:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/57607569/156325893.jpg.0.jpg)
Penn St. Nittany Lions (8-2; 5-2 Big Ten East) vs Nebraska Cornhuskers (4-6; 3-4 Big Ten West)
4:00 p.m. ET, November 18, 2017--FS1
Beaver Stadium (Capacity: 106,572 / University Park, PA)
| Penn State | Value (Nat'l Rank) | Value (Nat'l Rank) | Nebraska | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rushing Offense (ypg) | 146.0 (86) | 200/1 (105) | Rushing Defense (ypg) | Push |
| Passing Offense (ypg) | 283.6 (26) | 211.9 (52) | Passing Defense (ypg) |
 |
| Pass Efficiency | 152.70 (17) | 130.89 (72) | Pass Efficiency Defense |
|
| Total Offense (ypg) | 429.6 (40) | 412.0 (82) | Total Defense (ypg) |
|
| Scoring Offense (ppg) | 37.7 (17) | 32.5 (105) | Scoring Defense (ppg) |
|
| Rushing Defense (ypg) | 123.9 (22) | 115.6 (113) | Rushing Offense (ypg) |
|
| Passing Defense (ypg) | 194.4 (33) | 273.1 (32) | Passing Offense (ypg) | Push |
| Pass Efficiency Defense | 107.89 (11) | 126.81 (77) | Pass Efficiency |
|
| Total Defense (ypg) | 318.3 (18) | 388.7 (77) | Total Offense (ypg) |
|
| Scoring Defense (ppg) | 13.9 (4) | 25.1 (90) | Scoring Offense (ppg) |
|
| Punt Return Defense (ypr) | 4.29 (T - 25) | 6.92 (T - 71) | Punt Return Yds |
|
| Punt Return Yds | 14.10 (14) | 10.17 (98) | Punt Return Defense (ypr) |
|
| Net Punting Yds | 39.64 (27) | 38.98 (45) | Net Punting Yds | Push |
| Kickoff Return Yds | 26.15 (7) | 23.63 (104) | Kickoff Return Defense |
|
| Kickoff Return Defense | 20.86 (63) | 22.97 (33) | Kickoff Return Yds |
 |
| Turnover Margin | +1.30 (5) | -0.50 (T - 101) | Turnover Margin |
|
| Passes Had Intercepted | 8 (T - 58) | 9 (T - 51) | Passes Intercepted | Push |
| Passes Intercepted | 10 (T - 38) | 14 (T - 119) | Passes Had Intercepted |
|
| Penalty Yds/Game | 42.10 (20) | 62.00 (99) | Penalty Yds/Game |
|
| Sacks | 2.90 (T - 17) | 1.90 (T - 60) | Sacks Allowed |
|
| Sacks Allowed | 2.50 (T - 90) | 1.20 (T - 116) | Sacks | Push |
| Tackles for Loss (tpg) | 7.3 (T - 21) | 5.25 (45) | Tackles for Loss Allowed (tpg) | Push |
| Tackles for Loss Allowed (tpg) | 8.20 (126) | 3.6 (T - 127) | Tackles for Loss (tpg) | Push |
| Redzone Offense (%) | 87.5% (T - 42) | 86.0% (T - 83) | Redzone Defense (%) |
|
| Redzone Defense (%) | 80.0% (40) | 73.7% (T - 117) | Redzone Offense (%) |
|
| Redzone TD % | 72.50% | 65.11% | Redzone TD % Defense |
|
| Redzone TD % Defense | 48.00% | 47.37% | Redzone TD % |
|
| 3rd Down Conv. % | 40.0% (64) | 41.3% (83) | 3rd Down Defense % | Push |
| 3rd Down Defense % | 36.0% (49) | 38.4% (81) | 3rd Down Conv. % |
|
| 4th Down Conv. % | 50.0% (T - 66) | 60.0% (T - 95) | 4th Down Defense % |
|
| 4th Down Defense % | 50.0% (T - 57) | 50.0% (T - 66) | 4th Down Conv. % | Push |
| 1st Downs | 211 (56) | 224 (T - 102) | 1st Downs Allowed |
|
| 1st Downs Allowed | 180 (T - 36) | 203 (T - 68) | 1st Downs |
|
| Time of Possession | 29:05 (86) | 31:03 (37) | Time of Possession |
|
| Strength of Schedule | 37 | 22 | Strength of Schedule | Push |
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 not ranked by the NCAA and instead taken from S&P+.
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:
That’s... a lot of chipmunks. I knew that Nebraska was a world of not very good this year, but if Rutgers gets more logos than you...
The score of this game will likely depend on weather; if it’s clear and temps are higher than mid-twenties, the Lions, on paper, look like they’ll pull away quickly. But weather is a great equalizer, and if the conditions are less than ideal, Nebraska is good enough to stick around.
But it likely won’t be enough to save Mike Riley’s job.