What is the story about?
Penn St. Nittany Lions (3-2; 0-2 Big Ten) vs Northwestern Wildcats (3-2; 1-1 Big Ten)
3:30 p.m. ET, October 11—Fox Sports
Beaver Stadium (Capacity: 106,304 / University Park, PA)
| Penn State | Value (Nat’l Rank) | Value (Nat’l Rank) | Northwestern | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rushing Offense (ypg) | 175.4 (T – 52) | 146.6 (72) | Rushing Defense (ypg) | Push |
| Passing Offense (ypg) | 213.6 (81) | 165.0 (20) | Passing Defense (ypg) |  |
| Pass Efficiency | 142.27 (61) | 118.97 (42) | Pass Efficiency Defense | Push |
| Total Offense (ypg) | 389.0 (69) | 311.6 (31) | Total Defense (ypg) | |
| Scoring Offense (ppg) | 38.6 (20) | 17.0 (T – 26) | Scoring Defense (ppg) | Push |
| Rushing Defense (ypg) | 149.4 (77) | 196.0 (35) | Rushing Offense (ypg) | |
| Passing Defense (ypg) | 156.8 (16) | 185.0 (104) | Passing Offense (ypg) |  |
| Pass Efficiency Defense | 117.33 (35) | 125.22 (102) | Pass Efficiency | |
| Total Defense (ypg) | 306.2 (29) | 381.0 (73) | Total Offense (ypg) | |
| Scoring Defense (ppg) | 17.8 (30) | 23.6 (T – 94) | Scoring Offense (ppg) | |
| Punt Return Defense (ypr) | 6.0 (T – 58) | -1.29 (131) | Punt Return Yds (ypr) | |
| Punt Return Yds (ypr) | 8.0 (T – 78) | 4.0 (T – 39) | Punt Return Defense (ypr) | |
| Net Punting Yds (ypp) | 42.64 (25) | 39.54 (72) | Net Punting Yds (ypp) | |
| Kickoff Return Yds (ypr) | 30.6 (T – 7) | 13.4 (12) | Kickoff Return Defense (ypr) | Push |
| Kickoff Return Defense (ypr) | 19.67 (T – 67) | 18.75 (87) | Kickoff Return Yds (ypr) | Push |
| Turnover Margin (season) | +.8 (T – 25) | -1.2 (T – 126) | Turnover Margin (season) | |
| Passes Had Intercepted (season) | 2 (T – 20) | 2 (T – 103) | Passes Intercepted (season) | |
| Passes Intercepted (season) | 4 (T – 52) | 6 (T – 112) | Passes Had Intercepted (season) | |
| Penalty Yds/Game | 26.6 (3) | 33.8 (11) | Penalty Yds/Game | Push |
| Sacks (spg) | 2.4 (T – 40) | 1.6 (T – 58) | Sacks Allowed (spg) | Push |
| Sacks Allowed (spg) | 1.2 (T – 30) | 1.8 (T – 89) | Sacks (spg) | |
| Tackles for Loss (tpg) | 7.8 (T – 14) | 4.4 (T – 35) | Tackles for Loss Allowed (tpg) | Push |
| Tackles for Loss Allowed (tpg) | 3.8 (T – 18) | 4.2 (T – 118) | Tackles for Loss (tpg) | |
| Redzone Offense (% season) | 91.3% (T – 42) | 90.9% (T – 101) | Redzone Defense (% season) | |
| Redzone Defense (% season) | 80.0% (T – 38) | 93.3% (T – 29) | Redzone Offense (% season) | Push |
| Redzone TD % (season) | 65.22% | 36.36% | Redzone TD % Defense (season) | Push |
| Redzone TD % Defense (season) | 66.67% | 53.3% | Redzone TD % (season) | |
| 3rd Down Conv. % (season) | 40.0% (T – 71) | 40.3% (87) | 3rd Down Defense % (season) | Push |
| 3rd Down Defense % (season) | 40.0% (T – 80) | 49.3% (22) | 3rd Down Conv. % (season) | |
| 4th Down Conv. % (season) | 64.3% (T – 43) | 50.0% (T – 55) | 4th Down Defense % (season) | Push |
| 4th Down Defense % (season) | 61.1% (92) | 63.6% (T – 46) | 4th Down Conv. % | |
| 1st Downs | 109 (T – 70) | 90 (T – 36) | 1st Downs Allowed | |
| 1st Downs Allowed | 80.0 (T – 21) | 105 (T – 81) | 1st Downs | |
| Time of Possession | 26 (124) | 32 (14) | Time of Possession | |
| Strength of Schedule | 108 | 35 | Strength of Schedule | |
| Difference | > 25 | in | National Rank | |
| Difference | > 50 | in | National Rank | |
| Difference | > 75 | in | National Rank | |
| Difference | > 100 | in | National Rank | |
Note:
All of the above rankings are taken directly from the NCAA except for strength of schedule, which is taken from Power Rankings.
The Redzone TD% and Redzone TD% Defense are calculated by me and not ranked by the NCAA. Determining who has the advantage in these categories is strictly my arbitrary judgment.
Quick thoughts:
These stats aren’t where any of us thought we’d be right now. These two teams are much more evenly matched than we’d hoped, though there are more chipmunks than block Ns; the two teams seem
quite similar, mostly relying on defense to win the games they’ve won (last week in Pasadena notwithstanding).
The bright spots in these numbers seem few and far between, but I’ll try. Penalty yards? Tackles for loss? There’s nothing that’s particularly extraordinary this season, which is even more discouraging to say considering that last ranking – strength of schedule.
More behind some of these stats:
- Penn State’s offense has been in the red zone 23 times and scored 21 of those times; Northwestern has been in the red zone 15 times and scored 14 times
- The Nittany Lions’ defense has allowed 12 scores on 15 red zone trips; the Wildcats have allowed 10 scores on 11 red zone trips
- PSU has scored 15 touchdowns on their 23 trips (with 6 field goals), while NU has scored 8 touchdowns on their 15 trips (with 6 field goals); on defense, Penn State has given up 10 TDs and 2 field goals in the red zone, and Northwestern has given up 4 TDs and 6 field goals
- The Nittany Lions have attempted 14 fourth down conversions and converted on 9 of them; the Wildcats have attempted 11 and converted 7
- PSU’s defense has faced 18 fourth down attempts (amongst the most in the NCAA) and allowed 11 conversions, while NU’s defense has faced 4 fourth down attempts (amongst the least in the NCAA) and allowed 2 conversions
- Penn State has allowed 4 punt returns and has returned 11 punts; Northwestern has allowed 3 punt returns and returned 7 punts
- The Nittany Lions have punted 11 times with one touchback, and the Wildcats have punted 13 times with four touchbacks
- PSU has returned 5 kickoffs to NU’s 4
- Penn State’s opponents have returned 9 kickoffs with 21 touchbacks; Northwestern’s opponents have returned 10 kickoffs with 13 touchbacks
What say you all?
Do you find this article useful?
