Premium content
PREMIUM CONTENT
Published Nov 13, 2017
Monday Morning Football
circle avatar
Jim Comparoni  •  Spartans Illustrated
Publisher
Twitter
@JimComparoni

EAST LANSING - Michigan State’s surprisingly strong first three quarters of the season won’t do the program much good if the Spartans don’t capitalize with two more wins and a shiny 9-3 regular season record.

Moving on from a 48-3 loss in Saturday's a de facto Big Ten semifinal game at Ohio State is the first and last order of business at the Skandalaris Center today, with a game against Maryland (4-6) looming in the final home game of the year.

“We’ve got to get ourselves ready to play our next game and get win No. 8,” Mark Dantonio said during Sunday’s weekly teleconference.

In the weekly teleconference, which usually lasts about 15 minutes, Dantonio rarely talks about the upcoming game, and saves those comments for the weekly Tuesday press conference.

But he briefly broke from his usual protocol in mentioning in his opening statement about the need to point all focus toward getting the team’s eighth win this weekend.

“That’s the thing we can control,” he said. “Focus on the things we control and get ready to go.”

FILM DOESN’T LIE

Dantonio found nothing in the game film that he didn’t already know the last time he spoke with us, on Saturday evening.

“We obviously did not play well enough in any area to win and that is supported by the film,” Dantonio said. “I think also momentum sort of took over. Momentum swung in their favor and it was like a wave. So (we’ve) got to be able to respond better and the other thing we have to be able to do is move forward.”

VALUE IN FILM

Some might believe that the coaches would want to smash the game tape, move on and pretend it never happened - like Tom Izzo has famously done in past seasons.

But Izzo usually has 30 other game tapes to learn from during his teaching process.

Football coaches have fewer games to view, and more players to evaluate. Every snap of Saturday’s blowout loss can be used as teaching material, and Dantonio is deep into that process right now.

“There are things to learn from, especially schematically whether you were outflanked or you were out of position,” Dantonio said. “So I think it needs to be corrected more from a standpoint of what plays or defense was run. You need to just look at it and say, ‘Here’s all these formations, how did you adjust?’ Look at those things and draw from it and try and make it a learning experience.”

But he admitted there will be a time to dispose of it.

“This is one you want to burn and you don’t want it to be indicative of how you play all the time,” he said.

THE TEMPO QUESTION

I was surprised by the problems Michigan State had with Ohio State’s tempo. Dantonio and Joe Bachie commented after the game about the difficulty the defense had in getting the calls in on time, and getting set for pre-snap against Ohio State’s tempo.

Bachie said they worked on it in practice and thought they were ready for it, but it turned out that they were not.

Without getting a chance to clock it myself on film, I theorized that Ohio State perhaps had played faster than the Buckeyes had shown on film, and caught Michigan State a bit off-guard. I asked Dantonio on Sunday night if this had been the case, if OSU’s tempo was different from what they had shown up to that point in the season, and whether they snapped the ball even faster than the :12-second clip that Indiana used at times against Michigan State, three weeks ago.

“No, I think it was about the same,” Dantonio said. “I don’t think it was any faster. And they looked to the sideline and would change the play on us.

“I think they did a very good job of formationing us, formations that were a lot like what we’ve seen before, but (with) little a little bit of tweaks, whether it was an alignment here or an alignment there.”

Defenses expect to get new wrinkles each week, and prepare for the possibility of drastic changes. But Ohio State apparently disrupted Michigan State with some of the slight changes in formations that they showed, which caused some pause.

“They changed up some things there,” Dantonio said. “The (Michigan State defensive) calls were coming in, but for whatever reason, it just didn’t feel like we were lined up and ready to play. Now, on the film, it would appear you’re lined up, but I know in the game, I felt like it was a scramble.”

**

COMP’S TAKE: The margin of victory in this game, and the quick TKO, surprised everybody, from Dantonio, to fans, to myself, and most media. Vegas had Ohio State as a 17-point favorite, and that line seemed astronomical. But even Vegas sold it short by a couple of touchdowns.

Michigan State had played so soundly a week before, against Penn State. And Ohio State had looked awful a week earlier against Iowa.

Michigan State had matched up well against Ohio State over the years, with Dantonio having more success against Meyer than any coach in the Big Ten. Yet Michigan State was blown out of this game inside of 12 minutes.

In processing this surprising 45-point margin of victory, I wonder if part of MSU’s poor performance was due to the stunned surprise the Spartans may have felt, on both sides of the ball, when realizing early-on that Ohio State was just plain more talented than any team the Spartans had faced this year. Not only were the Buckeyes more talented, but they were more mature, and they had a leg-up in some schematic areas, AND they were just as motivated as the Spartans, if not more. These had to be stark discoveries for the young Spartans.

When Dantonio mentioned that the game in some respects “seemed like a scramble,” I think this gets back to the point of Michigan State realizing that Ohio State was a different animal than the one that showed up on the game tape from Iowa City. This was the first time many youthful players in the Spartan playing group had dealt with taking that type of a blow.

“I think sometimes when things are going against you, everything seems like a scramble,” Dantonio said. “Everything. And that’s the nature of this one. Everything – whether it was tackling or playing the ball in the deep part of the field or pressuring the quarterback or getting lined up, everything seemed to be a scramble. And we’ve got to negate that.”

D-TACKLES FAIL FOR A CHANGE

Ohio State’s 335 yards on the ground was the biggest surprise of the game. Firm play from defensive tackles Raequan Williams and Mike Panasiuk, along with reserve Naquan Jones, has been a team strength the Spartans all season. But OSU defeated MSU's strength in this game.

Williams and Panasiuk have been strong against double-teams on interior run plays since last November. They’ve been strong all year against the run, inside, against Michigan, Penn State, and even Notre Dame’s prodigious ground attack. When ND gained yards on the ground, they didn’t send the ball through MSU’s defensive tackles.

Last year, when Michigan State battled Ohio State to a tight 17-16 loss, Williams and Panasiuk were firm against OSU’s inside zone runs, and that set the foundation for the near-upset.

Now, Panasiuk and Williams are a year better, and have better back-ups. That’s why it was such a surprise that MSU’s defensive tackles struggled in this game.

“I don’t think we quit, I just think we didn’t play effectively,” Dantonio said. “Inside, our defensive tackles were getting reached.


Subscribe to read more.
Unlock Premium news from the largest network of experts.
Say your piece in exclusive fan communities.
Dominate with stats, athlete data, Rivals250 rankings, and more.
Go Big. Get Premium.Log In