:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/65964647/DSC_0528-2.0.0.jpg)
Penn St. Nittany Lions (10-2; 7-2 Big Ten East) vs Memphis Tigers (12-1; 8-1 AAC West)
12 p.m. ET, December 28, 2019--ESPN
AT&A Stadium (Capacity: 80,000 / Arlington, TX)
| Penn State | Value (Nat'l Rank) | Value (Nat'l Rank) | Memphis | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rushing Offense (ypg) | 173.5 (51) | 171.6 (79) | Rushing Defense (ypg) |  |
| Passing Offense (ypg) | 228.7 (69) | 200.7 (33) | Passing Defense (ypg) |
 |
| Pass Efficiency | 143.18 (47) | 115.36 (18) | Pass EfficiencyDefense | |
| Total Offense (ypg) | 402.2 (68) | 372.3 (49) | Total Defense (ypg) | Push |
| Scoring Offense (ppg) | 34.3T - (22) | 24.4 (47) | Scoring Defense (ppg) | |
| Rushing Defense (ypg) | 97.7 (5) | 196.2 (34) | Rushing Offense (ypg) |
|
| Passing Defense (ypg) | 232.5 (77) | 284.5 (26) | Passing Offense (ypg) |
|
| Pass Efficiency Defense | 123.46 (38) | 167.41 (10) | Pass Efficiency | |
| Total Defense (ypg) | 330.2 (24) | 480.7 (10) | Total Offense (ypg) | Push |
| Scoring Defense (ppg) | 14.1 (7) | 40.5 (8) | Scoring Offense (ppg) | Push |
| Punt Return Defense (ypr) | 1.84 (7) | 7.83 (66) | Punt Return Yds |
|
| Punt Return Yds | 6.36 (T - 82) | 6.69 (50) | Punt Return Defense (ypr) | |
| Net Punting Yds | 39.62 (39) | 39.91 (34) | Net Punting Yds | Push |
| Kickoff Return Yds | 19.92 (79) | 18.79 (28) | Kickoff Return Defense |
|
| Kickoff Return Defense | 17.46 (14) | 26.53 (6) | Kickoff Return Yds | Push |
| Turnover Margin | +0.58 (T - 21) | +0.00 (T - 64) | Turnover Margin |
|
| Passes Had Intercepted | 8 (T - 39) | 10 (T - 5) | Passes Intercepted | Push |
| Passes Intercepted | 8 (T - 86) | 9 (T - 55) | Passes Had Intercepted | |
| Penalty Yds/Game | 47.83 (35) | 61.08 (99) | Penalty Yds/Game |
|
| Sacks | 3.25 (T - 10) | 1.62 (T - 35) | Sacks Allowed | |
| Sacks Allowed | 2.33 (T - 5) | 2.46 (44) | Sacks | |
| Tackles for Loss (tpg) | 7.70 (14) | 6.92 (T - 109) | Tackles for Loss Allowed (tpg) |
|
| Tackles for Loss Allowed (tpg) | 6.25 (T - 89) | 7.00 (T - 25) | Tackles for Loss (tpg) |
|
| Redzone Offense (%) | 89.4% (T - 28) | 91.1% (124) | Redzone Defense (%) |
|
| Redzone Defense (%) | 81.5% (53) | 81.8% (T - 77) | Redzone Offense (%) | Push |
| Redzone TD % | 70.21% | 57.78% | Redzone TD % Defense | |
| Redzone TD % Defense | 48.15% | 61.82% | Redzone TD % | |
| 3rd Down Conv. % | 41.5% (46) | 38.5% (57) | 3rd Down Defense % | Push |
| 3rd Down Defense % | 35.3% (37) | 46.3% (20) | 3rd Down Conv. % | Push |
| 4th Down Conv. % | 68.8% (11) | 51.7% (T - 63) | 4th Down Defense % |
|
| 4th Down Defense % | 57.7% (T - 94) | 58.3% (T - 38) | 4th Down Conv. % |
|
| 1st Downs | 250 (T - 77) | 257 (T - 68) | 1st Downs Allowed | Push |
| 1st Downs Allowed | 219 (25) | 300 (16) | 1st Downs | Push |
| Time of Possession | 27:56 (109) | 30:21 (57) | Time of Possession |
|
| Strength of Schedule | 8 | 62 | 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 Team Rankings.com.
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:
Despite their competition level, Memphis is a good team! They did have an extra (13th) game they played against Cincinnati, so some of the raw number stats won’t be as beneficial as they might have been for the Nittany Lions.
Memphis has a good special teams unit, having been coached by now-PSU coach Joe Lorig last year, so we’ll see how the Lions match up on that unit, having been their most improved aspect of the game from last year.