Hopefully, get some time to look over the defense later in week.
Anyway - - Couple overall thoughts, and some specifics and some personnel stuff.
1 - Not that this needs to be said to most folks here.....but the kid #26 is pretty damn good!
2 - Kent St. was VERY vanilla with their defensive fronts. VERY.
3 - Early in the game, KSU was doing some overloading with their fronts. Just about every time they did this, and created a bubble in their front, whomever was calling the plays for PSU (in their "check with the sideline" system) adjusted the play call to attack the bubble in the run game.
KUDOS to whomever was responsible
KSU obviously realized that as well - - - and they went completely to base standard gap defenses up front after the 1st quarter.
4 - Kent RARELY blitzed....and they DID NOT stack the line (until late in the game).
The few times they did blitz, it was generally with a safety through the box, or occasionally with a corner off of the slot. Only a couple all day with the LBers
They played a lot of 6 man boxes, and occasionally dropped a safety down to create a 7 man box......but that was it. And they DID NOT crowd the LOS up front until the 4th quarter (when they started to do some more exotic stuff)
5 - In pass protection, damn near every time KSU blitzed or ran any stunts/twists (which wasn't that often)....the PSU O Line was horrible.....HORRIBLE....at adjusting on the fly.
Reminded me of some of the old Wisconsin OLines - with those big ginormous run blockers, but guys who could not move their feet in pass protection (some folks will remember who some of the old PSU defenses - with guys like Tamba Hali - used to ABUSE Wisconsin with the pass rush)
I am quite sure that opposing defensive coordinators will take note - - - - and I would expect, beginning next week with Pitt, we will see a multitude of stunts/twists/blitzes in pass down situations.
If the PSU OLine doesn't make HUGE strides, it could get ugly.
Personnel wise:
OL: PSU had 13 possessions (not counting the end of game kneel down)
The starting group 70 Mahon - 52 Bates - 72 Gaia - 53 Dowrey - 59 Nelson...... played 5 of them
70-52-72-66(McGovern for Dowrey)-59.........played 2
70-55(Laurent for Bates)-72-53-59.........played 4
70-52-72-55 (Laurent for Dowrey)-59.......played 2 (Wright came in for Nelson for a few plays of this drive, when Nelson got banged up)
So, overall:
70 (Mahon) - all 13 series
52 (Bates) - 9 series
72 (Gaia) - all 13 series
53 (Dowrey) - 9 series
59 (Nelson) - all 13 series, aside from a couple snaps due to injury
55 (Laurent) - played 6
66 (McGovern) - played 2
When evaluating specific players - from just one game - it is tough - - - - since I don't know the KSU personnel well enough to know who had "the tougher assignments".
But, without knowing who among the KSU front may have been the better players:
Pass protection:
Against the vanilla rushes - was mostly pretty good.
At tackle:
70 - Beaten badly just the one time - but it was very costly
59 - Only one bad beat in protection against base rushes
Inside:
53 - was absolutely abused twice against base pass rushes. Not his strength (to say the least)
Otherwise, the group inside (52, 55, 66, 72) held up well against the base four man rush
Against blitz/stunt - ugly all around
As mentioned, KSU did not run many stunts or blitzes in the pass game.
A couple of times they just had PSU out-schemed with an extra unblockable man....but even with "even numbers", the PSU front was awful in adjusting assignments to the movement.
When they did blitz/stunt, I don't think there were many times the line handled it well at all - - - fortunately McSorley was able to escape from a couple....and throw away a couple more......keeping sacks to a minimum
Non-Linemen:
That kid - 26 - was very good in pass-pro. Had one poor blitz pick up, but otherwise was really good.
On the other hand, 88 was horrible......and it seemed to be as much a lack of effort/commitment as anything (more on 88 in the run game below)
Run Game:
Given how basic KSU played their fronts.....not a good effort.
I didn't expect a whole lot - since I suppose the KSU front 7 is reasonably good for a MAC team (my guess, after watching them, is they might be better than a couple of B1G fronts).....but time will tell.....and I didn't expect HUGE improvements from the O Line.
That said, still a rather disappointing effort.
If not for a great effort from that kid - 26 - the run game would have been a complete crapper.
Inside guys:
72 (and he should be given credit for being pretty consistent on his snaps all day - not a given for a guy making his first start at OC) was generally lousy. The OC has to make a lot of "finesse/technique" blocks that involve helping out on of the OGs, and then getting off to the 2nd level. He was BAD....which, I guess, should be expected given the unique characteristics of the position....which was all new to him.
In one-on-one situations, more often than not, he simply couldn't handle his guy - - - and was destroyed more than once
By far - - - and this was the case last year as well - - - the most fundamentally sound interior offensive lineman, and the most mobile and agile one, was 55 (Laurent) He still at times gets overpowered - he just seems to be a little short on strength and power - but he is nearly perfect in getting the correct leverage points and having the footwork to get to the right spots.
53 was very inconsistent in his run game blocking. A couple of complete "whiffs" that shoulda' resulted in big negative plays, 52, and 66 were both "ok" in the run game
Tackles:
59 was mostly solid in the run game - had one particularly bad beat, but otherwise OK.
70 was OK early on, but really struggled as the game progressed, particularly when he was assigned to block on the move
Non-Linemen:
88 had a horrendous day. He was asked to make some inside trap type blocks, and a couple times was on the edge for some outside runs.
I am not sure if he had any real solid achievements in the blocking game all day (including pass pro, which he was asked to do a few times as well)
Unfortunately, this was "deja vu all over again" (he and Kyle Carter may have had the worst blocking years ever for PSU tight ends in 2015). If PSU had another legit option right now, he would be in danger of spending a lot of time on the sidelines - I would think
Overall, run game FUBARS (plays where they just got abused/overwhelmed/whiffed):
Mahon - 4
Nelson - 1
Gaia - 3
Dowrey - 2
Bates - 1
Laurent - 0
McGovern - 0
Gesicki - 4 (and he wasn't asked to block all that much)
Aside from the one hold on 59 (which was a tough deal, the play was set up as an inside run, and when that was shut down, Barkley bounced outside and 59 was left with a bad leverage situation), I don't recall any live action penalties.....so a solid effort there
The backfield was basically 9 and 26 (6 had a couple snaps at RB)
26 may be better than even most Penn Staters think he is. He made 1, maybe 2 bad cuts/reads all day.....and he made more yards out of bad blocking than just about anyone could imagine.
The kid was impressive. (and the one chance to get involved in the pass game he made one heck of a catch)
If the O Line ever comes around, he is gonna' light things up
9, quite frankly, IMO, struggled with some things. Not to be unexpected - - - first start for the young man in an offensive scheme that is still relatively new.
But he also did "the little things" well - IMO:
Handled the line of scrimmage well.
Most of his reads in the run game were proper (really, only one or two that were even questionable).
He seemed to get passes of relatively quickly (he didn't have a lot of pressure - so that sure helped.....and the defensive scheme was pretty simple)
What he is not - or at least what he didn't show on Saturday:
He is a willing runner - but not a dangerous runner. Based on that performance, he will not force any defensive coordinators to gameplan to stop his run game
Either by design, or by execution, the pass game was very simple. Unfortunately, with what was shown on Saturday, 9 doesn't have the skill set to scare any defense within the passing game that was utilized.
I am not sure if the simplicity of the pass game was purely an attempt to keep things limited - or it was an attempt to "not ask 9 to do things he isn't capable of doing"......but I think it is probably a bit of both.
We will certainly know better as the season goes along - but for now, at the least, QB play is a huge question mark going into the Pitt game.
Unfortunately, the limitations on offense, and at QB, stifled any attempts to fully utilize the guiys outside.
We mostly saw what we already knew:
12 is a darn good receiver
5 can be very good - if he gets a chance to contribute (which he couldn't last year, due to the limitations of the offense, and couldn't on Saturday - as the inside receiver role was all but non-existent) He did run a nice route and make a nice catch for the TD.....but this kid is legit, and its a real shame if PSU can't find a way to get him at least 4-5 balls per game
It was nice to see 3 get a chance to make a big play....and 13 had a couple moments (both memorable and forgettable)......but there just were not enough opportunities out there to see where 10, 84, 11 might fit into the mix.
I think we all feel there is a lot of talent, and a lot of depth of talent out there. Hopefully we can find (or develop) a "trigger man" to fully utilize them.
Time will tell
.
