The Matchup: The PSU Defense v. OSU Offense

Everyone knows the consistency of the Penn State program and they do things the way they do things and we could probably not even study this year's film and still have a pretty good idea of what defense they're going to play...

--Jim Tressel Press Conference.

Coach Tressel's press conference captured a universal truth regarding the Penn State defense--Penn State since what seems like the inception of football itself has been a 4-3 over, cover 3 defense.  The 'over' front means that Penn State shifts their defensive line one gap towards the offensive formation's strength and move their linebackers weak accordingly, with the Will linebacker in the weak flat outside the tackle box.  'Cover 3,' as the term implies, is simply a 3 deep, 4 under defense.  Though teams shift what secondary player comes up to be the fourth underneath defender, for Penn State it is often the strong safety, or what they call the 'hero.'

This defense has become less popular over time because it is more conservative than more recent defense fronts but Penn St. makes it work year after year.   Why?  Versatility.  On the one hand the defense is not naturally overloaded to stop the run.  The linebackers are off the ball and can keep plays in front.  On the other hand, the cover-3 look can become an 8-man front with the 'Hero' coming up to the force position to the field.  This is why cover-3 is favored by coaches such as Nick Saban.  The front puts Penn State's talented linebackers off the ball and lets them run to the football.  In fact, PSU's first move against a run-first team is to bring their Will linebacker into the tackle box and go to a 4-3 stack (aka 4-3 Miami).  

This simple adjustment allows Penn St. to concentrate their numbers in the box against the run game, but still play their base cover-3 defense.  As Chris Brown states

Fronts and coverages are tied together, which is the reason Bradley and Co. like it so much: They can get in an old-school eight-man front, and with a zone defense every defender has their eyes on the football. Contrast this with man defenses where members of the secondary might have their backs turned on option plays (deadly) or pass plays (can't see the ball in the air to make interceptions or breakups).

Penn State ties this together by putting their best interior defensive linemen in the '3' tackle position to the offense's strong side.  Put  that with with the hero coming up in run support, and Penn State's defense is strong to an offense's tight end side--where teams are most likely to run.  The one final element to the Penn St. defensive mix is third down blitzing.  This may come in the form of zone blitzing, but oftentimes Penn St. brings a simple overload blitz with cover-1 behind.

Perhaps no better example exists than Terrelle Pryor's key third down pick-up against PSU last year (at the 8:40 mark--I will come back to this later).

The irony is that Penn State has used this defense so long that--like many things in football--it has come back into vogue in the form of the TCU 4-2-5 over nickel defense.  PSU has stuck with their defensive philosophy year after year and have made it work.

The Ohio State Response

Of course, a team like OSU that plays Penn St. every year is well aware of what the Penn State defense wants to do and looks for ways to exploit it.  The OSU coaching staff did a nice job last year attacking PSU's preferred front.  For starters, OSU sought to throw off Penn State's preference to play their over front to the field (the wide side if a team is on the hashmarks).  The OSU offense would put their formation into the boundary, or go unbalanced with their twins to the field.  These small wrinkles made Penn State adjust how they 'fit' their defense to the formation and prevented them from getting comfortable.

Relatedly, OSU ran ISO and lead zone away from their formation's strength to the weak side.  This is the over's soft spot--away from the strong safety and right at the 'Will' linebacker who is often outside the tackle box.  If this sounds familiar it should--OSU had tremendous success against Minnesota running weakside from the I away from the walked up safety, particularly behind Boren and Adams.  Look for something similar from OSU this week.

The prime difference between last year and this year's OSU offensive squad is the giant leap forward in the OSU passing game, evidenced by OSU's balance. This opens up new possibilities for OSU this year.  As all cover-3 coaches know, the defense is most vulnerable to a 4-verticals route.  The reason is obvious--it puts four offenders deep against 3 deep defenders.  The deep safety thus has to try to cover 2 seam routes himself, making him wrong every time. 

Many cover-3 teams respond by having the outside flat defenders--either the strong safety or weakside linebacker, take the No. 2 wide receiver vertically in man coverage.

The offensive counter is to get a favorable match-up with the No. 2 receiver against the safety or linebacker.  OSU will likely do so by using Dane Sanzenbacher in the slot in either twins or tight trips set. 

To play vertical stem routes this way, however, opens an additional issue for PSU--the scrambling threat of Terrelle Pryor.  The more defenders that must be devoted to deep coverage, the less defenders whose eyes are in the backfield.  As noted above, Penn St. recognized the problems with playing man coverage against Pryor last year.  After that scramble, Tom Bradley pointed at himself as to say "my bad."  Pryor will be healthier this year than he was last year, presenting a bigger run threat.

Penn St. will thus find their options limited.  Look for the Nittany Lions to keep to their base 4-3 over and stack with cover 3, perhaps mixing in some different zone coverages, with the goal being to force OSU to execute to move the ball down field.  In other words, PSU may provide OSU chance to hit these vertical routes down the seams and make plays in the pass game, so long as OSU executes.  So long as Penn State stays with their cover 3 look for OSU to move the football through the air and let Terrelle Pryor make plays scrambling when PSU is left vulnerable through coverage responsibilities.  If Penn State tries to adjust, however, OSU must be quick to counter and turn to their improved run game.

Penn State will thus find their tried and true defense stretched against OSU.  Not only must PSU deal with the OSU passing threat, which the cover-3 can be vulnerable against, but it is more difficult to make adjustments within cover-3 against the pass game because of the Pryor run threat.   Penn State must hope they can stop the OSU run game with their base over front.  If they are unable to do so and OSU is able to nimbly respond to what the Penn St. defense is giving them, OSU should put themselves in a position to succeed.