What To Expect <> PSU Offensive Tendencies

[ColinPSU]

Since the start of B1G play, I have been venturing over to other schools boards and trying to show opposing fan bases how Penn State's offense works and provide some insight into what I think opposing teams are going to do. I'm not going to pretend like I understand what your defense does/what it's tendencies are - you will have to extrapolate what you expect NW to do based on the clips I provide. Here are the "need to knows" with this Penn State team.

Offensive philosophy: Spread, Run-Pass Option
Returning starters on O: 9
Key players: Barkley (#26), McSorley (#9), Geskiki (#88 - potentially injured), Hamilton (#5), Bates (#52), and McGovern (#66)

Penn State runs an RPO style offense exclusively out of an 11 personnel group (1RB, 1TE, and 3WR) with the main goal being optioning certain conflict players, such as an OLB or Saftey, depending on the play call and or defensive alignment. From a defensive standpoint, it's almost exactly the same as a defending the traditional triple option but with the forward pass wrinkle instead of a pitch read. If the conflict player commits to the run, McSorley (#9) pulls the ball and throws over the top, if the conflict player drops back in coverage McSorley then has the option to keep or give to Barkley (#26). That's a watered down explanation but here's what it looks like in action:



Pitt OLB comes up to defend the run and McSorley pulls it for an easy score. The OLB bites hard on the Barkley give and leaves the TE Gesicki (#88) wide open. The opposite of that would be the OLB stays in coverage the give read tries to take advantage of an extra helmet not in the box.

So, how are teams countering this offense? We have seen a couple different schemes but the two, IMO, that have had the most success are Iowa's bend-but-don't-break defense and teams with good secondaries who load the box and play a lot of zone fire coverage while bringing 4 or 5 man pressures (OSU, UM and USC.) My favorite examples are from the Pitt game this year and the USC game last year - IU did this some last week as well.

Pitt // 3rd and 10 // 11 minutes in the 2nd:



As I said in my Iowa preview, these exotic fronts have been confusing the hell out of this line. And this problem was apparent going back to UM last year. This is a 4 man rush but because we can't identify the rushers Barkley (#26) has to stay in and block, which still doesn't work because we don't correctly ID pressure. Iowa didn't run any of these "ninja" fronts, but they were able to get pressure with only 4 while having McSorley sit in the pocket and wait for the long routes to develop - and that worked as well. What is most likely is you guys will also have some pressure packages so let's take a look at what has worked against PSU in the past:

USC // 2nd and 9 // 7:30 in the 4th



We actually do an okay job picking up this 5 man pressure, but our OT gets beat bad on a 1-on-1 there. I still like this defensive play call as the pressure forces McSorely away from his two favorite targets last season - Geskicki (#88) and Godwin (#12) forcing a check down. This zone blitz has some nice over/under bracket coverage with our H and Y WRs forcing McSorley to check down to the hot route after feeling some pressure. Right now, we don't have the strongest OTs. They looked BAD against Iowa and still were underwhelming against IU last week. So if you can get pressure with 4, great more power to ya, but if you can't play solid zone behind your fire calls and try to contain the middle of the field with Cover 1 or 3 there are still ways to find success. IU last week was selling out to stop the run and bringing fire calls a good bit of the time:

U // 1st and 10 // 8:45 in the 4th



IU had a bunch of calls like this that were very effective. I particularly like that nickel fire call because even if McSorley hands the ball off that player is put in a position to make a play, assuming everyone keeps their responsibilities. Going through the small details - I like that the end gets his hands on Geskicki, I also like how he keeps his contain responsibility. The LB flys to the flat quick for the handoff between the DE and him for Gesicki. I still think this might have been the wrong read? It looks like IU was defending the pass there and not committing to the run so the ball should have gone to Barkley, but even still I think that fire call was perfect for that particular offensive call leading to Penn State starting behind the sticks for 2nd. This has also led to not being able to consistently get solid yards when the field shortens in the red zone.

IU // 2nd and Goal // 12:22 in the 3rd



Single coverage across the board, loaded box, and a clutch run stop. Big success metric I look at is red zone efficiency - it's a good barometer of how strong a team's run game is, yards and PPG can be very misleading. I think PSU finished 2/5 in the red zone against IU (I count 25 yards and in the red zone.) Against Iowa, we really struggled to punch the ball in and it showed with the scoreboard. We gained something like 520+ yards of offense yet only 19 points - mainly because we couldn't run between the tackles. This drive actually ends up with a missed 21 yard FG, on 3rd down Barkley fell in the backfield and caused a tap of a delay in the mesh point - I didn't want to look like I was cherry picking plays. I talked about this last week over at the IU board but running some more traditional red zone looks has caused some trouble with PSU. If you look at the clip above with Pitt, they stay in base alignment and get burned - IU and Iowa, mixed in some more goal-line personnel sets and were able to hold us. Now, interestingly enough, when we ran a QB ISO play earlier in the game against the same goal line look we were easily able to score, that is because we are using Barkley as a lead blocker - we almost never use an H-back (TE in power spreads) as a lead blocker. When we use the RPO in goal line, it's fairly easy to blow our plays up so if we continue to try option plays in the red zone NW needs to play good, disciplined defense (like Iowa, UM, OSU, and USC) to stop that option.

TL;DR NW should play fundamentally sound football, follows their responsibilities, and stop the RPO runs early - by attacking the mesh point - leading to 3rd and longs. When Penn State is in 3rd and long - expect a 5 man pressure to try and keep Barkley in to protect and (maybe?) pattern match with zone coverage behind it - I say maybe because I am not sure if your defense runs that out of base. I also wouldn't be shocked to see a lot of stemming and crowding of the line to try and confuse the OL with where the pressure is coming - even if you only bring 4. When in "& goal" situations looks for an overloaded box or a 46 look suited to stop the run while playing tight man coverage behind it.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Wow. Great stuff here. Thanks for sharing.

 

[wilbury]

Your analysis on several of these is off. In the Pitt game, the play is set up as a screen but Barkley gets caught up in the wash and the play blows up. You can see two of the Olinemen waiting for him to get the ball so they can move downfield. In the IN game, the correct read is the quick sland to #88 but McSorely eats the ball rather than throwing over the defensive end.

The best chance to beat PSU is to spy Barkley, sell out for the run and have the defensive ends rush upfield to contain McSorely and force him to throw over the offensive line.

 

[ColinPSU]

Your analysis on several of these is off. In the Pitt game, the play is set up as a screen but Barkley gets caught up in the wash and the play blows up. You can see two of the Olinemen waiting for him to get the ball so they can move downfield. In the IN game, the correct read is the quick sland to #88 but McSorely eats the ball rather than throwing over the defensive end.

Not correct. That if it was a screen, the blocking footwork would be extremely different (3 OL would be working upfield.) It looks like they are waiting because they miss their blocks pretty bad. WSU/ Leech do a lot of screen action Here is a screen blocking blue print:



See how those OL are actively working up field - that doesn't happen on that play and is why I am rather certain it's not a screen. Further, the reason why Barkley runs a route is that Pitt only brought 4, which is his rule if he has no one to block, run a route.

For the IU clip, I mention that the DE chips the TE prolonging that timing, OLB flys to the flat, even if that pass gets off it is well defended. All the little stuff like that ads up. Again, if you make plays like that on defense to prolong reads with any option offense you are going to make it harder.

Edit: Formatting/stupid rivals quote feature.

 

[ColumbusCatFan1]

Since the start of B1G play, I have been venturing over to other schools boards and trying to show opposing fan bases how Penn State's offense works and provide some insight into what I think opposing teams are going to do. I'm not going to pretend like I understand what your defense does/what it's tendencies are - you will have to extrapolate what you expect NW to do based on the clips I provide. Here are the "need to knows" with this Penn State team.

Offensive philosophy: Spread, Run-Pass Option
Returning starters on O: 9
Key players: Barkley (#26), McSorley (#9), Geskiki (#88 - potentially injured), Hamilton (#5), Bates (#52), and McGovern (#66)

Penn State runs an RPO style offense exclusively out of an 11 personnel group (1RB, 1TE, and 3WR) with the main goal being optioning certain conflict players, such as an OLB or Saftey, depending on the play call and or defensive alignment. From a defensive standpoint, it's almost exactly the same as a defending the traditional triple option but with the forward pass wrinkle instead of a pitch read. If the conflict player commits to the run, McSorley (#9) pulls the ball and throws over the top, if the conflict player drops back in coverage McSorley then has the option to keep or give to Barkley (#26). That's a watered down explanation but here's what it looks like in action:

View embedded media

Pitt OLB comes up to defend the run and McSorley pulls it for an easy score. The OLB bites hard on the Barkley give and leaves the TE Gesicki (#88) wide open. The opposite of that would be the OLB stays in coverage the give read tries to take advantage of an extra helmet not in the box.

So, how are teams countering this offense? We have seen a couple different schemes but the two, IMO, that have had the most success are Iowa's bend-but-don't-break defense and teams with good secondaries who load the box and play a lot of zone fire coverage while bringing 4 or 5 man pressures (OSU, UM and USC.) My favorite examples are from the Pitt game this year and the USC game last year - IU did this some last week as well.

Pitt // 3rd and 10 // 11 minutes in the 2nd:

View embedded media

As I said in my Iowa preview, these exotic fronts have been confusing the hell out of this line. And this problem was apparent going back to UM last year. This is a 4 man rush but because we can't identify the rushers Barkley (#26) has to stay in and block, which still doesn't work because we don't correctly ID pressure. Iowa didn't run any of these "ninja" fronts, but they were able to get pressure with only 4 while having McSorley sit in the pocket and wait for the long routes to develop - and that worked as well. What is most likely is you guys will also have some pressure packages so let's take a look at what has worked against PSU in the past:

USC // 2nd and 9 // 7:30 in the 4th

View embedded media

We actually do an okay job picking up this 5 man pressure, but our OT gets beat bad on a 1-on-1 there. I still like this defensive play call as the pressure forces McSorely away from his two favorite targets last season - Geskicki (#88) and Godwin (#12) forcing a check down. This zone blitz has some nice over/under bracket coverage with our H and Y WRs forcing McSorley to check down to the hot route after feeling some pressure. Right now, we don't have the strongest OTs. They looked BAD against Iowa and still were underwhelming against IU last week. So if you can get pressure with 4, great more power to ya, but if you can't play solid zone behind your fire calls and try to contain the middle of the field with Cover 1 or 3 there are still ways to find success. IU last week was selling out to stop the run and bringing fire calls a good bit of the time:

U // 1st and 10 // 8:45 in the 4th

View embedded media

IU had a bunch of calls like this that were very effective. I particularly like that nickel fire call because even if McSorley hands the ball off that player is put in a position to make a play, assuming everyone keeps their responsibilities. Going through the small details - I like that the end gets his hands on Geskicki, I also like how he keeps his contain responsibility. The LB flys to the flat quick for the handoff between the DE and him for Gesicki. I still think this might have been the wrong read? It looks like IU was defending the pass there and not committing to the run so the ball should have gone to Barkley, but even still I think that fire call was perfect for that particular offensive call leading to Penn State starting behind the sticks for 2nd. This has also led to not being able to consistently get solid yards when the field shortens in the red zone.

IU // 2nd and Goal // 12:22 in the 3rd

View embedded media

Single coverage across the board, loaded box, and a clutch run stop. Big success metric I look at is red zone efficiency - it's a good barometer of how strong a team's run game is, yards and PPG can be very misleading. I think PSU finished 2/5 in the red zone against IU (I count 25 yards and in the red zone.) Against Iowa, we really struggled to punch the ball in and it showed with the scoreboard. We gained something like 520+ yards of offense yet only 19 points - mainly because we couldn't run between the tackles. This drive actually ends up with a missed 21 yard FG, on 3rd down Barkley fell in the backfield and caused a tap of a delay in the mesh point - I didn't want to look like I was cherry picking plays. I talked about this last week over at the IU board but running some more traditional red zone looks has caused some trouble with PSU. If you look at the clip above with Pitt, they stay in base alignment and get burned - IU and Iowa, mixed in some more goal-line personnel sets and were able to hold us. Now, interestingly enough, when we ran a QB ISO play earlier in the game against the same goal line look we were easily able to score, that is because we are using Barkley as a lead blocker - we almost never use an H-back (TE in power spreads) as a lead blocker. When we use the RPO in goal line, it's fairly easy to blow our plays up so if we continue to try option plays in the red zone NW needs to play good, disciplined defense (like Iowa, UM, OSU, and USC) to stop that option.

TL;DR NW should play fundamentally sound football, follows their responsibilities, and stop the RPO runs early - by attacking the mesh point - leading to 3rd and longs. When Penn State is in 3rd and long - expect a 5 man pressure to try and keep Barkley in to protect and (maybe?) pattern match with zone coverage behind it - I say maybe because I am not sure if your defense runs that out of base. I also wouldn't be shocked to see a lot of stemming and crowding of the line to try and confuse the OL with where the pressure is coming - even if you only bring 4. When in "& goal" situations looks for an overloaded box or a 46 look suited to stop the run while playing tight man coverage behind it.

Thank you for the post. Always appreciate thoughtful/smart breakdowns that require a good deal of effort.

 

[ColumbusCatFan1]

TL;DR NW should play fundamentally sound football, follows their responsibilities, and stop the RPO runs early - by attacking the mesh point - leading to 3rd and longs. When Penn State is in 3rd and long - expect a 5 man pressure to try and keep Barkley in to protect and (maybe?) pattern match with zone coverage behind it - I say maybe because I am not sure if your defense runs that out of base. I also wouldn't be shocked to see a lot of stemming and crowding of the line to try and confuse the OL with where the pressure is coming - even if you only bring 4. When in "& goal" situations looks for an overloaded box or a 46 look suited to stop the run while playing tight man coverage behind it.

I don't think you'll see those crowded/overloaded fronts (ala Pitt) from Hank outside of the goaline. My guess is that NU will come out in a vanilla cover 4 with an occasional sprinkling of zone pressures...but not very often on 3rd down (if the Cats' get the PSU into that situation regularly). The defense will try to keep everything in front of them and rally to the ball. I also wouldn't be surprised to see more sub packages with someone like Kyle Quiero spying Barkley. The 'Cats have done this in the past when facing elite athletes. Jared McGee is a very capable fill in for Quiero at safety and Northwestern's D can be quite effective when they go with 5 DBs.

I like NU's chances if (it's a big IF) we can keep Barkley from creating explosion plays and tempt McSorley with the deep ball from the pocket. The Cats' secondary could thrive in that scenario. This defense has been very good with the whole "bend, but don't break" thing against spread option teams like PSU in the past. It will be quite an accomplishment if they can have similar success again on Saturday.

Outside of Barkley, losing contain on McSorley on 3rd down is my biggest concern. Duke just destroyed on NU in that area earlier this season. So many promising defensive series were ruined via scramble

 

[NURoseBowl]

ColinPSU and Wilbury - very interesting, informative posts. Appreciate the time and thought you put into this.

 

[ColinPSU]

I don't think you'll see those overloaded fronts (ala Pitt) from Hank outside of the goaline. My guess is that NU will come out in a vanilla cover 4, will sprinkle a few throw zone pressures at McSorley, however, not often on 3rd down (if the Cats' get the PSU into that situation regularly). The defense will try to keep everything in front of them and rally to the ball. I also wouldn't be surprised to see more sub packages with someone like Kyle Quiero spying Barkley. The 'Cats have done this in the past when facing elite athletes. Jared McGee is a very capable fill in for Quiero at safety and the 'Cats D can be quite effective when they go with 5 DBs.

I like NU's chances if (it's a big IF) we can keep Barkley from creating explosion plays and tempt McSorley with the deep ball. The NU secondary could thrive in that scenario. The 'Cats have been very good with the whole "bend, but don't break" thing against spread option teams like PSU.

If that is the case, we like to run long developing pass routes, a semi-counter to SOME quarters and cover 3 looks. This offense loves dig and post routes which are well-known cover 4 beaters. If you're DEs are quick enough to disrupt the timing it could lead to some problems. Iowa did something similar to that and most times this resulted in check downs to 26 because he didn't have to stay in and block.

If you want to leave Barkley in space, make sure you have a solid tackler like Iowa's Mike and everyone else has great pursuit angles. That's a tall order though, for any team/player. It's one of the reasons I think 5 man pressures are better because that keeps 26 in blocking and is less of a threat to escape.

I wouldn't rule out an exotic front, your staff is known for introducing wrinkles that frustrate opposing teams. A good example I use over at BWI often was one year NW put their TE/FB in the slot and had him run a seam route. That ended in a NW win and that player getting 10+ receptions and I think over 100 yards receiving. If you do it as much on defense is something I don't know.

 

[ColumbusCatFan1]

If you want to leave Barkley in space, make sure you have a solid tackler like Iowa's Mike and everyone else has great pursuit angles. That's a tall order though, for any team/player. It's one of the reasons I think 5 man pressures are better because that keeps 26 in blocking and is less of a threat to escape.

I wouldn't rule out an exotic front, your staff is known for introducing wrinkles that frustrate opposing teams. A good example I use over at BWI often was one year NW put their TE/FB in the slot and had him run a seam route. That ended in a NW win and that player getting 10+ receptions and I think over 100 yards receiving. If you do it as much on defense is something I don't know

Great response. I'm thoroughly enjoying this conversation.

RE Barkley Spy:

The reason I think Hank may spy Barkley with Quiero is exactly because he's good tackler. A recent example would be the he made on Jonathan Taylor behind the line of scrimmage in the 4th quarter last week against Wisconsin. That being said, he will not be able the contain Barkley by himself. It will have to be a phenominal team effort just to keep Saquon from hitting a big one. He'll get his yards.

RE Defensive Wrinkles:

Hank doesn't blitz often, but when he does it can be pretty darn effective. I'm not as fluent with his pressure concepts, so I won't waste your time with a hackneyed response. Maybe someone else can chime in? I will say some of the things you saw defensively in the 2014-15 match ups will most likely not be present on Saturday, notably the delayed MIKE pressure. Paddy Fisher is a really nice player for NU, but he doesn't possess the athleticism/range of Anthony Walker.

RE: Pass rush/Long Pass Routes

Xavier Washington, the lineman who gave PSU problems in 2014 will not be playing tomorrow. The DE that could create some issues on the long developing routes may be Joe Gaziano. He's flashed serious potential, but needs to become a more consistent presence in the opposition's back field. Gaz will have opportunities as I'm fairly confident PSU's offensive staff will choose to double Tyler Lancaster.

 

[ricko654321]

If that is the case, we like to run long developing pass routes, a semi-counter to SOME quarters and cover 3 looks. This offense loves dig and post routes which are well-known cover 4 beaters. If you're DEs are quick enough to disrupt the timing it could lead to some problems. Iowa did something similar to that and most times this resulted in check downs to 26 because he didn't have to stay in and block.

If you want to leave Barkley in space, make sure you have a solid tackler like Iowa's Mike and everyone else has great pursuit angles. That's a tall order though, for any team/player. It's one of the reasons I think 5 man pressures are better because that keeps 26 in blocking and is less of a threat to escape.

I wouldn't rule out an exotic front, your staff is known for introducing wrinkles that frustrate opposing teams. A good example I use over at BWI often was one year NW put their TE/FB in the slot and had him run a seam route. That ended in a NW win and that player getting 10+ receptions and I think over 100 yards receiving. If you do it as much on defense is something I don't know.

Yeah appreciate the post also. I do think we put in more wrinkles on offense game to game, though a lot of folks here don't realize it and dislike our OC (just don't get them started on the OL coach).

On D though- we will change up scheme, but almost always within the same overall framework. Hank is a great DC but he's not exactly the most deceptive. It's about running our scheme well and consistently and occasionally making small adjustments based on opponent (e.g. the 3rd safety as nickel / rover / spy sub package we've done a fair amount this year, or against running oriented teams we bring our Sam down tighter to the line and sometimes a safety creeps up). An exotic front I would wager a good amount you will not see from us. I agree entirely w CCF above. We will try to keep you guys in front of us on D, let Barkley get his yards, maintain contain and don't get beat over the top (hopefully). Will use some sub packages, but try to play bend but don't break and wait for either your offense to make mistakes (sacks, penalties, turnovers), or else to try to tighten up when the field shortens in the red zone.

There are a few fairly obvious situations where this can start to break down:
- LB and DB struggles tackling Barkley in 1 on 1 matchups (or even 1 on 2), he gets into space for explosion plays
- our DBs lose the 50/50 balls to yours when McSorley goes Yolo Ball as he frequently does, or coverage mistakes (we were supposed to have an experienced secondary coming into this year but injuries have led to a problem w CB depth)
- we have a chronic problem with QB scramblers on 3rd downs, our DEs haven't been great at getting pressure this year so they seem to end up forcing it a bit too hard and we let QBs out of the pocket too easily
- if when you get near / to the red zone our D is gassed bc our offense can't sustain drives and ToP then sometimes you see our D give up easy scores (e.g Duke the most obvious case of this in 2017)

 

[ColinPSU]

Yeah appreciate the post also. I do think we put in more wrinkles on offense game to game, though a lot of folks here don't realize it and dislike our OC (just don't get them started on the OL coach).

On D though- we will change up scheme, but almost always within the same overall framework. Hank is a great DC but he's not exactly the most deceptive. It's about running our scheme well and consistently and occasionally making small adjustments based on opponent (e.g. the 3rd safety as nickel / rover / spy sub package we've done a fair amount this year, or against running oriented teams we bring our Sam down tighter to the line and sometimes a safety creeps up). An exotic front I would wager a good amount you will not see from us. I agree entirely w CCF above. We will try to keep you guys in front of us on D, let Barkley get his yards, maintain contain and don't get beat over the top (hopefully). Will use some sub packages, but try to play bend but don't break and wait for either your offense to make mistakes (sacks, penalties, turnovers), or else to try to tighten up when the field shortens in the red zone.

There are a few fairly obvious situations where this can start to break down:
- LB and DB struggles tackling Barkley in 1 on 1 matchups (or even 1 on 2), he gets into space for explosion plays
- our DBs lose the 50/50 balls to yours when McSorley goes Yolo Ball as he frequently does, or coverage mistakes (we were supposed to have an experienced secondary coming into this year but injuries have led to a problem w CB depth)
- we have a chronic problem with QB scramblers on 3rd downs, our DEs haven't been great at getting pressure this year so they seem to end up forcing it a bit too hard and we let QBs out of the pocket too easily
- if when you get near / to the red zone our D is gassed bc our offense can't sustain drives and ToP then sometimes you see our D give up easy scores (e.g Duke the most obvious case of this in 2017)

I noticed you guys were playing a 4-3 Under (for those not aware: 4 down linemen with your Sam lined up over a TE, effectively a 5-2 font) against Wisconsin but wasn't sure if that was your base or not since they are such a run/power-oriented offense, could have just been a game plan thing. FWIW USC ran a 3-4 Under (very similar look) and that gave us some trouble in the running game, they do a good job flushing strong side running plays to the Will. Before you type furiously that Barkley had almost 200 yards against USC, if you remove that incredible TD run, 26 only had 115 on the ground and his YPC drops to 4.75. Another thing I saw was you guys move A LOT on any type of Z, H motion across the formation. While I would not say our offense does a ton of motion, I would expect to see that a little more because it will give us a better idea of what coverage you're in, it seems like you guys mix in a variety of zone and man. Be careful with the back half to not get sucked up on play action - the whole scheme of any RPO offense is to get your SS coming in for run support and dumping the ball over the top and because of the 3-yard rule, the safeties OL read will actually look like a genuine run play. We also struggle with TOP and sustaining drives so that should be interesting, we are like 35% on 3rd down this year, surprisingly that is up from 33% last year.

@ColumbusCatFan1 Quiero is from a town near where I grew up and we played them (Verona not BC) a few times, a VERY good football school. Will keep my eye out for 21 in purple.