The Nittany Lions are 3-2 after a 34-13 loss Friday, Oct. 2, and face USC on Saturday, Oct. 10, with physicality and quarterback questions unresolved.
What Happened
Penn State’s 34-13 loss at Northwestern on Friday, Oct. 2, delivered its second straight defeat, and Matt Campbell accepted responsibility for the performance.
Northwestern’s misdirection running game and physicality overwhelmed Penn State, which fell to 3-2 after opening 3-0. The Nittany Lions again got uneven play from quarterback Rocco Becht.
The loss puts Penn State’s early footing in the Big Ten at risk. USC arrives at 7:30 p.m. ET on Saturday, Oct. 10, with Campbell needing to show that the physicality problem will not carry into a third straight game.
Campbell put the performance on himself afterward.
> “The attitude, the effort, the toughness, we lacked it in every way, shape and form tonight, and I put a lot on me. I put a lot on me because there’s somehow, some way that I didn’t get this team prepared to play the physical brand of football that we need to play.”
>
> — Matt Campbell
Why This One Matters
Penn State beat Marshall 45-0, Temple 27-9 and Buffalo 55-13 before losing 24-20 to Wisconsin on Sept. 26 and by 21 points at Northwestern. For a team that entered the season No. 22 in the preseason AFCA Coaches Poll after going 7-6 overall and 3-6 in Big Ten play in 2025, the turn has been abrupt.
What Most People Are Missing
The concern extends beyond one poor road performance. Some Penn State players said the short week after Wisconsin meant less physical work in practice before Northwestern, putting Campbell’s preparation under scrutiny after he said his team was not ready for the game Northwestern played.
Receiver Chase Sowell said the lack of physicality was not confined to Friday night.
> “Do I feel like that’s part of our identity and part of Penn State’s identity? Yes. So I would like to be more physical with everybody. That’s just the message of the team. We got outphysicaled tonight, and that’s not the standard of Penn State. We’ve got to be better for this place.”
>
> — Chase Sowell
Next Man Up
Penn State kept Becht in the game and did not weigh a move to Alex Manske during the Northwestern blowout. Campbell has not said whether he will change quarterbacks against USC or use Manske in a future game.
That leaves a live decision entering USC. Becht’s uneven play over the Wisconsin and Northwestern losses has put the position in focus.
What the Coaches Can Actually Change
Campbell’s answer begins with the work Penn State does before USC: how much physical practice the staff uses after two losses, whether it adjusts the defensive response to misdirection and how it divides quarterback repetitions between Becht and Manske.
Campbell did not pin the loss on one position group. He said Penn State lacked attitude, effort and toughness across the board, making the response against USC larger than a quarterback call.
The Pate State Read
The quarterback question will draw the attention, but Penn State has to play with more discipline and force against the run. Northwestern’s misdirection running game and physicality overwhelmed Penn State.
Two losses after three decisive wins do not settle Campbell’s tenure. They do make USC a consequential test: Penn State needs a performance that looks prepared, tackles cleanly and keeps the Big Ten skid from growing.
What to Watch Next
Can Penn State handle misdirection? Watch whether the defense stays in position and responds to Northwestern’s misdirection running game.
Who plays quarterback in meaningful moments? Becht taking the offense throughout would keep the staff’s answer clear; Manske entering before the outcome is decided would change the conversation.
Does the physical play change? Tackling and the line of scrimmage will show whether Campbell’s challenge landed.
Penn State’s next task is plain: match USC’s physicality or risk letting two losses become the story of October.
Articles are drafted from Josh Pate's College Football Show under the site's editorial standards and monitored by the editorial team — corrections are timestamped, never silent.
CONTINUED FROM THE NOTEBOOK
Senate passes Protect College Sports Act, sends it to House
The bill could restrict repeat transfers and in-season FBS coaching departures while giving NCAA rules limited antitrust protection.
ANALYSISProduced with Pate State AI · reviewed by The Pate State editorial teamStandards 📝 The NotebookTS
The Pate State StaffSEP 29, 2026
What Happened
The Senate passed the Protect College Sports Act 77-22 on Monday, sending the NCAA-backed bill to a House that may decide whether college football gets federal rules for roster building and athlete pay.
The bill would give the NCAA and conferences a limited antitrust exemption to write and enforce rules on eligibility, transfers and compensation. It also would supersede state NIL laws that conflict with those rules.
The House is expected to take up the measure after the Nov. 3 elections. It could change the bill, and Congress would have to begin again in the next session if it does not pass by the end of the year.
Sen. Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican who wrote the bill with Washington Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell, said Congress has to settle a problem the sport cannot settle on its own.
“It would be nice if college sports could somehow magically fix itself, but this is a matter of law, federal law, and only Congress can fix it,” Cruz said. “Now I know some argue that college sports are doing just fine. They point to high television ratings, enthusiastic fan bases, and packed stadiums. But popularity does not demonstrate that the system is healthy. It simply proves that the system is worth saving.”
Why This One Matters
An athlete could transfer once without an eligibility delay under the bill. A second transfer would ordinarily require sitting out the following academic year, though exceptions could apply. The proposal also sets five years of eligibility, with exceptions for pregnancy, military service, religious missions and certain medical circumstances.
FBS head coaches and key staff members could not leave during the competitive season to effectively take another FBS job. The prohibition reaches recruiting, roster management, NIL duties and game planning.
Those rules would put real cost behind repeat transfers and midseason staff exits. More importantly, the antitrust exemption could let the NCAA and conferences enforce them.
The bill also proposes a 5% agent-fee cap, scholarships for 10 years after an athlete’s final season, a 20-school conference limit and protection for women’s and Olympic sports roster spots and grant-in-aid opportunities at 2024-25 levels.
What Most People Are Missing
The sit-out penalty for a second transfer will draw the most attention. The larger change is who can defend that rule in court.
Limited antitrust protection would give the NCAA and conferences more room to police eligibility, compensation and recruiting tampering. Schools could use that framework to retain players and spend on athletes under one federal system rather than navigating lawsuits and inconsistent state laws.
The Pate State Read
The 77-22 Senate margin does not guarantee a House vote. At least five Republican representatives have publicly criticized the measure, while the Congressional Black Caucus and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries oppose it. The caucus helped sink a rival college-sports bill in May.
Sen. Cory Booker, the New Jersey Democrat and former Stanford football player, argued the legislation shifts leverage back toward the institutions.
“This is a bill not about college athletes,” Booker said. “This is a bill about wealthy people. Wealthy coaches, wealthy institutions, and an NCAA who's enjoyed unbridled power for decades as we watch discrimination, hardships, injustice, and, finally, athletes started getting some power in the equation. And this body, after me trying for 10 to 15 years to get them to step in and help college athletes, this body rushes in to suddenly say 'We're protecting college athletes.' Well, that is not true.”
President Trump has backed the proposal, but the bill cannot reach him without House passage.
What to Watch Next
Will House leadership put the bill on the floor after the Nov. 3 elections? Do the Republican critics and Congressional Black Caucus hold together against it? And does the House settle the competing revenue-sharing and retention-fund figures or define how second-transfer exceptions would work?
The NCAA supports the bill. Baker said much work remains to ensure student-athlete benefits are codified into federal law.
“Now the bill moves to the U.S. House of Representatives and there is much work left to do to ensure student-athlete benefits are codified into federal law and future generations of young people can access those benefits and use college sports as the launching point for their careers,” Baker said.