’s replacement found a groove and the Pre-Snap Read forecast became a crop shoot, with QB Croft being a pure variable.
Prior to the Notre Dame, we wrote that QB Wimbush had been struggling. We said the Michigan State-ND game was an arms race of sorts, meaning a race to find out when Wimbush would turn the corner and gain traction as a viable starting QB. There were too many credible sources in South Bend who were saying that Wimbush had played just fine in practice and it was a matter of time until he figured out gameday. Well, the arms race ended in East Lansing as Wimbush took a major step that night. He and ND took it to another level, and Michigan State helped the cause by feeding the Irish 21 points off of turnovers.
Indiana represents another arms race of sorts, in two areas:
1. Their new QB, redshirt freshman Peyton Ramsey, is pretty good. He has some pretty good moments. He doesn’t have the strongest arm in the world. He is a pretty good runner, and effective runner, not quite the athlete that Brian Lewerke is, but he can move the chains with his feet and buy some time with his feet.
He’s not bad. Probably similar to Lewerke of last year.
But he also represents an arms race similar to that of Wimbush. He’s going to be a quality QB at some point in his career, probably a plus QB. The question is when will he make that leap?
He will be making his third start of the season on Saturday. If he remains the same QB who played against Michigan and Penn State, then the Spartans don’t have too much to worry about. He’s solid, but he’s not going to destroy you.
But this is college football, and each week is like a new season, and sometimes young players make astronomical improvements in a short period of time. I’m not saying he is Trace McSorley or CJ Beathard, but if Ramsey makes a McSorley or Beathard type of overnight leap in improvement, well, you have to hope it doesn’t happen on your watch. But it’s possible. He’s not bad. His receivers are good. His pass protection is good. His running game has been decent but not explosive.
Michigan State’s defense is good, solid, pretty heady, with good speed at most positions. But the defense Ramsey and the Hoosiers played against this week will be easier to navigate than the Michigan defense they played against last week.
Indiana’s offense has been on the field against Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. As good as MSU’s defense has played, Indiana will see nothing that would make them flinch.
But here’s the other side of that coin: MSU’s offense is more capable of putting points on the board than Michigan’s. Way more. And MSU’s o-line is better than Penn State’s. Way better. If Brian Lewerke can continue to gain ground on the Trace McSorleys of the world, then Michigan State’s offense will be better than Penn State’s in the coming weeks. Yeah, I said that.
2. Indiana’s ground defense represents the second arms race. By arms race, I mean it’s an area of construction. They are trying to improve. Will they get it up to a winnable level in time to play your team? Their ground defense is part of an arms race.
Their ground defense isn’t bad, from an individual standpoint. But from a collective standpoint, they had way too many plays last week in which their gap integrity, their run fits, were off. Michigan gashed them for 270-plus yards rushing.
Some of Indiana’s ground game problems are correctable, in terms of run fits. New head coach Tom Allen, a defensive guy, spoke at length about that stuff earlier in the week. He’s on it. Did he have “too much” defense in, to the point of leaving his guys a half-step slow to their gaps on a few too many occasions?
Allen made the point that when a defense does as many things as Indiana does (and they are multiple. Not crazy multiple, but they do move a lot up front), it makes it that much harder to play the run fit game of Tetris (my analogy, not his) when trying to get a set of slants and stunts to fit when Michigan is running a quick-breaking counter at you. The gaps change rapids. The Tetris blocks start whirling and falling quicker. And it becomes harder to stay in your gap and get all the gaps fit than if you reduce the volume and stay simple on offense.
To their credit, they generate TFLs with their slants, stunts, movements and well-disguised blitzes.
But will then reduce their volume in order to try to keep things more simple against an Michigan State run game that will run another steady diet of counters, powers, traps and sweeps at them - plus a new weekly run game wrinkle that has yet to be revealed?
It’s an arms race. If they try to improve what they did last week, they will probably blow up more rocket ships than they put in orbit and give up 200-plus on the ground again. Indiana has been working all week to improve its run fit problem. There’s a solid chance they will improve. But can they improve THAT MUCH in seven days? Good question. And the answer to that question will go a long, long way to determining how much ease, or trouble, Michigan State has in trying to win this game.
Or will Indiana reduce the volume, and play things simpler?
Probably a combination of both. One way or another, they aren’t likely to have the run fit problems they had last week. They will have SOME problems, because mode of operation is too hard to change in one week at this point in the season. Run fits are a quality control matter, and Tom Allen should have had it identified and snuffed out in the spring and August camp. But the problem made its way to the field last week and it was the main reason Indiana lost, because Indiana was Michigan’s equal in all other areas.
How much improvement will Indiana make in ground defense? Meanwhile, will MSU’s new success in the tailback run game from a week ago continue to surge forward? Mark Dantonio announced on Friday that LJ Scott will play on Saturday, despite Wednesday’s arrest for a traffic violation (driving with a suspended license). That helps MSU’s chances of winning, as long as he doesn’t fumble.
It’s a week-to-week thing in college football. Which team CONTINUES to improve in week seven? It’s a simple question, but that’s what determines whether Michigan State falls back to the back as a failed pretender or takes another step forward as a possible contender. Indiana will provide a test.
MSU’s improving ground game vs Indiana’s under-construction ground defense. I call it an arms race in name only. It’s actually a ground race.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST
If Michigan State and Indiana each play their B-game, Michigan State should be 10 points better than Indiana. If Michigan State plays with the ball-security smarts the Spartans had against Iowa and Michigan, then the Spartans should be fine. But chances of a spectacular beatdown are low.
I would be very impressed if Michigan State handles its business in all facets of the game and wins by 17 or more. If they do that, then this team will have taken a definite step toward becoming a real threat against Penn State and maybe Ohio State.
Penn State had some great moments in the first half of the season, but some weaknesses have popped up. PSU’s o-line gets a bad rap, and for good reason. PSU’s o-line is shoddy, especially on the right side. Indiana’s pass rush ransacked PSU’s backfield all day. Saquon Barkley is not going to be able to put up Heisman numbers on the ground in the second half of the season behind that o-line, and Penn State is going to have a terrible time on offense against the Wolverines. (Michigan is going to have a tough time against PSU’s defense too. Michigan will have a better chance to get its ground game going than Barkley will against the Wolverines, but PSU will have an edge at QB, WR and pass game construct).
Penn State beat Indiana comfortably on the scoreboard. But at the line of scrimmage, and in the defensive backfields, Indiana played PSU almost straight-up, closely. PSU benefitted from two TDs on special teams and a short-field TD drive early in the game. After a 21-0 lead in the opening minutes, Indiana was surprisingly even with PSU at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. Did PSU’s level of intensity dip due to the big lead? Probably. But line of scrimmage work is line of scrimmage work and there aren’t many linemen who are willing to take plays off and quit in the second quarter. Indiana won as many plays as they lost at the line of scrimmage in the last three quarters of that game. I came away almost as impressed with Indiana against PSU as you might have been with Indiana after last week’s game against Michigan. Indiana can hang with the best in the Big Ten East, and we don’t know for sure whether Michigan State is in that category, yet.
THE MACRO ON INDIANA:
* New head coach in Tom Allen. He was d-coordinator for Indiana last year, after serving as d-coordinator for one year at South Florida. Prior to that, he was linebackers coach at Ole Miss from 2012-14. He’s an Indianapolis native. Seems like a stern disciplinarian. I like his style, but he’s going to need a new offensive coordinator at some point in order for Indiana to get over the hump as a program.
He was elevated to the head coaching job last December after Kevin Wilson was fired for being rude or something like that.
Individually, Indiana is:
* Decent, and growing at QB, with Peyton Ramsey winning the starting job, and rightfully so, over inaccurate Richard Lagow.
* Decent and growing at RB, with true freshman Morgan Ellison.
* Indiana’s o-line is one of the most underrated units in the Big Ten. They aren’t dominant, but they are stable and functional. They are good in pass protection. Michigan managed to get pretty good heat on the QB as the game progressed, with blitzes. But Michigan COULD NOT get consistent pressure on the QB with a standard four-man rush.
* Indiana has quality WRs. Simmie Cobbs looks like an NFL player to me. No. 25, Luke Timian, is a classic possession route guy, who can make crafty plays over the middle to move the chains. Tight end Ian Thomas was not used enough against Michigan, but he is one of the most underrated players in the Big Ten. He’s in his second year at Indiana as a juco transfer. He’s good, at 6-5, with hands, and RAC ability (run after the catch).
* New Indiana o-coordinator Mike DeBord has tried to reinvent himself as an uptempo guy, after two years with Butch Jones at Tennessee. He left Tennessee to take the same job at Indiana, which means he was probably let go in Knoxville.
DeBord was o-coordinator at Michigan from 1997-99, which includes their National Championship season, and the season in which no one in Ann Arbor could identify that Tom Brady was better than Drew Henson. DeBord has been milquetoast since then, including a miserable stint as head coach at Central Michigan, a second tour or duty at Michigan, during which he was o-coordinator for the App State game, then five years as an NFL assistant coach, then he resurfaced at Tennessee.
Indiana still runs an uptempo offense, but it’s not as dynamic and problematic with run-pass conflicts as it was under Kevin Wilson. They still manage to snap the ball at :11 seconds from time to time, but it’s not quite the same outfit.
* On defense, their DTs - Hoff and Robinson - are comparable to Panasiuk and Raequan Williams. They’re pretty good.
Their d-ends are suspect against the run, but pass rush is occasionally decent.
LBs are average with their run-game collisions, below average in run fit consistency (or gap integrity), but a couple of their guys pursue the ball well as athletes.
Their CBs are good, with Fant being an NFL guy. One of their safeties is inconsistent and I don’t have an opinion on the other guy.
They play a lot of second-stringers on defense, and some third-stringers. They have quite a dropoff when playing reserves. The probably play some of those reserves too much, but that’s the luxury a first-year coach has, when trying to develop for the future.
But overall, their defense is better than it was in the Kevin Wilson days. They start eight seniors on defense, with a good one at every level (Hoff at DT, Scales at MLB and Font at CB). This was probably the defense Wilson was working toward before he was fired last year.
* On special teams, their place kicker is one of the best in the Big Ten, leads the conference in FG pct. Their punt return game is outstanding, with their return man having taken two back for TDs this year, and a long one of 50-plus yards serving as a game-changer in the final minutes last week against Michigan.
* In all, Indiana isn’t as physical up front as Iowa, but their QB and WR situation is better than Iowa’s was. We know more about Michigan State now than we did prior to the Michigan State-Iowa game. But we also know more about Indiana. And what we know is that this game has a good chance to be as challenging as the Iowa game was. Michigan State needed to stay clean in the turnover department to win that game. Michigan State might be able to get away with a -1 in this game, but it would be wise not to tempt that formula.
As for turnover margin, Indiana is the worst in the Big Ten. They have produced precious few turnovers this year.
* So this is a game. I call it The Border Skirmish. I’m the only one who calls it that, for now. You can join in with that monicker if you wish. It’s not quite a border war, but it’s an annual scuffle of intrigue, with The Old Brass Spittoon on the line. It’s a game. And why wouldn’t it be? Indiana took Michigan to overtime last week. Indiana benefitted from painfully conservative approach by Michigan to have a chance to rally late. Indiana used a long punt return in the final minutes to cause UM’s strategy to blow up in its face.
Functional QB, good WR, good pass protection, credible running back, good d-tackles, solid secondary, questions in run fits, question in run game collisions, questions in run defense at d-end, quality kicker, quality punt returner. Indiana isn’t perfect, but they have more than enough to give you problems, especially if you help them.
HOT TAKES AND SAUSAGE
* Indiana throws the ball much better than Minnesota did, coming into the game, with Rhoda. But Minnesota ran the ball much better, in previous games, than Indiana does.
Indiana has had some moments with freshman Ellison. But down-in and down-out, Indiana has not been a quality ground attack, overall.
* Both Indiana and Minnesota are good in pass pro. Minnesota is better, statistically, in pass pro than Indiana. But I like Indiana’s o-tackles in pass pro better.
* The Hoosiers rank dead last in the Big Ten in yards per carry. Second to last in yards per play on offense.
* Indiana is dead last in the Big Ten in turnover margin at -9. That might mean the percentages say they are due for a lift. Or it might mean they’ll continue to have a problem with it every week. Michigan State is No. 8 in the Big Ten in turnover margin at +0 (thanks to eight ugly fumbles).
* Indiana’s defense, surprisingly, is not bad. It’s pretty good, statistically and to the eye. That’s a big change from the Kevin Wilson days. (But their offense has taken a backward step).
* On pass defense, IU has allowed fewer than 100 yards through the air in consecutive weeks for the first time since 1989. The cover well at CB, they have a pretty decent pass rush, they bring some decent linebacker blitzes. They aren’t bad on pass defense, although No. 30 at safety is questionable.
* Their punt returner, J-Shun Harris, has returned two for TDs this year. He is the best in the Big Ten.
* Their primary WR, Simmie Cobbs, is a big, 6-foot-4, long-armed, strong guy. QB Ramsey didn’t target him enough last week against Michigan. But he had terrific moments against Ohio State and Virginia (and a couple against Penn State).
* Last year, Indiana finished 6-7 after losing to Utah in the Foster Farms Bowl, 26-24,with Tom Allen taking over for Kevin Wilson.
* It’s been written that IU football is now in its best place in 25 years.
* Indiana is looking for its third straight bowl bid.
THIS YEAR’S RESULTS
Indiana is 3-3, 0-3 in the Big Ten
Ohio State 49, Indiana 21
Indiana 34, Virginia 17*
vs Florida International (canceled due to hurricane. Indiana picked up Charleston Southern as an opponent for its open date on Oct. 7)
Indiana 52, Georgia Southern 17
Penn State 45, Indiana 14
Indiana 27, Charleston Southern 0
Michigan 27, Indiana 20 (OT)
* That’s one of the best non-conference wins of the year for the Big Ten. Virginia is 5-1 with wins over Duke, UNC, Boise State and UConn.
INDIANA OFFENSE
* They don’t stretch our slot LB with run-pass conflicts (and thereby stretch the interior B gap) the way they did when Kevin Wilson had Tevin Coleman or Jordan Howard at RB.
* “Indiana is a tempo team. They’re not terribly complex: slant, fade, in-cut,” said ABC analyst Brock Huard.
* Ranks No. 6 in the Big Ten in total offense (Michigan State is No. 5) and No. 6 in scoring offense, but those numbers get skewed by extra possessions created by tempo. More telling, Indiana ranks No. 13 in the Big Ten in yards per play, ahead of only Rutgers (Michigan State is No. 6 in the Big Ten in yards per play, not bad considering that one third of MSU’s games have been played in rain).
* IU ranks No. 5 in passing offense at 249 yards per game but No. 13 in the more important yards-per-pass-attempt category at 6.3. (Michigan State is tied for 11th in the Big Ten at 6.6 yards per pass attempt, but again … rain has had an impact on that).
THE LATEST ON Michigan State
* Enough games have been played that Big Ten stats are starting to paint an interesting picture:
+ Michigan State ranks No. 3 in the Big Ten in rush offense at 192 yards per game (fourth in the Big Ten in yards per carry at 4.5, trailing Ohio State, Penn State and Wisconsin).
+ Michigan State ranks No. 3 in the Big Ten in rush defense (93 yards per game), and tied for third in yards allowed per carry.
* Michigan State d-end Kenny Willekes is No. 5 in the Big Ten in sacks with four, and No. 4 in the Big Ten in TFLs with 8 (six solos, four assists equals eight, they say).
THE MICRO: On Indiana Personnel
QB PEYTON RAMSEY (6-2, 210, R-Fr, Cincinnati Elder)
* Was a 5.4 two-star recruit, and a spring commitment over offers from Illinois, BC, Wake Forest. Rivals missed on this evaluation.
* Started for the first time two weeks ago against Charleston Southern.
* 62 pct completions, 7 TDs, 4 INTs, 135 yards per game.
* Had a little success with QB draws vs PSU, counting few people in the box and it becomes a pass-run option for Ramsey, with the option to tuck and run almost immediately.
* Last week he was a respectable 20 of 41 for 178 yards against Michigan’s outstanding pass defense.
* Ramsey was 32 of 41 for 321 yards against Charleston Southern with 2 TDs and 1 INT.
* Most IU throws are quick-drop, short reads, a lot of slants and fades, probably too man, but when he wanted to take longer reads, his o-line usually gave him pretty good time to throw through the first two and a half quarters. UM’s pass rush became more of a problem two-thirds of the way through the game. He was sacked twice.
* His 48% completion percentage vs Michigan is quite a bit better than the seasonal rate UM has been allowing.
* He rushed 14 times for a net of 14 yards last week (gained 35, lost 21). Had along run of 9 yards.
- INT on a deep fade for WR Taysir Mack with 6:10 to go in the game. Great leaping INT by UM’s Lavert Hill.
* He looked for No. 25, Timian A LOT on third downs last week, including a big third-and-10 conversion in the red zone on an intermediate dig with 3:51 to play and IU down 20-10. Good pass protection to find him.
+ stepped up into the pocket vs a 5 man rush to find WR 22 Whop Philyor on a shallow crossing route for an 8-yard TD pass to cut it to 20-17 with 3:27 left last week.
* On the game-tying drive, he found Cobbs on a 10-yard square in and Timian dig route, caught at 15 yards vs man to man and good for 23 yards, then Cobbs for 10 more on a crossing route to get into field goal range.
* In overtime, he was stopped on a zone read keeper and a pair of roll-out INCs. Indiana coaches were criticized for rolling him out to his off hand.
* He came off the bench at Virginia to go 16 of 20 and help Indiana win on the road.
* As a runner, Ramsey is something less than Brian Lewerke, maybe in the Tyler O’Connor category for now.
* He carried the ball on two zone read keepers on the opening drive vs Michigan for 6 and 5 yards. One to the edge, and one up the middle.
(Richard Lagow, 6-6, 240, Sr., juco transfer)
* Lagow is streaky, but sometimes good. That gives you an idea of what they think about Ramsey.
* He was inaccurate against Penn State. Ramsey relieved him and played better. Ramsey won the job in the days that followed.
* IU runs a lot of fades vs press. I think Lagow throws the fade better than Ramsey. When Lagow gets in a hot rhythm with those fades to his big WRs, he can be a pain in the neck.
* Lagow started last year. Has four 300-plus yard passing games, the fourth most in school history.
* Completed 38 pct of this passes in the bowl loss last year.
* This year: 56 pct completions, 4 TDs, 3 INTs, 136 yards passing per game.
* Indiana is No. 10 in third down pct at 37.3 (Michigan State is No. 4 at 41.6).
Login to view embedded media
THIRD AND MEDIUM SAMPLE STUDY
+ Short out route to RB Majette for a gain of 10 last week in the 1Q.
+ Ramsey creative flip to No. 25 WR Timian while Ramsey was being tackled from behind, got it away for a completion to move the chains last week on their second possession. Creative.
= Cobbs dropped a slant last week in the 1q in tight handsy coverage.
- QB had him open but didn’t pass to No. 7 Taysir Mack on a slant on third-and-10 in the second quarter last week. Held the ball, dumped it off to the RB for a short gain, then punt.
* WR Taysir Mack (No. 7) was open on a neat little play, with three receivers crammed to the boundary. The other two ran interference for him, heading downfield on verts, while No. 7 cut to the inside behind their wakes, open vs man to man on a slant. But QB didn’t see him.
Decent play by DeBoard. Freshman QB didn’t execute.
WIDE RECEIVERS
* When IU stacks two WRs to each side, the deeper WR (the ones farthest from the line of scrimmage) are often used as the in-route receivers.
* They run a handful of pass plays with FIB (formation into the boundary), meaning two (sometimes three) WRs to the short side of the field. That can create traffic issues for the DBs. The good news is that LJ Scott doesn’t play DB. (It’s a thinker)
WR 1 SIMMIE COBBS (6-4, 220, R-Jr., Oak Park, Ill.)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 27 in Illinois. Also visited Purdue.
* No. 4 in the Big Ten in receiving with 37 catches (3 TDs), averaging 68 yards receiving per game.
* Had 4 catches for 39 yards against Michigan.
* He is a very impressive player when he extends his arms and catches it high, like Matt Trannon, or your dad against you when you were 10.
* Is very hard to stop on fades, whether jumpball or back-shoulder, WHEN the QB is accurate.
+ Had catches of 12 and 16 yards on the opening drive vs Charleston Southern two weeks ago, both on RPO crossing routes vs off coverage. He won’t see that much off coverage vs Michigan State.
I didn’t notice that much RPO vs Michigan or Penn State from Indiana. Maybe it’s something they do more of vs off coverage.
* Had a terrific TD vs Ohio State on a back shoulder fade.
++ Real nice 29-yard TD at Virginia. Three WRs crammed to the short side (FIB, formation into the boundary). Cobbs the outside guy. The two inside guys clear out with deep verticals. Cobbs runs a crossing route across their wake. Caught at 5 yards, 24 yards afte contact, very good run-after-catch ability.
- Dropped a third-and-three slant last week, with a UM DB having hands all over him, but still should have been caught.
* Had a 60-yarder called back last week because he stepped out of bounds earlier in the route and didn’t completely reestablish himself on the field. Caught that one high on a deep fade. Impressive.
(Taysir Mack, 6-2, 200, R-Fr., Brooklyn, NY)
* 9 catches on the year, two TDs.
* 5.6 three-star recruit. Also visited Rutgers. Had a Syracuse offer.
(I didn't put the title on this YouTube film, but I don't necessarily disagree with its title):
Login to view embedded media
25 WR LUKE TIMIAN (6-0, 195, R-Jr., Southlake, TX)
* Was a 5.4, two-star recruit, walked on at Indiana. Had an offer from Columbia. Visited Minnesota.
* Slippery guy, a poor man’s Blair White.
* Ramsey looked for No. 25 time after time on third downs last week. usually as a slot WR on in routes.
+ 6 yard gain on a slant as the middle of three WRs last week, as part of one of IU’s bread-and-butter plays (‘70s term).
* Had a team-high 7 catches for 95 yards last week.
* Possession type receiver.
+ Had a 17-yarder last week on a dig route, operating as a stacked WR. The stacked WR has a natural free release; IU uses it to gain a step of leverage on in routes. Sometimes IU stacks two receivers to each side. Usually symmetrical routes to each side.
* Michigan double-teamed him in the end zone on the fourth-down stoppage in overtime. He was the guy UM sought to stop.
WR DONAVAN HALE (6-4, 225, JR., Largo, Fla.)
* 5.4, two-star recruit. Also visited Syracuse. Also offered by Minnesota and South Florida.
* Sat out last week with an injury. Status unknown this week.
* 7 catches on the year.
(22 Whop Philyor, 5-11, 180, Fr., Plant City, Fla.) has one of the great names in the Big Ten. (Careful with that one.) He had three catches for 13 yards last week including an 8-yard TD grab which cut UM’s lead to 20-17.
* Was a 5.4, two-star recruit. Apparently had offers from Arizona, Iowa State, Louisville, Maryland, Va Tech, Syracuse.
RUNNING BACKS
* IU ranks No. 10 in rushing offense (137 yards per game) and dead last in the Big Ten in yards per carry (3.5), that’s a big change from the Kevin Wilson days of Tevin Coleman and the explosive run-pass conflict, sometimes featuring the run blast.
But Ellison is a talent on the rise.
* Indiana averaged only 3.5 yards per rush against Charleston Southern two weeks ago. The Hoosiers rushed for 157 yards that day.
* They will sprinkle in some zone read option. They don’t live on it.
* Inside zone. Some interior counters and powers. Not much in terms of sweeps or toss plays or fly sweeps.
* Didn’t see one bubble screen in nine quarters of film study.
RB MORGAN ELLISON (6-1, 225, Fr., Pickerington, Ohio)
* No. 30 in Ohio, also visited Ohio University. Had MAC offers. Rivals had him rated higher than most, and got it right.
* Rushed for 68 yards on 14 carries last week including a 31-yarder
* Ran for 187 yards vs Georgia Southern in late September.
+ A rambler. Kind of a watered down LJ Scott type. Solid player.
* Morgan Ellison rushed 14 times for 68 yards against Michigan. The Hoosiers netted 80 yards rushing against the Wolverines.
* Ellison rushed for 48 yards on 16 carries (3.0 per) vs Charleston Southern.
+ On the 31-yarder, UM outside LB Khaleke Hudson came out too wide to honor the QB on a zone read, leaving too much daylight outside the tight end. Ellison with good vision, decent burst, ran to daylight and untouched for the first 25 yards.
+ 8 yard TD run last week on an inside zone. RT Brandon Knight downblocked a tired Devin Bush as UM was caught on the field too long vs a tempo offense and wore down badly for the final two plays of this TD drive which cut UM’s lead to 13-10.
Login to view embedded media
24 RB MIKE MAJETTE (5-11, 210, Jr., Woodbridge, Va.)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 36 in Virginia.
* 22 carries on the year for a net of 22 yards.
* Is on the field a lot but had only one carry last week. I gather that when he’s on the field, the pass tendency is greater.
* He had 5 catches last week for 49 yards.
* 12 catches on the year for 90 yards.
* Made an error in blitz protection last week, resulting in QB Ramsey getting banged up and sidelined for a few plays.
+ 22-yard gain on a nice “wide receiver screen” to the RB out of empty formation last week in the 1H.
* Attempted a trans-contintental pass back to Ramsey last week in the 1Q but it fell incomplete. They were trying to duplicate the play Purdue hit Michigan with. It didn’t work because, I think, UM was in zone coverage. But BTN’s camera man sucks so bad and felt he (or she) had to zoom in on the football as soon as it was snapped. Dude needs to stick to basketball (or BTN needs to give him different instructions. Terrible. That’s one area in which the NFL TV product is consistently better than college - cameramen in the NFL show all 22 players on most plays.) This dude for BTN zoomed so quickly. I am calling for a drug test.
* Diving catch on wheel route in the red zone vs Ohio State.
TIGHT END
IAN THOMAS (6-5, 248, Sr., Baltimore, Md./Nassau Community College, NY)
* Out of nowhere, this guy is going to get All-Big Ten votes. Good tight end.
* 17 catches on the year, 3 TDs. Had a 54-yarder vs PSU when getting matched up with a LB in man to man on a crossing route.
* 8-yard gain on an over route on third-and-10 midway through the 4q last week.
+ 22 yard catch on a deep over route from Lagow early in the Penn State game.
* Had a one-handed catch on a pass thrown behind him midway through the PSU game.
* TD vs OSU on an out and up.
* He’s a weapon.
* If I had time, I would go back and watch his blocking more closely to see just how well-rounded he is. I didn’t notice his blocking one way or another when going through things initially.
OFFENSIVE LINE
* Their o-line is good - individually and collectively. I’m not sure why they don’t run the ball better.
* IU has done a good job evaluating and developing o-linemen. These guys look sturdy, they move well.
None of them are dumpy or defective.
IU doesn’t get first pick of the o-line recruiting pool, but they are doing something right. Dan Feeney and Jason Spriggs were a couple of Indiana OL NFL Draft picks in the last three years. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were one or two NFL guys in the current Hoosier OL batch.
* Indiana is No 8 in the Big Ten in sacks allowed with 13 (Michigan State is No. 3, having allowed only six sacks), but their pass pro looked pretty good in the first half against Michigan and for good chunks of the PSU game.
Their sack numbers are high probably due to having played PSU, OSU and UM.
* The center and guards each were beaten by Mo Hurst as part of TFLs last week, but he did that to MSU’s center and guards too.
* Freshmen (two true frosh) make up the second-string on the offensive line at four of the five positions.
54 LT COY CRONK (6-5, 305, Soph, Lafayette, Ind.)
* 5.6 three-star, ranked No. 13 in Indiana.
* Also visited Iowa State. Had additional offers from Illinois, Vanderbilt.
* Very much functional.
* Moves okay laterally in pass pro. Looks shorter than 6-5. Doesn’t have long arms, but he gets by.
+ Real good, smooth job of passing off one man to pick up a stunting Rashan Gary coming inside-out into his Cronk’s area. Filtered it out with no problem. QB had time to read then stepped up and scrambled for a 5 yard gain.
- Allowed a pressure to Rashan Gary on third-and-seven but got enough of Gary for long enough, then Gary got off of him and was tackling the QB Ramsey when Ramsey completed a pass while falling down to the Blair White guy for a gain of 8 and a first down in the first quarter.
LG 76 WES MARTIN (6-3, 310, Jr., West Milton, Ohio )
* 5.4, two-star recruit, unranked in Ohio. Had MAC offers.
* Mobile out to the flat, cut-blocking a Michigan CB last week on the opening drive, and flagged for doing it illegally. But that was a scary/sinister play. He can get out and get low. Pain in the rear.
+ Real nice, quick, sudden, tough trap block last week to help spring Ellison for a gain of 8.
+ Can pull and quick-foot it on shot gun power, too.
- Allowed a QB pressure to Winovich when he was influenced too far inside by a DT slant. Winovich came from outside-in into Martin’s area. QB flush, INC on a third down late in the 1H. Decent ploy by UM. Martin wasn’t physically beaten.
- Got stood-up by UM reserve DT Mone on a key third-and-one early in the 4q. Stuffed, no gain on an inside zone.
C HUNTER LITTLEJOHN (6-3, 305,Soph., Powell, Ohio, Olentangy Liberty)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 60 in Ohio.
* Had offers from Illinois, Minnesota, Purdue, Syracuse. Summer commitment.
+ Nice, solid job of zone blocking, getting out to LB Bush for a square block on an inside zone early in the 2H for a gain of 6.
* Didn’t see anything terrible from him.
RG SIMON STEPANIAK (6-4, 305, Soph., Hamilton, Ohio)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 44 in Ohio.
* Summer commitment. Also had offers from Illinois, Kentucky, Louisville, Minnesota, Syracuse and others, and apparently Penn State at some point.
* Sat out last week. Status unknown this week. Coach Allen hinted that he probably wouldn’t be back.
(51 Mackenzie Nworah, 6-4, 305, R-Fr., Houston) started last week against Michigan.
+ Real nice job picking up a stunting Maurice Hurst and moving his feet well to stay with him and give the QB a chance to throw it away.
* Was a three-star recruit, offered by ASU, BC, Colorado and others but didn’t take any other official visits after a December trip to Indiana, committing two weeks before signing day.
* is a little bit sloppy but has good make-up athleticism to catch up when he might get a step behind.
- Hurst beat him with a shoulder club move for a sack in the third quarter.
RT BRANDON KNIGHT (6-5, 305, Jr., Noblesville, Ind.)
* 5.7 three-star recruit, No. 7 in Indiana.
* Summer commitment with additional offers from Purdue, Illinois, Maryland, Miami (Fla.), Minnesota.
* Quality pass protector.
+ Good pass pro vs Michigan’s Winovich on an inside move on third-and-10 in the first quarter last week.
* Solid, balanced, poised, under control vs Winovich.
+ No problems vs a tiring Gary on a third-and-five late in the 1q, QB with plenty of time to find RB Majette on an out for a gain of 10.
- Beaten for a sack on third and long in the first quarter at PSU by LB Jason Cabinda blitzing off the edge.
DEFENSE
4-2-5 defense. Hybrid LB will play in the box. Wasn’t ideal against Michigan last week.
* They start eight seniors on defense, and this isn’t a bad unit. They aren’t afraid to play some second- and third-stringers, although those guys aren’t quite ready for prime time.
* UM’s O’Korn was 10 of 20 for 58 yards last week. He missed a wide-open Peoples-Jones in the first quarter which could have added about 60 more yards and a TD to the stats.
* Michigan had success with the basic inside zone in the first half, and it’s not like they were blowing people off the ball all the time. IU had some moving parts up front and sometimes didn’t fill all the puzzle pieces.
* Indiana disguises its blitzes well, No. 8 MLB Scales has good closing speed.
* Their CBs are good. There is no mismatch there. If you beat them on a route, you've earned it. They will put their hands on you and challenge the official to throw a flag (as they did in overturning an INT against Michigan).
* The player on defense to attack is safety, No. 30.
THE STATS:
* Indiana’s pass defense is pretty good, as is their third-down defense.
* Indiana is No. 7 in the Big Ten in total defense, and No. 6 in yards allowed per play. That’s a big improvement for Indiana defense.
* Indiana is tied for No. 2 in third down defense (tied with Michigan State), allowing 29.1 pct success. [Michigan is No. 1 by a big margin at 20.5 pct.]
* Indiana is No. 11 in the Big Ten in rush defense (172 yards allowed per game), No. 8 in yards allowed per rush.
* Indiana is No. 4 in pass defense (180 yards per game) [Michigan State is No. 3 at 170.]
* Indiana is tied for No. 5 in the Big Ten in yards allowed per pass play (Michigan State is No. 4, trailing Michigan, PSU and Minnesota).
* Indiana tackled real well in space on the perimeter in the first half against OSU. But I wouldn’t say they were a plus tackling team against UM and PSU.
* Indiana has only one interception this season (Michigan State has 6).
* Indiana has allowed 9 TD passes (Michigan State has allowed 4).
* Indiana is No. 6 in the Big Ten in sacks with 14 (Michigan State is No. 4 with 16).
THE TRAITS
* They are multiple on defense, but sometimes they confuse themselves. Multiple with stunts and slants, especially on third down.
Multiple fronts - not a ton of them - just an assortment.
They’ll do some 30 with a stand-up end, but it’s not a two-gapping 30. It’s cute to be multiple, but is that part of the reason they too often left gaps unfilled on some of those Higdon chunk runs last week. Coach Allen was pondering that this week.
* Last week we said Minnesota lacked speed in the middle of the field, and Michigan State took advantage with the new toss sweep look.
Indiana has some speed issues in pursuit, too. Play-side CBs not great at setting the edge on outside run plays.
But the toss sweep will lose its surprise element this week. Can Michigan State cook up other ways to probe the perimeter?
Michigan ran the toss sweep three times, that I noticed, last week, gaining about 5, 9 and 1 yards.
DEFENSIVE LINE
* They go two-deep at DT, although the reserves they bring in, 51 and 95, aren’t good right now. 95, Wilson, a sophomore, allowed movement vs double-teams last week.
49 DE GREG GOOCH (6-2, 250, Sr., Lyman, Fla.)
* 5.6 three-star recruit, No. 100 in Florida.
* Committed on signing day. Also visited Iowa State and Cincinnati
* Boundary DE
* Lost contain, getting nosy inside, on UM’s one-play overtime TD run of 25 yards by Higdon. Just good enough to lose.
* Ran okay to chase down O’Korn from behind on a QB zone read keeper.
(99 Allen Stallings, 6-2, 240, Soph., Oak Park, Ill.)
* Unranked 5.3 two-star recruit
* Good find for Indiana. No other offers.
* Stallings has come off the bench for 2.5 sacks.
* Good-looking athlete. Can bend his knees, read, stop and start with quickness, close ground. Another St. Dic type of d-end, but he looks better in the airport than St. Dic did.
- Vs the run, he lost his outside containment gap, hooked inside (legally) by LT Mason Cole. His error allowed Higdon to bounce outside for a 12-yard TD run.
91 DT JACOB ROBINSON (6-4, 285, Jr., Westfield, Ind.)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 18 in Indiana.
* Spring commitment over offers from Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin.
* Quality DT. Not a difference-maker, but he does the job.
* 2 sacks
* Not a bad athlete although he is kind of awkward, but he doesn’t quit when pursuing to the sideline.
* He gets free to the QB when Hoff sets a pick for him on DT/DT twist games. MSU’s inconsistent, young o-guards have worked with Brian Allen this week to pick that up. Good test.
* Makes pretty good use of long arms with two-hand shiver to the breast plate on the bull rush.
* I voiced my doubts about him on the Skull Session podcast, but I retract. I saw some DTs allowing some movement, but it wasn’t him. It was the reserves.
+ Good play, using long arms to defeat a cut block and pursuing out to the edge to make first contact on Higdon on a toss sweep
+ Beat UM’s Bredeson to gum up an isolation play before it got started on the first play of the 2H last week, resulting in a two-yard loss.
(98 Jerome Johnson, 6-3, 295, R-Fr., plays some snaps and is terrible vs double teams on inside runs.)
DT NATE HOFF (6-2, 310, Sr., Solon, Ohio/Newport R.I. Naval Academy Prep)
* Originally committed to Navy.
* no-star recruit. Good find by Indiana.
* Camped at MSU. They took a long look at him.
* Quality player, been a quality player for a long time.
* Big dude, hard to move, but he also has a quick upper body, can swim and cross your face and stay there. If he gets an inch on you, you don't get it back.
* Never seems to give up a negative play.
+ Big TFL vs Onwenu on third-and-10 with 4:15 left helped launch Indiana’s comeback from a 20-10 deficit to force overtime.
* Nate Hoff beat Ohio State’s LG and RG on different plays in the opener. Equal opportunity winner.
(51 Mike Barwick, 6-0, 295, Soph.)
* They lose a lot when they sub Hoff out and put Barwick in, in terms of firmness vs double-teams. Barwick not good vs double-teams. Isaac of UM had a 14 yard run on an inside zone because of it, last week in the 2q.
+ Defeated UM LG Bredeson on an end sweep attempt in the third quarter last week.
47 DE ROBERT McCRAY (6-2, 270, Sr., Conyers, Ga.)
* 5.4 two-star recruit, unranked in Ga.
* Committed on signing day, also visited Southern University. Apparently had offers from Boise State, East Carolina and Ga Tech.
+ Pretty good wheels on an inside stunt on third down last week to force a quick O’Korn thrown (complete to TE).
- Lost outside contain on a sweep, getting nosy to the inside, on a 1Q run.
* Decent take-off, plays low as a short St. Dic type of d-end. Not bad, but MSU’s o-tackles have seen better.
- Mediocre with his hands in trying to beat mediocre UM right tackle.
(Brandon Wilson, 6-3, 255, Soph.)
LINEBACKERS
4 LB CHRIS COVINGTON (6-2, 230, Sr., Chicago)
* 5.4 two-star, unranked in Illinois
* Committed on signing day over MAC offers
* Usually plays in space. Had to play in the box as a Sam last week.
- Wasn’t firm and low enough when slanting from the C to the B gap vs a UM inside zone. UM RG Onwenu sealed him from the B gap and put him on skates, gain of 14. This was one of those examples Coach Allen was talking about doing so much on defense that it can mess with your run fits.
* Gets up to speed quickly to go full-tilt into the ball carrier. Respectable.
+ Good break on a TE curl on third-and-four to break it up early in the 4q last week.
(Dameon Willis, 6-1, 230, Jr.)
8 MLB TEGRAY SCALES (6-0, 230, Sr., Cincinnati Colerain)
* 5.7 three-star recruit, No. 29 in Ohio.
* Committed two weeks before signing day, no other visits. Also apparently had offers from Boston College, Lousiville, Minnesota.
* Good vs the ball carrier, not great vs blocks.
* Three sacks vs Penn State. One on an inside blitz, quick. The other two were chase-around, loose plays to the outside, including a green dog (cross key) blitz. He has plus closing speed for a linebacker.
* He leads the team in sacks with 3.5 and tackles with 48. He’s good, not great.
+ Showed some heart in tacking on FB Poggi in the B gap on an isolation play but Poggi caught him 1 yard deep and won the collision. Scales had heart, but at 230 pounds and arriving a little late, there was a little too much daylight. Meanwhile, DE 49 Gooch got carved out of his gap by LT Cole, who isn’t that great. Higdon bounced outside for a 12-yard TD run in the second quarter.
- Might have shown a lack of heart in doing an olé number in avoiding the fullback at the point of attack on a 59-yard TD run by Higdon on a counter early in the fourth quarter.
(Reakwon Jones, 6-2, 230, Soph.)
19 HYBRID LB TONY FIELDS (5-11, 205, Sr., Tallahassee, Fla.)
* 5.6 three-star recruit. No. 87 in Florida.
* Committed two weeks before signing day. No other visits. Apparently had offers from Louisville, Michigan State, NC State.
+ Dodged a TE and delivered a good stick to blow up a WR screen last week.
+ Good INT vs Penn State, covering WR in man to man, under cut it.
- Allowed TD on slot corner fade vs PSU. Good pass, not much he could do.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
* 3-12, quarters in the red zone, with the slot LB off, like Michigan State’s base.
16 CB RASHARD FANT (5-10, 180, Sr., Fairburn, Ga.)
* Four-star recruit, No. 18 in Georgia.
* October commitment, no other visits. Also had offers from FSU, Kentucky, Ole Miss.
* NFL player. Projected as a third- or fourth-rounder by NFLDraftScout.com.
+ Terrific coverage and high-point INT on a third and 7 fade intended for McDoom last week. But it was flagged for pass interference because Fant grabbed some cloth.
+ Good pass break up on a deep INC to Crawford last week.
* No. 3 in the nation in passes defensed last year with 20. Second-team All-Big Ten (media).
CB 14 ANDRE BROWN (6-0, 195, Decatur, Ga.).
- Missed a little time last week after tweaking something in his lower body.
- Not all that aggressive in setting the edge vs the UM toss sweep to his side. He’ll need to improve upon that for Michigan State. Because of him, an otherwise well-defended toss sweep got out for 14 yards in the third quarter last week.
* Will puts hands on you in coverage, got away with it vs a deep route in the Penn State game.
(3 Tyler Green 6-3, 190, Jr., played a little bit in place of Brown last week)
S 30 CHASE DUTRA (6-1, 212, Sr. Brownsbrug, Ind.)
* 5.7 three-star recruit. No. 9 in Indiana.
* Summer commitment over Indiana State and Western Michigan.
- Wildly inconsistent player. Will tackle well on one play, then whiff on the next.
- Beaten on a deep post by two steps by Don Peoples-Jones during UM’s first drive last week, but the QB overthrew. Michigan isolated him in the slot and blew by him. UM should have tried it a few more times.
- Missed a tackle on Issac on a run blitz in the 1q last week.
+ pretty good tackle scraping to the short sinde on a Higdon sweep.
- Missed tackle in being late to fill the eighth gap on an inside zone in the 2q on HIgdon. Missed the tackle at 4 yards, and the play got out for 17.
- Pursuit angle not great on the Paris Campbell long TD by OSU in the opener, squeezed too far to the inside, couldn’t get back to the boundary to tackle Campbell.
(Zeke Walker, 6-2, 215, Jr.)
9 S JON CRAWFORD (6-2, 203, Jr., Largo, Fla.)
* 5.5 three-star, unranked.
* December commitment also took official visits to Iowa, North Carolina, Syracuse.
- Missed a tackle on Higdon on a power in the 1Q, allowing 5 extra yards.
- Beaten on slot fade to the corner vs PSU for a TD.
SPECIAL TEAMS
Kicker Griffin Oakes is a good one. Forced OT with a clutch kick at the end of regulation last week.
+ He is 7 of 8 on field goals for the year.
PR J-Shun Harris (5-8, 170, Jr., Fishers, Ind.)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, No. 13 in Indiana.
* Summer commitment over MAC offers.
* Indiana is No. 1 in the Big Ten in punt return average at 19.0 per (has taken two back for TDs).
* 11 punt returns for a 23.3 average, with 2 TDs including a 70-yarder.
* Is back after tearing ACL in both knees.
+ IU set up for the return when down 20-10 rather than going for a block when UM punting from own 27-yard line with 4:15 left. Good decision. Harris returned it about 55 yards to the Michigan red zone, setting up a TD and IU’s comeback toward overtime.
- Indiana allowed a game-opening KO return for a TD to Penn State’s Saquan Barkley.
P Haydon Whitehead: no opinion.
KR Devonte Williams (5-10, 190, Soph.)
* Indiana is second to last in kickoff return average (16.9 per) [Michigan State is No. 4 at 24.3.]
ADD IT ALL UP
My guess on the ground game arms race? Will Indiana’s ground defense improve enough this week in order to head off a Michigan State tailback attack that is suddenly gaining traction? I’m going to say no. By that, I mean I’ll go with the most recent body of work. Michigan State rushed for 200-plus at Minnesota, at times against a stacked box. Indiana looked leaky in allowing Michigan to rush for 271. It doesn’t take a math major to expect success for Michigan State on the ground in this game, although Paul Konyndyk wisely cautions that in sports last week’s problem is this week’s area of emphasis, so expect improvement if the problem is not a physical or athletic one. In this case, I think MOST of Indiana’s problems in run defense were structural and assignment-oriented rather than physical - thus the problems are somewhat correctable. So the Konyndyk theorem should be noted here.
Ground game, Michigan State 200-plus? I’m going to say 170. If they get over 215, and there are no game-changers on special teams or turnovers, then Michigan State should win by 13 or more.
Will Lewerke show new levels of development, able to operate on a dry track for a change? Quite possible. Indiana's pass defense is good. They have good blitz packages. MSU's pass pro will get a good test but I think MSU is up for it. And MSU may prove to be the most balanced offense Indiana has faced since the Ohio State game - if MSU continues its current trends of improvement.
MSU should stop Indiana's ground game, and hold the Hoosiers below 90 yards.
How much has Ramsey grown as a starter in these last couple of weeks? How much more will he target Cobbs? How much more with the TE be a factor than last week? Indiana has some elements that can test MSU in this part of the matchup, but the overall pass game structure by DeBord has not been great.
Overall, MSU has the ability to score more on Indiana than Michigan did. But Indiana has ability to score more against MSU than they did in the first 55 minutes against Michigan.
Overall, if both play their B game, MSU should be in good shape. But this is a test.
Monday MSU Football Notebook, by Paul Konyndyk
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 1 Replies
Dantonio: resilience part of MSU's developing identity
Paul Konyndyk | Associate Editor
Mark Dantonio has been impressed with his young team's ability to handle adversity, including self-inflicted adversity.
Associated Press
Watching all but a handful of plays in the third quarter of a 30-27 victory at Minnesota, may have been a factor in Michigan State’s slippage on defense during a furious fourth-quarter Golden Gopher comeback, which was thwarted by a pair of onside kick recoveries by Khari Willis and Cody White.
“Our defense was not on the field almost the entire third quarter,” Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio said during his weekly teleconference on Sunday. “I think it was 27 plays to four. So, then they had to come back in and we did not play well at that point.
“The game got very interesting but we closed out, won the football game and we’re 5-1 and made it difficult for them to run the football, had explosive plays.”
Changing quarterbacks from Conor Rhoda to Demry Croft provided a much-needed spark for a Minnesota offense, which had been stagnant until the fourth quarter. Croft ability to scrambling for positive yards on broken plays gave him the confidence needed to make big plays in the passing game down the stretch.
In retrospect, Dantonio believes his ballclub may have erred by defending Croft the same way they defended Rhoda.
“I thought we got a little lax there at the end and we didn't play as well as we had early,” Dantonio said, “and their quarterback change sort of changed the structure of the game. We needed to go to more of a capture mode, rather than just trying to take off and sack him at all costs. I felt like he got out a bit and extended plays, and that led to a couple of scores in the fourth quarter, that made it very close.”
Developing Resiliency
Young teams make mistakes, and Michigan State made a bunch of them in the fourth quarter against Minnesota. But the ability to bounce back from mistakes is beginning to emerge as part of youthful Spartans' identity according to Dantonio.
“It's painful at times, but I guess we all learn with some of the mistakes that we make, or we learn with things that happen to us,” Dantonio said. “It's not so much the mistakes, just things that happen. It's older players, younger players. I feel like our football team is developing a personality as we do this, as we move through. We're going to play hard, we're going to make some mistakes, but we're going to play hard and we're going to come ready to play. Those are the biggest two things that I could ask for of our football team.”
Michigan State’s resiliency as a football team begins with sophomore quarterback Brian Lewerke, whose demeanor is unchanged when faced with adversity like a first-quarter interception, which could have easily resulted in a pick-six, but didn’t.
“We’re going to make mistakes,” Dantonio said. “The biggest thing that I can say about our football team is we don’t get rattled when things happen. We didn’t get rattled when we had a 30-minute delay. When I walked over to Brian after the pick, he wasn’t rattled and was ready to go back to work. That’s a positive, and people see that, feel that in terms of his leadership.”
Cave Man Football
Michigan State was determined to get its run game sorted out at Minnesota, and the Spartans did just that, rushing for 245 yards and three touchdowns on a night LJ Scott set a new career high rushing total with 194 yards on 25 carries.
Michigan State’s game plan for run the ball effectively against Minnesota defense, which was ranked No. 25 in the FBS against the run before facing the Spartans, was to use multiple tight ends and a fullback. Early success running the football out of its jumbo package, a fullback, one wide receiver, and multiple tight ends, including converted offensive guard Chase Gianacakos, led co-offensive coordinator Dave Warner to stick with what worked.
“I thought Chase had a big game on Saturday night at tight end,” Dantonio said. “He gives us a different personnel grouping in there. He’s been good. It’s been good for him, and it’s been good for the football team.”
The likelihood of inclement weather made running the football imperative for Michigan State.
“We felt like the weather would be like this,” Dantonio said. “I do feel like we all felt like we needed to get our tailbacks going, and we did feel like these were things we could exploit a little bit because we had not done them as much … But the biggest reason, I think, is we wanted to get our tailbacks going. And the reality of the situation is, if things are working, you see more of it. And things were working.”
Fullback Colin Lucas was also instrumental in Michigan State’s success on the ground.
“Lucas played his best game last night,” Dantonio said. “I thought he had a dominant block on that touchdown run of L.J.’s to the right. I thought he had a nice game and did a nice job. He is going to fit up on you.”
Jarvis settling in, Reid gaining experience
Right guard Kevin Jarvis made his third consecutive start on Saturday, and the experience he has gained during in the Big Ten thus far will benefit the talented true freshman moving forward.
“I thought that he did some very good things,” Dantonio said. “He got out on the edge, but there’s a lot of different things that are going on in there, so again it’s a learning process for him. But when you look at him he’s extremely talented, he’s not out of sorts in terms of his athletic ability with size or his strength there.”
Dantonio does, however, seem concerned with keeping Jarvis fresh, and avoiding the dreaded freshman wall.
“He’s got valuable experience there and he’ll remain a fixture in that offensive line for many years and through the remainder of this year,” Dantonio said. “But I do think at times we need to take a little bit of stress off of him and just give him a minute to sort of settle in a little bit and refocus a little bit because it’s tough being out there every single play he’s out there as a true freshman.”
Jarvis was inserted into the starting lineup after an undisclosed injury to junior David Beedle, who remains sidelined, but could return at some point this season, according to Dantonio, who also expects promising redshirt freshman tackle AJ Arcuri to return from injury this season.
Jarvis is one of two true freshman playing significant roles for Michigan State on the o-line, along with Jordan Reid, who played 22 snaps against Minnesota at right tackle. Investing reps in Reid at right tackles enables Michigan State to give starting left tackle Cole Chewins a breather from time to time. In those instances, the Spartans move redshirt freshman Luke Campbell from right to left tackle.
“Jordan is very athletic,” Dantonio said. “He played right tackle, we flopped Luke Campbell over to left tackle to give (Chewins) some relief … But he’s a very good football player. Again, a true freshman, so we have a redshirt freshman, two true freshmen really playing there, then two sophomores and a senior making up the bulk of who’s playing on our offensive line. But talented and should be another fixture for the future.”
Dazzling Debut
True freshman Connor Heyward validated his reputation for great hands in his debut as Michigan State’s starting kick and punt returner.
“He has done an outstanding job of catching punts in practice and kickoffs in practice and I just felt like we needed a guy that could do that and had some running back skills,” Dantonio said.
Heyward showed running back skills, and then some, totaling, 115 yards on three kick returns.
“He’s got great running skills, he’s calm, he’s been in a position of leadership,” Dantonio said. “I don’t think any situation is too big for him because he was a quarterback at a large high school in Georgia, and also he started as a ninth grader for their basketball team. So, I knew he had been in pressure situations before. He has great hands, great hand-eye coordination.”
Heyward’s impact performance likely cemented Heyward’s role as Michigan State’s starting punt and kick returner for years to come.
“I think he showed what he could do a little bit, which was a big positive in the game,” Dantonio said.
Heyward would have been the story on special teams if not for redshirt freshman kicker Matt Coghlin making field goals of 42, 35, and 25 yards respectively.
“He’s proven to be a good kicker, and thus far he’s 5-of-7 on the year,” Dantonio said. “I think the two he’s missed -- he missed the last one here, but I’ll give him a hall pass on that one, I guess. He’s gotten the ball up, which that’s the main thing with me all the time. Get the ball up and believe you’re going to make it.”
Paul Konyndyk | Associate Editor
Mark Dantonio has been impressed with his young team's ability to handle adversity, including self-inflicted adversity.
Associated Press
Watching all but a handful of plays in the third quarter of a 30-27 victory at Minnesota, may have been a factor in Michigan State’s slippage on defense during a furious fourth-quarter Golden Gopher comeback, which was thwarted by a pair of onside kick recoveries by Khari Willis and Cody White.
“Our defense was not on the field almost the entire third quarter,” Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio said during his weekly teleconference on Sunday. “I think it was 27 plays to four. So, then they had to come back in and we did not play well at that point.
“The game got very interesting but we closed out, won the football game and we’re 5-1 and made it difficult for them to run the football, had explosive plays.”
Changing quarterbacks from Conor Rhoda to Demry Croft provided a much-needed spark for a Minnesota offense, which had been stagnant until the fourth quarter. Croft ability to scrambling for positive yards on broken plays gave him the confidence needed to make big plays in the passing game down the stretch.
In retrospect, Dantonio believes his ballclub may have erred by defending Croft the same way they defended Rhoda.
“I thought we got a little lax there at the end and we didn't play as well as we had early,” Dantonio said, “and their quarterback change sort of changed the structure of the game. We needed to go to more of a capture mode, rather than just trying to take off and sack him at all costs. I felt like he got out a bit and extended plays, and that led to a couple of scores in the fourth quarter, that made it very close.”
Developing Resiliency
Young teams make mistakes, and Michigan State made a bunch of them in the fourth quarter against Minnesota. But the ability to bounce back from mistakes is beginning to emerge as part of youthful Spartans' identity according to Dantonio.
“It's painful at times, but I guess we all learn with some of the mistakes that we make, or we learn with things that happen to us,” Dantonio said. “It's not so much the mistakes, just things that happen. It's older players, younger players. I feel like our football team is developing a personality as we do this, as we move through. We're going to play hard, we're going to make some mistakes, but we're going to play hard and we're going to come ready to play. Those are the biggest two things that I could ask for of our football team.”
Michigan State’s resiliency as a football team begins with sophomore quarterback Brian Lewerke, whose demeanor is unchanged when faced with adversity like a first-quarter interception, which could have easily resulted in a pick-six, but didn’t.
“We’re going to make mistakes,” Dantonio said. “The biggest thing that I can say about our football team is we don’t get rattled when things happen. We didn’t get rattled when we had a 30-minute delay. When I walked over to Brian after the pick, he wasn’t rattled and was ready to go back to work. That’s a positive, and people see that, feel that in terms of his leadership.”
Cave Man Football
Michigan State was determined to get its run game sorted out at Minnesota, and the Spartans did just that, rushing for 245 yards and three touchdowns on a night LJ Scott set a new career high rushing total with 194 yards on 25 carries.
Michigan State’s game plan for run the ball effectively against Minnesota defense, which was ranked No. 25 in the FBS against the run before facing the Spartans, was to use multiple tight ends and a fullback. Early success running the football out of its jumbo package, a fullback, one wide receiver, and multiple tight ends, including converted offensive guard Chase Gianacakos, led co-offensive coordinator Dave Warner to stick with what worked.
“I thought Chase had a big game on Saturday night at tight end,” Dantonio said. “He gives us a different personnel grouping in there. He’s been good. It’s been good for him, and it’s been good for the football team.”
The likelihood of inclement weather made running the football imperative for Michigan State.
“We felt like the weather would be like this,” Dantonio said. “I do feel like we all felt like we needed to get our tailbacks going, and we did feel like these were things we could exploit a little bit because we had not done them as much … But the biggest reason, I think, is we wanted to get our tailbacks going. And the reality of the situation is, if things are working, you see more of it. And things were working.”
Fullback Colin Lucas was also instrumental in Michigan State’s success on the ground.
“Lucas played his best game last night,” Dantonio said. “I thought he had a dominant block on that touchdown run of L.J.’s to the right. I thought he had a nice game and did a nice job. He is going to fit up on you.”
Jarvis settling in, Reid gaining experience
Right guard Kevin Jarvis made his third consecutive start on Saturday, and the experience he has gained during in the Big Ten thus far will benefit the talented true freshman moving forward.
“I thought that he did some very good things,” Dantonio said. “He got out on the edge, but there’s a lot of different things that are going on in there, so again it’s a learning process for him. But when you look at him he’s extremely talented, he’s not out of sorts in terms of his athletic ability with size or his strength there.”
Dantonio does, however, seem concerned with keeping Jarvis fresh, and avoiding the dreaded freshman wall.
“He’s got valuable experience there and he’ll remain a fixture in that offensive line for many years and through the remainder of this year,” Dantonio said. “But I do think at times we need to take a little bit of stress off of him and just give him a minute to sort of settle in a little bit and refocus a little bit because it’s tough being out there every single play he’s out there as a true freshman.”
Jarvis was inserted into the starting lineup after an undisclosed injury to junior David Beedle, who remains sidelined, but could return at some point this season, according to Dantonio, who also expects promising redshirt freshman tackle AJ Arcuri to return from injury this season.
Jarvis is one of two true freshman playing significant roles for Michigan State on the o-line, along with Jordan Reid, who played 22 snaps against Minnesota at right tackle. Investing reps in Reid at right tackles enables Michigan State to give starting left tackle Cole Chewins a breather from time to time. In those instances, the Spartans move redshirt freshman Luke Campbell from right to left tackle.
“Jordan is very athletic,” Dantonio said. “He played right tackle, we flopped Luke Campbell over to left tackle to give (Chewins) some relief … But he’s a very good football player. Again, a true freshman, so we have a redshirt freshman, two true freshmen really playing there, then two sophomores and a senior making up the bulk of who’s playing on our offensive line. But talented and should be another fixture for the future.”
Dazzling Debut
True freshman Connor Heyward validated his reputation for great hands in his debut as Michigan State’s starting kick and punt returner.
“He has done an outstanding job of catching punts in practice and kickoffs in practice and I just felt like we needed a guy that could do that and had some running back skills,” Dantonio said.
Heyward showed running back skills, and then some, totaling, 115 yards on three kick returns.
“He’s got great running skills, he’s calm, he’s been in a position of leadership,” Dantonio said. “I don’t think any situation is too big for him because he was a quarterback at a large high school in Georgia, and also he started as a ninth grader for their basketball team. So, I knew he had been in pressure situations before. He has great hands, great hand-eye coordination.”
Heyward’s impact performance likely cemented Heyward’s role as Michigan State’s starting punt and kick returner for years to come.
“I think he showed what he could do a little bit, which was a big positive in the game,” Dantonio said.
Heyward would have been the story on special teams if not for redshirt freshman kicker Matt Coghlin making field goals of 42, 35, and 25 yards respectively.
“He’s proven to be a good kicker, and thus far he’s 5-of-7 on the year,” Dantonio said. “I think the two he’s missed -- he missed the last one here, but I’ll give him a hall pass on that one, I guess. He’s gotten the ball up, which that’s the main thing with me all the time. Get the ball up and believe you’re going to make it.”
Trends, Schemes & Analysis: taking a second look
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 3 Replies
Trends, Schemes & Analysis
Jim Comparoni | Publisher
EAST LANSING - Michigan State heads into its next challenge at Minnesota on Saturday night still searching for improvement in its run offense.
Michigan State (4-1, ranked No. 21 by the Associated Press) hasn’t been bad on the ground, but with most other areas of the team looking quite good, if the Spartans could spruce up its running attack, Michigan State fans might really be in for a feel-good season.
The Spartans rank No. 5 in the Big Ten in rush offense at 181.6 yards per game and No. 5 in the conference in yards per rush at 4.4.
The Spartans rushed for 158 yards during Michigan State’s 14-10 victory at Michigan on Saturday. Michigan went into the game ranked No. 1 in the nation in rushing defense.
“It was tough sledding in there, but we had to take that,” said head coach Mark Dantonio. “That was something I said we had to be able to do - run the ball.
“The production might not be there as much as we want, but we were going to run it and we were going to force the issue at the very least in terms of not getting behind the chains. We couldn’t become a third-and-12 team, a third-and-15 team and take sacks and pass the ball 50 times in that weather. We had to endure whatever came with the run, and that meant running some.”
Quarterback Brian Lewerke has been MSU’s leading rusher through every checkpoint of the season. He has 309 yards for the year, averaging 5.8 per carry.
Lewerke has accounted for 37 percent of Michigan State’s carries and 38 percent of the Spartan’s rushing yardage.
“Our quarterback is creating,” Dantonio said. “He’s making some plays with his feet. He’s also got a couple called runs maybe that we’ve used as well. But there’s just been a different dynamic in terms of what we’ve done offensively maybe than what we have before. But there’s no question we have to get our tailbacks running the ball. The production has to come, I think, for us to continue to grow as a football team.”
Michigan State will work to get its tailbacks a bigger chunk of that ball-carrying pie. But Lewerke’s work on the ground has been a big bonus for the offense through five games. Two late scrambles against Iowa and Michigan were key in melting the clock, and a 16-yard TD tuck-and-run against the Wolverines - punctuated by a brave dive for the goal line - gave the Spartans their first lead at 7-3.
Madre London rushed for 59 yards against the Wolverines, but 50 of those yards came on a single burst.
INSIDE LONDON'S 50-YARDER: Freshmen Rule
The freshman tandem of Luke Campbell and Kevin Jarvis made the play. They double-teamed All-America candidate Maurice Hurst and drove him three yards downfield and two yards inward as part of a counter-gap play.
The dominant block forced Hurst back into the lap of middle linebacker Devon Bush.Bush was not able to pursue the alley and cut off London as London broke into daylight.
With the freshmen dominating Hurst, pull guard Tyler Higby had a clear shot at Michigan defensive end Rashan Gary.
Gary is such a quick, troublesome player that Michigan State didn’t leave him totally unblocked on this counter-gap. Usually, the d-end is allowed to come straight upfield, and the pull blocker executes a kickout block. This time, Michigan State assigned tight end Mark Sokol to chip Gary for an instant before Sokol turned and blocked a Michigan cornerback.
With Gary having been held up briefly by the chip, Higby had time to pull, cross the formation and drive Gary outward and out of the play.
Fullback Collin Lucas was offset to the left. He blocked linebacker Mike McCray in the c-gap.
McCray succeeded in meeting Lucas on the offense’s side of the line of scrimmage but he wasn’t able to close up the massive daylight left in Hurst’s wake. If Hurst had held strong, McCray’s stalemate would have log-jammed the interior and stuffed London.
By design, Lucas’ initial trek was to his left, and then he veered to the right c-gap. The initial trek to the left influenced Bush to that side of the line. Having been influenced in the wrong direction, Bush was more easily caught up in the Hurst/Jarvis/Campbell avalanche that caved through the right side of the line.
In all, credit the Jarvis/Campbell tag team with plusses on the play, along with Sokol and Lucas, and Spartan coaches with fine play design.
London did a good job of folloing his blocker and darting to daylight. However, he was caught from behind by five Wolverines, including a defensive end.
London has never improved his top-end speed from the day he was caught from behind in his first Green-White Game. If London had the speed of Edwin Baker, Jeremy Langford or even Gerald Holmes from last year or perhaps even LJ Scott from last year’s Ohio State game, that play might have gone for 83 yards and a 21-3 lead.
**
Gerald Holmes rushed for 27 yards, including a 15-yarder behind pulling Brian Allen during MSU’s first touchdown drive against the Wolverines.
BREAKING DOWN HOLMES' RUN: Freshmen Again
On Holmes’ 15-yarder, Holmes followed Allen on a counter to the weak side. After snapping and pulling, Allen blasted into play-side defensive end Chase Winovich and drove him three yards downfield.
Michigan went away from its base 30 front and played an over/4-3 on this snap, probably because Michigan State had gone heavy with two TEs and a fullback. Michigan briefly took 205-pound viper linebacker Khaleke Hudson out of the game and replaced him with 6-foot-4, 310-pound defensive tackle Bryan Mone as a second defensive tackle, to get more beef on the field. But the beef didn't hold up.
Mone didn’t withstand the double-team block of freshmen Jarvis and Campbell. They drove Mone three yards downfield.
Elsewhere, Sokol won his collision with play-side linebacker Mike McCray and bounced him to the outside. And fullback Lucas got enough of middle linebacker Devin Bush.
Michigan State blockers batted 1.000 on this play and Holmes turned in seven additional yards after contact. Campbell got away with a borderline late hit at the end of the run on Bush.
Interestingly Michigan went away from its base 30 defensive front and opted for a 4-3 on these two plays, which went for a combined 65 yards on the ground.
**
L.J. Scott, last year’s leading rusher, missed the Michigan game with an undisclosed injury. Head coach Mark Dantonio said Scott could have played in case of an emergency, but they elected to hold him out.
The Spartans averaged a respectable 3.9 yards per carry against Michigan, but were unable to consistently get positive yards from its tailbacks, a factor which led to a series of three-and-outs during Saturday’s rainstorm.
HOW ABOUT THAT O-LINE?
Michigan State’s offensive line was outstanding in pass protection, allowing no sacks against a Michigan team that came into the game leading the nation in sacks.
The combination of providing good pass protection and not getting stonewalled in the ground game enabled the o-line to grade out well, overall, while remaining one of the youngest offensive lines in the Big Ten.
“When you have a redshirt freshman at right tackle (Luke Campbell), when you are playing with your left tackle as a sophomore (Cole Chewins), your left guard is a redshirt sophomore (Tyler Higby), and we have a true freshman starting at right guard (Kevin Jarvis), who played pretty well all things considering, I think our football team is unique in the fact that we’re a young football team in a lot of areas,” Dantonio said. “You got young receivers out there as well. You could say the same about the defensive side of our ball, playing a lot of different players, a lot of first-time starters. So we’re going to grow every time we get an opportunity to play.”
ABOUT THAT GROWTH …
During Dantonio’s weekly teleconference on Sunday, I asked if the developmental process for the offensive line will be sped up by the fact that the Spartans have played against two excellent defensive fronts in the last two weeks - Iowa and Michigan - which play two vastly different styles of play.
“I do think you’re correct in that,” Dantonio said. “I do think Iowa played very well. Michigan’s great, up there as well. A lot of different things thrown at our guys relative to the things conceptually from Michigan’s defense. A little more basic from Iowa, but they do it very, very well.
“Both games we knew we would be challenged up front,” Dantonio added. “We knew it was going to be tough to run the football. But nevertheless, we decided we were going to run it.”
Michigan State gained 105 yards rushing against Iowa, but netted only 88.
Iowa has had some mediocre outings in terms of run defense, including an allowance of 295 yards on the ground against Penn State (212 to Saquon Barkley). Iowa allowed 200 yards rushing to Illinois last weekend in a 45-16 Hawkeye victory. A 58-yarder by Illinois freshman RB Mike Epstein bolstered those stats. But Iowa held Illinois to 49 yards rushing in the second half.
Forget the numbers and trust the eye test. Iowa has a stout run defense and the numbers will show that by the end of the year.
Michigan’s defensive line doesn’t have a lot of huge humans, but they are quick, and create confusion with fast slants and stunts, plus plenty of horsepower. The Wolverines are low on second-string help, but they haven’t needed much of it thus far. They will need it when they face quality uptempo teams.
As for this week’s opponent for the Spartans, Minnesota ranks No. 4 in the Big Ten in rush defense, allowing 114 yards per game, and No. 8 in the Big Ten in yards allowed per rush at 4.1.
Rushing yards allowed by Gopher opponents this year (and per-carry averages in parentheses):
Buffalo: 51 yards (2.3).
Oregon State: 80 yards (3.1)
Middle Tennessee State: 46 yards (3.1)
Maryland: 262 yards (5.6 per)
Purdue: 132 yards (4.6 per)
SpartanMag Prediction: Michigan State running backs will have their best output of the season on Saturday night in Minneapolis. More on the reasons why later in the week in the Pre-Snap Read.
WHAT ABOUT THAT PASS PROTECTION?
Michigan’s fierce pass rush was expected to be a massive plus in the Wolverines’ favor. Instead, Michigan State attempted 22 passes without a sack, and there were few hits on Lewerke in the pocket.
“I thought as much as anything, the structure of what we did was very sound,” Dantonio said. “(Chase) Gianacakos played some tight end for us. He’s a 6-5, 300-pound guy.”
Gianacakos, an offensive guard by trade, has donned the No. 94 in the past two games and served as a tight end.
The No. 94 makes him an eligible receiver, when he isn’t covered up by a split end.
Wearing a number in the 90s and serving as basically an extra offensive tackle, Spartan coaches affectionately refer to the role as a “yackle.” Most recently, second-string offensive lineman Michael Dennis played the role in 2014.
“(Gianacakos) may not have gone out for a pass but he was in a protection mode,” Dantonio said. “He was part of the protection.
“Up front, obviously Brian Allen is playing very well and he controls a lot of things up there,” Dantonio added. “Beyond that, everybody has their moments.”
WHAT ABOUT THE PHANTOM HOLDING PENALTY?
Gianacakos was flagged for holding during a Lewerke run with 1:26 remaining when Michigan had no time outs. The flag stopped the clock. MSU’s next snap, on third-and-eight, would have been made with :46 seconds left. If that play had taken more than :06 seconds for the pile to settle and the officials to reset the play clock, Michigan State wouldn’t have had to snap the ball on fourth down.
Instead, the holding call gave Michigan a chance to advance the ball for a Hail Mary pass in the final seconds.
On Sunday night, I mentioned to Dantonio that the only angle we in media could see was the television angle, which showed Gianacakos having his left arm and hand inside the framework of the player he was blocking, which is legal, textbook hand placement. I mentioned that the play looked like a legal pancake to me and asked Dantonio if he had any thoughts on the holding call.
“You mean without criticizing the officials? No.” Dantonio said.
I asked Dantonio if Gianacakos graded out well on that play.
“He graded out pretty well on that play, but a lot of things happen on the field,” he said. “I can only do my job to the best of my abilities.”
Because the flag was on the team with the lead, officials didn’t restart the game clock until MSU’s next snap.
“The way I understand the rule is whoever doesn’t have the penalty is going to be the team that benefits,” Dantonio said. “It won’t benefit the team that the penalty is against. So if it was on us, the clock would not run. If it had been on them, the clock would have run. And if they would have been ahead of us (on the scoreboard), the clock would have run. That’s the way I understand it. That’s the way the rule was interpreted to me on the field.”
DANTONIO UNPLUGGED
“I think the keys to the game really, after I watched the film, from an offensive perspective -- zero turnovers, and we were not sacked,” Dantonio said. “When we got in the red zone we went 2-for-2 on touchdowns.
“Obviously we didn’t have the production we wanted to have, had the one dropped pass in the second quarter, but we had bad field position and the weather and everything else in the second half.
“But those are the key components. Quarterback being able to create and scramble for a touchdown and then a couple times for yardage, getting first downs. No turnovers, no sacks.
“Basically a great football game. I thought our guys played extremely wel. Obviously some things we want to change to better ourselves. But just a great win, great bus ride home and right now we’re 4-1, 2-0 in the conference and we need to look forward.”
THE AFTERGLOW
Dantonio was asked about the celebration in the hours and day that followed Michigan State’s eighth victory over Michigan in the last 10 years.
Did he have time to appreciate the win?
“Well, a little bit Sunday morning before we came in to work, but we got home at about 2 o’clock in the morning,” Dantonio said. “But just the ride itself - nothing important on the ride, it’s just sitting sort of with yourself and collecting yourself.”
Michigan passed for 198 yards against Michigan State, but completed less than 50 percent of its passes while doing so (16-of-35) and threw three interceptions.
Michigan State came out of the game ranked No. 2 in the nation in pass efficiency defense.
Spartan cornerbacks Justin Layne and Josiah Scott have settled in as team strengths. Tyson Smith and Josh Butler have been assets earlier in the season but haven’t played as much lately.
Meanwhile, sophomore David Dowell emerged as a starting safety for the Iowa game, and came forward as a difference-maker against Michigan.
“I thought our safeties played very, very well,” Dantonio said. “David (Dowell) also had some tackles and a pass break-up, obviously was on the front end of three turnovers. So huge plays.
“Khari (Willis) played very well. Tracked a guy down on the reverse, tracked another guy down one time, just ran him down. So he played extremely well.
“Our defense obviously kept us in the game. We were difficult to run on after the first series. We really only gave up one explosive play, and they fumbled on that one, the pass play. So when you’re talking about 20-yard passes, we gave up zero; and 15-yard runs, we gave up zero. So we come away with five turnovers and did not give up the big plays. Good things start to happen.”
Michigan State effectively changed between zone and man-to-man, forcing to Michigan quarterback John O’Korn to holding the ball too long in the pocket at times, leading coverage sacks and pressures.
“I thought we pressured the quarterback,” Dantonio said. “He didn’t have a lot of time. And we pressured him into mistakes, and then we had four sacks as well.
“Our safeties played very well. Obviously Joe Bachie continues to play very well. We got good play out of our defensive front. I thought Josiah Scott and Justin Layne played very solid, too.”
BACHIE, PLAYER OF THE WEEK
Bachie was named Big Ten Defensive Player of the Week. He had a team-high 10 tackles, marking the third time he has reached double digits.
Bachie had an 11-yard sack in the second quarter. He forced a fumble on Michigan’s second offensive series of the game, a play that was arguably the turning point of the game. That fumble set up Michigan State’s go-ahead touchdown drive at 7-3, and changed the tenor of the game.
He recorded the first interception of his career on the second play of the fourth quarter. On that play, he showed lateral movement, quick burst and seemed to have knowledge of where the receiver was headed as O’Korn attempted the pass. From there, Bachie made a diving catch that would make a tight end proud.
On the game’s final play, Bachie commanded air space in the end zone, and high-pointed the ball for a pass-break-up. He put himself in the optimal place to play the pass, and out-jumped the crowd.
FROSH RETURN MEN
Michigan State has a pair of promising return men in true freshman Laress Nelson and Andre Welch. But each player made mistakes in the second half, causing Michigan State to begin its first two drives of the second half inside the Spartan 5-yard line.
Welch bobbled the opening kickoff of the second half, sending him on a lateral trek, which led to a holding penalty by a teammate.
Nelson muffed a punt, which rolled inside the 5-yard line before he covered it.
Dantonio indicated that both players will remain in their roles, although Nelson was replaced by Darrell Stewart late in the Michigan game.
“Laress has done a good job back there,” Dantonio said. “We want to continue to help him grow in that area. But the circumstances were tough. You know, he’s not playing all the time on offense, he’s in and out a little bit, but not all the time.
“He’s not caught six balls in 30 games, he’s a freshman. So that was difficult.
“Same with Andre Welch. On the back end, he bobbled the one when he did catch it at the goal line.
“So those are some of the things we have to look at and there’s growing pains as we go. Some of those things we have to make decisions on obviously.
“But (it was) not a perfect game on our part, just not a perfect game. At the end of the game, I felt like time could’ve been taken off and obviously we didn’t get that happening with the penalty call. So we live and we learn, but we got through it.”
Jim Comparoni | Publisher
EAST LANSING - Michigan State heads into its next challenge at Minnesota on Saturday night still searching for improvement in its run offense.
Michigan State (4-1, ranked No. 21 by the Associated Press) hasn’t been bad on the ground, but with most other areas of the team looking quite good, if the Spartans could spruce up its running attack, Michigan State fans might really be in for a feel-good season.
The Spartans rank No. 5 in the Big Ten in rush offense at 181.6 yards per game and No. 5 in the conference in yards per rush at 4.4.
The Spartans rushed for 158 yards during Michigan State’s 14-10 victory at Michigan on Saturday. Michigan went into the game ranked No. 1 in the nation in rushing defense.
“It was tough sledding in there, but we had to take that,” said head coach Mark Dantonio. “That was something I said we had to be able to do - run the ball.
“The production might not be there as much as we want, but we were going to run it and we were going to force the issue at the very least in terms of not getting behind the chains. We couldn’t become a third-and-12 team, a third-and-15 team and take sacks and pass the ball 50 times in that weather. We had to endure whatever came with the run, and that meant running some.”
Quarterback Brian Lewerke has been MSU’s leading rusher through every checkpoint of the season. He has 309 yards for the year, averaging 5.8 per carry.
Lewerke has accounted for 37 percent of Michigan State’s carries and 38 percent of the Spartan’s rushing yardage.
“Our quarterback is creating,” Dantonio said. “He’s making some plays with his feet. He’s also got a couple called runs maybe that we’ve used as well. But there’s just been a different dynamic in terms of what we’ve done offensively maybe than what we have before. But there’s no question we have to get our tailbacks running the ball. The production has to come, I think, for us to continue to grow as a football team.”
Michigan State will work to get its tailbacks a bigger chunk of that ball-carrying pie. But Lewerke’s work on the ground has been a big bonus for the offense through five games. Two late scrambles against Iowa and Michigan were key in melting the clock, and a 16-yard TD tuck-and-run against the Wolverines - punctuated by a brave dive for the goal line - gave the Spartans their first lead at 7-3.
Madre London rushed for 59 yards against the Wolverines, but 50 of those yards came on a single burst.
INSIDE LONDON'S 50-YARDER: Freshmen Rule
The freshman tandem of Luke Campbell and Kevin Jarvis made the play. They double-teamed All-America candidate Maurice Hurst and drove him three yards downfield and two yards inward as part of a counter-gap play.
The dominant block forced Hurst back into the lap of middle linebacker Devon Bush.Bush was not able to pursue the alley and cut off London as London broke into daylight.
With the freshmen dominating Hurst, pull guard Tyler Higby had a clear shot at Michigan defensive end Rashan Gary.
Gary is such a quick, troublesome player that Michigan State didn’t leave him totally unblocked on this counter-gap. Usually, the d-end is allowed to come straight upfield, and the pull blocker executes a kickout block. This time, Michigan State assigned tight end Mark Sokol to chip Gary for an instant before Sokol turned and blocked a Michigan cornerback.
With Gary having been held up briefly by the chip, Higby had time to pull, cross the formation and drive Gary outward and out of the play.
Fullback Collin Lucas was offset to the left. He blocked linebacker Mike McCray in the c-gap.
McCray succeeded in meeting Lucas on the offense’s side of the line of scrimmage but he wasn’t able to close up the massive daylight left in Hurst’s wake. If Hurst had held strong, McCray’s stalemate would have log-jammed the interior and stuffed London.
By design, Lucas’ initial trek was to his left, and then he veered to the right c-gap. The initial trek to the left influenced Bush to that side of the line. Having been influenced in the wrong direction, Bush was more easily caught up in the Hurst/Jarvis/Campbell avalanche that caved through the right side of the line.
In all, credit the Jarvis/Campbell tag team with plusses on the play, along with Sokol and Lucas, and Spartan coaches with fine play design.
London did a good job of folloing his blocker and darting to daylight. However, he was caught from behind by five Wolverines, including a defensive end.
London has never improved his top-end speed from the day he was caught from behind in his first Green-White Game. If London had the speed of Edwin Baker, Jeremy Langford or even Gerald Holmes from last year or perhaps even LJ Scott from last year’s Ohio State game, that play might have gone for 83 yards and a 21-3 lead.
**
Gerald Holmes rushed for 27 yards, including a 15-yarder behind pulling Brian Allen during MSU’s first touchdown drive against the Wolverines.
BREAKING DOWN HOLMES' RUN: Freshmen Again
On Holmes’ 15-yarder, Holmes followed Allen on a counter to the weak side. After snapping and pulling, Allen blasted into play-side defensive end Chase Winovich and drove him three yards downfield.
Michigan went away from its base 30 front and played an over/4-3 on this snap, probably because Michigan State had gone heavy with two TEs and a fullback. Michigan briefly took 205-pound viper linebacker Khaleke Hudson out of the game and replaced him with 6-foot-4, 310-pound defensive tackle Bryan Mone as a second defensive tackle, to get more beef on the field. But the beef didn't hold up.
Mone didn’t withstand the double-team block of freshmen Jarvis and Campbell. They drove Mone three yards downfield.
Elsewhere, Sokol won his collision with play-side linebacker Mike McCray and bounced him to the outside. And fullback Lucas got enough of middle linebacker Devin Bush.
Michigan State blockers batted 1.000 on this play and Holmes turned in seven additional yards after contact. Campbell got away with a borderline late hit at the end of the run on Bush.
Interestingly Michigan went away from its base 30 defensive front and opted for a 4-3 on these two plays, which went for a combined 65 yards on the ground.
**
L.J. Scott, last year’s leading rusher, missed the Michigan game with an undisclosed injury. Head coach Mark Dantonio said Scott could have played in case of an emergency, but they elected to hold him out.
The Spartans averaged a respectable 3.9 yards per carry against Michigan, but were unable to consistently get positive yards from its tailbacks, a factor which led to a series of three-and-outs during Saturday’s rainstorm.
HOW ABOUT THAT O-LINE?
Michigan State’s offensive line was outstanding in pass protection, allowing no sacks against a Michigan team that came into the game leading the nation in sacks.
The combination of providing good pass protection and not getting stonewalled in the ground game enabled the o-line to grade out well, overall, while remaining one of the youngest offensive lines in the Big Ten.
“When you have a redshirt freshman at right tackle (Luke Campbell), when you are playing with your left tackle as a sophomore (Cole Chewins), your left guard is a redshirt sophomore (Tyler Higby), and we have a true freshman starting at right guard (Kevin Jarvis), who played pretty well all things considering, I think our football team is unique in the fact that we’re a young football team in a lot of areas,” Dantonio said. “You got young receivers out there as well. You could say the same about the defensive side of our ball, playing a lot of different players, a lot of first-time starters. So we’re going to grow every time we get an opportunity to play.”
ABOUT THAT GROWTH …
During Dantonio’s weekly teleconference on Sunday, I asked if the developmental process for the offensive line will be sped up by the fact that the Spartans have played against two excellent defensive fronts in the last two weeks - Iowa and Michigan - which play two vastly different styles of play.
“I do think you’re correct in that,” Dantonio said. “I do think Iowa played very well. Michigan’s great, up there as well. A lot of different things thrown at our guys relative to the things conceptually from Michigan’s defense. A little more basic from Iowa, but they do it very, very well.
“Both games we knew we would be challenged up front,” Dantonio added. “We knew it was going to be tough to run the football. But nevertheless, we decided we were going to run it.”
Michigan State gained 105 yards rushing against Iowa, but netted only 88.
Iowa has had some mediocre outings in terms of run defense, including an allowance of 295 yards on the ground against Penn State (212 to Saquon Barkley). Iowa allowed 200 yards rushing to Illinois last weekend in a 45-16 Hawkeye victory. A 58-yarder by Illinois freshman RB Mike Epstein bolstered those stats. But Iowa held Illinois to 49 yards rushing in the second half.
Forget the numbers and trust the eye test. Iowa has a stout run defense and the numbers will show that by the end of the year.
Michigan’s defensive line doesn’t have a lot of huge humans, but they are quick, and create confusion with fast slants and stunts, plus plenty of horsepower. The Wolverines are low on second-string help, but they haven’t needed much of it thus far. They will need it when they face quality uptempo teams.
As for this week’s opponent for the Spartans, Minnesota ranks No. 4 in the Big Ten in rush defense, allowing 114 yards per game, and No. 8 in the Big Ten in yards allowed per rush at 4.1.
Rushing yards allowed by Gopher opponents this year (and per-carry averages in parentheses):
Buffalo: 51 yards (2.3).
Oregon State: 80 yards (3.1)
Middle Tennessee State: 46 yards (3.1)
Maryland: 262 yards (5.6 per)
Purdue: 132 yards (4.6 per)
SpartanMag Prediction: Michigan State running backs will have their best output of the season on Saturday night in Minneapolis. More on the reasons why later in the week in the Pre-Snap Read.
WHAT ABOUT THAT PASS PROTECTION?
Michigan’s fierce pass rush was expected to be a massive plus in the Wolverines’ favor. Instead, Michigan State attempted 22 passes without a sack, and there were few hits on Lewerke in the pocket.
“I thought as much as anything, the structure of what we did was very sound,” Dantonio said. “(Chase) Gianacakos played some tight end for us. He’s a 6-5, 300-pound guy.”
Gianacakos, an offensive guard by trade, has donned the No. 94 in the past two games and served as a tight end.
The No. 94 makes him an eligible receiver, when he isn’t covered up by a split end.
Wearing a number in the 90s and serving as basically an extra offensive tackle, Spartan coaches affectionately refer to the role as a “yackle.” Most recently, second-string offensive lineman Michael Dennis played the role in 2014.
“(Gianacakos) may not have gone out for a pass but he was in a protection mode,” Dantonio said. “He was part of the protection.
“Up front, obviously Brian Allen is playing very well and he controls a lot of things up there,” Dantonio added. “Beyond that, everybody has their moments.”
WHAT ABOUT THE PHANTOM HOLDING PENALTY?
Gianacakos was flagged for holding during a Lewerke run with 1:26 remaining when Michigan had no time outs. The flag stopped the clock. MSU’s next snap, on third-and-eight, would have been made with :46 seconds left. If that play had taken more than :06 seconds for the pile to settle and the officials to reset the play clock, Michigan State wouldn’t have had to snap the ball on fourth down.
Instead, the holding call gave Michigan a chance to advance the ball for a Hail Mary pass in the final seconds.
On Sunday night, I mentioned to Dantonio that the only angle we in media could see was the television angle, which showed Gianacakos having his left arm and hand inside the framework of the player he was blocking, which is legal, textbook hand placement. I mentioned that the play looked like a legal pancake to me and asked Dantonio if he had any thoughts on the holding call.
“You mean without criticizing the officials? No.” Dantonio said.
I asked Dantonio if Gianacakos graded out well on that play.
“He graded out pretty well on that play, but a lot of things happen on the field,” he said. “I can only do my job to the best of my abilities.”
Because the flag was on the team with the lead, officials didn’t restart the game clock until MSU’s next snap.
“The way I understand the rule is whoever doesn’t have the penalty is going to be the team that benefits,” Dantonio said. “It won’t benefit the team that the penalty is against. So if it was on us, the clock would not run. If it had been on them, the clock would have run. And if they would have been ahead of us (on the scoreboard), the clock would have run. That’s the way I understand it. That’s the way the rule was interpreted to me on the field.”
DANTONIO UNPLUGGED
“I think the keys to the game really, after I watched the film, from an offensive perspective -- zero turnovers, and we were not sacked,” Dantonio said. “When we got in the red zone we went 2-for-2 on touchdowns.
“Obviously we didn’t have the production we wanted to have, had the one dropped pass in the second quarter, but we had bad field position and the weather and everything else in the second half.
“But those are the key components. Quarterback being able to create and scramble for a touchdown and then a couple times for yardage, getting first downs. No turnovers, no sacks.
“Basically a great football game. I thought our guys played extremely wel. Obviously some things we want to change to better ourselves. But just a great win, great bus ride home and right now we’re 4-1, 2-0 in the conference and we need to look forward.”
THE AFTERGLOW
Dantonio was asked about the celebration in the hours and day that followed Michigan State’s eighth victory over Michigan in the last 10 years.
Did he have time to appreciate the win?
“Well, a little bit Sunday morning before we came in to work, but we got home at about 2 o’clock in the morning,” Dantonio said. “But just the ride itself - nothing important on the ride, it’s just sitting sort of with yourself and collecting yourself.”
Michigan passed for 198 yards against Michigan State, but completed less than 50 percent of its passes while doing so (16-of-35) and threw three interceptions.
Michigan State came out of the game ranked No. 2 in the nation in pass efficiency defense.
Spartan cornerbacks Justin Layne and Josiah Scott have settled in as team strengths. Tyson Smith and Josh Butler have been assets earlier in the season but haven’t played as much lately.
Meanwhile, sophomore David Dowell emerged as a starting safety for the Iowa game, and came forward as a difference-maker against Michigan.
“I thought our safeties played very, very well,” Dantonio said. “David (Dowell) also had some tackles and a pass break-up, obviously was on the front end of three turnovers. So huge plays.
“Khari (Willis) played very well. Tracked a guy down on the reverse, tracked another guy down one time, just ran him down. So he played extremely well.
“Our defense obviously kept us in the game. We were difficult to run on after the first series. We really only gave up one explosive play, and they fumbled on that one, the pass play. So when you’re talking about 20-yard passes, we gave up zero; and 15-yard runs, we gave up zero. So we come away with five turnovers and did not give up the big plays. Good things start to happen.”
Michigan State effectively changed between zone and man-to-man, forcing to Michigan quarterback John O’Korn to holding the ball too long in the pocket at times, leading coverage sacks and pressures.
“I thought we pressured the quarterback,” Dantonio said. “He didn’t have a lot of time. And we pressured him into mistakes, and then we had four sacks as well.
“Our safeties played very well. Obviously Joe Bachie continues to play very well. We got good play out of our defensive front. I thought Josiah Scott and Justin Layne played very solid, too.”
BACHIE, PLAYER OF THE WEEK
Bachie was named Big Ten Defensive Player of the Week. He had a team-high 10 tackles, marking the third time he has reached double digits.
Bachie had an 11-yard sack in the second quarter. He forced a fumble on Michigan’s second offensive series of the game, a play that was arguably the turning point of the game. That fumble set up Michigan State’s go-ahead touchdown drive at 7-3, and changed the tenor of the game.
He recorded the first interception of his career on the second play of the fourth quarter. On that play, he showed lateral movement, quick burst and seemed to have knowledge of where the receiver was headed as O’Korn attempted the pass. From there, Bachie made a diving catch that would make a tight end proud.
On the game’s final play, Bachie commanded air space in the end zone, and high-pointed the ball for a pass-break-up. He put himself in the optimal place to play the pass, and out-jumped the crowd.
FROSH RETURN MEN
Michigan State has a pair of promising return men in true freshman Laress Nelson and Andre Welch. But each player made mistakes in the second half, causing Michigan State to begin its first two drives of the second half inside the Spartan 5-yard line.
Welch bobbled the opening kickoff of the second half, sending him on a lateral trek, which led to a holding penalty by a teammate.
Nelson muffed a punt, which rolled inside the 5-yard line before he covered it.
Dantonio indicated that both players will remain in their roles, although Nelson was replaced by Darrell Stewart late in the Michigan game.
“Laress has done a good job back there,” Dantonio said. “We want to continue to help him grow in that area. But the circumstances were tough. You know, he’s not playing all the time on offense, he’s in and out a little bit, but not all the time.
“He’s not caught six balls in 30 games, he’s a freshman. So that was difficult.
“Same with Andre Welch. On the back end, he bobbled the one when he did catch it at the goal line.
“So those are some of the things we have to look at and there’s growing pains as we go. Some of those things we have to make decisions on obviously.
“But (it was) not a perfect game on our part, just not a perfect game. At the end of the game, I felt like time could’ve been taken off and obviously we didn’t get that happening with the penalty call. So we live and we learn, but we got through it.”
DotComp: Don't act surprised
- Spartans Illustrated Message Board
- 50 Replies
DotComp: Don't act surprised
Jim Comparoni | Publisher
This was, without a doubt, Michigan State’s biggest win … in seven days.
Oh sure, I get it. Beating Michigan is a delicious thing for Spartan fans, and Spartan players - and it should be, considering the maize circus that in-state fans have to live through all year, and the things Spartan players may have heard us saying about them over the last few months, if they were listening.
I understand why Mark Dantonio raised his hand almost as high as he could when asked where this win ranks.
“It’s up there,” he said. “Way up there.”
This is a guy with wins at the Rose Bowl, the Cotton Bowl and two Big Ten Championship Games. He’s the only guy with those bullet points on a coaching resumé. Ever.
Yet this win over the erstwhile No. 7-ranked team in the nation ranks that high for Dantonio?
Today, yes. By November, who knows?
Back in 2011 when Michigan State punked Michigan 28-14, an excited Kirk Cousinsloudly proclaimed that he and his posse would forever be able to “walk the streets,” having gone 4-0 against the Wolverines in their careers.
That was a big win. Many were picking against the Spartans prior to that game, as they always do. And that seemed like a high moment, about as high as someone could reach while sitting down.
But back in 2011, Cousins still had big games to play, such as the skull-smashing 37-31 victory over No. 4- ranked Wisconsin, a mental-hurdle win at Iowa, a Legends Division-clinching win at Northwestern, and then a landmark victory over Georgia at the Outback Bowl.
Where did the win over Michigan end up ranking that year?
Meh.
Exactly.
Michigan looked good in the funny papers last week, and the week before, and throughout the summer and spring - which is when they’ve been at their best, for half a century. No one is keeping score at that time of year, but somehow they always claim victory, and are granted victory, whether at home or in Rome.
Then another season starts. And at some point, reality sets in that Michigan has won half as many national championships in the last 65 years as Brigham Young.
And this morning, in Wolverine fiefdom, some are whispering for the first time that maybe the king has no robe.
Spartan fans have been hearing for three years that football’s greatest coach was going to return Michigan to its glory years - although no one will actually recognize a return to glory-years football, if and when it happens at Michigan, because no one alive today remembers 1933.
Meanwhile, Spartan fans were enjoying actual progress toward a return of glory years football in late December of 2014 when their team’s victory over Baylor in the Cotton Bowl was upstaged back home by a press conference announcing Harbaugh’s hiring. Dantonio fielded questions about Harbaugh’s hiring while in Dallas.
Dantonio skillfully answered while giving respect, back then, in Dallas. In truth, it ticked him off. But it also motivated him to continue to dog the program for which he bears a black mark on his soul. (His words).
What bothers him about Michigan?
“Just watch the during warm-ups,” he said back then. “Just watch. I tell our guys that are new to this (rivalry) that it won’t take more than a few minutes around it to see what it’s about. Just watch.”
So I watched again, on Saturday, looking for something inflammatory during the warm-up. I didn’t see anything. Maybe that chapter is done.
Dantonio is still driven like crazy to beat Michigan, and he’s certainly annoyed by the circus that we on the outside make of the Wolverines any time they belch or pass gas. But I don’t think Dantonio is bothered by the people inside the Michigan program like he used to be. However, that hasn’t altered his success against them.
Dantonio is 8-3 against Michigan, exceeding the promise he made the day he was hired that his teams would “measure up” against the Wolverines.
They’ve done better than measure up. On Saturday, they once again stuffed a sock in college football’s paper-program loudmouth.
But by November, if Michigan has lost to Penn State, Ohio State and Wisconsin, this win over an eventual 8-4 (or worse) Wolverine team might not register any greater than MSU’s win over Iowa … seven days ago.
'IT'S SO ENCOURAGING'
Michigan is pretty good. Iowa is pretty good. If those teams played next week, who you got? Flip a coin and plant a flag.
Michigan has great starting unit on defense, and has a chance to become a terrific team this year. But the Wolverines have had a chance to improve every day since their over-glorified victory against Florida on Sept. 2. And they haven’t come very far.
The Wolverines toiled with Air Force and Purdue for too long. Michigan State players watched film of those games and felt they could and should beat Michigan. They felt they could and should win, if they played well in all areas.
As it turned out, they played well in most areas. And played well enough, overall.
That’s why when the Hail Mary pass hit the turf, incomplete, Spartan players jogged and smiled and celebrated.
But they didn’t run and scream and cry.
Michigan State was the better team. Not by much. But Michigan State didn’t need to play a perfect game and conjure up superstar efforts to stage a miracle.
The Spartans just tackled, covered, protected the ball, punted it back to Michigan in the rain and said, “Try to beat us.”
Some day, Michigan State will play a Big Ten team good enough to take that challenge and beat the Spartans. By that time, the Spartans hope to be better than they are today, and present tougher challenges to coming opponents.
It’s kind of methodical, simple process. But we’ve seen them trek through the autumn like this before, so unremarkable, but somehow consistent. In the past, they have racked up wins like recycled cans. And they might be at it again.
“In my mind, that’s the best defense we’re going to see,” said senior center Brian Allen.“It’s so encouraging because we are not even close to playing our best football yet."
The Spartan offense was stuck in neutral for most of the second half, due to beginning their first two drives of the third quarter inside their 5-yard line.
When questioned about playing conservative, Dantonio interrupted: “No, we played smart with the weather.”
Michigan State went three-and-out (or four-and-out) on its first seven drives of the second half.
"We didn’t gamble too much," Dantonio said. "We didn’t go down the field with the ball at all in the second half because of the weather. It was blowing out there, and wet. So everything was intermediate. We tried to run the ball and take the clock as much as we could and make them beat us on defense.”
People will recite those struggles as proof that Michigan State somehow wasn’t deserving of victory.
Meanwhile, Michigan’s offense went three-and-out, interception, interception, interception, three-and-out, and three-and-out on six of its first seven drives of the second half.
Meanwhile, Michigan’s offense went three-and-out, interception, interception, interception, three-and-out, and three-and-out on six of its first seven drives of the second half.
But, you see, Michigan State deserves zero credit for those stoppages. The interceptions were all Michigan’s fault. They weren’t of Michigan State’s doing.
Booger Harbaugh didn’t even mention the words “Michigan State” in the four or so minutes of his press conference that appeared on Michigan’s official athletics site. He offered no credit to the winning team, no compliments for Michigan State’s coaches, or defense, or band, or mascot or anything.
Typical. Harbaugh has the maturity of a fourth-grader, at times.
Dantonio? When given a softball question about going 8-3 against Michigan, the Spartan head coach turned it into a compliment for the opponent.
“Is this win validation for what you’ve done in the past?” someone asked Dantonio.
“I don’t know,” Dantonio said. “We’ve done it eight times. So I don’t know why there’s a lot of doubt.
“We’ll do it again or somebody else will do it again at some point in time.
“For this year, that’s the way it went down. It doesn’t mean it’s going to happen next year.
“They have a very good football team. They are extremely, extremely well-coached. They ran 40 different formations in the first half. 40. So they are an extremely well-coached football team with great talent, but we have some guys too.”
No one is pretending that the Spartans played a perfect game.
“We made some mistakes there that drive you crazy, but we survived them,” Dantonio said. “Every time we got a turnover, we got a penalty which made it just seem like a punt, and set us back.
“We hurt ourselves sometimes. But also, we found a way to win and I think that’s what good teams do.
“We’re becoming a good team. I don’t know if we’re there yet but we’re 4-1.”
THE PROPER PATH
It was a big win, partly because of the low expectations these Spartan had. They can enjoy a victory like this, and accept it for what it is, and realize there is way more work to do, because it’s not like Michigan State to stump for September Heismans and clamber for better computer rankings than thou.
It was amusing to once again defeat the team that had been climbing the trees, doing the can-opening dives and crying for attention every day of the non-football calendar year.
That’s where college football is different from all the other organized religions of the world. Winning a game and improving to 4-1 is cute and all. But, let’s be real, half of the fun is beating the rival back down to the truth. The truth in Ann Arbor this morning is that 8-4 probably won’t wear well in khaki. And 2-8 against Mr. Dantonio since 2008 seems less than valiant.
But that stuff is just the icing.
The cake, the real satisfaction for Michigan State this weekend comes via the self-validation of what’s been going on within their own walls. And that's what Dantonio was getting at, when he reached his hand high to signify where this win ranks with him.
It wasn't just the win. It was the journey.
This win, these four wins, the brand of football required to win them, the improved pass rush, the updated pass defense, the return of a disciplined run defense, the expanded defensive repertoire, the quality pass protection, the improved red zone play design, the return of team football not just on Saturdays, but every hour of every day … they’re all part of the validation that everything dictated by Dantonio, since the Monday after last Thanksgiving, through winter conditioning, every edict and decision Dantonio made through the spring and summer and fall camp, all set the Michigan State program on the proper path to today.
The proper path.
“Our biggest thing coming into this season was restoring the attitude that this program used to have,” Allen said. “We haven’t played our best football yet, but you see guys playing to the whistle, you see guys finishing, you see guys cheering each other on.
“Laress Nelson drops that punt, and you’ve got five guys out there telling him, ‘Hey man, no one cares. Keep your head up and we’re moving.’
“Guys made mistakes all night; guys are picking each other up. (We are) so much closer, so much more of a team. It’s just that attitude that we’re not going to accept losing, we’re going to keep going. It’s nice to see that in action. We’ve talked about it from November on, but we’re doing it now. So it’s cool to see.”
The rest of us had to wait until Saturday’s big reveal in Ann Arbor to get a true handle on the progress that’s been made.
“We battled some adversity last year,” Dantonio said. “We had some things going. Obviously we needed to bounce back. We made a commitment to do that as a program and a football team way back in the spring. We had some different things going on in the second semester as well, but I knew that we would rally up and I knew that our football team and our program would basically come back to the top.
“That’s what we’re trying to do. We’re just trying to go step by step.”
There’s validation that Michigan State is back as the best team in the state, back as a player in the Big Ten East, which means a player in the Big Ten, which means a player in everything. And validation that Dantonio’s blueprint for success still works, and is still in place, with a roster stocked with sophomores.
Harbaugh is now 1-2 against Dantonio. Don’t bring up Michigan’s record against it’s two main rivals over the last 10 or 15 years. And Michigan, for the first time since late December of 2014, might not want to talk about the future, either.
If you can’t get above .500 against Michigan State this year, if you can’t beat the Spartans this year, when is Michigan going to do it? Next year in East Lansing when Lewerke and most of the offensive line and key receivers get a year older and become … juniors? Next year when 90 percent of the playing group on defense returns? Next year, when the Spartans have spent an extra 365 days on Dantonio’s re-proven path?
Today, and throughout the week, anti-MSU factions might say this game was ugly, and that Michigan State didn’t win it as much as Michigan gave it to them.
Michigan has never actually lost a game, you see. It’s usually the fault of a crowned field, or poor officiating, or a bad Wolverine coach on his way out, or a bad quarterback who shouldn’t be on the field. It’s never, ever the opponent that is responsible for a Wolverine loss.
And that’s part of the circus that hits you in your religion. But it’s also amusing.
The game was ugly? Not to a Spartan fan. This game pitted two of the top five defenses in America, with almost half of the game played in 20-plus mile an hour winds and driving rain. What did you expect, Holiday on Ice? Shut up. This is Midwestern football, and Dantonio is becoming its new face.
Jim Comparoni | Publisher
This was, without a doubt, Michigan State’s biggest win … in seven days.
Oh sure, I get it. Beating Michigan is a delicious thing for Spartan fans, and Spartan players - and it should be, considering the maize circus that in-state fans have to live through all year, and the things Spartan players may have heard us saying about them over the last few months, if they were listening.
I understand why Mark Dantonio raised his hand almost as high as he could when asked where this win ranks.
“It’s up there,” he said. “Way up there.”
This is a guy with wins at the Rose Bowl, the Cotton Bowl and two Big Ten Championship Games. He’s the only guy with those bullet points on a coaching resumé. Ever.
Yet this win over the erstwhile No. 7-ranked team in the nation ranks that high for Dantonio?
Today, yes. By November, who knows?
Back in 2011 when Michigan State punked Michigan 28-14, an excited Kirk Cousinsloudly proclaimed that he and his posse would forever be able to “walk the streets,” having gone 4-0 against the Wolverines in their careers.
That was a big win. Many were picking against the Spartans prior to that game, as they always do. And that seemed like a high moment, about as high as someone could reach while sitting down.
But back in 2011, Cousins still had big games to play, such as the skull-smashing 37-31 victory over No. 4- ranked Wisconsin, a mental-hurdle win at Iowa, a Legends Division-clinching win at Northwestern, and then a landmark victory over Georgia at the Outback Bowl.
Where did the win over Michigan end up ranking that year?
Meh.
Exactly.
Michigan looked good in the funny papers last week, and the week before, and throughout the summer and spring - which is when they’ve been at their best, for half a century. No one is keeping score at that time of year, but somehow they always claim victory, and are granted victory, whether at home or in Rome.
Then another season starts. And at some point, reality sets in that Michigan has won half as many national championships in the last 65 years as Brigham Young.
And this morning, in Wolverine fiefdom, some are whispering for the first time that maybe the king has no robe.
Spartan fans have been hearing for three years that football’s greatest coach was going to return Michigan to its glory years - although no one will actually recognize a return to glory-years football, if and when it happens at Michigan, because no one alive today remembers 1933.
Meanwhile, Spartan fans were enjoying actual progress toward a return of glory years football in late December of 2014 when their team’s victory over Baylor in the Cotton Bowl was upstaged back home by a press conference announcing Harbaugh’s hiring. Dantonio fielded questions about Harbaugh’s hiring while in Dallas.
Dantonio skillfully answered while giving respect, back then, in Dallas. In truth, it ticked him off. But it also motivated him to continue to dog the program for which he bears a black mark on his soul. (His words).
What bothers him about Michigan?
“Just watch the during warm-ups,” he said back then. “Just watch. I tell our guys that are new to this (rivalry) that it won’t take more than a few minutes around it to see what it’s about. Just watch.”
So I watched again, on Saturday, looking for something inflammatory during the warm-up. I didn’t see anything. Maybe that chapter is done.
Dantonio is still driven like crazy to beat Michigan, and he’s certainly annoyed by the circus that we on the outside make of the Wolverines any time they belch or pass gas. But I don’t think Dantonio is bothered by the people inside the Michigan program like he used to be. However, that hasn’t altered his success against them.
Dantonio is 8-3 against Michigan, exceeding the promise he made the day he was hired that his teams would “measure up” against the Wolverines.
They’ve done better than measure up. On Saturday, they once again stuffed a sock in college football’s paper-program loudmouth.
But by November, if Michigan has lost to Penn State, Ohio State and Wisconsin, this win over an eventual 8-4 (or worse) Wolverine team might not register any greater than MSU’s win over Iowa … seven days ago.
'IT'S SO ENCOURAGING'
Michigan is pretty good. Iowa is pretty good. If those teams played next week, who you got? Flip a coin and plant a flag.
Michigan has great starting unit on defense, and has a chance to become a terrific team this year. But the Wolverines have had a chance to improve every day since their over-glorified victory against Florida on Sept. 2. And they haven’t come very far.
The Wolverines toiled with Air Force and Purdue for too long. Michigan State players watched film of those games and felt they could and should beat Michigan. They felt they could and should win, if they played well in all areas.
As it turned out, they played well in most areas. And played well enough, overall.
That’s why when the Hail Mary pass hit the turf, incomplete, Spartan players jogged and smiled and celebrated.
But they didn’t run and scream and cry.
Michigan State was the better team. Not by much. But Michigan State didn’t need to play a perfect game and conjure up superstar efforts to stage a miracle.
The Spartans just tackled, covered, protected the ball, punted it back to Michigan in the rain and said, “Try to beat us.”
Some day, Michigan State will play a Big Ten team good enough to take that challenge and beat the Spartans. By that time, the Spartans hope to be better than they are today, and present tougher challenges to coming opponents.
It’s kind of methodical, simple process. But we’ve seen them trek through the autumn like this before, so unremarkable, but somehow consistent. In the past, they have racked up wins like recycled cans. And they might be at it again.
“In my mind, that’s the best defense we’re going to see,” said senior center Brian Allen.“It’s so encouraging because we are not even close to playing our best football yet."
The Spartan offense was stuck in neutral for most of the second half, due to beginning their first two drives of the third quarter inside their 5-yard line.
When questioned about playing conservative, Dantonio interrupted: “No, we played smart with the weather.”
Michigan State went three-and-out (or four-and-out) on its first seven drives of the second half.
"We didn’t gamble too much," Dantonio said. "We didn’t go down the field with the ball at all in the second half because of the weather. It was blowing out there, and wet. So everything was intermediate. We tried to run the ball and take the clock as much as we could and make them beat us on defense.”
People will recite those struggles as proof that Michigan State somehow wasn’t deserving of victory.
Meanwhile, Michigan’s offense went three-and-out, interception, interception, interception, three-and-out, and three-and-out on six of its first seven drives of the second half.
Meanwhile, Michigan’s offense went three-and-out, interception, interception, interception, three-and-out, and three-and-out on six of its first seven drives of the second half.
But, you see, Michigan State deserves zero credit for those stoppages. The interceptions were all Michigan’s fault. They weren’t of Michigan State’s doing.
Booger Harbaugh didn’t even mention the words “Michigan State” in the four or so minutes of his press conference that appeared on Michigan’s official athletics site. He offered no credit to the winning team, no compliments for Michigan State’s coaches, or defense, or band, or mascot or anything.
Typical. Harbaugh has the maturity of a fourth-grader, at times.
Dantonio? When given a softball question about going 8-3 against Michigan, the Spartan head coach turned it into a compliment for the opponent.
“Is this win validation for what you’ve done in the past?” someone asked Dantonio.
“I don’t know,” Dantonio said. “We’ve done it eight times. So I don’t know why there’s a lot of doubt.
“We’ll do it again or somebody else will do it again at some point in time.
“For this year, that’s the way it went down. It doesn’t mean it’s going to happen next year.
“They have a very good football team. They are extremely, extremely well-coached. They ran 40 different formations in the first half. 40. So they are an extremely well-coached football team with great talent, but we have some guys too.”
No one is pretending that the Spartans played a perfect game.
“We made some mistakes there that drive you crazy, but we survived them,” Dantonio said. “Every time we got a turnover, we got a penalty which made it just seem like a punt, and set us back.
“We hurt ourselves sometimes. But also, we found a way to win and I think that’s what good teams do.
“We’re becoming a good team. I don’t know if we’re there yet but we’re 4-1.”
THE PROPER PATH
It was a big win, partly because of the low expectations these Spartan had. They can enjoy a victory like this, and accept it for what it is, and realize there is way more work to do, because it’s not like Michigan State to stump for September Heismans and clamber for better computer rankings than thou.
It was amusing to once again defeat the team that had been climbing the trees, doing the can-opening dives and crying for attention every day of the non-football calendar year.
That’s where college football is different from all the other organized religions of the world. Winning a game and improving to 4-1 is cute and all. But, let’s be real, half of the fun is beating the rival back down to the truth. The truth in Ann Arbor this morning is that 8-4 probably won’t wear well in khaki. And 2-8 against Mr. Dantonio since 2008 seems less than valiant.
But that stuff is just the icing.
The cake, the real satisfaction for Michigan State this weekend comes via the self-validation of what’s been going on within their own walls. And that's what Dantonio was getting at, when he reached his hand high to signify where this win ranks with him.
It wasn't just the win. It was the journey.
This win, these four wins, the brand of football required to win them, the improved pass rush, the updated pass defense, the return of a disciplined run defense, the expanded defensive repertoire, the quality pass protection, the improved red zone play design, the return of team football not just on Saturdays, but every hour of every day … they’re all part of the validation that everything dictated by Dantonio, since the Monday after last Thanksgiving, through winter conditioning, every edict and decision Dantonio made through the spring and summer and fall camp, all set the Michigan State program on the proper path to today.
The proper path.
“Our biggest thing coming into this season was restoring the attitude that this program used to have,” Allen said. “We haven’t played our best football yet, but you see guys playing to the whistle, you see guys finishing, you see guys cheering each other on.
“Laress Nelson drops that punt, and you’ve got five guys out there telling him, ‘Hey man, no one cares. Keep your head up and we’re moving.’
“Guys made mistakes all night; guys are picking each other up. (We are) so much closer, so much more of a team. It’s just that attitude that we’re not going to accept losing, we’re going to keep going. It’s nice to see that in action. We’ve talked about it from November on, but we’re doing it now. So it’s cool to see.”
The rest of us had to wait until Saturday’s big reveal in Ann Arbor to get a true handle on the progress that’s been made.
“We battled some adversity last year,” Dantonio said. “We had some things going. Obviously we needed to bounce back. We made a commitment to do that as a program and a football team way back in the spring. We had some different things going on in the second semester as well, but I knew that we would rally up and I knew that our football team and our program would basically come back to the top.
“That’s what we’re trying to do. We’re just trying to go step by step.”
There’s validation that Michigan State is back as the best team in the state, back as a player in the Big Ten East, which means a player in the Big Ten, which means a player in everything. And validation that Dantonio’s blueprint for success still works, and is still in place, with a roster stocked with sophomores.
Harbaugh is now 1-2 against Dantonio. Don’t bring up Michigan’s record against it’s two main rivals over the last 10 or 15 years. And Michigan, for the first time since late December of 2014, might not want to talk about the future, either.
If you can’t get above .500 against Michigan State this year, if you can’t beat the Spartans this year, when is Michigan going to do it? Next year in East Lansing when Lewerke and most of the offensive line and key receivers get a year older and become … juniors? Next year when 90 percent of the playing group on defense returns? Next year, when the Spartans have spent an extra 365 days on Dantonio’s re-proven path?
Today, and throughout the week, anti-MSU factions might say this game was ugly, and that Michigan State didn’t win it as much as Michigan gave it to them.
Michigan has never actually lost a game, you see. It’s usually the fault of a crowned field, or poor officiating, or a bad Wolverine coach on his way out, or a bad quarterback who shouldn’t be on the field. It’s never, ever the opponent that is responsible for a Wolverine loss.
And that’s part of the circus that hits you in your religion. But it’s also amusing.
The game was ugly? Not to a Spartan fan. This game pitted two of the top five defenses in America, with almost half of the game played in 20-plus mile an hour winds and driving rain. What did you expect, Holiday on Ice? Shut up. This is Midwestern football, and Dantonio is becoming its new face.