Indiana has transformed its offense
Could Indiana earn its fifth win with this new look?
I was extremely negative about the state of the Indiana Football program following the Ohio State loss, which was absolutely deserved. This 4-win season (maybe 5-win season) will cover the incredibly dismal minutiae of one of the worst seasons Indiana’s played in the last decade-plus. But something got into the Hoosiers on Saturday that propelled them to win their first game at Michigan State since 2001 (eliminating the COVID season) and their first road win of the season after losing at Cincinnati, at Nebraska, at Rutgers, and at Ohio State.
The Hoosiers posted their second-highest overall grade of the season (behind Rutgers, thanks to a high defensive grade in Piscataway), and their offensive grade was the highest they’ve recorded in 2022, even higher than Idaho.
It was an unexpected and, frankly, strange sign of life from Indiana a week after posting its second-worst single-game grade of the PFF Era (2014). For those curious, the worst grade was last year’s game against Ohio State.
Suddenly, Indiana is interesting again, not because of its chances to get to a bowl game (obviously) but because it’s made an entire identity change on offense mid-season, which speaks volumes about where this Indiana offensive staff might go if it finds the right tools.
Let’s discuss.
Abandoning the pass
I must admit, Indiana surprised me here. Michigan State was graded as the 98th defense in the country going into the game, so neither its pass nor rush defense is superb by any standard, but its pass defense is certainly its floor. I could list some extremely poor data points to support this, but for the sake of time, MSU’s rush defense is 89th in the nation, its pass rush is 73rd, and its coverage is 121st, according to PFF, and it allows the second-most passing yards per game in the Big Ten (yes, Indiana allows the most).
It could have been the weather. It could have been Walt Bell throwing his hands up with the entire passing corps. It could have been Indiana trying to surprise Michigan State. Whatever it was, going into any game with an emphasis on this rushing attack – statistically 120th in the country – required some massive kahunas on Walt Bell’s part, and we may see a total style change continue into the final game of the season.
Indiana, who ranks 11th in the country in total pass attempts, didn’t attempt a pass until its 12th offensive play (third drive of the game). There was likely more leniency for this type of behavior after Dexter Williams’ touchdown on the first drive, but it seemed clear that this was the gameplan.
Shaun Shivers led the team with 117 rushing yards, thanks to a 79-yard touchdown scamper; Williams was close behind with 113 yards, including a 34-yard touchdown run; Josh Henderson finished with 41 yards; and Jaylin Lucas had 24. From a 30,000-foot view, this is the rushing attack Indiana wanted from Shivers and Henderson – Shivers as the big-play threat/every down back and Henderson as the short-yardage power back.
Regardless, it seemed clear that there were intentional changes made in the run-blocking schemes, and it resulted in seams for runners. In looking at run direction, Indiana has had a balanced rushing attack, but against Michigan State, it was clear where the Hoosiers feel comfortable running the ball. On 41 rushes, Indiana only ran the ball to the left side of its offensive line 5 times. Otherwise, a designed run carried the runner to the perimeter (15 times). The Hoosiers ran to the right side of their line 10 times, in addition to 7 carries to the perimeter.
This makes it clear that Indiana views its best rushing opportunities to be in Josh Sales and Kahlil Benson’s direction, and the grades agree. Both linemen have been steadily improving in that area since their snap counts began to rise (something to look forward to in the future). Sales has actually climbed his way to 85th in the conference in PFF’s run blocking grade, which sounds low but Luke Haggard is next for IU at 135th with Benson just behind him at 148th.
And as noted earlier, Indiana hit the perimeter on 22 of 41 rushes. That means receivers need to block, and who has been in the game most often since Cam Camper was injured? Receivers who can block. Malachi Holt-Bennett ranks 19th among receivers in the conference in run blocking, and he saw 50 snaps against MSU, the most of any IU receiver. Andison Coby ranks 34th in the conference in run blocking, and he saw 34 snaps. Tight end AJ Barner was asked to block a season-high 33 times, and James Bomba saw a season-high 23 snaps after a previous season-high of 21 the week before. No receiver caught a pass against Michigan State, only Barner and Henderson (one each), and only 7 passes were attempted.
Indiana is going more run-heavy since Camper’s injury and the turmoil around the quarterback position began (perhaps a chicken or egg situation there), and it’s a pattern that began to show last week but for obvious reasons (Ohio State) was largely invisible.
On the whole, the improvements are marginal. The run blocking grade at MSU was the third-highest of the season (and still not great); the rushing grade was the second-highest; IU gains 2.8 line yards per rush on the season and gained 2.9 against MSU; and if it wasn’t for the second-half comeback, this would be a different conversation about the continued breakdown of the offense (and additional breakdown of the defense). But on individual plays, the changes are tangible.
This effort by Walt Bell and Rod Carey might just breathe some hope into this offense going into the offseason, as long as it can carry over into its last game against Purdue.
Can it carry over? Let’s see.
Purdue’s defense is graded as the 93rd defense in the country, primarily because of its poor rushing defense, which grades as the 103rd rushing defense in the nation, according to PFF. For reference, MSU’s rushing defense now ranks 89th.
Recent performances include failing rush defense grades in 3 of the last 4 games, allowing 105 yards to Evan Hull at Northwestern, allowing 200 yards to Kaleb Johnson at Iowa (!), allowing (just) 98 yards to Chase Brown at Illinois, and allowing 113 yards to Braelon Allen at Wisconsin (and 73 to his backup). Three of those four teams rank in the bottom-four of the Big Ten in PFF’s rushing grade, and Indiana is the fourth.
The key difference between Indiana and those teams, though, is that it has Dexter Williams, whose rushing grade is head-and-shoulders above all other non-RBs in the conference with at least 18 carries. Purdue has not faced a quarterback with that type of rushing threat this season. No Big Ten team has.
Perhap most telling about the future matchup against Purdue is that the Boilermakers allow a 44% success rate on non-passing downs, according to CollegeFootballData.com, and Indiana only needed 33% (not good!) to beat Michigan State.
Can the passing defense hold?
Likely no. As impressive as the secondary was against Michigan State in the second half and, particularly, in the overtime periods, this is a secondary that has continually shown that it is far from the secondary Indiana fans used to know.
I wrote about the degradation previously, but in 2020, the IU secondary finished its season with a PFF coverage grade ranked 38th in the country. Its current 2022 coverage grade with a game to go is 124th.
Now, as the defense further regresses as the 2022 season moves along, Indiana’s pass rush grades as the second-to-worst in the nation, creating a pass rush-coverage pairing that offers little to no resistance to any passing attack.
Purdue’s passing attack isn’t lethal by any means, graded 68th in the nation, but the individuals within its passing corps are dangerous, including Charlie Jones, who leads the Big Ten in receiving (96.0 yards per game) and owns the 4th-best receiving grade in the conference. Tight end Payne Durham is second in the Big Ten in receptions by tight ends and is Purdue’s second-leading receiver. He owns a plus grade in receiving. And former four-star receiver TJ Sheffield is one of the most dangerous third receivers on a Big Ten team.
How Indiana handles receivers outside of Jones will be crucial, and I know I’ll be watching Tiawan Mullen closely as he plays Jones, following Mullen’s impressive performance against Ohio State last week.
The secondary will have to play outside of itself if Indiana can’t find the same success on the ground as it did against Michigan State