SB Nation Detroit Editor's Pick
Analyzing the Box Score: Northwestern
[Bump. --LVS.]
Because it seems as though the guys at the TOC are a little busy this week, I thought I'd contribute with my own version of "mining the box score."
Official box score can be found here. Some quick thoughts on the numbers:
Offense:
- The offense racked up 457 total yards. However, for the second straight week, the offense departed from its balanced ways of the past to rely heavily on Cousins' arm. The ground game was only able to muster 105 yards, 25 of which came on the Baker's amazing/dangerous/dread-inducing touchdown run at the end of the game. Again, the passing game led the way with 352 yards - averaging 8 yards per attempt and accounting for three touchdowns.
- MSU had 26 rushing attempts compared to 44 passing attempts. While this unbalanced play calling may be attributed to the fact that MSU was forced to play from behind for most of this game, the trend in play calling since our first game suggests that the balanced offense of the first half of the season may be regressing to the more one-dimensional offense we saw last year:
- Vs. Illinois: 31 rushing attempts and 24 passing attempts
- Vs. Michigan: 42 rushing attempts and 26 passing attempts
- Vs. Wisconsin: 45 rushing attempts and 29 passing attempts
- Vs. Northern Colorado: 37 rushing attempts and 25 passing attempts
- Vs. Notre Dame: 43 rushing attempts and 34 passing attempts
- Vs. FAU: 30 rushing attempts and 17 passing attempts
- Vs. WMU: 37 rushing attempts and 22 passing attempts
- Of those 26 rushing attempts, Edwin Baker had 10 for 73 yards (7.3 avg), Le'Veon Bell had 8 for 12 yards (1.5 avg.), and Larry Caper only had 1 for 3 yards. Le'Veon Bell has struggled for the second straight week, as he gained only 13 total yards on 10 carries last week against Illinois. After all of the articles written about how the offensive line vowed to redeem itself against Northwestern after a poor showing against Illinois, there were surprisingly few holes created for Bell.
- Not enough can be said about Kirk Cousins' second half performances this season. Cousins continued to impress this week, completing 7 of 8 attempts for 98 yards on MSU's go ahead drive in the fourth quarter. Cousins' leadership and efficiency helped MSU chew up 9:35 in the 4th quarter and put 21 points on the board. As many of you know, Cousins' impressive stats and MSU's unblemished record have caused him to start receiving Heisman (!) attention from a number of sources.
- Northwestern posted a disruption percentage of 22.8. They posted 7 quarterback hurries, 2 sacks, 4 pass breakups, and 3 non-sack tackles for loss. Considering that Illinois, whose defense appears to be superior to Northwestern's, only had a disruption percentage of 20%, this is a step in the wrong direction. With Iowa and Adrian Clayborn looming large next week, let's hope the offensive line pulls it together.
- Perhaps the largest source of frustration on both the offensive and defensive side of the ball was the third down conversion. On offense, MSU converted only 5 of 14 third down attempts, relying on two successful fourth down conversions to slightly mitigate their third down failures. On defense, Northwestern converted 8 of its 16 third down conversions, many of which were of the third and LONG variety. Not only is this frustrating to watch, but it also will cost us games in the future against more complete opponents.
Defense:
- Northwestern had 170 yards on 47 carries, leading to a respectable 3.6 yards per carry. However, this speciously impressive figure doesn't tell the whole story. Between Persa and the running backs, Northwestern amassed 208 yards on the ground, but MSU's 8 sacks reduced that positive yardage by 38 yards.
- MSU held Persa to a season-low 63% completion rate (19 of 30) and a passer rating of 109.34. While Persa's completion percentage and passer rating have been on a steady decline since Northwestern's first game against Vanderbilt (90.5 completion pct. and a 226.4 passer rating), his numbers against MSU were a significant statistical drop.
- Granted, I would expect MSU's defense to be the strongest group he had faced, as their previous opponents were Vanderbilt, Illinois State, Rice, Central Michigan, Minnesota, and Purdue.
- The MSU secondary also recorded Persa's third interception of the season, and kept Persa from having a passing TD for the second straight game. Michigan State has 13 interceptions on the season, tying them for 5th in the nation. Also, combining this interception with the fumble recovery and fumble lost, MSU sported a +1 turnover margin, helping to maintain it's statistical domination in this category and sustaining it's #9 ranking in the nation in this category.
- Sticking with Persa, MSU limited him to 46 yards on 22 carries (2.1 YPC). However, it should be noted that Persa's 81 yards gained on the ground were tempered by the 8 sacks and subsequent loss of 35 yards. Compare: Persa rushed for 24 yards on 20 carries against Purdue, though he had more success in the air against their defense.
- MSU posted a disruption percentage of 20.8. I was a bit surprised to see that the disruption percentage was so low on this game, considering MSU recorded 8 sacks. However, our line was only credited with three quarterback hurries, and our secondary only had one pass break up and one interception.
- Surprisingly absent from the defensive stat sheet was Will Gholston. However, I for one believe that it will only be a matter of time before he starts racking up some impressive numbers.
Special Teams:
- Aaron Bates averaged 43 yards per punt. Looking at his punts individually, you'll see that he averaged just under 46 yards per punt with the wind and had one punt of 53 yards (2nd quarter) and one punt of 22 yards (4th quarter) into the wind. Notably, while Bates' kicks int he 4th quarter appeared to be affected by the wind, Cousins' passes did not.
This is a FanPost, written by a member of the TOC community. It does not represent the official positions of The Only Colors, Inc.--largely because we have no official positions.
18 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This game was a bizarro version
of the way we thought it would play out going in. We thought we’d run it down their throats all game, and shut down their to-date anemic running game. There was some concern about facing their passing attack, which has been very good this year. Instead, we relied on the pass because we couldn’t run the ball consistently. They actually had more success running than passing at least compared to their season averages.
I will give kudos to our D for limiting their passing game. Persa threw for less yardage and had a much lower completion percentage than his season averages. We were not so good against the run. On offense, we passed the ball efficiently – actually more than efficiently – we were outstanding.
In the rushing game, Baker was the lone bright spot – and I think we should have used him more. Even if you eliminate that last 25 yard carry, Baker averaged better than 5 yards a pop, which is pretty good. An optimist might even say it’s evidence that complaints about the demise of our rushing attack are overblown. Falling into a 17-0 hole tends to push you toward using the pass to try to get back into it.
by TheCrestedHelm on Oct 27, 2010 10:36 AM CDT reply actions
I agree about Baker getting more carries
If Bell doesn’t start off strong this week against Iowa then Baker needs to get the majority of the carries. We still need to utilize Caper in passing situations though.
The dominating passing game
I think can also be attributed to NU’s defensive schemes, and inability to adjust.
Basically, Cousins was able to take snaps in the shotgun with either 4 guys wide & one guy (TE) covering a tackle, or with 5 guys wide, and just pick apart their D with his passes. It seemed like NU was committed to stacking the box to stop the run, and when MSU recognized this and began to spread the field, NU was unable to adjust & get the proper coverage.
Kudos to our coaching staff for taking what the defense gave them, and exploiting it.
This team has the ability
to run when that is going well and can pass when they need to. Although rushing has not been a strength recently, it sets up the play action in which Dell and Cunningam have shined. Pick your poison.
Given that we ran more than we passed in every previous game
I’m going to take a wild guess and say the playcalling imbalance was due to playing from behind all day (especially late). The run game has run into trouble, which is troubling, but I don’t think we’re in danger of becoming one-dimensional.
Might be crazy
But I think the run game’s struggles against NU are overstated. Poor early play plus great NU play plus big early deficit = passing a lot to catch up.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
No shift
I dont really see that much of a trending imbalance, this was really our only game where theres a huge gap.
Ooonst ooonst muthafucka!
…it will cost us games in the future against more complete opponents.
Minus a bowl game, and the obvious tilt this upcoming weekend, which teams on our remaining schedule are more complete than Northwestern?
Those are two of our five remaining games.
I think it’s a fair point.
Hey! I'm tryin' to eat lunch here!
The interpretation I get is one of that this team still has a lot to prove
The Spartans have been consistently better then their competition, week-in and week-out. While last week was by no means a positive outcome in all facets, no game ever really is, and the best you can hope for at the end of the day is to win.
They won. As a matter of fact, all they have done is win. Against pretty decent competition too, I might add. I think the benefit of the doubt can be given to the team by now.
I think every time the Spartans have been given the benefit of the doubt
they get cocky, and embarrass themselves
Ooonst ooonst muthafucka!
A lot to prove? No, but not nothing to prove, either.
Even at 8-0, I think it’s fair to say that there’s been an element of Sparty playing up — or down — to their competition this season. They got the job done in the non-conference games without really crushing it. It took their ‘A’ game a quarter to show up vs. UM, a half vs. Illinois, and three quarters against NU. Their best game came against the best team they played, but that was at home. If they play like they did against Wisconsin, MSU will beat Iowa, but will they? The Wisconsin game is the exception thus far, not the rule.
Hey! I'm tryin' to eat lunch here!
There's always something to prove until the season is over
But what I’m saying is in the games given thus far, the Spartans have been forced to respond multiple times, in multiple ways. They’ve done that and more.
Every team has good games, bad games, mediocre games over the course of a season. And, honestly, if you review the hardest challenge for the Spartans (Northwestern), it’s pretty remarkably clear that it just wasn’t their day. The fact they managed to win anyway proved a hell of a lot.
Now, we’ll see how the respond to a different, but equally difficult, test in Iowa City.
I agree
Probably should have put “may” instead of “will” in that sentence. We’ve won despite our third-down let downs so far, and whose to say we won’t win with them in the future. Though, for the sake of our colletive sanity, I certainly hope that we can get our defense off the field in third and 15+ yard situations…
No argument there
Few things are more frustrating on this planet then having the opposition consistently convert 3rd and 15s while the good guys can’t get a 3rd and 2 to save their lives.
It also seems like 3rd and 7 is a more likely conversion for the Spartans then 3rd and short. I wonder if Treadwell every figures out this mystifying fact and realizes a bit of it just might have to do with god-awful playcalling in that particular situation?
Mining the box score is good.
Due to the wet field and (beginning) rainy conditions, MSU made a concerted effort to run the ball- and were stuffed repeatedly. I missed the second half due to a meeting (about which: blergh) but it doesn’t surprise me a bit that they went to the air in the second half. That, and being down by 17 early. If it isn’t working, you can’t just keep beating your head against the wall. I’m somewhat concerned that Illinois and NW showed you could make MSU one-dimensional by stopping the run game early, but the problem there is MSU can still kill you through the air.
That and the run game came back against Illinois in the second half
Not quite as well as the pass game, obviously, but we were actually able to move the ball on the ground a little bit at least.

by 




















