:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/43852404/20141108_lbm_br2_013.JPG.0.jpg)
Penn State 13, Indiana 7
Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here.
| Basics | Indiana | Penn State | Nat'l Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Plays | 68 | 66 | |
| Close Rate (non-garbage time) | 100.0% | ||
| Avg Starting FP | 23.3 | 34.4 | 29.9 |
| Possessions | 15 | 15 | |
| Scoring Opportunities* |
1 | 4 | |
| Points Per Opportunity | 0.00 | 3.25 | 4.69 |
| Leverage Rate** | 55.9% | 59.1% | 68.2% |
| Close S&P*** | 0.288 | 0.395 | 0.505 |
|
* A scoring opportunity occurs when an offense gets a first down inside the opponent's 40 (or scores from outside the 40). ** Leverage Rate = Standard Downs / (Standard Downs + Passing Downs) *** When using IsoPPP, the S&P formula is (0.8*Success Rate) + (0.2*IsoPPP) |
|||
| EqPts (what's this?) | Indiana | Penn State | |
| Total | 7.4 | 16.0 | |
| Rushing | 5.4 | 10.0 | |
| Passing | 2.1 | 6.1 | |
| Success Rate (what's this?) | Indiana | Penn State | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 25.0% | 25.8% | 41.9% |
| Rushing (close) | 28.2% | 28.1% | 43.5% |
| Passing (close) | 20.7% | 23.5% | 40.2% |
| Standard Downs | 31.6% | 25.6% | 47.1% |
| Passing Downs | 16.7% | 25.9% | 30.6% |
| IsoPPP (what's this?) | Indiana | Penn State | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 0.44 | 0.94 | 0.85 |
| Rushing (close) | 0.49 | 1.11 | 0.73 |
| Passing (close) | 0.35 | 0.76 | 0.98 |
| Standard Downs | 0.33 | 0.93 | 0.77 |
| Passing Downs | 0.70 | 0.96 | 1.13 |
| Line Stats | Indiana | Penn State | Nat'l Avg |
| Line Yards/Carry (what's this?) | 2.59 | 2.00 | 2.92 |
| Std. Downs Sack Rt. | 0.0% | 23.5% | 4.7% |
| Pass. Downs Sack Rt. | 5.6% | 5.9% | 7.6% |
| Turnovers | Indiana | Penn State |
|---|---|---|
| Turnovers | 2 | 2 |
| Turnover Points (what's this?) | 6.9 | 13.3 |
| Turnover Margin | +0 | |
| Exp. TO Margin | Penn State +0.66 | |
| TO Luck (Margin vs. Exp. Margin) | Indiana +0.66 | |
| TO Points Margin | Indiana +6.4 points | |
| Situational | Indiana | Penn State |
| Q1 S&P | 0.358 | 0.265 |
| Q2 S&P | 0.361 | 0.598 |
| Q3 S&P | 0.239 | 0.414 |
| Q4 S&P | 0.218 | 0.234 |
| 1st Down S&P | 0.267 | 0.461 |
| 2nd Down S&P | 0.341 | 0.457 |
| 3rd Down S&P | 0.269 | 0.266 |
| Projected Scoring Margin: Penn State by 2.2 | ||
| Actual Scoring Margin: Penn State by 6 | ||
One offensive touchdown, one defensive touchdown, and 20 punts. And the one offensive touchdown goes for 92 yards, one-sixth of the game's total yardage.
Okay.
On standard downs, both teams had success rates worse than the national average for passing downs. So basically, first-and-10 was like 2nd-and-12.
Boise State and New Mexico combined for 109 points, Georgia and Kentucky combined for 94, Ohio State and Michigan State went for 86, Texas A&M and Auburn for 79, Georgia Tech and N.C. State for 79, Oregon and Utah for 78, UCLA and Washington for 74, et cetera.
But there were some defensive slogs. Alabama and LSU, for instance, combined for 18 punts, but you can forgive that one a bit, because both teams have top-10 defenses.
Penn State does, too, but it's harder to look past the puntfest that was PSU-Indiana. The Nittany Lions beat the Hoosiers, 13-7, in a game that featured 20 punts (and not particularly good punts either; net punting: PSU 36.8, Indiana 32.7), a 7-for-34 third-down conversion rate, and a combined 45 percent completion rate. Penn State's Christian Hackenberg and Indiana's Zander Diamont combined to go 25-for-56 for 236 yards, four interceptions, six sacks, and no touchdowns.
This Penn State defense is so good, and this Penn State offense is so bad.
Duke and Syracuse combined for 16 punts of their own, but Duke at least offered some excitement by returning a punt for a game-turning touchdown in the fourth quarter. It broke a 10-10 tie and prompted a turnover-on-downs and an interception that Duke turned into a 27-10 cruise. Penn State and Indiana just kept punting.
You're doing a hell of a job, Bob Shoop. Hang in there.