DSC Inside Read: Indiana Isn’t the Same Team Oregon Studied in September — And That’s the Point

 

There are two versions of Indiana living inside the data Oregon’s staff has been grinding.

The first is the September machine — the one that detonated early opponents with absurd efficiency and played defense like it was rationing oxygen. Through five games, Indiana was scoring 47.8 points per game, gaining 538.2 yards per game, and averaging 7.5 yards per play while allowing just 9.6 points and 4.2 yards per play. That isn’t a profile. That’s a warning label.

The second version is the one Oregon is preparing for now — the post-quarterfinals Indiana that is still undefeated, still elite, but no longer operating in the same extreme margins. The scoring dipped to 41.6 points per game, the offense slid to 468.1 yards per game and 7.0 yards per play, and the defense gave up more space (252.6 yards per game, 4.5 per play). Indiana didn’t fall apart. They evolved.

And Oregon’s entire week is going to be built around identifying what got sharper… and what got exposed.

---

The Biggest Change: Indiana’s Offense Calmed Down — and Got Smarter

If you only look at raw production, you might think Indiana cooled off.

• Rushing dropped from 267.8 yards per game to 220.7
• Yards per carry fell from 6.1 to 5.4
• Passing dipped from 270.4 to 247.4 per game
• Yards per pass attempt ticked down from 9.94 to 9.65

That’s real. The “tsunami” version of Indiana became slightly less overwhelming.

But here’s the counter: the quarterback got better.

Fernando Mendoza’s grade climbed from 87.7 through five games to 91.1 on the season, while his completion rate held essentially steady (72.8% → 72.1%). That’s the profile of a quarterback who isn’t living on early-script freebies anymore. It’s a quarterback who learned how to win games that aren’t already decided in the first quarter.

The deeper truth is this: Indiana’s offense became less about constant chunk runs and more about being able to win in any environment — loud stadium, playoff pressure, tight score, ugly possessions. Early Indiana could bury you quickly. Late Indiana can still do it… but they can also just keep taking the game away from you one drive at a time.

---

The “New Indiana” Weapon Oregon Has to Respect: Explosives Through Multiple Receivers

September Indiana looked like an offense that could overwhelm you with its top two options:

• Elijah Sarratt: 31 catches, 412 yards through five games
• Omar Cooper Jr.: 22 catches, 408 yards through five games

Those two were already high-level.

The version Oregon faces now still features both — but it’s not just them anymore:

• Cooper finished with 61 catches for 849 yards
• Sarratt finished with 55 for 727

And then there’s the player who changes how you have to call coverage:

Charlie Becker.

Becker went from 4 catches for 70 yards through five games to 28 for 566 across the season — and his grade rocketed from 71.8 to 88.7. That’s not “more games.” That’s a different role. That’s a vertical threat becoming a real part of the weekly plan.

If Oregon is living in any version of “we’ll tilt coverage to Cooper/Sarratt and be fine,” Indiana now has answers. Becker’s emergence is how an offense graduates from productive to dangerous.

---

The One Offensive Trend That Helps Oregon: Indiana Threw More Picks

This is the most important “quiet” number in the whole profile shift:

• Indiana had 1 interception through five games
• Indiana finished with 7 on the season

That means six interceptions over the final nine games.

The Mendoza grade rising while interceptions rise is the kind of contradiction that matters in a playoff matchup. It suggests Indiana wasn’t careless early — they were clean. Later, against better opponents and tighter situations, they were forced into more difficult throws, and a handful finally flipped the other way.

Oregon’s defense doesn’t need Indiana to be reckless. Oregon needs two Indiana possessions to end with the wrong kind of decision.

Because in a semifinal, that’s usually the difference between playing for a national title… and watching someone else do it.

---

Defense: Indiana Became Even Meaner Against the Run — But More Human Against the Pass

The cleanest evolution on Indiana’s defense is also the most dangerous for Oregon if the Ducks aren’t balanced.

Indiana’s run defense improved across the season:

• Opponent rushing fell from 88.0 yards per game to 73.7
• Opponent YPC dropped from 3.2 to 2.8
• Opponent rushing TD rate also improved (3 in 5 games vs 5 in 14 overall)

That’s a defense that got stronger at its foundation. That’s a front that became harder to dent.

But the pass defense went the other direction.

• Opponent completion rate rose from 59.5% to 62.4%
• Opponent yards per attempt jumped from 5.29 to 6.03
• Opponent pass yards per game rose from 133.4 to 178.9
• Opponent passing TDs went from 1 through five games to 7 on the season

Indiana is still very good defensively, but the late-season version gave up more rhythm throws, more intermediate completions, and more total space in the air.

That matters because Oregon’s path to the title game isn’t “run into a wall and hope.” Oregon’s path is to punish any defense that has become slightly more vulnerable in the windows behind the linebackers and between safeties.

---

The Pressure Is Still Real: Indiana’s Pass Rush Stayed Elite

Even with some statistical softening, the pass rush remained a constant:

• 16 sacks in five games (3.2 per game)
• 42 sacks in 14 games (3.0 per game)

So whatever openings exist in Indiana’s secondary, they aren’t going to be available if Oregon can’t protect long enough to access them.

This is the simplest chess match of the week:

Oregon’s protection rules vs Indiana’s pressure packages.

If Oregon’s QB is comfortable, the pass-defense trend says the Ducks will have throws.
If he isn’t, the entire game turns into third-and-long survival.

---

What This Means for Oregon: The Margin Game Has Changed

The September Indiana profile was built on extremes:

• overwhelming efficiency
• low possessions
• suffocating defense
• chaos takeaways

The current Indiana is built on something more dangerous in January:

repeatable football.

Less explosive on the ground than early.
More diverse in the passing game than early.
Better against the run defensively than early.
More vulnerable against the pass defensively than early.
More interceptions thrown than early.

So Oregon’s plan should be obvious — and brutally hard to execute:

1. Stay balanced without wasting downs into the teeth of a now-elite run defense
2. Attack the pass-defense vulnerability with timing throws and intermediate shots
3. Win two “flip” moments (interception, strip, special teams field position)
4. Survive Indiana’s rush long enough for the openings to become real

Because this game won’t be decided by who looks better on paper. It’ll be decided by who wins the handful of snaps where the season actually swings.

Indiana isn’t the same team Oregon studied in September.

And if Oregon wants a trip to the national championship game, the Ducks have to be ready for the version Indiana became — not the one they used to be.

The Central Truth: Oregon’s Passing Game Has to Win Before the Rush Wins

Everything about this matchup funnels toward one unavoidable truth: Oregon’s passing game has to dictate the game early enough that Indiana’s pass rush never gets to take control of it.

Indiana’s defense has evolved into something sturdier and more disciplined against the run, and that matters because it removes the luxury of leaning on patience alone. This is no longer a front that can be softened simply by volume. If Oregon treats the run game as the primary answer, the game risks becoming a series of long-yardage downs where Indiana’s pressure packages can tilt the field.

The opening has to come through the air — but not recklessly, and not vertically for the sake of it.

The numbers make the opportunity clear. As the season progressed, Indiana became more vulnerable in the passing game, allowing a higher completion rate, more yards per attempt, and significantly more total passing yardage. Those aren’t breakdowns; they’re stress fractures. They show up when a defense has to cover more ground laterally and vertically at the same time, and when quarterbacks are able to get the ball out on rhythm.

That’s where Oregon’s passing plan has to live.

For Oregon to win this game, the pass game has to function as a pressure release valve — quick decisions, defined reads, intermediate throws that force Indiana’s linebackers and safeties to hesitate. The goal isn’t to hunt explosives early. The goal is to make Indiana’s rush arrive late, to force them to play coverage first and aggression second.

Only once that balance shifts does the deeper part of the passing game open. Only then do the chunk plays become available. If Oregon can force Indiana into a choice between protecting the middle of the field and bringing extra pressure, the Ducks gain control of the leverage battle — and leverage, not tempo, will decide this semifinal.

The full preview will dive into Oregon’s own evolution and the protection challenges surrounding Dante Moore. But the foundation is already clear:

Oregon doesn’t need to beat Indiana deep to win this game.
Oregon needs to beat Indiana on time.

If the ball is coming out cleanly and on schedule, the rush loses its teeth. And if the rush loses its teeth, Oregon is playing for a national championship.