Misguided comments regarding Penn State offensive line and running game

[stormingnorm]

X

 

[KnightSlayer]

Even though it is now in its second year, many Penn State fans remain ignorant about what an RPO-based offense is, and what it isn’t.

Comments about “not controlling the line of scrimmage”, or “not blowing people off of the ball” are the byproduct of this ignorance of the system.
If you are waiting to see the Penn State offensive line “blow people off of the ball”, you might as well take a long nap, because it is not going to be happening any time soon.

There are many pluses and minuses to an RPO style of attack, and some people may like the RPO system and some may not. But in an RPO system one thing you simply cannot see is an offensive line “blowing people off of the ball”, no matter how talented the offensive line may be.
Blowing people off of the ball, getting out to the second level of the opposing defense, simply cannot happen in an RPO – because it would result in a penalty (illegal man downfield) every time the Quarterback made his read and opted to utilize the P part of the RPO.
The RPO is more of a "hit 'em where they ain't" system - by getting into the ideal option, rather than a "knock them on their butts" system.

FWIW, the handful of times Penn State has actually run a pure “run” play (which has not been very often) the offensive line was very effective at getting off the ball and creating seams to the second level or to the outside edge.

What people have been commenting about with respect to Penn State’s run game difficulties with the offensive line is not a problem with the offensive line. It is inherent to the the option selected when executing the RPO.
Any defense – whether it be Alabama, Pitt, or even Georgia State - if they want to, can take away the Inside Zone part of the RPO package, easily.
That is exactly what Pitt and Georgia State did, essentially saying “We are not going to let Barkley beat us, as a runner”. They did this by simply shooting both of their inside linebackers aggressively up into the Center-Guard gaps.
There is no way to effectively block the inside zone – out of the RPO – against that defensive scheme. And that is both simply obvious and not a secret.

That does not mean the RPO is a bad system. The way to counter that defense, within the RPO, is to have the Quarterback read that action, and then pull the ball out of the Tailback’s belly,and exploit that vacated middle of the defense with a quick pop pass to the TE running a seam route, or to a slot receiver running a slant, or some other exploitation of that vacated middle. We have seen just that numerous times over the last year and a half.
You can also attack that scheme by running the R part of the RPO as an outside zone or a toss sweep – which Penn State has done from time to time – or even a wheel route. Which effectively can get the tailback outside of those shooting inside linebackers, who are now all tied up in the traffic in the middle of the line - and get the tailback, or other receiver/ball-carrier, out into unfettered open space.

Thus far, Penn State has not shifted dramatically away from the inside zone as the primary R option in the RPO. Maybe they should have, but they have not thus far. But I am sure that Moorhead is more than bright enough to know that option is a bullet he will have at his disposal when needed.

FWIW, Iowa has never been a defense that likes to shoot their inside linebackers. Narduzzi, on the other hand, has always favored that scheme – even against non-RPO teams - and the Georgia State coaches did the same things Pitt did.

If Iowa stays with what they are most familiar with, which is a much less aggressive read-and-flow defense with their linebackers staying behind the screens created by their defensive linemen, Penn State will likely have more consistent success with their inside zone. At least being able to get Barkley through the Line of Scrimmage.
If Iowa does adopt the “Pitt” scheme on defense, it will be up to either McSorley to make the quick read and exploit the belly of the defense with the P option, or for Moorhead to adjust his play calls to a more outside zone / sweep / counter heavy scheme for the R option.

In either case, the issue that many people think they are seeing, an inability for the offensive line to “control the line of scrimmage”, or "blow people off of the ball" in the run game, is simply misguided. It simply isn't an option in an RPO scheme.
That doesn't mean the offensive line has been perfect, or even outstanding - there certainly have been occasional breakdowns - but the things mentioned in most of the criticisms are simply ignorance of the system. A system that is very different from anything Penn State fans became accustomed to seeing over the last 20 years.

Well said. McSorley is the key. If he has the kind of game I think he's capable of, we will score a bunch of points against Iowa. If he plays like he did against pitt, it will be a much tighter game. I'm betting he has a good game against Iowa.

 

[cvilleelkscoach]

Barry leave the football talk to the adults. You have no idea what you are talking about if you think the oline doesn't need to get to the second level in the zone scheme. How the hell do you block the two base run plays in this offense the inside and outside zone? Contrary to what you wrote, they are the base run plays. Go to a clinic and hear Joe talk about it.

Stick to "business analysis" was it? You have more careers and knowledge than George Costanza.

 

[Rollin Stone]

OL are allow to be downfield on an RPO albeit close to the LOS if they are engaged with a Defensive player. So they can push an DL to a LB and engage the LBer and the QB can still throw the ball beyond the LOS. They rule may state a 2-3 yard area but the key is "engaged with a defender." This is what makes it so tough on Defenses because Safeties are taught to read through the OL to see Run / Pass.

 

[ThePennsyOracle]

Barry, can we hire an Vice Associate Assistant Athletic Director for Football Scheme Information?

 

[ram2020]

Really some very reasonable points here, but I think it's tough to blame the system when Bates gets beat like a whip resulting in a sack for mcsorley. And I'm sorry, then I guess I don't favor a system in which third and short is unattainable or our all world halfback gets his head taken off 6 yards behind the LOS. I understand we score points....in big bunches with this system and it's been great for us. But the idea that giving up sacks and hurries of our QB and accepting our runningback is going to get stuffed 6 times a game.....and our third down percentage is going to suck thus stressing our defense. It just makes me think is "there another way within the confines of this offensive scheme?"

 

[KnightSlayer]

Really some very reasonable points here, but I think it's tough to blame the system when Bates gets beat like a whip resulting in a sack for mcsorley. And I'm sorry, then I guess I don't favor a system in which third and short is unattainable or our all world halfback gets his head taken off 6 yards behind the LOS. I understand we score points....in big bunches with this system and it's been great for us. But the idea that giving up sacks and hurries of our QB and accepting our runningback is going to get stuffed 6 times a game.....and our third down percentage is going to suck thus stressing our defense. It just makes me think is "there another way within the confines of this offensive scheme?"

So Penn State is tied for 9th in sacks allowed and you choose to focus on the one time Bates got beat. Barkley is getting stuffed 6 times a game while maintaining 8.1 yards per carry and we've scored over 30 points per game the last 10 games but, you're not happy. LOL

 

[PSU_RAM]

So Penn State is tied for 9th in sacks allowed and you choose to focus on the one time Bates got beat. Barkley is getting stuffed 6 times a game while maintaining 8.1 yards per carry and we've scored over 30 points per game the last 10 games but, you're not happy. LOL

You could win every game by 100 points and people will still find faults.....just the way it is.

 

[aaron335]

VERY GOOD POST Storm. I could not have stated it better myself.

 

[ram2020]

So Penn State is tied for 9th in sacks allowed and you choose to focus on the one time Bates got beat. Barkley is getting stuffed 6 times a game while maintaining 8.1 yards per carry and we've scored over 30 points per game the last 10 games but, you're not happy. LOL

Our competition has sucked. There have been more than a few moments where in a 3rd and short situation, or after floundering a few possessions, I have said "this is when a big O-line takes the next step and holds there blocks and we get a big first down." It has not happened, running the ball, often. We are 73rd in the country at third down conversions Knight and against dreadful competition. Barkley has one big run a game that seems to skew his yards per carry significantly. I'm telling you man, this small defense of ours is going to need the offense to have some sustained drives. Its all roses scoring 35 points or whatever, but not when the other team scores more. And as teams limit our possessions by playing ball control it is going to be even more vital to pick up short yardage to move the chains. Your margin for error decreases if you don't score on limited possessions. If Pitt had protected the ball, they certainly hold us under 30 points. You think OSU or Michigan or Wisconsin can't hold us to under 30 this year? I'm not being negative, but I didn't like watching Pitt run it down our throats, I find it abhorrent that Georgia State had a back rush for over 100 and on offense, if we are going to win a big ten title, we are going to have to be able to get a little push with our big O-line this year, nobody will be surprised by anything over the top. Sorry, just reality. Not being negative, but i'm going to be honest on a football blog. If you think it overly pessimistic....fine. I sincerely hope im wrong and will be the first to admit it if I am.

 

[ram2020]

FWIW - The time when Bates was beaten in pass protection, it was not an RPO play.
And Penn State has been sacked twice in 104 attempts (once for McSorley, once for Stevens). Which, I believe, is a rate even a bit lower than what the vaunted 1994 Penn State offense allowed, and among the ten best rates in the country thus far in 2017.

As far as third downs are concerned, and the only thing that matters with regard to third downs - namely how many times do you fail to convert - and how many times you prevent the opposition from converting:

Penn State's Offense fails to convert 6.3 third downs per game, the 12th best mark in the nation
Penn State's Defense, on the other hand, stops opponents on third down 11.7 times per game, the 8th best mark among defenses nationally.
That is an incredible advantage - nearly 5 and 1/2 more stops per game as a team. I would not be surprised if that is the best combined (offense and defense) third down efficacy in the country.

This may be another of those "numbers" that many fans view through an obsolete prism - namely, "what is your conversion percentage" - which is a meaningless stat, because it ignores the obvious, that you "convert" every third down that you avoid on offense (by gaining ten or more yards on first and/or second down), and you "allow" every third down conversion on defense that you don't get to (by allowing ten or more yards on first and/or second down).
On both offense and defense, Penn State has been very effective - avoiding 3rd downs on offense, and getting to them on defense. And, when they do get there, they are converted - or stopping - more than enough to rank among the most effective in the country on both sides of the ball.

Will that hold true against Michigan, Michigan State, and O$U? Honestly, you think they perform that well against meaningful competition?

 

[tboyer]

It's a good post but I don't entirely agree. In fact Franklin has made it clear he'd like to have more push from the OL on those inside zones. Plus, they do sometimes run counters to get the body advantage. They've had good success pulling Mahon and having him lead Barkley on the left side.

I don't think it's an argument to say -- because of RP option, because PSU is not running I formation, that PSU will never be able to run the ball inside. They will. Some of the plays they get stuffed on now they will actually be able to run successfully when the group has a little more time to gell.

Yes of course Moorhead's offense is about getting the ball in space, but that shouldn't be having to throw it every time. When Moorhead's offense is working at maximum efficiency, they'll run for as much as they pass for.

And yes, some of the inside zone for zero or negative yards -- it has a purpose. It sets up other plays.

Plus, Barkley and Miles are now getting so used to getting stuffed, they're looking to bounce it outside which they can both do becuase of their speed.

So maybe the inside zone will work great as a stuff followed by a quick PSU back running around the end with the linebackers losing contain.

 

[tboyer]

So Penn State is tied for 9th in sacks allowed and you choose to focus on the one time Bates got beat. Barkley is getting stuffed 6 times a game while maintaining 8.1 yards per carry and we've scored over 30 points per game the last 10 games but, you're not happy. LOL

Akron, Pitt, Georgia State. I wouldn't want to try to settle any argument with statistics from the pre-season. The Big Ten will be totally different. Sure, PSU is favored in this game for a reason, but it will be nothing like the first three games.

 

[sluggo72]

Even though it is now in its second year, many Penn State fans remain ignorant about what an RPO-based offense is, and what it isn’t.

Comments about “not controlling the line of scrimmage”, or “not blowing people off of the ball” are the byproduct of this ignorance of the system.
If you are waiting to see the Penn State offensive line “blow people off of the ball”, you might as well take a long nap, because it is not going to be happening any time soon.

There are many pluses and minuses to an RPO style of attack, and some people may like the RPO system and some may not. But in an RPO system one thing you simply cannot see is an offensive line “blowing people off of the ball”, no matter how talented the offensive line may be.
Blowing people off of the ball, getting out to the second level of the opposing defense, simply cannot happen in an RPO – because it would result in a penalty (illegal man downfield) every time the Quarterback made his read and opted to utilize the P part of the RPO. So fans need to adjust their thought processes and expectations - or they will never understand the philosophy of the RPO.

The RPO is more of a "hit 'em where they ain't" system - by getting into the ideal option, rather than a "knock them on their butts" system.

FWIW, the handful of times Penn State has actually run a pure “run” play (which has not been very often) the offensive line was very effective at getting off the ball and creating seams to the second level or to the outside edge.

What people have been commenting about with respect to Penn State’s run game difficulties with the offensive line is not a problem with the offensive line. It is inherent to the the option selected when executing the RPO.
Any defense – whether it be Alabama, Pitt, or even Georgia State - if they want to, can take away the Inside Zone part of the RPO package, easily.
That is exactly what Pitt and Georgia State did, essentially saying “We are not going to let Barkley beat us, as a runner”. They did this by simply shooting both of their inside linebackers aggressively up into the Center-Guard gaps.
There is no way to effectively block the inside zone – out of the RPO – against that defensive scheme. And that is both simply obvious and not a secret.
You can run the inside-zone against that scheme - but only if your linemen are firing off of the ball and into the second level of the defense, to take on the linebackers before they get up into the line of scrimmage. Which - obviously - you can not do in an RPO.

That does not mean the RPO is a bad system. The way to counter that defense, within the RPO, is to have the Quarterback read that action, and then pull the ball out of the Tailback’s belly,and exploit that vacated middle of the defense with a quick pop pass to the TE running a seam route, or to a slot receiver running a slant, or some other exploitation of that vacated middle. We have seen just that numerous times over the last year and a half.
You can also attack that scheme by running the R part of the RPO as an outside zone or a toss sweep – which Penn State has done from time to time – or even a wheel route. Which effectively can get the tailback outside of those shooting inside linebackers, who are now all tied up in the traffic in the middle of the line - and get the tailback, or other receiver/ball-carrier, out into unfettered open space.

Thus far, Penn State has not shifted dramatically away from the inside zone as the primary R option in the RPO. Maybe they should have, but they have not thus far. But I am sure that Moorhead is more than bright enough to know that option is a bullet he will have at his disposal when needed.

FWIW, Iowa has never been a defense that likes to shoot their inside linebackers. Narduzzi, on the other hand, has always favored that scheme – even against non-RPO teams - and the Georgia State coaches did the same things Pitt did.

If Iowa stays with what they are most familiar with, which is a much less aggressive read-and-flow defense with their linebackers staying behind the screens created by their defensive linemen, Penn State will likely have more consistent success with their inside zone. At least being able to get Barkley through the Line of Scrimmage.
If Iowa does adopt the “Pitt” scheme on defense, it will be up to either McSorley to make the quick read and exploit the belly of the defense with the P option, or for Moorhead to adjust his play calls to a more outside zone / sweep / counter heavy scheme for the R option.

In either case, the issue that many people think they are seeing, an inability for the offensive line to “control the line of scrimmage”, or "blow people off of the ball" in the run game, is simply misguided. It simply isn't an option in an RPO scheme.
That doesn't mean the offensive line has been perfect, or even outstanding - there certainly have been occasional breakdowns - but the things mentioned in most of the criticisms are simply ignorance of the system. A system that is very different from anything Penn State fans became accustomed to seeing over the last 20 years.

 

[sluggo72]

There is so much wrong with this post I don't know where to begin.
Wrong and wrong again!!

 

[Raffycorn]

I think something that we'll see is quite a bit more of the "inverted" (for lack of a better term) look on the RPOs. We saw it more often in the second half against Pitt where rather than seeing a Barkley run up the middle packaged with a pass look and a McSorley keeper, we see Barkley going to the outside packaged with a pass look and the option for Trace to take it up the middle. That might mask a little bit of the disadvantage of the inside linebackers just hammering the A gaps and gives Barkley a little bit of an opportunity to get outside by design.

The offensive line has actually not been too bad at all, at least according to the advanced stats. Our rushing opportunity rate - the percentage of carries where the offensive line provides at least five rushing yards for the ballcarrier - is 49.4%, good for 9th in the country and far better than the 38% we saw in 2016. The power success rate and stuff rate are still lagging behind, but we've improved substantially in explosive rushing plays which balances it out. The offense as a whole has been far more efficient than 2016. www.footballstudyhall.com is a wonderful resource for this.

 

[KnightSlayer]

Akron, Pitt, Georgia State. I wouldn't want to try to settle any argument with statistics from the pre-season. The Big Ten will be totally different. Sure, PSU is favored in this game for a reason, but it will be nothing like the first three games.

You're looking at my post out of context. He calls out Bates for the "one" time he got beat. Everyone gets beat at some point. I was just pointing out that Bates and the Oline in general haven't been beat very often. Barkley only averaged 5 yards per carry in our first 3 games last year and ended the year at 5.5 per carry. I've watched this Oline carefully the first 3 games and it is my opinion that they are already better than last year and they will continue to get better.

 

[Woodpecker]

You could win every game by 100 points and people will still find faults.....just the way it is.

We should be winning by 101!

 

[tboyer]

You're looking at my post out of context. He calls out Bates for the "one" time he got beat. Everyone gets beat at some point. I was just pointing out that Bates and the Oline in general haven't been beat very often. Barkley only averaged 5 yards per carry in our first 3 games last year and ended the year at 5.5 per carry. I've watched this Oline carefully the first 3 games and it is my opinion that they are already better than last year and they will continue to get better.

I agree with everything you say here. They are better and they're going to continue to get better. I think they NEED to get better for PSU to have a good chance the rest of the season. Barkley doesn't need much room and sometimes he does fine with no room at all. But if they can get him a little more push, that means instead of 2nd and 10 or 2nd and 12, they'll be able to hand the ball to Barkley on 1st down with a good likelihood of getting 3-5 yards. It's not what this offense will primarily be about, but if they can add that to their toolbox the whole offense will be more effective.

 

[Ranger Dan]

Even though it is now in its second year, many Penn State fans remain ignorant about what an RPO-based offense is, and what it isn’t.

Thank you for the detailed and thoughtful commentary. I expect that your goal was an attempt to be informative and not condescending, despite the fact that you can smell the condescension in your post from a mile away... LOL

I was a (ok, maybe "THE") vocal critic of our running game against GA St. I did not ever complain about our O line's lack of "blowing anyone off the ball". My issue is the huge number of tackles for loss. I would think that if the defense was going to sell out to stop the inside run, then there would be a read for that and McSorely would throw a bubble or otherwise not hand off to Barkley within two yards of the LOS.

 

[ezmarsh]

I would suspect that they do. I would be very, very surprised to learn that they didn't - at least on most play calls.
But it is easier said than done - and requires quite a bit from the Quarterback.

Just looking at one play call, the RPO that starts out with the Inside Zone read as the R option - which is Penn State's most bread-and-butter call.

Post-snap, the Quarterback has to:

Take the snap, get the ball into Barkley's belly, read the outside contain man on defense (typically either the Defensive End or the Outside Linebacker), determine whether that man is crashing down too tight - and McSorley should take the ball and get outside - or whether the contain man is staying home, and the R option is the give to Barkley.
Now, if this is all post-snap read, he also has to detect if the defense has shot the inside linebackers, taking away the inside zone for Barkley, and if they have, McSorley has to pull the ball and find/hit his P option that is best positioned to take advantage of that scheme (normally some seam or slant route into the middle of the defensive backfield)
On some occasions, there may not be a good P option - depending on the play call - and sometimes you just have to make the best of a bad situation and tip your hat to the other guy for "out-guessing" you.

That is an awful lot to do post-snap.
I am not privy to how Penn State teaches their Quarterbacks to go through all of the RPO reads, but I would suspect that they try to accomplish a lot of the P option decision making through pre-snap reads - by trying to read alignment and see how the defense reacts to any motion. But that is just a guess on my part (I would guess that is probably part of what is taking place with the looks to the sideline once the Offense gets aligned at the line of scrimmage).

In either event, it is a lot to properly execute in a very compressed time frame, and no Quarterback is going to accomplish that on every snap - especially since the opposing defense is aware of what they are trying to do, and is going to try to confuse and disguise their intents.

This Saturday's game will likely be a very different challenge for the offense. Unless Ferentz breaks with 20 years of tradition, Iowa will be playing primarily a lot more of a contain and control type of defense - two high safeties, three and four deep pass coverages, and only occasional blitzes (and few line stunts) than either Pitt of Georgia State. That is just what they are comfortable doing - and they generally do it very well. A lot like Tom Bradley's old defenses.
That should make some of the reads a lot easier - but will also make it tougher to execute (especially to execute "big plays" - since it should be a lot more difficult to create open spaces) than Penn State's opponents have presented thus far.

4 d linemen plus 2 box LB=6. 5 O lineman can not block 6==someone is always unblocked---there are times that unblocked player makes a tackle---there are lots of other times the Option read--pass or run-- works...scoring as many points as the O is,I think we're OK

 

[NatLion]

You're looking at my post out of context. He calls out Bates for the "one" time he got beat. Everyone gets beat at some point. I was just pointing out that Bates and the Oline in general haven't been beat very often. Barkley only averaged 5 yards per carry in our first 3 games last year and ended the year at 5.5 per carry. I've watched this Oline carefully the first 3 games and it is my opinion that they are already better than last year and they will continue to get better.

Best part of the Bates sack, was him slamming his helmet into the ground on the sideline after the play. Has not allowed a sack since. That's the attitude that makes him a winner.

 

[83wuzme]

The first post begs the question if we should still be running an RPO system, and if so, how much ?
Unlike 2015 or early 2016, I would argue we now have the personnel and the depth that would allow us to be successful with more traditional offensive systems.
I realize having different run offense schemes can dig onto practice time and reduce proficiency, but we are accumulating a lot of experience on the OL now.

 

[blion72]

Even though it is now in its second year, many Penn State fans remain ignorant about what an RPO-based offense is, and what it isn’t.

Comments about “not controlling the line of scrimmage”, or “not blowing people off of the ball” are the byproduct of this ignorance of the system.
If you are waiting to see the Penn State offensive line “blow people off of the ball”, you might as well take a long nap, because it is not going to be happening any time soon.

There are many pluses and minuses to an RPO style of attack, and some people may like the RPO system and some may not. But in an RPO system one thing you simply cannot see is an offensive line “blowing people off of the ball”, no matter how talented the offensive line may be.
Blowing people off of the ball, getting out to the second level of the opposing defense, simply cannot happen in an RPO – because it would result in a penalty (illegal man downfield) every time the Quarterback made his read and opted to utilize the P part of the RPO. So fans need to adjust their thought processes and expectations - or they will never understand the philosophy of the RPO.

The RPO is more of a "hit 'em where they ain't" system - by getting into the ideal option, rather than a "knock them on their butts" system.

FWIW, the handful of times Penn State has actually run a pure “run” play (which has not been very often) the offensive line was very effective at getting off the ball and creating seams to the second level or to the outside edge.

What people have been commenting about with respect to Penn State’s run game difficulties with the offensive line is not a problem with the offensive line. It is inherent to the the option selected when executing the RPO.
Any defense – whether it be Alabama, Pitt, or even Georgia State - if they want to, can take away the Inside Zone part of the RPO package, easily.
That is exactly what Pitt and Georgia State did, essentially saying “We are not going to let Barkley beat us, as a runner”. They did this by simply shooting both of their inside linebackers aggressively up into the Center-Guard gaps.
There is no way to effectively block the inside zone – out of the RPO – against that defensive scheme. And that is both simply obvious and not a secret.
You can run the inside-zone against that scheme - but only if your linemen are firing off of the ball and into the second level of the defense, to take on the linebackers before they get up into the line of scrimmage. Which - obviously - you can not do in an RPO.

That does not mean the RPO is a bad system. The way to counter that defense, within the RPO, is to have the Quarterback read that action, and then pull the ball out of the Tailback’s belly,and exploit that vacated middle of the defense with a quick pop pass to the TE running a seam route, or to a slot receiver running a slant, or some other exploitation of that vacated middle. We have seen just that numerous times over the last year and a half.
You can also attack that scheme by running the R part of the RPO as an outside zone or a toss sweep – which Penn State has done from time to time – or even a wheel route. Which effectively can get the tailback outside of those shooting inside linebackers, who are now all tied up in the traffic in the middle of the line - and get the tailback, or other receiver/ball-carrier, out into unfettered open space.

Thus far, Penn State has not shifted dramatically away from the inside zone as the primary R option in the RPO. Maybe they should have, but they have not thus far. But I am sure that Moorhead is more than bright enough to know that option is a bullet he will have at his disposal when needed.

FWIW, Iowa has never been a defense that likes to shoot their inside linebackers. Narduzzi, on the other hand, has always favored that scheme – even against non-RPO teams - and the Georgia State coaches did the same things Pitt did.

If Iowa stays with what they are most familiar with, which is a much less aggressive read-and-flow defense with their linebackers staying behind the screens created by their defensive linemen, Penn State will likely have more consistent success with their inside zone. At least being able to get Barkley through the Line of Scrimmage.
If Iowa does adopt the “Pitt” scheme on defense, it will be up to either McSorley to make the quick read and exploit the belly of the defense with the P option, or for Moorhead to adjust his play calls to a more outside zone / sweep / counter heavy scheme for the R option.

In either case, the issue that many people think they are seeing, an inability for the offensive line to “control the line of scrimmage”, or "blow people off of the ball" in the run game, is simply misguided. It simply isn't an option in an RPO scheme.
That doesn't mean the offensive line has been perfect, or even outstanding - there certainly have been occasional breakdowns - but the things mentioned in most of the criticisms are simply ignorance of the system. A system that is very different from anything Penn State fans became accustomed to seeing over the last 20 years.

that was a comprehensive analysis. the only thing i would add is a key part of the RPO is for the QB to take the option to keep it and run. if the QB never does this, then their is way too much pressure on the TB. if Trace runs 10-12 times per game, that will keep the DEF honest

 

[VaLion'92]

Even though it is now in its second year, many Penn State fans remain ignorant about what an RPO-based offense is, and what it isn’t.

Comments about “not controlling the line of scrimmage”, or “not blowing people off of the ball” are the byproduct of this ignorance of the system.
If you are waiting to see the Penn State offensive line “blow people off of the ball”, you might as well take a long nap, because it is not going to be happening any time soon.

There are many pluses and minuses to an RPO style of attack, and some people may like the RPO system and some may not. But in an RPO system one thing you simply cannot see is an offensive line “blowing people off of the ball”, no matter how talented the offensive line may be.
Blowing people off of the ball, getting out to the second level of the opposing defense, simply cannot happen in an RPO – because it would result in a penalty (illegal man downfield) every time the Quarterback made his read and opted to utilize the P part of the RPO. So fans need to adjust their thought processes and expectations - or they will never understand the philosophy of the RPO.

The RPO is more of a "hit 'em where they ain't" system - by getting into the ideal option, rather than a "knock them on their butts" system.

FWIW, the handful of times Penn State has actually run a pure “run” play (which has not been very often) the offensive line was very effective at getting off the ball and creating seams to the second level or to the outside edge.

What people have been commenting about with respect to Penn State’s run game difficulties with the offensive line is not a problem with the offensive line. It is inherent to the the option selected when executing the RPO.
Any defense – whether it be Alabama, Pitt, or even Georgia State - if they want to, can take away the Inside Zone part of the RPO package, easily.
That is exactly what Pitt and Georgia State did, essentially saying “We are not going to let Barkley beat us, as a runner”. They did this by simply shooting both of their inside linebackers aggressively up into the Center-Guard gaps.
There is no way to effectively block the inside zone – out of the RPO – against that defensive scheme. And that is both simply obvious and not a secret.
You can run the inside-zone against that scheme - but only if your linemen are firing off of the ball and into the second level of the defense, to take on the linebackers before they get up into the line of scrimmage. Which - obviously - you can not do in an RPO.

That does not mean the RPO is a bad system. The way to counter that defense, within the RPO, is to have the Quarterback read that action, and then pull the ball out of the Tailback’s belly,and exploit that vacated middle of the defense with a quick pop pass to the TE running a seam route, or to a slot receiver running a slant, or some other exploitation of that vacated middle. We have seen just that numerous times over the last year and a half.
You can also attack that scheme by running the R part of the RPO as an outside zone or a toss sweep – which Penn State has done from time to time – or even a wheel route. Which effectively can get the tailback outside of those shooting inside linebackers, who are now all tied up in the traffic in the middle of the line - and get the tailback, or other receiver/ball-carrier, out into unfettered open space.

Thus far, Penn State has not shifted dramatically away from the inside zone as the primary R option in the RPO. Maybe they should have, but they have not thus far. But I am sure that Moorhead is more than bright enough to know that option is a bullet he will have at his disposal when needed.

FWIW, Iowa has never been a defense that likes to shoot their inside linebackers. Narduzzi, on the other hand, has always favored that scheme – even against non-RPO teams - and the Georgia State coaches did the same things Pitt did.

If Iowa stays with what they are most familiar with, which is a much less aggressive read-and-flow defense with their linebackers staying behind the screens created by their defensive linemen, Penn State will likely have more consistent success with their inside zone. At least being able to get Barkley through the Line of Scrimmage.
If Iowa does adopt the “Pitt” scheme on defense, it will be up to either McSorley to make the quick read and exploit the belly of the defense with the P option, or for Moorhead to adjust his play calls to a more outside zone / sweep / counter heavy scheme for the R option.

In either case, the issue that many people think they are seeing, an inability for the offensive line to “control the line of scrimmage”, or "blow people off of the ball" in the run game, is simply misguided. It simply isn't an option in an RPO scheme.
That doesn't mean the offensive line has been perfect, or even outstanding - there certainly have been occasional breakdowns - but the things mentioned in most of the criticisms are simply ignorance of the system. A system that is very different from anything Penn State fans became accustomed to seeing over the last 20 years.

Very well said, and consider it an educative piece of material for yours truly.

One question though, and perhaps I can take a stab at answering it myself: if the RPO's strength do not include the inside run game and getting OL to that second level, why do we even waste the formation with a Paterno-Lombardi esque run up the middle into a congested defense, netting at most a couple yards? Why not (then) take it to the outside more, more toss sweeps? If this isn't a power I offense, why even run those types of plays? Seems like we had a lot of "wasted" downs vs Pitt and Ga State running the ball inside. Granted, they could easily overcome a 2nd/8 or 3rd/8 against those defenses. But going forward?

Is it to keep the defense honest??

 

[KnightSlayer]

that was a comprehensive analysis. the only thing i would add is a key part of the RPO is for the QB to take the option to keep it and run. if the QB never does this, then their is way too much pressure on the TB. if Trace runs 10-12 times per game, that will keep the DEF honest

We didn't need to do that against any of our first three opponents. You will see Trace keep it more often when good defenses do that. He'll either run it or hit the open receiver.

 

[djr4rebs]

I'm not sure I get the outrage over Bates giving up a single sack. It's almost funny. He's been so good in his time here that it's became unacceptable for him to get beaten on a play.

 

[sluggo72]

4 d linemen plus 2 box LB=6. 5 O lineman can not block 6==someone is always unblocked---there are times that unblocked player makes a tackle---there are lots of other times the Option read--pass or run-- works...scoring as many points as the O is,I think we're OK

You forgot the TE and you forgot the guy away from the play and you forgot that if we get them all blocked, if our Rb s can't beat a DE LB etc one on one we shouldn't have recruited them

 

[sluggo72]

OL are allow to be downfield on an RPO albeit close to the LOS if they are engaged with a Defensive player. So they can push an DL to a LB and engage the LBer and the QB can still throw the ball beyond the LOS. They rule may state a 2-3 yard area but the key is "engaged with a defender." This is what makes it so tough on Defenses because Safeties are taught to read through the OL to see Run / Pass.

Check out where 77 was on the TE dump pass to 88 vs Pitt for the TD Thank god he was engaged

 

[sluggo72]

"But in an RPO system one thing you simply cannot see is an offensive line “blowing people off of the ball”, no matter how talented the offensive line may be.
Blowing people off of the ball, getting out to the second level of the opposing defense, simply cannot happen in an RPO – because it would result in a penalty (illegal man downfield) every time the Quarterback made his read and opted to utilize the P part of the RPO. So fans need to adjust their thought processes and expectations - or they will never understand the philosophy of the RPO."

don't get me started but this is entirely wrong, incorrect, somebody blabbing to look like he knows whats going on. As mentioned earlier, I don't have time to explain why this is wrong, but remember one thing, ' save the brain, save the game' is why you don't see people 'blowing' people off the LOS!! it has nothing, zero, to do with RPO!! I'll explain later.

 

[steelhead52]

I co

FWIW - The time when Bates was beaten in pass protection, it was not an RPO play.
And Penn State has been sacked twice in 104 attempts (once for McSorley, once for Stevens). Which, I believe, is a rate even a bit lower than what the vaunted 1994 Penn State offense allowed, and among the ten best rates in the country thus far in 2017.

As far as third downs are concerned, and the only thing that matters with regard to third downs - namely how many times do you fail to convert - and how many times you prevent the opposition from converting:

Penn State's Offense fails to convert 6.3 third downs per game, the 12th best mark in the nation
Penn State's Defense, on the other hand, stops opponents on third down 11.7 times per game, the 8th best mark among defenses nationally.
That is an incredible advantage - nearly 5 and 1/2 more stops per game as a team. I would not be surprised if that is the best combined (offense and defense) third down efficacy in the country.

This may be another of those "numbers" that many fans view through an obsolete prism - namely, "what is your conversion percentage" - which is a meaningless stat, because it ignores the obvious, that you "convert" every third down that you avoid on offense (by gaining ten or more yards on first and/or second down), and you "allow" every third down conversion on defense that you don't get to (by allowing ten or more yards on first and/or second down).
On both offense and defense, Penn State has been very effective - avoiding 3rd downs on offense, and getting to them on defense. And, when they do get there, they are converted - or stopping - more than enough to rank among the most effective in the country on both sides of the ball.

I could be wrong, but I think the 94 team gave 3 sacks for the season.

 

[Monlion]

I would suspect that they do. I would be very, very surprised to learn that they didn't - at least on most play calls.
But it is easier said than done - and requires quite a bit from the Quarterback.

Just looking at one play call, the RPO that starts out with the Inside Zone read as the R option - which is Penn State's most bread-and-butter call.

Post-snap, the Quarterback has to:

Take the snap, get the ball into Barkley's belly, read the outside contain man on defense (typically either the Defensive End or the Outside Linebacker), determine whether that man is crashing down too tight - and McSorley should take the ball and get outside - or whether the contain man is staying home, and the R option is the give to Barkley.
Now, if this is all post-snap read, he also has to detect if the defense has shot the inside linebackers, taking away the inside zone for Barkley, and if they have, McSorley has to pull the ball and find/hit his P option that is best positioned to take advantage of that scheme (normally some seam or slant route into the middle of the defensive backfield)
On some occasions, there may not be a good P option - depending on the play call - and sometimes you just have to make the best of a bad situation and tip your hat to the other guy for "out-guessing" you.

That is an awful lot to do post-snap.
I am not privy to how Penn State teaches their Quarterbacks to go through all of the RPO reads, but I would suspect that they try to accomplish a lot of the P option decision making through pre-snap reads - by trying to read alignment and see how the defense reacts to any motion. But that is just a guess on my part (I would guess that is probably part of what is taking place with the looks to the sideline once the Offense gets aligned at the line of scrimmage).

In either event, it is a lot to properly execute in a very compressed time frame, and no Quarterback is going to accomplish that on every snap - especially since the opposing defense is aware of what they are trying to do, and is going to try to confuse and disguise their intents.

This Saturday's game will likely be a very different challenge for the offense. Unless Ferentz breaks with 20 years of tradition, Iowa will be playing primarily a lot more of a contain and control type of defense - two high safeties, three and four deep pass coverages, and only occasional blitzes (and few line stunts) than either Pitt of Georgia State. That is just what they are comfortable doing - and they generally do it very well. A lot like Tom Bradley's old defenses.
That should make some of the reads a lot easier - but will also make it tougher to execute (especially to execute "big plays" - since it should be a lot more difficult to create open spaces) than Penn State's opponents have presented thus far.

Love your analysis, I am not an x's and o's guy and have never played the game at an organized level, but I have watched a lot of Penn State football. I may be heading into get off my lawn territory because strategies can change significantly over time, but I've been watching Penn State football since the late 60s and my recollection is that the current Penn State offense is the type of offense that Penn State usually feasted on from the late 60s through the 80s. This offense seems to depend on speed, deception and the big play. When we played that type of offense, and the talent was equal, usually by the fourth quarter the time of possession was so far to the advantage of Penn State that we could run off 6 yard run after 6 yard run and impose our will on the opponent.

With Penn State's good teams from the late 60s through 80s, when we got a 14 point lead going into the 4th qtr even against good teams like SC, the game was over. Our lines, offense and defense, and backs would take over, control the time of possession and we would win. I don't know if our current players are not capable of doing that or the scheme prevents them from doing that. Am I way off base here, just curious as to your thoughts. With this type of offense will we ever be able to "impose our will" simply by overpowering an equal team late in the game or is that archaic thinking?

 

[Monlion]

As a follow up, after thinking about it, last year we did impose our will against Ohio State in the fourth quarter.

 

[j0nnyhb_Prime]

I thought the OP did a great job explaining RPO.

As an Iowa fan, that was a very interesting read.

I think one of the keys to the game for Iowa is if Jewel (43) is close to 100%. He has been dinged up, and a step slow ... when he is 100% he is the best LB in the B10. Safties have to play better as well. Jackson (15) at CB has been the best player on the Iowa defense so far this year ...

Iowa needs to play like they did vs Michigan last year ... if they do, they have a shot (ball control, affective run game, move the chains). Punting has also been a concern for Iowa, coverage has been good but hang time and distance not so good.

Should be an interesting game!

 

[ezmarsh]

You forgot the TE and you forgot the guy away from the play and you forgot that if we get them all blocked, if our Rb s can't beat a DE LB etc one on one we shouldn't have recruited them

Did not forget any of that---simply pointing out that ANY option system leaves an unblocked defender---there are times that defender blows up a play

 

[PSU20]

Wait until we play Mich/OSU and we will find out if the RPO is effective w/o blocking the LB's.