Football is a game of 22 chess pieces that can go off-script at any moment. It is as complicated as it is violent, appealing to both the strategist and the person who likes big things smashing into each other. It can be hard to analyze sometimes because there are simply too many things to analyze at once.
Penn State makes big plays. Wisconsin stops them. What will give in the Big Ten title game?
Here’s the biggest key to determining which of these teams is hanging a Big Ten banner and hoping for a Playoff bid.
Matthew O’Haren-USA TODAY Sports
Sometimes, though, it’s pretty easy to hone in on something important.
The Big Ten title game between Wisconsin and Penn State could be defined by any number of factors.
- Both teams create excellent field position for their offenses, and whoever doesn’t on Saturday will be at a disadvantage.
- Special teams and turnovers are always huge in huge games.
- This is the biggest game in the careers of both starting quarterbacks, Penn State’s Trace McSorley and Wisconsin’s Alex Hornibrook (and backup Bart Houston). Either could lay an egg.
- Et cetera.
That said, one stat seems particularly important heading into Saturday.
Penn State’s offense has ripped off 80 gains of 20-plus yards, seventh in the countryWisconsin’s defense has allowed only 40 such gains, eighth.
Tale of the tape
In a game decided by tiny margins — Wisconsin is just a three-point favorite per Vegas, 0.3 points per S&P+ — things could be decided simply by whether Penn State generates closer to three of these plays or closer to six.
As I wrote on Wednesday, it’s almost encouraging that Penn State’s offensive improvement has been incremental; it means there’s still room for growth.
Penn State still ranks only 83rd in success rate and 119th in stuff rate (a potentially major issue in facing a Wisconsin defense that ranks 15th and 34th, respectively).
Inefficiency renders you inconsistent. It forces you to operate out of second-and-9s and third-and-7s, and even the best passing-downs offense isn’t always going to succeed on passing downs.
But Joe Moorhead, Trace McSorley, and an absurd receiving corps (each of the top nine targets averages at least 13.9 yards per catch, and eight average at least 9.1 yards per target) have enough explosive gains to create consistency where none should exist.
But growth is for 2017. Right now, Penn State’s offense is what it is: dangerous as hell and inefficient.
This makes Saquon Barkley’s foot injury a critical story. PSU’s sophomore running back is terrifying in the open field. Most of the Nittany Lions’ explosive plays have come through the air, but he is still good for a couple of big rushes per game, and if he is limited, that makes The Race for 6 Big Plays a tougher proposition.
That said, Barkley has also been woefully inefficient in 2016.
Individual Rushing Stats
| Player | Pos. | Ht, Wt | Year | Rushes | Yards | TD | Yards/ Carry |
Hlt Yds/ Opp. |
Opp. Rate |
Fumbles (Lost) |
| Saquon Barkley | RB | 5'11, 223 | SO | 228 | 1219 | 15 | 5.3 | 7.8 | 35.5% | 2 (2) |
| Trace McSorley | QB | 6'0, 205 | SO | 113 | 522 | 6 | 4.6 | 3.5 | 42.5% | 8 (3) |
| Mark Allen | RB | 5'6, 181 | SO | 28 | 115 | 1 | 4.1 | 2.8 | 39.3% | 0 (0) |
| Miles Sanders | RB | 5'11, 205 | FR | 25 | 184 | 1 | 7.4 | 10.2 | 48.0% | 4 (3) |
| Andre Robinson | RB | 5'9, 216 | FR | 25 | 130 | 5 | 5.2 | 3.5 | 40.0% | 0 (0) |
Of Barkley’s 228 carries, only 35.5 percent have gained at least five yards; of the 78 carries given to Mark Allen, Miles Sanders, and Andre Robinson, 42.3 percent have gained at least five.
If Barkley is unable to take on as heavy a load, that might actually make PSU a little bit more efficient even as it tamps down the Nittany Lions’ big-play potential.
There’s uncertainty regarding Barkley’s status. There is no uncertainty regarding Wisconsin’s defense: It’s awesome.
Star linebacker Jack Cichy was lost for the season with a pectoral injury near the end of October, and the Badgers didn’t miss a beat.
- Wisconsin’s defense (first 7 games): 4.9 yards per play, 14.3 points per game, 79.4 percent average percentile performance.
- Wisconsin’s defense (last 5 games): 4.5 yards per play, 12.8 points per game, 80.0 percent average percentile performance.
So much of football can be broken into efficiency and explosiveness. Success rate measures the former, and IsoPPP measures the latter. IsoPPP is designed to look at how explosive your successful plays are. A bend-don’t-break defense might have pretty iffy success rates, but the successful plays it allows won’t be very big.
In this regard, you could say that Wisconsin is a bend-don’t-break defense — on standard downs. Justin Wilcox’s defense flips to something different on passing downs, however.
- Wisconsin’s defense on standard downs: 25th in success rate, 1st in IsoPPP.
- Wisconsin’s defense on passing downs: 9th in success rate, 105th in IsoPPP.
Wisconsin’s run defense has been absurd, especially in obvious-run situations. That has forced opponents to take to the air, and when the Badgers know you’re going to pass, they swarm.
Safeties Leo Musso and D’Cota Dixon (combined: nine interceptions, five breakups) and cornerbacks Derrick Tindal and Sojourn Shelton (combined: seven INTs, 23 PBUs) give the Badgers some of the best defensive back havoc numbers in the country. That’s not really an aspect you usually see in a supposed bend-don’t-break.
Wisconsin’s offense has question marks. Hornibrook left last week’s Minnesota game with a head injury but practiced and appears probable for Saturday night. He’ll likely be asked to make some tough passes, considering the Wisconsin run game will be against a top-20 Rushing S&P+ defense.
Still, a Rose Bowl or Playoff spot will probably be decided when the Badgers are on defense.
If Penn State’s line can hold up against a solid pass rush, McSorley might have a chance to bail the Nittany Lions out on second- or third-and-long. His passer rating on third-and-7 or more is 133.4, solid for the circumstances, and it’s 176.6 on second downs.
But how many and-long situations will he face? And will he complete a couple of big gainers or a few?
See More:
