:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47476952/usa-today-8867090.0.jpg)
Penn St. Nittany Lions (5-2; 2-1 Big Ten) vs Maryland Terrapins (2-4; 0-2 Big Ten)
3:30 p.m. ET, October 24, 2015--ESPN
M & T Bank Stadium (Capacity: 71,008 / Baltimore, MD)
| Penn State | Value (Nat'l Rank) | Value (Nat'l Rank) | Maryland | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rushing Offense (ypg) | 162.7 (76) | 196.8 (100) | Rushing Defense (ypg) | Push |
| Passing Offense (ypg) | 177.4 (106) | 260.8 (104) | Passing Defense (ypg) | Push |
| Pass Efficiency | 124.43 (85) | 141.86 (100) | Pass Efficiency Defense | Push |
| Total Offense (ypg) | 340.1 (111) | 457.7 (110) | Total Defense (ypg) | Push |
| Scoring Offense (ppg) | 23.0 (103) | 34.7 (T-103) | Scoring Defense (ppg) | Push |
| Rushing Defense (ypg) | 145.3 (45) | 177.7 (56) | Rushing Offense (ypg) | Push |
| Passing Defense (ypg) | 152.3 (10) | 163.7 (113) | Passing Offense (ypg) |
|
| Pass Efficiency Defense | 112.73 (32) | 87.49 (126) | Pass Efficiency |
|
| Total Defense (ypg) | 297.6 (16) | 341.3 (108) | Total Offense (ypg) |
|
| Scoring Defense (ppg) | 17.7 (T-20) | 24.3 (96) | Scoring Offense (ppg) |
|
| Net Punting Yds | 35.91 (90) |
22.0 (3) | Punt Return Yds |
|
| Punt Return Yds | 9.0 (T-57) | 35.24 (97) | Net Punting Yds | |
| Kickoff Return Yds | 23.23 (38) | 21.38 (76) | Kickoff Return Defense | |
| Kickoff Return Defense | 25.73 (114) | 21.22 (69) | Kickoff Return Yds | |
| Turnover Margin | +1.0 (T-11) |
-1.83 (127) | Turnover Margin |
|
| Penalty Yds/Game | 42.29 (22) | 72.33 (108) | Penalty Yds/Game |
|
| Sacks | 3.86/gm (2) | 1.67/gm (T-47) | Sacks Allowed | |
| Sacks Allowed | 3.43/gm (T-121) |
3.33/gm (T-9) |
Sacks |
|
| Redzone Offense (%) | 88.0% (35) | 85.7% (T-78) |
Redzone Defense (%) | |
| Redzone Defense (%) | 94.1% (118) |
85.7% (T-48) | Redzone Offense (%) |
|
| Redzone TD % | 48.0% | 75.0% |
Redzone TD % Defense | Push |
| Redzone TD % Defense | 76.47% | 57.14% |
Redzone TD % | Push |
| 3rd Down Conv. % | 28.4% (125) |
39.1% (75) |
3rd Down Defense % |
|
| 3rd Down Defense % | 34.7% (44) |
32.9% (T-114) | 3rd Down Conv. % |
|
| 4th Down Conv. % | 22.2% (T-122) | 53.8% (T-75) | 4th Down Defense % | |
| 4th Down Defense % | 25.0% (T-12) |
33.3% (T-107) | 4th Down Conv. % |
|
| 1st Downs | 108 (114) | 147 (97) | 1st Downs Allowed | Push |
| 1st Downs Allowed | 119 (T-45) | 99 (124) | 1st Downs |
|
| Time of Possession | 29:35 (78) |
26:52 (112) | Time of Possession | |
Difference
Difference >25 in National Rank =
Difference >50 in National Rank =
Difference >75 in National Rank =
Difference >100 in National Rank =
Note: 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: ...right.
Yet again, if our offense can even come close to what our opponent is giving up on average statistically year to date we should win this one going away. But can they even muster that?
After a somewhat lackluster defensive performance in Columbus, Bob Shoop's boys will look to bounce back this week--and if the stats are any indicator, that may not be too much of an issue.
Once again, sacks will be an issue, as will third down conversions. The biggest shocker on the above, to me, is that the redzone may not be as much of a liability as it has been in weeks past--and maybe punting won't either (provided we keep Will Likely in check, much like we were able to do with Rutgers' Janarion Grant).
What do you guys think?