The Pre-Snap Read: Michigan State v Indiana
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.com
East Lansing, Mich. - Indiana is on the cusp of a generational type of season. But can the Hoosiers handle it? If they can, then they’ll likely handle Michigan State.
That’s what everyone is expecting. But this has been a season of blown-up expectations. Indiana is riding the positive side of that phenomenon with a 3-0 record. For now, and with good reason to believe they can keep it up.
Indiana beat Michigan for the first time since 1987.
Indiana was 1-22 all-time against Penn State prior to upsetting the Nittany Lions in the season opener.
Their victory over No. 8 Penn State in the opener was Indiana’s first win over a Top 10 team in 33 years.
Now the No. 10-ranked Hoosiers are ranked in the Top 10 for the first time since 1969. We’ll see if they can handle it. Michigan State, as a program, has a penchant for knocking off Top 10 teams.
Indiana plays Ohio State next week. The Michigan State game, on paper, would look like a potential sandwich letdown game for the Hoosiers.
Indiana coach Tom Allen is trying to motivate against that possibility by rallying his team to claim the Old Brass Spittoon, a trophy the Hoosiers haven’t possessed in Allen’s four years as head coach.
Also, Allen is smartly telling his team that they owe Michigan State one. Indiana felt they were ripped off by a questionable penalty late in the Michigan State game last year.
“We have a grudge against Michigan State,” said offensive lineman Caleb Jones. “We should have won last year.”
Those quotes are likely straight from the coach’s mouth. That’s fine. Allen is smart. He respects this challenge at Michigan State and wants to use any kind of emotional or psychological button he can find for a program that is processing heights it hasn’t experienced in generations, with the potential to experience more - especially if they don’t fall prey to this sandwich game.
THE LATEST ON MSU:
Michigan State is in correction mode after last week’s 49-7 loss at Iowa.
Gap fits in run defense were a correctable problem last week. But it was a problem against Rutgers as well.
I asked coach Mel Tucker about linebacker play, gap fits and communication on Tuesday. Here is that exchange, followed by a SpartanMag Film Room looking at some of the things that need to be corrected:
The Hawkeyes didn’t enjoy a physicality advantage on every single snap last week, but they did on enough of them to help assemble a dominant, well-schemed performance.
Michigan State isn’t going to be a physical juggernaut this year. Michigan State is physical enough at defensive tackle, and occasionally at d-end. But things could wear down at d-end. And Michigan State isn’t as physical as it needs to be at TE and with WR blocking in order to help make the run game go.
MSU’s interior run blocking last week was much better than it was against Rutgers, and about the same as it was against Michigan. Michigan State averaged 3.0 yards per tailback carry last week against the best per-play statistical defense in the Big Ten. Tucker charted 15 “efficient” run plays against Iowa. Those aren’t chunk plays, but they are plays that netted at least three yards with no missed blocking assignments. That’s useful, if other areas of the team are holding water. Last week, they weren’t.
But I saw some good moments in combo blocking last week with Samac and his offensive guards.
Pass protection was much worse last week than it had been in the previous two weeks when it actually served as a team strength.
Offensive guards Matt Carrick and JD Duplain were each beaten on the pass rush on the first two pocket pass attempts of the day. RT Kevin Jarvis was also beaten on the second pocket pass attempt of the day. That was an unsettling beginning for Rocky Lombardi and he never got settled the rest of the day, with only a pair of deep shot completions aiding his stats.
Tucker offered some coachspeak this week, saying they needed to correct the errors and build on the positives. There were some positives. There was a pulse with the run blocking, although Michigan State wasted some RB carries on Anthony Williams and Brandon Wright. Those guys might have some ability but Williams failed to hit the hole correctly on his first carry of the season. He has potential, but that was a waste. It’s good to get him on the field and give him a shot, make a mistake and learn from it. But if Michigan State is going to hang in this game against Indiana, the Spartans can’t have empty carries from anyone. The margin for error is small due to MSU’s mediocre physical ability, yet Michigan State makes too many of them at various positions. That mix will get you beat every week in the Big Ten.
Michigan State d-tackle Naquan Jones was not good enough against double-team blocking last week. He was average against Rutgers, good against Michigan, and then went back to average, or less, last week. They need him to be a bell cow. He’s capable but I’m wondering about his level of determination.
Meanwhile, Jacob Slade is solid at the other DT, and Jalen Hunt is coming along nicely with some quickness when one-gapping. And Dashaun Mallory showed last week that he is more than just a two-gap stuffer. He can also get his 340-pound frame moving a little bit, to cross face and penetrate, or move with his gap on a fast outside zone play. He showed something.
INDIANA’S RESULTS
Indiana is 8-2 in its last 10 Big Ten games.
This season:
Indiana 37, Rutgers 21
Indiana 38, Michigan 21
Indiana 36, Penn State 35 (OT)
* Indiana’s offense looked devastating in the first quarter against Michigan, going up 14-7 after its first two possessions, with an array of pass catching threats and a dangerous QB. Indiana led 24-7 at halftime and Pennix had led the offense to more than 300 yards in the first half.
* The most impressive thing from Indiana on that day might have been holding Michigan to a net of 13 yards rushing on 18 carries.
And Indiana did it mainly by keeping two safeties deep as part of IU’s base defense. In other words, IU stopped the run with a standard number in the box. They didn’t set out to stop the run by outnumbering it. They did it with firm two-gapping on the d-line and linebackers who make good reads behind it, and occasionally filled with effective run blitzes.
McFadden, Indiana’s inside linebacker who reminds me a little of Riley Bullough, is adept at making backfield reads while playing behind a two-gapping d-line. That’s the level of insticts and understanding that Noah Harvey needs to harness. (As for Bullough, he never had to make reads behind two-gapping defensive linemen because Michigan State was solely a one-gapping system back then. Michigan State these days runs a combination of one-gapping and two-gapping, which can be very effective, but tasks LBs with making good, smart, quick, somewhat instinctive reads).
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST: Michigan State vs Indiana
* I don’t know if Indiana is a Top 10 team, but the Hoosiers are a good, somewhat deep, explosive, correct football team. They are so correct and spirited that it’s a reminder of how difficult it is to get good in this league if you have to stay above teams like Indiana, and how quickly a Michigan, Nebraska or Penn State (or Michigan State) can sink.
* We all know about Indiana QB Michael Pennix by now. But I’m surprised by how solid Indiana’s defensive interior and entire front seven is. They’ve taken on a sturdiness in there somewhat similar to Dantonio’s early years at Michigan State.
* Indiana’s WRs are terrific mix of three talented pass catches, plus a good tight end.
* Indiana has big RBs who can do their job well, and can move the pile but aren’t overly explosive.
* Indiana’s o-line is good enough in run blocking but not nearly the test Michigan State faced last week in this department, and not as good as Michigan was supposed to be on the ground.
Indiana’s pass protection was awful late in the Penn State game but has improved nicely since then and it wasn’t a problem against Michigan, especially after Aidan Hutchinson went down early in the game with an injury. Indiana did a decent job on Kwity Paye. Indiana didn’t have to double-team him in the first half. I didn’t get a chance to chart what they did to him in the second half (that would have required watching the game for a third time. I was only after to watch it two and a half times).
* Indiana is No. 5 in the Big Ten in total defense. I kind of expected that ranking to be higher. I haven’t seen teams roll up much of anything on them.
Total defense rankings in the Big Ten:
1. Wisconsin
2. Northwestern (wait, wut?)
3. Iowa
4. Ohio State
5. Indiana
6. Michigan State
Rankings in yards allowed per play (which is the best measurement of team defense):
1. Iowa
2. Northwestern
3. Wisconsin
4. Michigan State
5. Indiana
6. Michigan
7. Ohio State
* Indiana is uncommon in how many players the Hoosiers use on defense. They play second-stringers at almost every position, and some third-stringers. Tucker noted that they play 17 different players in the front seven. Their level of recruiting evaluation and player development is obviously outstanding.
* Indiana runs multiple coverages, from man-free to zone blitzes, and disguise them well. Tackle well. They disguise their blitzes well at pre-snap and disguise their zone drops.
* Indiana forced three takeaways against PSU and Rutgers and two against Michigan.
* They take smart, direct, fast, downhill angles to the ball or to their leverage point. I noticed this last year and wrote about it in the Pre-Snap Read. They are better at it this year and tackling better.
Their back seven players are good at taking on blocks, whether they’re blowing up a block or weaseling around them.
They arrive with hard contact at the ball carrier or at the point of attack blocker.
They are well-coached to know where to go, and well-coached in the quickness with which they flow and the technique and anger when they get there.
They might not be loaded with NFL guys on defense, but they have guys buzzing around with full-tilt postures.
Tom Allen is a defensive coach first, and it shows in these guys. The physical same-pageness they play with is reminiscent of Dantonio’s early years, although the scheme is much different as Indiana is more multiple and they play a 4-2-5. (Actually it’s a 3-3-5 with the defensive end playing as a stand-up edge).
* They don’t have good pass rushing defensive linemen. But they blitz CBs and slot CBs with regularity, much more than most teams. They also blitz LBs regularly.
Indiana does get to the QB, but they do it with blitzers or coverage pressure, not from pure excellent defensive line pass rushers.
If you can pick up their blitzes, and have good QB discretion as to when to get rid of the ball safely and punt, and occasionally make Indiana pay for blitzes, then they can be had. But it will take safe, savvy, expert play from the QB. Indiana isn’t terrifying on defense, they’re just kind of pesky, correct and opportunistic.
You don’t have to be John Elway to move the ball on them. But you have to be better than Penn State’s Clifford, Michigan’s Milton or Rutgers’ Vedral. Milton did pretty well against them. Clifford lesser. Vedral even less. All of them turned it over.
PSU’s Clifford: 238 yards (24 of 35, 3 TDs, 2 INTs).
RU’s Vedral: 130 yards passing (21 of 34, 2 TDs, 3 INTs)
UM’s Milton: 344 yards passing (18 of 34, 3 TDs, 2 INTs)
KEY AREA
* Avoid turnover. As always. This is always an obvious key, but even more so with these two teams. Michigan State has been prone to turning it over and Indiana has been very good at forcing them.
Indiana doesn’t have a great pass rush. They have good, tricky coverages and ball-hawking DBs. If things begin to go sour for Rocky Lombardi, he needs to avoid last week’s temptation of trying to force a play. Kirk Cousins had the same problem as a sophomore and junior.
KEY MATCHUP
I would worry about Indiana WR Whop Philyor against MSU’s slot coverage.
Philyor is Indiana’s favorite receiver. He’s a possession-plus guy, meaning he can give you possession routes and grabs but also has the plus ability to put a double move on you and go deep.
He almost always lines up in the slot.
MSU’s slot defender was supposed to be Shakur Brown. Brown isn’t great, but he’s pretty good whether manning up or getting some bracket help.
But Brown had to play wide cornerback last week because Chris Jackson was out with an undisclosed injury.
With Jackson out and Brown replacing him, Michigan State started sophomore Julian Barnett in the slot. Barnett played 13 snaps, and true freshman played 14 snaps at that position.
Due to Iowa’s size, physicality and formations, Michigan State mostly went with big safety Michael Dowell as the fifth DB. He played 53 snaps.
But if Jackson can’t play, it will be interesting to see who and what Michigan State goes with in the slot vs Philyor.
Dowell is coming along nicely, and is pretty good against the run. But at 215 pounds, he isn’t the type of guy who can play slot corner against a sleek WR like Philyor.
Barnett has the talent to do it but is still gaining the know-how. Grose is somewhere in between. And Davion Williams was absent last week after serving as a second-string CB in the season opener.
If Jackson can’t play, school might be in session in the slot area.
INDIANA: THE MACRO
Head coach Tom Allen was defensive coordinator at Indiana in 2016, under Kevin Wilson. He took over as head coach when Wilson was fired due to improper harshness with players, or something like that.
Allen, an Indiana native, was linebackers coach at Ole Miss, and spent one year as defensive coordinator at South Florida before being hired by Wilson to become DC and Indiana in 2016.
* Allen handled the defense at Indiana for his first two years. He gave up daily control of the defense last year. Tackling was an issue early last season, but not anymore.
Vs. Penn State:
* PSU turned it over 3 times in the first half, including an INT returned inside the 5-yard line, and a fumble at the IU 6-yard line.
* Indiana took a 17-7 lead after a Jamar Johnson INT return inside the 10-yard line. RB Scott rammed it on on two inside zone runs.
* PSU had nine returning starters from an offense that ranked No. 2 in the Big Ten in scoring offense last year at 36 points per game. PSU out-gained Indiana 488-211, but the 14-point swing on those two turnovers were costly.
* Indiana had only 102 yards of total offense through the third quarter, but led 17-14.
* Pennix was just 7-of-14 for 60 yards through the 3Q against PSU.
* With PSU leading 21-20 with 1:42 to go, Indiana purposefully allowed PSU to score an untouched 9-yard TD run. That was Indiana’s only chance to win - let PSU score, get the ball back, score a TD, go for two, force overtime. And that’s exactly what IU did.
* Indiana’s defense had been pretty much error-free until a deep middle bust resulted in a 60-yard TD pass for PSU gave PSU a 21-20 lead with 2:00 to play. Second-string safety Juwan Burgess was beaten in zone coverage on the play, biting Indiana for perhaps playing too many reserves. Burgess played outside technique and allowed a fat window for the post route.
* Prior to Indiana’s game-tying drive in the last two minutes, the Hoosier had just 87 yards in the first half and 46 in the second.
* Pennix won the game with a dive to the pylon on a two-point conversion. I think the call should have been reversed. Looked to me like the ball hit the grass out of bounds just before the ball got to the pylon. Penn State should have been awarded the victory.
vs Rutgers:
Indiana’s defense was excellent for the first three quarters. The offense was sleepy, but eventually woke up in time to take over.
* Indiana started slow and trailed 7-6 with 6:00 to go in the 1H when Indiana forced a turnover at the Rutgers 5-yard line. On that play, blitzing LB Cam Jones hit the QB’s arm, causing a pass attempt to flutter high. Second-string d-end Jon King intercepted it. Rutgers scored three plays later to go up 13-7.
* Indiana then intercepted a Rutgers pass on Rutgers’ next play from scrimmage, giving Indiana another short field at the Scarlet Knights’ 28-yard line. Indiana was in the end zone a few plays later.
Those two turnover-induced TD drives of 5 and 28 yards turned a 7-6 deficit into a 20-7 Indiana halftime lead.
Indiana controlled the 2H, beginning with a LB McFadden INT on a fourth down roll out pass. Then Indiana went deep on its first offensive play of the 2H, hooking up with Philyor on a deep post. A facemask penalty stalled things and IU had to kick a field goal, but led 23-7 and controlled it the rest of the way.
At the line of scrimmage: Indiana netted 109 yards rushing against Rutgers (rushed for 145 but had some losses).
Rutgers netted 121 yards rushing (gained 166).
The Takeaway: Indiana hasn’t been as dominant this year as you might have thought if you only watched their game against Michigan. Indiana has been good, occasionally explosive, and consistent on defense, especially in the art of forcing turnovers.
The biggest problem is the idea that Pennix might have hit a new gear last week. He seems to be improving. He was already pretty good. If he indeed has gone from good to very good, then this team could go with him.
INDIANA OFFENSE
* Indiana has had three different offensive coordinators in three years.
* This year, former Michigan walk-on QB Nick Sheridan, the son of former Michigan State assistant coach Mike Sheridan, is Indiana’s offensive coordinator. Nick was a Pop Warner legend of sorts in the Okemos area back during the Saban years when Sheridan was briefly an Michigan State assistant. Sheridan went on to coach at Notre Dame, Michigan, the NFL and other places.
* Sheridan replaces Kalen DeBoer, who left to become head coach at Fresno State.
* I haven’t seen Indiana operate at fast tempo. They don’t huddle, but they don’t hurry. They are a check-with-me system.
Lots of pistol. Some zone read, but not much in the way of QB keepers. Pennix can run, but they don’t ask him to do it much.
They run the inside zone, like most teams these days. I didn’t see any gap plays, or pin-and-pulls, or pulling linemen, or outside zones for that matter. Their run game is very much a one-flavor team. Inside zones.
Their pass game is lethal, due to the talent. Pennix has a great arm and is showing good ability to make reads and decisions. He has three excellent WRs.
He and Sheridan get the TE involved nicely. And he’s a good TE, Hendershot.
In terms of unique characteristics, Indiana will put three WRs to the short side of the field more often than most teams. OSU has done this as well over the years. I haven’t seen it be especially problematic for an opponent, but it causes for interesting traffic copping for the defense to the short side when they do that.
MICRO: THE PERSONNEL
QB 9 MICHAEL PENNIX (6-3, 218, R-Fr., Tampa, Fla.).
* Four-star recruit, ranked No. 55 in Florida by Rivals.com.
* Also visited FSU and South Florida. Visited all three in December of his senior year.
* Offers from Oregon, Tennessee and others.
Tucker called Michael Pennix “a difference-maker at QB.”
Pennix is averaging 250 yards passing per game, 59 pct, 7 TDs 1 INT.
* Indiana is 8-1 with Pennix as a starter, with the lone loss being last year at Michigan State.
* The scary thing for Michigan State about Pennix is that he appears to be improving. He wasn’t great against Penn State or Rutgers. He started slow against both teams, and was frigid against PSU, missing a couple of potential TD passes.
* I felt Pennix threw more catchable short passes last week against Michigan than he did in the first two games. The short passes to the flat got him into a rhythm and softened up the UM defense. In the first two games, he often put too much heat on the ball, or threw too sharply and had some drops.
* But he was outstanding against Michigan: 30 of 50 for 342 yards with 3 TDs, 0 INTs. He was precise, accurate and showed an electric arm. He made good reads, and the offensive system presented him with open choices.
* He’s good at firing into the cover-two hole, especially on the short side. He has plenty of arm to do it from the field, but when he sees a cover-two window to the short side, he has the laser to drill it over the squat corner and outside the safety. The arm strength allows it to get there before the safety can close over the top.
* Against PSU, Pennix was just 7 of 14 for 60 yards through the 3Q against PSU. He finished 19 of 36 for 170 with 1 TD and 1 INT.
+ They don’t feature him as a runner, but he can do it. Had a 25-yard QB draw on third down against Rutgers in the 1H and looked good doing it, calling his own number when the seas parted.
* For a guy with good mobility, they don’t ask him to boot and throw on the run very much. He looked pretty good on a half roll pass to Philyor on a slot WR drag for about 15 against Rutgers, but they don’t do that much.
++ Really nice 15-yard dart to WR Fryfogle on a corner route into the cover-two window as part of a high-low smash concept. Short side pass, good read, threw a rope.
- Missed Fryfogle in the 2Q vs PSU on a switch route to the flag, jammed him with the throw to the inside shoulder on the turn.
- INT in the 3Q vs PSU, got a little pressure from a d-end beating his left tackle. Stared down the receiver on a 25 yard hook.
* Had a streak of 20 straight completions against Michigan State last year.
INJURY HISTORY
* Pennix played in three games as a true freshman two years ago but went down with an ACL.
* Last year, he went 5-1 as a starter but then went out with a shoulder injury.
- on third-and-three vs a PSU blitz, overthrew Philyor on a deep slot fade. He was open.
+ Was having a mediocre day through three quarters against PSU, but then ripped a 15-yard out to the wide side of the field, outside the numbers, on a rope on third-and-eight against cover four. He didn’t have much of a window, but he drilled it.
* Makes good intermediate reads, will zip the 15-yard dig against zones.
HOW DO YOU CONTAIN HIM: Penn State had good moments when the pass rush was getting home - especially early in the fourth quarter. Michigan State doesn’t have pass rushers like Penn State.
The problems Indiana had in pass protection at left tackle didn’t resurface in the last two games, even against Michigan.
* I think the plan will be similar to the Michigan game: How to contain him with a myriad of coverages and some occasional pressure. However, he is much better at making reads than UM’s Milton. And his WRs are better than Milton’s. His pass protection is potentially worse.
You have to hope you can disguise your coverages, and get home on some pressures and then hope that he’s erratic with his accuracy the way he was at times against PSU and (to a lesser extent) against Rutgers.
But if he has time, and he’s on, he can throw for 350 yards against good coverages with these receivers.
WIDE RECEIVERS
The Skinny: An excellent trio, with a mix of quickness, size, intermediate talent and some deep-ball explosiveness, and circus-catch hands.
1 WR WHOP PHILYOR (5-11, 180, Sr., Tampa)
* Was a two-star recruit by Rivals.com, ranked No. 145 in Florida by ESPN.
* Nick-named “Whop” because he liked Whoppers at Burger King as a kid .
21 receptions, averaging 7 catches per game
* Had more than 1,000 yards receiving last year, just the seventh in Indiana history to do that.
* Accelerates quickly on his release moves when he decides to hit the gas.
* They use him almost exclusively in the slot.
* Has quick feet in getting into his route through the first 10 yards, quick pedals. Reminds me of a faster version of Mill Coleman.
WR 3 TY FRYFOGLE (6-2, 214, Sr., Lucedale, Miss.)
* Two-star recruit with offers from Ole Miss and Idaho. Was ranked No. 41 in Mississippi.
++ Had a pair of terrific circus catches against UM’s CB Gray last week as part of IU’s second TD drive.
+ 20-yard gain on slot fade to the back shoulder vs press man.
* 13 catches on the year.
* Last year, had 131 yards receiving vs PSU.
WR 13 MILES MARSHALL, 6-4, 208, Soph. from Ga., 7 catches
* 5.6 three-star recruit, No. 90 in Georgia. Summer commitment had offers from Purdue, Virginia, Vanderbilt and mid-majors.
++ Excellent 13-yard TD reception on a jumpball fade last week against Michigan’s CB Green. Just high-balled him as a mismatch guy in the red zone.
* Had four catches for a team-high 46 yards in the victory over Penn State.
* Three catches for 36 yards against Michigan.
* Last year as a freshman he had 16 catches.
TE 86 PEYTON HENDERSHOT (6-4, 255, Jr., North Salem, Ind.)
* HM All-Big Ten by coaches last year.
* Was a two-star recruit by Rivals.com, ranked No. 13 in Indiana by ESPN.
* Had an official visit to Penn State but did not get offered. Had offers from Syracuse, Wake Forest and MAC schools.
* Had team-high six catches against Rutgers for 34 yards and two short TDs.
* Four catches for 31 yards with a TD against Michigan.
* Had 52 catches last year but has dropped at least one pass in every game this year.
- Had a crossing route zip through his hands on third down with 3:30 to go in the PSU game and Indiana up 20-14.
- Had crossing route zip through his hands on third down in the 1Q of the Rutgers games. Might be having trouble with Pennix’ velocity.
- They went deep to him on a wheel in the 1Q vs Michigan but a catchable pass went through his finger tips.
* He had a 49-yard reception last year vs OSU on a double pass trick play from WR Hale, who has since graduated.
RUNNING BACKS:
The Skinny: Big guys who do the job, especially in short yardage, but haven’t been explosive (yet). Scott was a great stat man earlier in his career and is coming off a good 97-yard output against Michigan. His per-carry average has not been as good this year as it was in his first two seasons.
RB 8 STEVIE SCOTT III (6-2, 231, Soph., Syracuse, NY)
* Three star recruit ranked No. 11 in New York by Rivals.com
* Had offers from Army, Boston College, Duke, Pitt, Purdue, Syracuse.
* Took official visits to Indiana and Rutgers.
* Originally committed to Rutgers. Got hurt. De-committed. Former Michigan RB Mike Hart, Indiana’s RBs coach and a native of the Syracuse area, got in his ear and reeled him in for the Hoosiers.
* Rushed for 845 yards last year (4.7 per), and 1,137 as a freshman (5.0 per).
This year, he is averaging 3.6 yards per carry.
Scott rushed for: 57 yards against Penn State, 81 against Rutgers and 97 against Michigan.
* He ranks No. 1 in the Big Ten in rushing yards and total TDs since 2018.
+ 14-yard TD run against PSU on a check-with-me inside zone run (Indiana had three WRs to the boundary, PSU went with only one down lineman. IU had a numbers edge in the box and PSU vacated a gap.)
RB 6 JAMES SAMPSON (6-2, 220, Soph., Avon, Ind.)
* One of Indiana’s highest-ranked recruits of the last several years.
* Was a four-star recruit, ranked No. 3 in Indiana, No. 185 in the nation.
* Was an October commitment. Had offers from Arkansas, Florida State, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State.
* Rushed for 33 yards on seven carries against Rutgers.
* Rushed for 25 yards on eight carries against Michigan, along with a 9-yard reception.
* Last year he rushed for 275 yards.
OFFENSIVE LINE:
The Skinny: Questionable at times in pass protection. Good enough in the run game with inside zone schemes. They didn’t have a problem with Rutgers’ tilted defensive tackle after having the advantage of seeing it on film against Michigan State.
Indiana’s offensive tackles really struggled in pass protection in the fourth quarter of the PSU game.
- Allowed a blind-side sack to an unblocked OLB as part of a five-man rush on a third down in the 1Q against PSU.
LT: 77 CALEB JONES (6-8, 362, Jr., Indianapolis)
* Was a three-star recruit by Rivals.com. Ranked No. 12 in Indiana by ESPN.
* Also had offers from Illinois, Purdue, MACs.
* Mammoth, mammoth size.
- Gave up three sacks in the 2H against PSU, including two to Shaka Toney of PSU. Michigan State doesn’t have a Shaka Toney. But Beesley might be able to get skinny against Jones and beat him on a rip or a duck-under.
* Jones didn’t look bad in pass protection in the last two games.
LG 56 MIKE KATIC (6-4, 311, R-Fr., Gibsonia, Pa.)
* No opinion, other than noticing that he allowed pressure to PSU’s Jayson Oweh on third-and-medium in the fourth quarter for an INC.
LG 57 HARRY CRIDER (6-4, 311, Sr., Columbus, Ind.)
* Was ranked No. 22 in Indiana.
* Had offers from Virginia MACs and Ivys.
* Captain.
* Rimington Trophy Watch List.
* Moving from LG to C this year.
RG 51 MACKENZIE NWORAH (6-4, 322, Sr., Houston)
* Was a 5.5 three-star unranked in Texas by Rivals.com.
* Was a spot starter for the previous three years, while battling injuries.
* No opinion other than noticing that he allowed pressure on a third-down hurry INC early in the Rutgers game.
RT MATTHEW BEDFORD (6-6, 314, Soph., Cordova, Tenn.)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 26 in Tennesssee.
*Was a summer commitment with offers from Mississippi State and South Carolina.
+ Good down block on a Scott 25-yard run in the 1H vs Rutgers.
INDIANA DEFENSE
* I’m not seeing many missed tackles. And they try to put good contact on you every chance they get.
- They will go with two deep safeties and a slot CB and allow themselves to be light in the box, numbers-wise. In theory, you should be able to run the ball against them in three-WR sets. They will flash a safety or corner in for help on run defense, run-blitz style so they end up not being as out-numbered in the box as they might look at pre-snap.
* They intercepted PSU QB Clifford twice in the first half. Once on a bad, duck of an overthrown screen. The other was an overthrown crossing route to the TE with the centerfield safety behind off man-to-man.
* They stay square, sturdy and hit pretty good when they get there.
* Their d-line didn’t get moved off the line of scrimmage vs PSU or Michigan, so I wouldn’t expect Michigan State to be able to do it either.
* Their d-line is going to be tough on the interior in short yardage. PSU couldn’t budge them inside the 5-yard line but resorted to a play-action pop pass to the TE on fourth-and-goal (old fashioned pop pass downfield, not the pop sweep).
Next drive, IU stopped PSU’s third-and-one inside run cold.
With 5 minutes left in regulation, Indiana stuffed PSU on a fourth-and-one inside zone run. Third-string Indiana DE CJ Person beat the PSU left tackle on the play, bulled him, displaced him and LB Cam Jones filled with a physical tackle.
* When they bring ILB cross blitzes, their LBs lower their shoulder and make strong contact with blockers to help logjam plays.
* They take on blockers with the correct shoulder, correct angle, and hit pretty hard.
SCHEMES, TRENDS & ANALYSIS
* PSU ran several QB draws and QB lead draws when catching Indiana light in the box (with two deep safeties as a third cornerback committed to the slot WR). The QB draw gives the offense a plus-one. Rocky Lombardi was a little dinged up last week so I don’t know how much Michigan State can use this.
* PSU’s QB Clifford scored on a 35-yard QB scramble against two-deep. Interestingly, Indiana was in zone. Usually long QB scrambles come when catching a defense in man-to-man. Not this time. That cut Indiana’s lead to 17-14 on the last play of the third quarter.
Clifford isn’t known as much of a runner, but he ran for 119 yards on 17 carries against Indiana.
* Rutgers caught Indiana in a slot CB blitz and executed a screen pass for 15 yards. That play looked like it had more potential at the outset but Indiana’s cover-three zone behind the blitz contained it.
But Indiana can be susceptible to screen passes, maybe not for huge plays, but for good chunks and chain-movers.
* PSU went deep vs pressing slot CB Tiawan Mullen in the fourth quarter. Mullen flagged for interference.
* Indiana held Michigan to 13 net yards rushing (42 in gains, 29 in losses). This is a staggering statistic that says a lot about Michigan’s floundering ways and also the secret sauce to Indiana’s 3-0 success. They are deceptively firm on the d-line, with swarming run support from LBs and DBs.
DEFENSIVE LINE
The Skinny: This group is deceptive. They don’t look like great athletes. They don’t make many plus plays. But they don’t lose the line of scrimmage while two-gapping, and the back seven behind them do such a good job of arriving correctly and on the same page that it all works out real well.
The d-line holds the point of attack with two-gapping technique, the LBs make good reads behind it, so Indiana can play a lot of downs with two deep safeties. If you can stop the run while keeping two safeties deep AND keeping a defensive back in the slot, then it’s like playing with 12 on the field.
This isn’t a great defense, but they’re getting the job done and causing turnovers.
DE 6 JAMES HEAD (6-5, 261, Jr., Miami)
* Was a 5.7 three-star recruit.
* Was a summer commitment with offers from Michigan State, Baylor, KSU, Mississippi State, Nebraska, Oregon, NC State, South Carolina, Tennessee.
Indiana NEVER used to be able to recruit like this in the south, aside from a few Gerry DiNardo recruits in Louisiana.
* Second-year starter.
* 2.5 sacks last year.
* I haven’t noticed any plus plays out of him this year.
DT 50 SIO NOFOAGATOTOA (6-4, 315, American Samoa/Clearwater (Fla.) Academy International)
* Was a 5.5 three-star recruit. Also had offers from Arizona, ASU, BC, Nebraska, Wisconsin, NC State and others.
+ Good job crossing face on a slant to get a TFL on a third-and-1 in the 1Q against PSU.
+ Good vs double-teams last week against Michigan.
* Had nine tackles last year.
(94 Demarcus Elliott)
* Solid when two-gapping in goal-line situation vs PSU.
DT 98 JEROME JOHNSON (6-3, 304, Sr., Bassfield, Miss.)
* Three-star recruit.
* Officially visited South Florida. Had offers from Louisville, Ole Miss, Illinois.
* Decent pass rushing turning the corner when stunting outside.
* A little questionable vs double teams, and really struggled with it last year.
DE 87 MICHEL ZIEMBA (6-3, 258, Sr., Sanford, Fla.)
* Was a 5.4 two-star recruit with mid-major offers.
* Stand-up defensive end.
* Had 6.5 TFLS last year.
DE 92 ALFRED BRYANT (6-2, 258, Jr., Fresno, Texas)
* Was a three-star recruit. Ranked No. 46 WDE in nation by Rivals.com.
* Had offers from Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Kansas State. * Stand-up DE.
- A little soft against PSU’s wham blocks. But Michigan State isn’t tough enough at TE to emulate that.
LINEBACKERS:
The Skinny: Solid, dependable guys, and they go two-deep.
LB 47 MICAH McFADDEN (6-2, 227, Jr., Tampa)
* Two-star recruit.
* Had offers from BC, UMass, Southern Miss, MACs.
+ Nifty A-gap blitzer on third downs. .
* Quality downhill MLB. Riley Bullough type.
+ Nice INT on a fourth-and-eight sprint right option by Rutgers in the 3Q. McFadden played zone, roamed with the No. 3 WR, got width, ran with him, made the play. Veteran play.
(LB 8 James Miller 6-2, 231, Soph., Tampa)
* 5.6, three-star recruit who committed on signing day after official visits to Indiana, Iowa, Marshall.
* He is McFadden’s back-up, will get playing time.
* Impressed with the force Miller put on PSU’s tight end when taking on a block.
* Slippery through the inside gaps with quick reads as a run defender.
* Good TFL on run blitz in the 3Q vs PSU, busting through a C/LG double team.
* This guy is a back-up? I said the same thing about Cam Jones last year.
(44 Allen Thomas, saw action in 1Q vs PSU.)
LB 4 CAM JONES, Jr., 6-3, 224, Memphis.
* He was a three-star, ranked No. 26 in Tennessee. He had offers from Tennessee, Mississippi State, Missouri.
* He has active speed in pursuit.
+ Hit Rutgers QB on a two-LB inside blitz, causing a pass attempt to flutter high for an INT. Second-string d-end Jon King intercepted it.
* Noticed him last year as a second-stringer as the type of frame/speed guy that Indiana rarely used to have in the past, especially a three-star out-of-state guy with this type of ability, beating SEC schools to get him. What’s that all about?
* Had an INT return for a TD last year against UConn.
HUSKY 31 BRYANT FITZGERALD (6-0, 209, R-Jr., Indianapolis)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 7 in Indiana.
* Had offers from Minnesota, Illinois.
(Replacing Marcelino Ball who is missing the season with an ACL).
* This is their overhang hybrid type defender.
* He’ll play CB in the slot quite a bit. And he’ll play at the LB level as a “box” DB at times, if you go with heavier personnel.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
The Skinny: They do a lot of shape-shifting back there, and they know where they’re going. Their knees are bent and they arrive full-tilt with no false steps. They’ve been forcing turnovers.
Michigan WR Ronnie Bell had six catches for 149 yards. Some teams have had success going deep middle.
CB 2 REESE TAYLOR (5-11, 185, Jr., Indianapolis)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 11 in Indiana.
* Had offers from Iowa, Minnesota, Purdue, Wisconsin.
+ Excellent CB in run support, a sports car at avoiding blocks and knifing to the ball carrier.
(CB 23 Jaylin Williams (6-0, 179, Jr., Memphis)
* was a 5.5 three-star recruit, ranked No. 30 in Tennessee.
* Had offers from Missouri, Mississippi State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Vanderbilt, Washington State.
* plays some box DB
+ INT vs PSU on a bad screen pass.
- Beaten on a 23-yard over route vs Rutgers. QB had all day to throw. This is where Rutgers’ mediocre pass rush could give an opponent a chance to capitalize, especially when catching them in an easy-to-read, man-to-man rather than one of Indiana’s tricky zone coverages.
- Allowed 37 yard TD on a deep post to Michigan’s Cornelius Johnson. He played off at the line of scrimmage, outside technique like he was expecting safety help.
CB 3 TIAWAN MULLEN (5-10, 176, Soph., Fort Lauderdale)
* Was a 5.8 four-star recruit, ranked No. 43 in Florida.
* Took official visits to Kansas State, Nebraska, Pittsburgh,
* Excellent freshman season last year.
* Preseason All-Big Ten.
+ Excellent play, sniffing out a tunnel screen and ankle-tackling it from the back side for a loss of one.
- PSU went deep vs pressing slot CB Tiawan Mullen in the fourth quarter. Mullen flagged for interference.
SS 1 DEVON MATTHEWS (6-2, 200, Jr., Jacksonville, Fla.)
* Two-star recruit. Ranked No. 172 in Florida. Officially visited UConn, Cincinnati.
* Good break on the ball to break up an intermediate post in the 1Q vs PSU.
* Good physical hit on the TE after the catch.
* Good hitter in run support.
FS 22 JAMAR JOHNSON (6-1, 197, Jr., Sarasota, Fla.)
* Was a 5.5 three-star recruit.
* Had offers from Purdue, Iowa State, Virginia Tech.
+ Had a 63-yard pick six against Tennessee in the Gator Bowl.
* INT vs PSU, playing deep center field safety behind man to man coverage, picked off an overthrown ball.
+ Came on a CB blitz and stripped QB Clifford of PSU for a fumble on a third-and-1 at the 6-yard line late in the 1H.
(FS Juwan Burgess, 6-1, 187, Jr., Tampa)
* Burgess was a 5.6 three-star recruit. He committed two weeks before signing day with apparent offers from Alabama, Clemson, Arkansas, Florida, FSU, Auburn, Miami, Ohio State and pretty much everybody.
- * Indiana’s defense had been pretty much error free until a deep middle bust resulted in a 60-yard TD pass for PSU gave PSU a 21-20 lead with 2:00 to play. Second-string safety Juwan Burgess was beaten in zone coverage on the play, biting Indiana for perhaps playing too many reserves. Burgess played outside technique and allowed a fat window for the post route.
SPECIAL TEAMS
PK Charles Campbell, Soph.
* Is 6 for 6 on the year .
+ 48 yarder vs PSU. Was 2 for 2 vs PSU.
* Hit a 52-yarder against Michigan.
* Coverage and return teams: No opinion.
ADD IT ALL UP
Just when you think Michigan State is a limited, mistake-prone team and Indiana might be the best team in the Big Ten East outside of Ohio State, a game like this could bring both teams back to the middle.
The path to victory is tricky for Michigan State. Need to protect the QB against pressures and the QB has to make smart reads and not turn the ball over. Getting the ground game established is something Michigan State hasn’t done effectively all year, although there were some sparks of hope in each of the last two weeks. Indiana’s run defense has been good, not great.
They stuffed Michigan on the ground. Penn State’s tailbacks rushed for 113 yards on 34 carries (3.3 per), but PSU received a big boost from QB Clifford’s surprising 119 yards rushing on QB draws and scrambles.
For Michigan State to win this game, the Michigan State ground game needs to wake up and post something better than the 121 yards rushing that Rutgers put up. Can Michigan State get that done? Sure, but it’s something we haven’t seen them accomplish yet.
Rocky Lombardi was a little banged up last week and it affected his accuracy. His ability to pilot this offense through the air and an occasional keeper would seem unlikely after watching his play last week. At his best, he could do his part to help Michigan State win this game, including providing some plus plays. Whether or not he’s at his physical best is a fair question. And even if he is, will Michigan State be good enough in other areas of football to make a good day from Rocky stand up?
Michigan State needs Rocky to regain his accuracy on intermediate routes, get back to having good discretion, and sprinkle in some deep balls. Maybe more than “some” deep balls. Might need a raid of them like the Michigan game. Rutgers has given up some deep balls this year, with No. 22 and 23 getting beat. Michigan State will likely need to roll some deep dice in this game if the run game isn’t providing much return.
All of that COULD add up to 30 points of offense from Michigan State on a good day. But can Michigan State keep Indiana under 35?
First, avoid the turnover bug that Indiana’s opponents have had. Don’t give them a short field on turnovers, as Michigan State did against Rutgers and Iowa, and as Indiana’s opponents have done this year. A lot of that gets back to Lombardi and pass protection. The fumble issue wasn’t an issue in the past two weeks.
Make Indiana operate on a deep field, hope that your myriad of coverages and occasional pressures can contain a quality QB with an excellent trio of recievers. Going to need TE Hendershott to drop a couple more passes.
Overall, Michigan State just seems to need too many recent negatives to become positives overnight, and needs a hot Indiana team to look ahead to Ohio State and play as cold as they did for nearly two quarters against PSU. It’s possible, especially in this bizarro college football season of swings, especially with Indiana - as a program - possibly due for a correction, and Michigan State - as a program - possibly posing danger to a Top 10 opponent.
At the end of the day, however, Indiana looks consistent and responsible on defense, and the QB/WR combination for the Hoosier offense gives every indication that revved-up consistency is becoming the norm for them in 2020.
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.com
East Lansing, Mich. - Indiana is on the cusp of a generational type of season. But can the Hoosiers handle it? If they can, then they’ll likely handle Michigan State.
That’s what everyone is expecting. But this has been a season of blown-up expectations. Indiana is riding the positive side of that phenomenon with a 3-0 record. For now, and with good reason to believe they can keep it up.
Indiana beat Michigan for the first time since 1987.
Indiana was 1-22 all-time against Penn State prior to upsetting the Nittany Lions in the season opener.
Their victory over No. 8 Penn State in the opener was Indiana’s first win over a Top 10 team in 33 years.
Now the No. 10-ranked Hoosiers are ranked in the Top 10 for the first time since 1969. We’ll see if they can handle it. Michigan State, as a program, has a penchant for knocking off Top 10 teams.
Indiana plays Ohio State next week. The Michigan State game, on paper, would look like a potential sandwich letdown game for the Hoosiers.
Indiana coach Tom Allen is trying to motivate against that possibility by rallying his team to claim the Old Brass Spittoon, a trophy the Hoosiers haven’t possessed in Allen’s four years as head coach.
Also, Allen is smartly telling his team that they owe Michigan State one. Indiana felt they were ripped off by a questionable penalty late in the Michigan State game last year.
“We have a grudge against Michigan State,” said offensive lineman Caleb Jones. “We should have won last year.”
Those quotes are likely straight from the coach’s mouth. That’s fine. Allen is smart. He respects this challenge at Michigan State and wants to use any kind of emotional or psychological button he can find for a program that is processing heights it hasn’t experienced in generations, with the potential to experience more - especially if they don’t fall prey to this sandwich game.
THE LATEST ON MSU:
Michigan State is in correction mode after last week’s 49-7 loss at Iowa.
Gap fits in run defense were a correctable problem last week. But it was a problem against Rutgers as well.
I asked coach Mel Tucker about linebacker play, gap fits and communication on Tuesday. Here is that exchange, followed by a SpartanMag Film Room looking at some of the things that need to be corrected:
The Hawkeyes didn’t enjoy a physicality advantage on every single snap last week, but they did on enough of them to help assemble a dominant, well-schemed performance.
Michigan State isn’t going to be a physical juggernaut this year. Michigan State is physical enough at defensive tackle, and occasionally at d-end. But things could wear down at d-end. And Michigan State isn’t as physical as it needs to be at TE and with WR blocking in order to help make the run game go.
MSU’s interior run blocking last week was much better than it was against Rutgers, and about the same as it was against Michigan. Michigan State averaged 3.0 yards per tailback carry last week against the best per-play statistical defense in the Big Ten. Tucker charted 15 “efficient” run plays against Iowa. Those aren’t chunk plays, but they are plays that netted at least three yards with no missed blocking assignments. That’s useful, if other areas of the team are holding water. Last week, they weren’t.
But I saw some good moments in combo blocking last week with Samac and his offensive guards.
Pass protection was much worse last week than it had been in the previous two weeks when it actually served as a team strength.
Offensive guards Matt Carrick and JD Duplain were each beaten on the pass rush on the first two pocket pass attempts of the day. RT Kevin Jarvis was also beaten on the second pocket pass attempt of the day. That was an unsettling beginning for Rocky Lombardi and he never got settled the rest of the day, with only a pair of deep shot completions aiding his stats.
Tucker offered some coachspeak this week, saying they needed to correct the errors and build on the positives. There were some positives. There was a pulse with the run blocking, although Michigan State wasted some RB carries on Anthony Williams and Brandon Wright. Those guys might have some ability but Williams failed to hit the hole correctly on his first carry of the season. He has potential, but that was a waste. It’s good to get him on the field and give him a shot, make a mistake and learn from it. But if Michigan State is going to hang in this game against Indiana, the Spartans can’t have empty carries from anyone. The margin for error is small due to MSU’s mediocre physical ability, yet Michigan State makes too many of them at various positions. That mix will get you beat every week in the Big Ten.
Michigan State d-tackle Naquan Jones was not good enough against double-team blocking last week. He was average against Rutgers, good against Michigan, and then went back to average, or less, last week. They need him to be a bell cow. He’s capable but I’m wondering about his level of determination.
Meanwhile, Jacob Slade is solid at the other DT, and Jalen Hunt is coming along nicely with some quickness when one-gapping. And Dashaun Mallory showed last week that he is more than just a two-gap stuffer. He can also get his 340-pound frame moving a little bit, to cross face and penetrate, or move with his gap on a fast outside zone play. He showed something.
INDIANA’S RESULTS
Indiana is 8-2 in its last 10 Big Ten games.
This season:
Indiana 37, Rutgers 21
Indiana 38, Michigan 21
Indiana 36, Penn State 35 (OT)
* Indiana’s offense looked devastating in the first quarter against Michigan, going up 14-7 after its first two possessions, with an array of pass catching threats and a dangerous QB. Indiana led 24-7 at halftime and Pennix had led the offense to more than 300 yards in the first half.
* The most impressive thing from Indiana on that day might have been holding Michigan to a net of 13 yards rushing on 18 carries.
And Indiana did it mainly by keeping two safeties deep as part of IU’s base defense. In other words, IU stopped the run with a standard number in the box. They didn’t set out to stop the run by outnumbering it. They did it with firm two-gapping on the d-line and linebackers who make good reads behind it, and occasionally filled with effective run blitzes.
McFadden, Indiana’s inside linebacker who reminds me a little of Riley Bullough, is adept at making backfield reads while playing behind a two-gapping d-line. That’s the level of insticts and understanding that Noah Harvey needs to harness. (As for Bullough, he never had to make reads behind two-gapping defensive linemen because Michigan State was solely a one-gapping system back then. Michigan State these days runs a combination of one-gapping and two-gapping, which can be very effective, but tasks LBs with making good, smart, quick, somewhat instinctive reads).
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST: Michigan State vs Indiana
* I don’t know if Indiana is a Top 10 team, but the Hoosiers are a good, somewhat deep, explosive, correct football team. They are so correct and spirited that it’s a reminder of how difficult it is to get good in this league if you have to stay above teams like Indiana, and how quickly a Michigan, Nebraska or Penn State (or Michigan State) can sink.
* We all know about Indiana QB Michael Pennix by now. But I’m surprised by how solid Indiana’s defensive interior and entire front seven is. They’ve taken on a sturdiness in there somewhat similar to Dantonio’s early years at Michigan State.
* Indiana’s WRs are terrific mix of three talented pass catches, plus a good tight end.
* Indiana has big RBs who can do their job well, and can move the pile but aren’t overly explosive.
* Indiana’s o-line is good enough in run blocking but not nearly the test Michigan State faced last week in this department, and not as good as Michigan was supposed to be on the ground.
Indiana’s pass protection was awful late in the Penn State game but has improved nicely since then and it wasn’t a problem against Michigan, especially after Aidan Hutchinson went down early in the game with an injury. Indiana did a decent job on Kwity Paye. Indiana didn’t have to double-team him in the first half. I didn’t get a chance to chart what they did to him in the second half (that would have required watching the game for a third time. I was only after to watch it two and a half times).
* Indiana is No. 5 in the Big Ten in total defense. I kind of expected that ranking to be higher. I haven’t seen teams roll up much of anything on them.
Total defense rankings in the Big Ten:
1. Wisconsin
2. Northwestern (wait, wut?)
3. Iowa
4. Ohio State
5. Indiana
6. Michigan State
Rankings in yards allowed per play (which is the best measurement of team defense):
1. Iowa
2. Northwestern
3. Wisconsin
4. Michigan State
5. Indiana
6. Michigan
7. Ohio State
* Indiana is uncommon in how many players the Hoosiers use on defense. They play second-stringers at almost every position, and some third-stringers. Tucker noted that they play 17 different players in the front seven. Their level of recruiting evaluation and player development is obviously outstanding.
* Indiana runs multiple coverages, from man-free to zone blitzes, and disguise them well. Tackle well. They disguise their blitzes well at pre-snap and disguise their zone drops.
* Indiana forced three takeaways against PSU and Rutgers and two against Michigan.
* They take smart, direct, fast, downhill angles to the ball or to their leverage point. I noticed this last year and wrote about it in the Pre-Snap Read. They are better at it this year and tackling better.
Their back seven players are good at taking on blocks, whether they’re blowing up a block or weaseling around them.
They arrive with hard contact at the ball carrier or at the point of attack blocker.
They are well-coached to know where to go, and well-coached in the quickness with which they flow and the technique and anger when they get there.
They might not be loaded with NFL guys on defense, but they have guys buzzing around with full-tilt postures.
Tom Allen is a defensive coach first, and it shows in these guys. The physical same-pageness they play with is reminiscent of Dantonio’s early years, although the scheme is much different as Indiana is more multiple and they play a 4-2-5. (Actually it’s a 3-3-5 with the defensive end playing as a stand-up edge).
* They don’t have good pass rushing defensive linemen. But they blitz CBs and slot CBs with regularity, much more than most teams. They also blitz LBs regularly.
Indiana does get to the QB, but they do it with blitzers or coverage pressure, not from pure excellent defensive line pass rushers.
If you can pick up their blitzes, and have good QB discretion as to when to get rid of the ball safely and punt, and occasionally make Indiana pay for blitzes, then they can be had. But it will take safe, savvy, expert play from the QB. Indiana isn’t terrifying on defense, they’re just kind of pesky, correct and opportunistic.
You don’t have to be John Elway to move the ball on them. But you have to be better than Penn State’s Clifford, Michigan’s Milton or Rutgers’ Vedral. Milton did pretty well against them. Clifford lesser. Vedral even less. All of them turned it over.
PSU’s Clifford: 238 yards (24 of 35, 3 TDs, 2 INTs).
RU’s Vedral: 130 yards passing (21 of 34, 2 TDs, 3 INTs)
UM’s Milton: 344 yards passing (18 of 34, 3 TDs, 2 INTs)
KEY AREA
* Avoid turnover. As always. This is always an obvious key, but even more so with these two teams. Michigan State has been prone to turning it over and Indiana has been very good at forcing them.
Indiana doesn’t have a great pass rush. They have good, tricky coverages and ball-hawking DBs. If things begin to go sour for Rocky Lombardi, he needs to avoid last week’s temptation of trying to force a play. Kirk Cousins had the same problem as a sophomore and junior.
KEY MATCHUP
I would worry about Indiana WR Whop Philyor against MSU’s slot coverage.
Philyor is Indiana’s favorite receiver. He’s a possession-plus guy, meaning he can give you possession routes and grabs but also has the plus ability to put a double move on you and go deep.
He almost always lines up in the slot.
MSU’s slot defender was supposed to be Shakur Brown. Brown isn’t great, but he’s pretty good whether manning up or getting some bracket help.
But Brown had to play wide cornerback last week because Chris Jackson was out with an undisclosed injury.
With Jackson out and Brown replacing him, Michigan State started sophomore Julian Barnett in the slot. Barnett played 13 snaps, and true freshman played 14 snaps at that position.
Due to Iowa’s size, physicality and formations, Michigan State mostly went with big safety Michael Dowell as the fifth DB. He played 53 snaps.
But if Jackson can’t play, it will be interesting to see who and what Michigan State goes with in the slot vs Philyor.
Dowell is coming along nicely, and is pretty good against the run. But at 215 pounds, he isn’t the type of guy who can play slot corner against a sleek WR like Philyor.
Barnett has the talent to do it but is still gaining the know-how. Grose is somewhere in between. And Davion Williams was absent last week after serving as a second-string CB in the season opener.
If Jackson can’t play, school might be in session in the slot area.
INDIANA: THE MACRO
Head coach Tom Allen was defensive coordinator at Indiana in 2016, under Kevin Wilson. He took over as head coach when Wilson was fired due to improper harshness with players, or something like that.
Allen, an Indiana native, was linebackers coach at Ole Miss, and spent one year as defensive coordinator at South Florida before being hired by Wilson to become DC and Indiana in 2016.
* Allen handled the defense at Indiana for his first two years. He gave up daily control of the defense last year. Tackling was an issue early last season, but not anymore.
Vs. Penn State:
* PSU turned it over 3 times in the first half, including an INT returned inside the 5-yard line, and a fumble at the IU 6-yard line.
* Indiana took a 17-7 lead after a Jamar Johnson INT return inside the 10-yard line. RB Scott rammed it on on two inside zone runs.
* PSU had nine returning starters from an offense that ranked No. 2 in the Big Ten in scoring offense last year at 36 points per game. PSU out-gained Indiana 488-211, but the 14-point swing on those two turnovers were costly.
* Indiana had only 102 yards of total offense through the third quarter, but led 17-14.
* Pennix was just 7-of-14 for 60 yards through the 3Q against PSU.
* With PSU leading 21-20 with 1:42 to go, Indiana purposefully allowed PSU to score an untouched 9-yard TD run. That was Indiana’s only chance to win - let PSU score, get the ball back, score a TD, go for two, force overtime. And that’s exactly what IU did.
* Indiana’s defense had been pretty much error-free until a deep middle bust resulted in a 60-yard TD pass for PSU gave PSU a 21-20 lead with 2:00 to play. Second-string safety Juwan Burgess was beaten in zone coverage on the play, biting Indiana for perhaps playing too many reserves. Burgess played outside technique and allowed a fat window for the post route.
* Prior to Indiana’s game-tying drive in the last two minutes, the Hoosier had just 87 yards in the first half and 46 in the second.
* Pennix won the game with a dive to the pylon on a two-point conversion. I think the call should have been reversed. Looked to me like the ball hit the grass out of bounds just before the ball got to the pylon. Penn State should have been awarded the victory.
vs Rutgers:
Indiana’s defense was excellent for the first three quarters. The offense was sleepy, but eventually woke up in time to take over.
* Indiana started slow and trailed 7-6 with 6:00 to go in the 1H when Indiana forced a turnover at the Rutgers 5-yard line. On that play, blitzing LB Cam Jones hit the QB’s arm, causing a pass attempt to flutter high. Second-string d-end Jon King intercepted it. Rutgers scored three plays later to go up 13-7.
* Indiana then intercepted a Rutgers pass on Rutgers’ next play from scrimmage, giving Indiana another short field at the Scarlet Knights’ 28-yard line. Indiana was in the end zone a few plays later.
Those two turnover-induced TD drives of 5 and 28 yards turned a 7-6 deficit into a 20-7 Indiana halftime lead.
Indiana controlled the 2H, beginning with a LB McFadden INT on a fourth down roll out pass. Then Indiana went deep on its first offensive play of the 2H, hooking up with Philyor on a deep post. A facemask penalty stalled things and IU had to kick a field goal, but led 23-7 and controlled it the rest of the way.
At the line of scrimmage: Indiana netted 109 yards rushing against Rutgers (rushed for 145 but had some losses).
Rutgers netted 121 yards rushing (gained 166).
The Takeaway: Indiana hasn’t been as dominant this year as you might have thought if you only watched their game against Michigan. Indiana has been good, occasionally explosive, and consistent on defense, especially in the art of forcing turnovers.
The biggest problem is the idea that Pennix might have hit a new gear last week. He seems to be improving. He was already pretty good. If he indeed has gone from good to very good, then this team could go with him.
INDIANA OFFENSE
* Indiana has had three different offensive coordinators in three years.
* This year, former Michigan walk-on QB Nick Sheridan, the son of former Michigan State assistant coach Mike Sheridan, is Indiana’s offensive coordinator. Nick was a Pop Warner legend of sorts in the Okemos area back during the Saban years when Sheridan was briefly an Michigan State assistant. Sheridan went on to coach at Notre Dame, Michigan, the NFL and other places.
* Sheridan replaces Kalen DeBoer, who left to become head coach at Fresno State.
* I haven’t seen Indiana operate at fast tempo. They don’t huddle, but they don’t hurry. They are a check-with-me system.
Lots of pistol. Some zone read, but not much in the way of QB keepers. Pennix can run, but they don’t ask him to do it much.
They run the inside zone, like most teams these days. I didn’t see any gap plays, or pin-and-pulls, or pulling linemen, or outside zones for that matter. Their run game is very much a one-flavor team. Inside zones.
Their pass game is lethal, due to the talent. Pennix has a great arm and is showing good ability to make reads and decisions. He has three excellent WRs.
He and Sheridan get the TE involved nicely. And he’s a good TE, Hendershot.
In terms of unique characteristics, Indiana will put three WRs to the short side of the field more often than most teams. OSU has done this as well over the years. I haven’t seen it be especially problematic for an opponent, but it causes for interesting traffic copping for the defense to the short side when they do that.
MICRO: THE PERSONNEL
QB 9 MICHAEL PENNIX (6-3, 218, R-Fr., Tampa, Fla.).
* Four-star recruit, ranked No. 55 in Florida by Rivals.com.
* Also visited FSU and South Florida. Visited all three in December of his senior year.
* Offers from Oregon, Tennessee and others.
Tucker called Michael Pennix “a difference-maker at QB.”
Pennix is averaging 250 yards passing per game, 59 pct, 7 TDs 1 INT.
* Indiana is 8-1 with Pennix as a starter, with the lone loss being last year at Michigan State.
* The scary thing for Michigan State about Pennix is that he appears to be improving. He wasn’t great against Penn State or Rutgers. He started slow against both teams, and was frigid against PSU, missing a couple of potential TD passes.
* I felt Pennix threw more catchable short passes last week against Michigan than he did in the first two games. The short passes to the flat got him into a rhythm and softened up the UM defense. In the first two games, he often put too much heat on the ball, or threw too sharply and had some drops.
* But he was outstanding against Michigan: 30 of 50 for 342 yards with 3 TDs, 0 INTs. He was precise, accurate and showed an electric arm. He made good reads, and the offensive system presented him with open choices.
* He’s good at firing into the cover-two hole, especially on the short side. He has plenty of arm to do it from the field, but when he sees a cover-two window to the short side, he has the laser to drill it over the squat corner and outside the safety. The arm strength allows it to get there before the safety can close over the top.
* Against PSU, Pennix was just 7 of 14 for 60 yards through the 3Q against PSU. He finished 19 of 36 for 170 with 1 TD and 1 INT.
+ They don’t feature him as a runner, but he can do it. Had a 25-yard QB draw on third down against Rutgers in the 1H and looked good doing it, calling his own number when the seas parted.
* For a guy with good mobility, they don’t ask him to boot and throw on the run very much. He looked pretty good on a half roll pass to Philyor on a slot WR drag for about 15 against Rutgers, but they don’t do that much.
++ Really nice 15-yard dart to WR Fryfogle on a corner route into the cover-two window as part of a high-low smash concept. Short side pass, good read, threw a rope.
- Missed Fryfogle in the 2Q vs PSU on a switch route to the flag, jammed him with the throw to the inside shoulder on the turn.
- INT in the 3Q vs PSU, got a little pressure from a d-end beating his left tackle. Stared down the receiver on a 25 yard hook.
* Had a streak of 20 straight completions against Michigan State last year.
INJURY HISTORY
* Pennix played in three games as a true freshman two years ago but went down with an ACL.
* Last year, he went 5-1 as a starter but then went out with a shoulder injury.
- on third-and-three vs a PSU blitz, overthrew Philyor on a deep slot fade. He was open.
+ Was having a mediocre day through three quarters against PSU, but then ripped a 15-yard out to the wide side of the field, outside the numbers, on a rope on third-and-eight against cover four. He didn’t have much of a window, but he drilled it.
* Makes good intermediate reads, will zip the 15-yard dig against zones.
HOW DO YOU CONTAIN HIM: Penn State had good moments when the pass rush was getting home - especially early in the fourth quarter. Michigan State doesn’t have pass rushers like Penn State.
The problems Indiana had in pass protection at left tackle didn’t resurface in the last two games, even against Michigan.
* I think the plan will be similar to the Michigan game: How to contain him with a myriad of coverages and some occasional pressure. However, he is much better at making reads than UM’s Milton. And his WRs are better than Milton’s. His pass protection is potentially worse.
You have to hope you can disguise your coverages, and get home on some pressures and then hope that he’s erratic with his accuracy the way he was at times against PSU and (to a lesser extent) against Rutgers.
But if he has time, and he’s on, he can throw for 350 yards against good coverages with these receivers.
WIDE RECEIVERS
The Skinny: An excellent trio, with a mix of quickness, size, intermediate talent and some deep-ball explosiveness, and circus-catch hands.
1 WR WHOP PHILYOR (5-11, 180, Sr., Tampa)
* Was a two-star recruit by Rivals.com, ranked No. 145 in Florida by ESPN.
* Nick-named “Whop” because he liked Whoppers at Burger King as a kid .
21 receptions, averaging 7 catches per game
* Had more than 1,000 yards receiving last year, just the seventh in Indiana history to do that.
* Accelerates quickly on his release moves when he decides to hit the gas.
* They use him almost exclusively in the slot.
* Has quick feet in getting into his route through the first 10 yards, quick pedals. Reminds me of a faster version of Mill Coleman.
WR 3 TY FRYFOGLE (6-2, 214, Sr., Lucedale, Miss.)
* Two-star recruit with offers from Ole Miss and Idaho. Was ranked No. 41 in Mississippi.
++ Had a pair of terrific circus catches against UM’s CB Gray last week as part of IU’s second TD drive.
+ 20-yard gain on slot fade to the back shoulder vs press man.
* 13 catches on the year.
* Last year, had 131 yards receiving vs PSU.
WR 13 MILES MARSHALL, 6-4, 208, Soph. from Ga., 7 catches
* 5.6 three-star recruit, No. 90 in Georgia. Summer commitment had offers from Purdue, Virginia, Vanderbilt and mid-majors.
++ Excellent 13-yard TD reception on a jumpball fade last week against Michigan’s CB Green. Just high-balled him as a mismatch guy in the red zone.
* Had four catches for a team-high 46 yards in the victory over Penn State.
* Three catches for 36 yards against Michigan.
* Last year as a freshman he had 16 catches.
TE 86 PEYTON HENDERSHOT (6-4, 255, Jr., North Salem, Ind.)
* HM All-Big Ten by coaches last year.
* Was a two-star recruit by Rivals.com, ranked No. 13 in Indiana by ESPN.
* Had an official visit to Penn State but did not get offered. Had offers from Syracuse, Wake Forest and MAC schools.
* Had team-high six catches against Rutgers for 34 yards and two short TDs.
* Four catches for 31 yards with a TD against Michigan.
* Had 52 catches last year but has dropped at least one pass in every game this year.
- Had a crossing route zip through his hands on third down with 3:30 to go in the PSU game and Indiana up 20-14.
- Had crossing route zip through his hands on third down in the 1Q of the Rutgers games. Might be having trouble with Pennix’ velocity.
- They went deep to him on a wheel in the 1Q vs Michigan but a catchable pass went through his finger tips.
* He had a 49-yard reception last year vs OSU on a double pass trick play from WR Hale, who has since graduated.
RUNNING BACKS:
The Skinny: Big guys who do the job, especially in short yardage, but haven’t been explosive (yet). Scott was a great stat man earlier in his career and is coming off a good 97-yard output against Michigan. His per-carry average has not been as good this year as it was in his first two seasons.
RB 8 STEVIE SCOTT III (6-2, 231, Soph., Syracuse, NY)
* Three star recruit ranked No. 11 in New York by Rivals.com
* Had offers from Army, Boston College, Duke, Pitt, Purdue, Syracuse.
* Took official visits to Indiana and Rutgers.
* Originally committed to Rutgers. Got hurt. De-committed. Former Michigan RB Mike Hart, Indiana’s RBs coach and a native of the Syracuse area, got in his ear and reeled him in for the Hoosiers.
* Rushed for 845 yards last year (4.7 per), and 1,137 as a freshman (5.0 per).
This year, he is averaging 3.6 yards per carry.
Scott rushed for: 57 yards against Penn State, 81 against Rutgers and 97 against Michigan.
* He ranks No. 1 in the Big Ten in rushing yards and total TDs since 2018.
+ 14-yard TD run against PSU on a check-with-me inside zone run (Indiana had three WRs to the boundary, PSU went with only one down lineman. IU had a numbers edge in the box and PSU vacated a gap.)
RB 6 JAMES SAMPSON (6-2, 220, Soph., Avon, Ind.)
* One of Indiana’s highest-ranked recruits of the last several years.
* Was a four-star recruit, ranked No. 3 in Indiana, No. 185 in the nation.
* Was an October commitment. Had offers from Arkansas, Florida State, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State.
* Rushed for 33 yards on seven carries against Rutgers.
* Rushed for 25 yards on eight carries against Michigan, along with a 9-yard reception.
* Last year he rushed for 275 yards.
OFFENSIVE LINE:
The Skinny: Questionable at times in pass protection. Good enough in the run game with inside zone schemes. They didn’t have a problem with Rutgers’ tilted defensive tackle after having the advantage of seeing it on film against Michigan State.
Indiana’s offensive tackles really struggled in pass protection in the fourth quarter of the PSU game.
- Allowed a blind-side sack to an unblocked OLB as part of a five-man rush on a third down in the 1Q against PSU.
LT: 77 CALEB JONES (6-8, 362, Jr., Indianapolis)
* Was a three-star recruit by Rivals.com. Ranked No. 12 in Indiana by ESPN.
* Also had offers from Illinois, Purdue, MACs.
* Mammoth, mammoth size.
- Gave up three sacks in the 2H against PSU, including two to Shaka Toney of PSU. Michigan State doesn’t have a Shaka Toney. But Beesley might be able to get skinny against Jones and beat him on a rip or a duck-under.
* Jones didn’t look bad in pass protection in the last two games.
LG 56 MIKE KATIC (6-4, 311, R-Fr., Gibsonia, Pa.)
* No opinion, other than noticing that he allowed pressure to PSU’s Jayson Oweh on third-and-medium in the fourth quarter for an INC.
LG 57 HARRY CRIDER (6-4, 311, Sr., Columbus, Ind.)
* Was ranked No. 22 in Indiana.
* Had offers from Virginia MACs and Ivys.
* Captain.
* Rimington Trophy Watch List.
* Moving from LG to C this year.
RG 51 MACKENZIE NWORAH (6-4, 322, Sr., Houston)
* Was a 5.5 three-star unranked in Texas by Rivals.com.
* Was a spot starter for the previous three years, while battling injuries.
* No opinion other than noticing that he allowed pressure on a third-down hurry INC early in the Rutgers game.
RT MATTHEW BEDFORD (6-6, 314, Soph., Cordova, Tenn.)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 26 in Tennesssee.
*Was a summer commitment with offers from Mississippi State and South Carolina.
+ Good down block on a Scott 25-yard run in the 1H vs Rutgers.
INDIANA DEFENSE
* I’m not seeing many missed tackles. And they try to put good contact on you every chance they get.
- They will go with two deep safeties and a slot CB and allow themselves to be light in the box, numbers-wise. In theory, you should be able to run the ball against them in three-WR sets. They will flash a safety or corner in for help on run defense, run-blitz style so they end up not being as out-numbered in the box as they might look at pre-snap.
* They intercepted PSU QB Clifford twice in the first half. Once on a bad, duck of an overthrown screen. The other was an overthrown crossing route to the TE with the centerfield safety behind off man-to-man.
* They stay square, sturdy and hit pretty good when they get there.
* Their d-line didn’t get moved off the line of scrimmage vs PSU or Michigan, so I wouldn’t expect Michigan State to be able to do it either.
* Their d-line is going to be tough on the interior in short yardage. PSU couldn’t budge them inside the 5-yard line but resorted to a play-action pop pass to the TE on fourth-and-goal (old fashioned pop pass downfield, not the pop sweep).
Next drive, IU stopped PSU’s third-and-one inside run cold.
With 5 minutes left in regulation, Indiana stuffed PSU on a fourth-and-one inside zone run. Third-string Indiana DE CJ Person beat the PSU left tackle on the play, bulled him, displaced him and LB Cam Jones filled with a physical tackle.
* When they bring ILB cross blitzes, their LBs lower their shoulder and make strong contact with blockers to help logjam plays.
* They take on blockers with the correct shoulder, correct angle, and hit pretty hard.
SCHEMES, TRENDS & ANALYSIS
* PSU ran several QB draws and QB lead draws when catching Indiana light in the box (with two deep safeties as a third cornerback committed to the slot WR). The QB draw gives the offense a plus-one. Rocky Lombardi was a little dinged up last week so I don’t know how much Michigan State can use this.
* PSU’s QB Clifford scored on a 35-yard QB scramble against two-deep. Interestingly, Indiana was in zone. Usually long QB scrambles come when catching a defense in man-to-man. Not this time. That cut Indiana’s lead to 17-14 on the last play of the third quarter.
Clifford isn’t known as much of a runner, but he ran for 119 yards on 17 carries against Indiana.
* Rutgers caught Indiana in a slot CB blitz and executed a screen pass for 15 yards. That play looked like it had more potential at the outset but Indiana’s cover-three zone behind the blitz contained it.
But Indiana can be susceptible to screen passes, maybe not for huge plays, but for good chunks and chain-movers.
* PSU went deep vs pressing slot CB Tiawan Mullen in the fourth quarter. Mullen flagged for interference.
* Indiana held Michigan to 13 net yards rushing (42 in gains, 29 in losses). This is a staggering statistic that says a lot about Michigan’s floundering ways and also the secret sauce to Indiana’s 3-0 success. They are deceptively firm on the d-line, with swarming run support from LBs and DBs.
DEFENSIVE LINE
The Skinny: This group is deceptive. They don’t look like great athletes. They don’t make many plus plays. But they don’t lose the line of scrimmage while two-gapping, and the back seven behind them do such a good job of arriving correctly and on the same page that it all works out real well.
The d-line holds the point of attack with two-gapping technique, the LBs make good reads behind it, so Indiana can play a lot of downs with two deep safeties. If you can stop the run while keeping two safeties deep AND keeping a defensive back in the slot, then it’s like playing with 12 on the field.
This isn’t a great defense, but they’re getting the job done and causing turnovers.
DE 6 JAMES HEAD (6-5, 261, Jr., Miami)
* Was a 5.7 three-star recruit.
* Was a summer commitment with offers from Michigan State, Baylor, KSU, Mississippi State, Nebraska, Oregon, NC State, South Carolina, Tennessee.
Indiana NEVER used to be able to recruit like this in the south, aside from a few Gerry DiNardo recruits in Louisiana.
* Second-year starter.
* 2.5 sacks last year.
* I haven’t noticed any plus plays out of him this year.
DT 50 SIO NOFOAGATOTOA (6-4, 315, American Samoa/Clearwater (Fla.) Academy International)
* Was a 5.5 three-star recruit. Also had offers from Arizona, ASU, BC, Nebraska, Wisconsin, NC State and others.
+ Good job crossing face on a slant to get a TFL on a third-and-1 in the 1Q against PSU.
+ Good vs double-teams last week against Michigan.
* Had nine tackles last year.
(94 Demarcus Elliott)
* Solid when two-gapping in goal-line situation vs PSU.
DT 98 JEROME JOHNSON (6-3, 304, Sr., Bassfield, Miss.)
* Three-star recruit.
* Officially visited South Florida. Had offers from Louisville, Ole Miss, Illinois.
* Decent pass rushing turning the corner when stunting outside.
* A little questionable vs double teams, and really struggled with it last year.
DE 87 MICHEL ZIEMBA (6-3, 258, Sr., Sanford, Fla.)
* Was a 5.4 two-star recruit with mid-major offers.
* Stand-up defensive end.
* Had 6.5 TFLS last year.
DE 92 ALFRED BRYANT (6-2, 258, Jr., Fresno, Texas)
* Was a three-star recruit. Ranked No. 46 WDE in nation by Rivals.com.
* Had offers from Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Kansas State. * Stand-up DE.
- A little soft against PSU’s wham blocks. But Michigan State isn’t tough enough at TE to emulate that.
LINEBACKERS:
The Skinny: Solid, dependable guys, and they go two-deep.
LB 47 MICAH McFADDEN (6-2, 227, Jr., Tampa)
* Two-star recruit.
* Had offers from BC, UMass, Southern Miss, MACs.
+ Nifty A-gap blitzer on third downs. .
* Quality downhill MLB. Riley Bullough type.
+ Nice INT on a fourth-and-eight sprint right option by Rutgers in the 3Q. McFadden played zone, roamed with the No. 3 WR, got width, ran with him, made the play. Veteran play.
(LB 8 James Miller 6-2, 231, Soph., Tampa)
* 5.6, three-star recruit who committed on signing day after official visits to Indiana, Iowa, Marshall.
* He is McFadden’s back-up, will get playing time.
* Impressed with the force Miller put on PSU’s tight end when taking on a block.
* Slippery through the inside gaps with quick reads as a run defender.
* Good TFL on run blitz in the 3Q vs PSU, busting through a C/LG double team.
* This guy is a back-up? I said the same thing about Cam Jones last year.
(44 Allen Thomas, saw action in 1Q vs PSU.)
LB 4 CAM JONES, Jr., 6-3, 224, Memphis.
* He was a three-star, ranked No. 26 in Tennessee. He had offers from Tennessee, Mississippi State, Missouri.
* He has active speed in pursuit.
+ Hit Rutgers QB on a two-LB inside blitz, causing a pass attempt to flutter high for an INT. Second-string d-end Jon King intercepted it.
* Noticed him last year as a second-stringer as the type of frame/speed guy that Indiana rarely used to have in the past, especially a three-star out-of-state guy with this type of ability, beating SEC schools to get him. What’s that all about?
* Had an INT return for a TD last year against UConn.
HUSKY 31 BRYANT FITZGERALD (6-0, 209, R-Jr., Indianapolis)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 7 in Indiana.
* Had offers from Minnesota, Illinois.
(Replacing Marcelino Ball who is missing the season with an ACL).
* This is their overhang hybrid type defender.
* He’ll play CB in the slot quite a bit. And he’ll play at the LB level as a “box” DB at times, if you go with heavier personnel.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
The Skinny: They do a lot of shape-shifting back there, and they know where they’re going. Their knees are bent and they arrive full-tilt with no false steps. They’ve been forcing turnovers.
Michigan WR Ronnie Bell had six catches for 149 yards. Some teams have had success going deep middle.
CB 2 REESE TAYLOR (5-11, 185, Jr., Indianapolis)
* Was a 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 11 in Indiana.
* Had offers from Iowa, Minnesota, Purdue, Wisconsin.
+ Excellent CB in run support, a sports car at avoiding blocks and knifing to the ball carrier.
(CB 23 Jaylin Williams (6-0, 179, Jr., Memphis)
* was a 5.5 three-star recruit, ranked No. 30 in Tennessee.
* Had offers from Missouri, Mississippi State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Vanderbilt, Washington State.
* plays some box DB
+ INT vs PSU on a bad screen pass.
- Beaten on a 23-yard over route vs Rutgers. QB had all day to throw. This is where Rutgers’ mediocre pass rush could give an opponent a chance to capitalize, especially when catching them in an easy-to-read, man-to-man rather than one of Indiana’s tricky zone coverages.
- Allowed 37 yard TD on a deep post to Michigan’s Cornelius Johnson. He played off at the line of scrimmage, outside technique like he was expecting safety help.
CB 3 TIAWAN MULLEN (5-10, 176, Soph., Fort Lauderdale)
* Was a 5.8 four-star recruit, ranked No. 43 in Florida.
* Took official visits to Kansas State, Nebraska, Pittsburgh,
* Excellent freshman season last year.
* Preseason All-Big Ten.
+ Excellent play, sniffing out a tunnel screen and ankle-tackling it from the back side for a loss of one.
- PSU went deep vs pressing slot CB Tiawan Mullen in the fourth quarter. Mullen flagged for interference.
SS 1 DEVON MATTHEWS (6-2, 200, Jr., Jacksonville, Fla.)
* Two-star recruit. Ranked No. 172 in Florida. Officially visited UConn, Cincinnati.
* Good break on the ball to break up an intermediate post in the 1Q vs PSU.
* Good physical hit on the TE after the catch.
* Good hitter in run support.
FS 22 JAMAR JOHNSON (6-1, 197, Jr., Sarasota, Fla.)
* Was a 5.5 three-star recruit.
* Had offers from Purdue, Iowa State, Virginia Tech.
+ Had a 63-yard pick six against Tennessee in the Gator Bowl.
* INT vs PSU, playing deep center field safety behind man to man coverage, picked off an overthrown ball.
+ Came on a CB blitz and stripped QB Clifford of PSU for a fumble on a third-and-1 at the 6-yard line late in the 1H.
(FS Juwan Burgess, 6-1, 187, Jr., Tampa)
* Burgess was a 5.6 three-star recruit. He committed two weeks before signing day with apparent offers from Alabama, Clemson, Arkansas, Florida, FSU, Auburn, Miami, Ohio State and pretty much everybody.
- * Indiana’s defense had been pretty much error free until a deep middle bust resulted in a 60-yard TD pass for PSU gave PSU a 21-20 lead with 2:00 to play. Second-string safety Juwan Burgess was beaten in zone coverage on the play, biting Indiana for perhaps playing too many reserves. Burgess played outside technique and allowed a fat window for the post route.
SPECIAL TEAMS
PK Charles Campbell, Soph.
* Is 6 for 6 on the year .
+ 48 yarder vs PSU. Was 2 for 2 vs PSU.
* Hit a 52-yarder against Michigan.
* Coverage and return teams: No opinion.
ADD IT ALL UP
Just when you think Michigan State is a limited, mistake-prone team and Indiana might be the best team in the Big Ten East outside of Ohio State, a game like this could bring both teams back to the middle.
The path to victory is tricky for Michigan State. Need to protect the QB against pressures and the QB has to make smart reads and not turn the ball over. Getting the ground game established is something Michigan State hasn’t done effectively all year, although there were some sparks of hope in each of the last two weeks. Indiana’s run defense has been good, not great.
They stuffed Michigan on the ground. Penn State’s tailbacks rushed for 113 yards on 34 carries (3.3 per), but PSU received a big boost from QB Clifford’s surprising 119 yards rushing on QB draws and scrambles.
For Michigan State to win this game, the Michigan State ground game needs to wake up and post something better than the 121 yards rushing that Rutgers put up. Can Michigan State get that done? Sure, but it’s something we haven’t seen them accomplish yet.
Rocky Lombardi was a little banged up last week and it affected his accuracy. His ability to pilot this offense through the air and an occasional keeper would seem unlikely after watching his play last week. At his best, he could do his part to help Michigan State win this game, including providing some plus plays. Whether or not he’s at his physical best is a fair question. And even if he is, will Michigan State be good enough in other areas of football to make a good day from Rocky stand up?
Michigan State needs Rocky to regain his accuracy on intermediate routes, get back to having good discretion, and sprinkle in some deep balls. Maybe more than “some” deep balls. Might need a raid of them like the Michigan game. Rutgers has given up some deep balls this year, with No. 22 and 23 getting beat. Michigan State will likely need to roll some deep dice in this game if the run game isn’t providing much return.
All of that COULD add up to 30 points of offense from Michigan State on a good day. But can Michigan State keep Indiana under 35?
First, avoid the turnover bug that Indiana’s opponents have had. Don’t give them a short field on turnovers, as Michigan State did against Rutgers and Iowa, and as Indiana’s opponents have done this year. A lot of that gets back to Lombardi and pass protection. The fumble issue wasn’t an issue in the past two weeks.
Make Indiana operate on a deep field, hope that your myriad of coverages and occasional pressures can contain a quality QB with an excellent trio of recievers. Going to need TE Hendershott to drop a couple more passes.
Overall, Michigan State just seems to need too many recent negatives to become positives overnight, and needs a hot Indiana team to look ahead to Ohio State and play as cold as they did for nearly two quarters against PSU. It’s possible, especially in this bizarro college football season of swings, especially with Indiana - as a program - possibly due for a correction, and Michigan State - as a program - possibly posing danger to a Top 10 opponent.
At the end of the day, however, Indiana looks consistent and responsible on defense, and the QB/WR combination for the Hoosier offense gives every indication that revved-up consistency is becoming the norm for them in 2020.
